Thoughts about co-ops and SOFs

[Heather in Neverland]

It's true that Jesus was not all about inclusion in every venue, but He also didn't form groups that had a broad label and then excluded according to a narrower description.

 

So the common thread I am seeing here is that these groups that DO want to include only yellow circles should be very specific in the name of the group? That might make for long names. Or can they call themselves the yellow circle group but when one inquires about joining they are given a description of exactly what a yellow circle is according to the group itself BEFORE a person joins? And they should also stick to the original description after the person joins (rather than changing mid-stream and causing some to have to leave the group)?

 

Would that make it more acceptable? Having all the info up front?

[Carol in Cal.]

So the common thread I am seeing here is that these groups that DO want to include only yellow circles should be very specific in the name of the group? That might make for long names. Or can they call themselves the yellow circle group but when one inquires about joining they are given a description of exactly what a yellow circle is according to the group itself BEFORE a person joins? And they should also stick to the original description after the person joins (rather than changing mid-stream and causing some to have to leave the group)?

 

Would that make it more acceptable? Having all the info up front?

 

Yes, it would, for me. The change ups are rough, as are the descriptions that seem to imply that all yellow is welcome when, in fact, only darkish, textured, unstriped mustard yellow is allowed.

[8circles]

I would also like to point out that the real issue is not that the yellow circles want to have a group that is all about yellow circles, but that it is the manner in which some yellow circles treat all the colors and shapes they have arbitrarily decided cannot possibly associate with yellow circles. Not all, and probably not a majority of yellows act this way. Only the really LOUD/BRIGHT yellows and they draw a lot of artistic attention to themselves much to the chagrin of the shier, more compassionate yellows. So, some yellow circle groups choose to redefine "yellow" and "circle" and then proceed to winnow out the other colored shapes based on a far narrower definition of hue and conformity than is even presented in the Crayola Guide to Color brought to you buy the maker of Crayola. Suddenly Crayola yellows are now relabeled "Roseart" and are therefore substandard yellow circles.

 

Essentially, the yellow circle group co-opts a term that they never originally defined nor actually possess a right to define, change the definition - even radically - and then superimpose this on others. It's not that they are focusing on yellow circles because they all just love yellow and circles and want to spend a day every week at the park discussing yellow circles. It's that they seek to create a social strata in which, though they are not endowed with the inalienable right to be the color and shape judge/jury, they do in fact judge all of the other shapes and hues. The yellow circle club essentially usurps the roll of Crayola and decides who gets in the box and who does not or at least conveys their pronouncements to the other yellow circles thereby renaming them the green triangles...again, another job not bequethed to the yellow circles to begin with.

 

That's the rub. Many a yellow circle has been told they are not yellow circles though they very clearly are or that they are likely to dirty the yellow circle next door for not being the right shade of yellow... very hurtful and unproductive simply because some yellow circles are either so insecure it makes them feel better or so certain they are the personal voice of Crayola, that other yellow circles are told they are headed for the wax melter. This makes some yellow circles upset because it reflects badly on Crayola those who are trying to follow Crayola's mission statement. This is very likely the personal experience of many yellow circles, green triangles, orange circles, blue squares, and purple parallelograms who have posted in these threads. In my case, the yellow circles decided I am not a yellow circle based solely on a set of fiction books I have allowed my young shapes to read.

 

So, if the yellow circles want to have a yellow circle group celebrating yellow circles, wonderful. But, if the yellow circles use this as an excuse to speak for Crayola on a point that Crayola has not given permission for yellow circles to decide, then they should refrain from calling others Roseart and treating them like torn, stained, and discarded accu-cut products. Only Crayola gets to decide what color, hue, and shape is worthy of the box and the label...the other colored shapes are only called to shine their hue for others.

 

As a yellow circle with an odd hue, so rarely if ever chosen by any of the other yellow circles to be involved in any version of box fellowship, I have learned to value the friendship and comaraderie of a variety of colors and shapes and am thankful for the inclusiveness of other crayons because amongst my own shade, I am an outcast. I may have a box fellowship I attend with my partner colored shape and our shaped offspring, but our own hue remains largely hidden because few yellow circles in the surrounding boxes are tolerant of lighter or darker shades of yellow or squat circles. All of which makes Crayola, the maker of all colors and shapes, very, very sad.

 

Faith

 

Faith, your shade of yellow is gorgeous. Beautiful post.

