Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Anti-Racism’

At This Manhattan Middle School School, Sixth-Graders Are Asked to Surveil Friends and Family for ‘Microaggressions’


By Aaron Sibarium | July 27, 2022

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/at-this-manhattan-middle-school-school-sixth-graders-are-asked-to-surveil-friends-and-family-for-microaggressions-2657743305.html/

Students at a New York City public school, March 2022. (Getty Images)

A New York City public school encouraged students as young as 10 years old to keep a list of all the “microaggressions” they witnessed, both at school and in their own families, according to materials from the school’s curriculum reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon. The same students were also asked to list their gender identity—”cisgender,” “nonbinary,” or “trans”—as well as their sexual orientation on a graded worksheet.

The sixth-grade humanities curriculum from Lower Manhattan Community Middle School, where just 31 percent of students are white, required students to read Tiffany Jewell’s This Book Is Anti-Racist, one of only five books assigned for the 2021-2022 year. The book contains 20 lessons on “how to wake up, take action, and do the work”—including the work of confronting the police, which Jewell suggests white students can do without ending up “in jail or harmed.”

“If you are a Black, Brown, or Indigenous Person of the Global Majority, you will need to decide how each outcome could end for you,” Jewell writes in a chapter called “Choosing My Path.” “White people, this is not something you need to do because you are at the center of the system.”

From Tiffany Jewell’s ‘This Book Is Anti-Racist’

The book also asks students to surveil their friends and family for racist behavior. “Grab your notebook,” one “activity” instructs readers. “Look and listen for the microaggressions around you. Write them down and note your observations.” Another activity asks students how “folx” in their families “resisted” or “contributed to racism,” defined as the “systemic misuse and abuse of power by institutions.”

The curriculum, which went into effect August 2021, came as parents across New York City were mobilizing against critical race theory in public schools—and as education officials across the country were denying that there was any such thing.

“Critical race theory is not taught in elementary schools,” Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, asserted in July 2021. Parents “are bullying teachers and trying to stop us from teaching students accurate history.”

One month earlier, New York Regents chancellor Lester Young stated that critical race theory “is not our theory of action” and assured parents that “we are not preparing young people to be activists.”

Jewell’s book belies that assurance. “We will work together, in solidarity, to disrupt racism and become anti-racist accomplices,” the preface reads. “There are many moments to pause in this book so you can check in with yourself and grow into your activism.”

The curriculum could spell legal trouble for the school, which is already under investigation for separating seventh and eight-graders into racial affinity groups. That practice prompted a civil rights complaint in December from the watchdog group Parents Defending Education; on July 13, the Department of Education announced it would investigate the middle school over the complaint.

“It’s astonishing that administrators at Lower Manhattan Community seem determined to create a racially hostile educational environment on top of the civil rights investigation that was just opened,” said Nicole Neily, the president of Parents Defending Education. “Parents who were once proud of the school’s academic performance compared to other New York City public schools are now concerned—justifiably so—about the school’s increasing fixation on race.”

Those concerns come amid steep enrollment declines—and budget cuts—in New York City’s public schools. With enrollment down 8 percent since 2020, schools have lost $215 million in funding this year alone, forcing widespread layoffs and larger class sizes.

Divisive curricula like the one at Lower Manhattan Community School have exacerbated that exodus. One parent told the Free Beacon that their child would not be returning to the middle school this fall on account of an assignment that required sixth-graders to disclose their “social identities”—including their sexual orientation—on a worksheet. Though students did not have to “write something for every category,” instructors collected the worksheet for a grade.

Such lessons aren’t the product of a few school administrators run amok but reflect the race-conscious worldview of the New York City Department of Education. In June 2020, then-executive superintendent of Manhattan public schools Marisol Rosales hosted a panel on dismantling “systemic racism in our schools,” which held up Lower Manhattan Community School’s “mission statement on race” as a model for the entire school system.

“To undo the legacy of racism and oppression in this country that impacts our school community,” the mission statement reads, Lower Manhattan Community Schools works to instill “anti-racist beliefs and practices.”

The school’s sixth-grade humanities curriculum is a microcosm of what that education looks like in practice. Three of its five units concern “identity,” with Jewell’s book listed as a “key text” for unit one. The “social identities” worksheet was part of a broader lesson on “the dominant culture,” which consists of “people who are white, middle class, Christian and cisgender.”