[FaithManor]

So the common thread I am seeing here is that these groups that DO want to include only yellow circles should be very specific in the name of the group? That might make for long names. Or can they call themselves the yellow circle group but when one inquires about joining they are given a description of exactly what a yellow circle is according to the group itself BEFORE a person joins? And they should also stick to the original description after the person joins (rather than changing mid-stream and causing some to have to leave the group)?

 

Would that make it more acceptable? Having all the info up front?

 

Actually Heather, I do think having that info up front would be good. It's one thing to hand someone a SOF that is say similar to the Apostle's Creed so other yellow circles join up only to discover that it's not just a yellow circle group, but it's a group that excludes yellow circles that go to movies, or let their young circles read Harry Potter, or wear shorts, or you have a swimming pool, or are Calvinist in interpretation instead of Arminian or vice versa......it is far better to be upfront and honest than it is to later kick people out of the yellow circle club when you knew before you formed the club that the members didn't want to include yellow circles of other personal practices or broader belief systems. Again, I have nothing against the existence and fellowship of yellow circle clubs, my objection is to misrepresentation of what the club truly believes so that others end up very hurt when they get kicked out of the yellow circles for a belief that was not addressed at membership time. I don't even care what the name is, just be honest about whom and whom you do not want to join the club. That way, those yellow circles who not define their shape and color so narrowly, will not get steam-rolled in the future and thus, Crayola's reputation will not be damaged. :D

 

And Heather, you know that I am saying this good naturedly, don't you? I am one of your many sister's in yellowhood that is better for being able to converse and discourse with you and read about your family adventures in online land!

 

Faith

[Heather in Neverland]

Yes, it would, for me. The change ups are rough, as are the descriptions that seem to imply that all yellow is welcome when, in fact, only darkish, textured, unstriped mustard yellow is allowed.

 

I gotcha. I am all for being up front about your exclusivity. :D

 

There is a country club on this island that is only for Australians. And a swim club that is only for Chinese. And clubs that are only for women. And some that are just for Malaysian women. And oodles of clubs and organizations that are only for Muslims. Etc etc etc

 

So even on an island where the population is incredibly diverse, exclusivity in certain ways is everywhere. I don't think we can get around it and really, would you want to? Would you want to give up the right to associate (or not) with whomever you choose?

 

The problem, of course, is the hurt feelings.

[Murphy101]

Nothing in the history of the world suggests that exclusive-minded, insular religion adds to the quality of life of people, to community, or to human growth.

 

In fact, exclusive minded religion has, instead, a documentable history of violence, hate, power abuse, judgement, murder, and exclusion.

 

Oh good grief. Not one person has said these people in their everyday lives are following an insular exclusive religion. These people are not on some God-forsaken compound in the desert with tinfoil hats. Most of the time they are constantly involved with other aspects of life that bring them into contact with all sorts if people, many of which are very different in many ways from themselves.

 

I think in a world where yellow circles are more and more likely to be...confronted, they have a right to have a space free from possible confrontation.

 

I agree. In most of these situations, they aren't trying to avoid others as much as they are trying to connect to certain people.

 

As a purple triangle, I can understand wanting to get together with other purple triangles. It doesn't mean I don't like or don't associate with blue square or yellow circles. It just means sometimes I crave the company of my fellow purple triangles.

[Heather in Neverland]

 

And Heather, you know that I am saying this good naturedly, don't you? I am one of your many sister's in yellowhood that is better for being able to converse and discourse with you and read about your family adventures in online land!

 

Faith

 

Oh of course! :grouphug: you know i love you! I was just trying to get to the heart of the matter.

 

I once joined a co-op when i attended a church full of homeschoolers. Everything was fine. Then they got this bug that all members of the co-op have to be members of that church as well. Not regular attenders.... Members.

To be fair, they had their reasons for doing this.

 

For reasons I don't care to get into, we were not members and did not want to become members although we were regular attenders. So I had to leave the group. I huffed and puffed and stomped around in anger but in the end I had to admit that it was their group and they had the right to make the rules. I didn't like the rules. Therefore, it was not the group for me.

[twoforjoy]

I don't think we can get around it and really, would you want to? Would you want to give up the right to associate (or not) with whomever you choose?

 

Aren't Christians supposed to lay down their rights? I keep seeing people talking about how groups have the right to be exclusive, but to me, that's a non-issue. Sure, we have the right. We have the right to do all sorts of things. But that doesn't make those things right or good.

 

The problem is that many homeschoolers are already isolated. And, when the only co-op in your area is exclusive, that means it's going to be that much harder for people who don't share the views that it seems like many homeschoolers share to find social outlets for their children and support for themselves. And, that stinks. I would think that, in order to better love and serve the other homeschoolers around them, Christian homeschoolers would make the decision to lay down their right to exclude whoever they want from their groups and find a way to include all homeschoolers in their groups and activities.