Whoever does not fit into this “box,” Jewell writes, is “part of what’s called the ‘subordinate culture.’” Her description of that culture is exhaustive, albeit studded with solecisms: “Folx included in the ‘subordinate culture,’ include Black, Brown, indigenous People of Color of the Global Majority, queer, transgender, and nonbinary folx, and cisgender women, youth, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, atheist, and non-Christian folx, neurodiverse folx, folx living with disabilities, those living in poverty, and more.”

“The people who want to talk about racism all the time are the racists,” said Maud Maron, who served as an elected representative for parents in the district where Lower Manhattan Community School is located. “The people who suffer are the kids who get cheated out of a wholesome school experience and hours of learning that should be focused on academics instead of race indoctrination.”

Lower Manhattan Community School did not respond to a request for comment.

The focus on race extended to the seventh-grade social studies curriculum—ostensibly devoted to early American history—which used “anti-racist” guru Ibram X. Kendi’s Stamped from the Beginning as its main textbook, according to a syllabus for the 2021-2022 school year reviewed by the Free Beacon.

These curricula do not seem to have soothed racial tensions at Lower Manhattan Community School, which is 41 percent Asian, 15 percent Hispanic, and 7 percent black.

A group of parents and administrators in April began planning a “restorative justice circle” to address alleged incidents of racism that had taken place over the school year, according to emails reviewed by the Free Beacon. The incidents included a black student calling a South Asian student “Indian Boy,” an Asian student touching a black student’s hair, and a “rumor” that a white student “used the N-word.”

The school eventually canceled the circle after a parent objected that it would “violate students’ privacy” and “possibly put current students at risk”—and after parents started to litigate the incidents over email, replicating the racial catfighting that had consumed the classroom.

One parent questioned the wisdom of discussing the transgressions of Asian students at a time when anti-Asian hate crimes were on the rise. It didn’t go over well.

“African Americans have been facing race-based violence for 500 years in this country, and still face it every day,” another parent responded. “So, I’d ask you to please be sensitive to that fact during discussions and emails with our group.”

Emerson College Promotes Professor Who Publicly Fantasized About Massacring White People


REPORTED BY: SAM NEVES | MAY 31, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/31/emerson-college-promotes-professor-who-publicly-fantasized-about-massacring-white-people/

Emerson College

Emerson College has a tradition of warmly welcoming racially divisive administrators. Only a few months after promoting a professor who said blacks and whites can’t be friends and divorced her husband because of his race, Emerson College has now nominated Shaya Gregory Poku as the school’s new vice president for equity and social justice. 

Poku is one of the authors of the manual “9 Tips for Anti-Racist Child Rearing.” In it, she guides parents on how to raise their children within the critical race theory dogma. The manual claims that not judging people by the color of their skin is “absurd.”

Even though Poku received an award named after Martin Luther King, her ideology opposes everything King stood for. Poku’s manual says parents should instruct their children to “acknowledge and celebrate differences in appearance” and to “describe people referring to their racial backgrounds.” 

The manual also tells parents they should prevent their kids from “socializing with other children who are being raised to have and perpetuate false and decrepit ideas.” Poku says there should be “educational interventions” against those children. 

According to Poku’s manual, race should play a factor not only in the people you surround yourself with, but also in the businesses you support. To escape the “white bubble,” people should “patronize businesses owned by people of color” and buy less at white-owned businesses, the manual says. 

In the manual, Poku also claims kids should learn about “racial hierarchy” and instructs parents to tell their children at a very young age that the world is unfair, meritocracy is a myth, and that their efforts might not be rewarded. 

Dean Believes Blacks and Whites Can’t Be Friends

Similar to the new vice president for equity and social justice, Emerson President William Gilligan recently nominated racially divisive professor Kim McLarin to be the college’s dean of graduate and professional studies. McLarin, who is known for her racially divisive rhetoric, wrote an article for the Washington Post entitled “Can Black Women and White Women be True Friends?” She claims that black women and white women will never be able to have “true friendships.”

“Generally speaking, it’s not that I dislike white women. Generally speaking, it’s that I do not trust them. Generally speaking, most black women don’t,” wrote McLarin.

In 2006, McLarin divorced her husband, who is white. In a New York Times piece she authored, McLarin admits that her ex-husband’s race played a significant role in her decision to end the relationship. 

In a piece published a few weeks before her nomination, McLarin fantasized about massacring crowds of white people: 

If a civil war breaks out, I say, if violent white mobs begin roaming the country as they have done in the past, I will not worry about precision shooting. I intend to sit on my porch with my legally acquired handgun and as much ammunition as I have and perhaps a bottle of Scotch and take them as they come.

William Gilligan and Emerson College did not reply to requests for comment.


Sam Neves is a former leftist and a correspondent for Campus Reform. He is a marketing major at Emerson College. After graduation, Sam plans to attend law school and continue his mission to fight for people who do not have a voice.

Author Sam Neves profile

SAM NEVES

MORE ARTICLES

California School District Tells Kids: ‘Attacking Whiteness Is Not Enough’


REPORTED BY: SPENCER LINDQUIST | FEBRUARY 02, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/02/02/california-school-district-tells-kids-attacking-whiteness-is-not-enough/

A now-deleted portion of the Riverside, Califonia school district’s website obtained by The Federalist displays that the district promoted an essay that attacks people based on their inborn skin color. The essay, titled “Decentering Whiteness” by Jeff Hitchcock and Charley Flint, claimed that “attacking whiteness is not enough.” It sought to divide people on the basis of their race and argued that “whiteness” should be pushed to “the margin,”

Riverside Unified School District promoted the essay at least three separate times, under the “Professional Learning,” “Community Engagement,” and “Culture and Climate” sections of their Equity, Access, and Community Engagement resources page, according to screenshots.

The Federalist previously revealed that both Riverside Superintendent Renee Hill and Board of Education member Tom Hunt lied about the district teaching critical race theory. One parent from the district, who wished to remain unnamed, told The Federalist that the resources list that contained “Decentering Whiteness” was removed from the website following the exposé of the district’s dishonesty. 

When asked why the resources had been removed, Communication Director Diana Meza stated that the district is “updating the Equity, Access & Community Engagement google site and landing page, the page should be back up soon.”

The school district has charge of nearly 40,000 students, according to federal data, and 35 percent of those students are white. School families’ median income is significantly above the national average, at approximately $73,000 per year.

Decentering Whiteness

The removed 19-page “resources” document, which can be viewed here, not only condemned “whiteness” but served as a guidebook for how institutions can fight it, so that “whiteness itself can be made more marginal.” The paper explained, “Decentering whiteness, as we envision it, is a collective process that can take place in organizations, sectors of society, personal lives, etc., over periods of days, months, years and generations.”

While launching into both anti-white attacks and blatant attempts to divide people on the basis of their immutable characteristics, the paper engaged in race essentialism. It cast race as a defining rather than incidental characteristic when it tells readers to “Assume whiteness, and race, always structures our experience, and thus needs to be consciously considered as part of any social process.”

White people are also openly villainized in the materials. One line reads, “white culture has, on balance, been based on principles of conquest and exploitation” while another says that in the attempt to marginalize whiteness, “simply attacking whiteness is not enough.”

The document did not oppose attacking “whiteness” out of an opposition to racism, nor did it express any concern over the potential fallout of seizing on racial fault lines for socio-political ends. Rather, it simply argued that openly attacking whiteness wouldn’t be strategically effective. It remarked “Simply attacking whiteness is not enough to accomplish this goal. Assaults on whiteness, depending on their nature, may have the effect of confirming and solidifying the central position of whiteness in American society.”

Lighter skin color has been and continues to be one of the prime targets of critical race theory. Noel Ignatiev, a Marxist Harvard professor who is cited in “Decentering Whiteness,” infamously claimed that “treasonous to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.”

He also remarked, “Make no mistake about it: we intend to keep bashing the dead white males, and the live ones, and the females too, until the social construct known as ‘the white race’ is destroyed—not ‘deconstructed’ but destroyed.”

Perhaps most sinister, “Decentering Whiteness” clearly sought to encourage racial division and even racial conflict, calling on a multiracial coalition to “displace” whiteness. It read “It will take a multiracial effort to displace whiteness, one that includes people from all racial/cultural groups.”

How exactly any of this rhetoric benefits the students or staff at Riverside Unified School District is entirely unclear. The presence of this material in a school climate is in fact both un-American and undeniably harmful, not only to the white people who are maligned by it but also those of all other racial backgrounds whom the article attempts to conscript into a race-based power struggle. 


Spencer Lindquist is an intern at The Federalist and a senior at Pepperdine University where he studies Political Science and Rhetoric and Leadership and serves as Pepperdine’s College Republicans President. You can follow him on Twitter @SpencerLndqst and reach him at LSpencerLindquist@gmail.com. SPENCER LINDQUISTVISIT ON TWITTER@SPENCERLNDQST

Boston University Requires Faculty To Say They Should ‘Intervene’ If a Woman Is Encouraged To Have Children


Reported by Aaron Sibarium | December 14, 2021

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/boston-university-requires-faculty-to-say-they-should-intervene-if-a-woman-is-encouraged-to-have-children-2656024135.html/

Mandatory Title IX training violated school’s own free speech policies, critics say

A screenshot of Boston University’s mandatory Title IX training this semester.