 

Now, they are certainly free not to do so, and to exercise their right to be as exclusive as they wish. I'm not saying they shouldn't. But, to me, that doesn't mean it's the right thing to do or something to be applauded.

 

If people really feel the need to have time to be around "like-minded" individuals, isn't that what friendship is for? Have a couple of like-minded friends over and be as exclusive as you want during the time you're together. But, I think it does need to be recognized that finding support is very difficult for many homeschoolers, and these sorts of exclusive SOFs just make it that much harder, particularly for homeschoolers who aren't conservative Protestants, to find support. So why not save exclusivity for other times and use a co-op to serve as many homeschoolers as possible? To me, that just seems like the right and loving thing to do.

 

I was part of a mom's group when I first moved to my neighborhood. A number of the moms were part of a specific church group. They could very easily have only had a group for people who shared their beliefs. But, I'm really glad they decided to lay down their right to do so and to have an inclusive group, because a lot of friendships were formed (many between people with different beliefs) that are still strong six years later. These women (who were part of the same church group) also had a Bible study group together that met once a week, and I'm sure they got together as friends, so it's not like they lacked time with the "like-minded." It's not like they never had any time to be around people who believed just the same as they did. But they recognized that the community as a whole could benefit from a mother's group that was inclusive rather than exclusive. I'm not sure why more homeschooling co-ops can't take the same approach.

Edited July 15, 2011 by twoforjoy

[Heather in Neverland]

 

As a purple triangle, I can understand wanting to get together with other purple triangles. It doesn't mean I don't like or don't associate with blue square or yellow circles. It just means sometimes I crave the company of my fellow purple triangles.

 

YES! that's exactly it!

 

I remember the summer I lived in Cuernavaca, Mexico, with a family that did not speak a lick of English. As much as I love the Spanish language and the Mexican culture, whenever I had a chance to hang around another American it was like an oasis to me. Sometimes you just need your peeps.:D

[Murphy101]

As for names and clear info up front.

 

People can call themselves anything and it doesn't make it true. If someone calls themselves a flamingo, do I have to agree to accept them as a flamingo?

 

There are Catholics that aren't catholic. They are not in communion with either the eastern or western church. They might or might not follow church teachings. Yes. They have that right. There is not a logo or copyright or trademark on the term Catholic, like there is for say Pepsi. A product can't call itself Pepsi unless it IS Pepsi. Religion does not have that restriction, and I am glad for that just as often as I'm frustrated by it.

 

The result tho is that individuals have the uber tough job of trying to sort through things.

 

Which makes giving very absolute and completely defined parameters extremely difficult. That can backfire by requiring they be more strict than they actually want to be. And no group can plan for every applicant situation. What about mixed families? Is my being catholic okay but not if I'm married to someone outside the faith? What if I'm going through RCIA, but I'm not actually a catholic yet? What if I was raised a total heathen and still have some bad habits even tho I have converted?

[Mrs Mungo]

Heather, have you read any of my other posts on this?

 

Honestly, I think the differences in people's experiences with *specific groups* is too vast to overcome. I have been homeschooling for 11 years, I have moved 4 times in that time. I have experienced a lot of different groups. Let me explain a few of the experiences of myself or a few of my friends. I would really like to know how you think you would feel if these things happened to you:

 

You attend a church. It's a great church, you love it. You sign up for nursery, help in the foodbank, you are asked to be a helper in the children's ministry and you teach Bible classes there. You try to join the homeschool group and are told you can't. Your beliefs don't exactly line up. So, you aren't allowed to go to the zoo with people who let you teach Bible lessons to their kids. You are good enough to help whenever and wherever they need it, but you aren't good enough to be blessed by a ministry you need. How would you feel?

 

You join a group without a statement of faith. It is a Christian military homeschool group. You join. You volunteer for years within the group, you participate heavily in the group, it makes up your circle of friends for the most part. One non-Christian family joins and makes a few waves. Most people just let it go. The family moves away before the next year starts. But, a couple of the newer ladies get mad about it. They have recently been appointed in leadership roles. They design a statement of faith. Over half the current membership is suddenly excluded, including you. They boot everyone who doesn't sign unceremoniously off of the email list. Nobody recovers any part of the money they put into the group. How do you feel?

 

You are a strong, extremely conservative fundamentalist military family which has recently moved. You have never had a problem with a SOF, you happily sign a griup's SOF when you apply for membership. Your application is rejected because you haven't been a member of your home church long enough. How do you