Boston University is requiring all students and faculty to affirm that they should “intervene” if a woman is complimented on her husband or encouraged to have children, guidance transmitted during a mandatory Title IX training this semester.

The training included multiple-choice questions that had to be answered correctly in order to complete it. Some questions were empirical—”How often do you think people make false allegations?”—while others asked about the appropriate course of conduct in a given scenario. Faculty who did not complete the training would “not be eligible for merit-based salary increases,” the school said in a campus-wide email, with further penalties possible for “continued non-compliance.” Students who did not complete it would “be blocked from registering next semester,” according to the university’s website.

Several scenarios involved “bystander intervention,” the idea that onlookers should prevent harassment by inserting themselves into potentially inappropriate encounters. In one vignette, an Asian woman is told that her white husband is “good-looking” and that “half-Asian babies are the cutest.” Asked “what should you do,” students and faculty were forced to select “Intervene” to advance through the training. Even though the woman “smiled” at the compliment, the training explains, she still “might have felt uncomfortable” about comments relating to “her race, her husband’s appearance, or the prospect of having children” itself.

The training also required students and faculty to affirm that people “rarely” make false accusations. “You might be surprised to learn that false reports aren’t common, and frivolous claims are almost nonexistent,” the training says. “Sometimes” was not an acceptable answer—though one study found that as many as two-thirds of hate crime accusations turn out to be false.

The training drew sharp criticism from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), which told the Washington Free Beacon that Boston University was violating its own free speech policies.

“BU makes clear commitments to free expression and academic freedom, and that includes the right to be free from compelled speech,” FIRE’s Aaron Terr said. But to complete the training, students and faculty “must select the university’s preferred answers as their own,” Terr explained.

“This is compelled speech and has no place at a university that promises its faculty expressive freedom,” Terr said.

Boston University did not respond to a request for comment.

The training, which was created by the education consultancy EVERFI and appears on the school’s “compliance services” website, demonstrates how the antidiscrimination law can become a Trojan Horse for compelled speech. Universities frame such compulsion as a way of complying with Title IX and other civil rights statutes, even when it goes far beyond what the law requires. Simply quizzing students and faculty on their legal obligations does not violate academic freedom, Terr said. But the Boston University training, which requires “them to express agreement with particular viewpoints,” does.

Boston University has seen several such violations since the summer of 2020. Between July and November of last year, the university’s theater and playwriting programs both adopted a policy of requiring “land acknowledgment[s]” before performances, with the theater program also requiring all instructors to “include a [Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion] statement in their syllabus.” In October, FIRE sent the university a letter of concern about both policies but has yet to receive a response.

Statutes like Title IX can give administrators cover for this sort of overreach. After Yale Law School’s “discrimination and harassment coordinators” pressured second-year law student Trent Colbert to write a pre-drafted apology for a “triggering” email, the dean of the law school, Heather Gerken, claimed the administrators were merely “attempting to carry out their obligations under university policy whenever discrimination complaints are filed.” She also invoked Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which “oblige[s] the law school to ensure a learning environment free of discrimination.”

In the name of complying with these laws, universities have attempted to regulate a quotidian and constantly expanding list of behaviors. The BU training goes so far as to imply that telling someone to put their phone away could constitute illegal discrimination or harassment. One question asks about the “best path forward” when a classmate “keeps checking their phone” while working on a group project. The “right” answer involves giving the classmate “the benefit of the doubt”; the wrong one involves telling them to “stop checking your phone—that’s rude.”

Other questions encourage people to police flirtatious encounters and potentially offensive jokes. “You sit near Heidi, and for the past week you’ve seen David come over to talk to her several times,” one scenario begins. “You’re not sure, but you thought you saw David rubbing her back at one point today. What should you do?” Students and faculty who said “Nothing” were told to “try again.”

“You don’t have to be certain that potentially concerning behavior crosses the line before taking action,” the training states.

Nor must you be certain that anyone finds a joke offensive before speaking up about it. “What should you do” if “Greg begins speaking loudly in a stereotypical Chinese accent,” the training asks. “Say something. Mocking an accent is offensive”—even if nobody registers offense.

The training justifies such interventions by positing that “microaggressions” are more damaging to “employee well-being” than “overt harassment.” Even “[w]ell-meaning people can still cause harm,” one module says. “It’s important to separate someone’s intention from the impact of their actions.”

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: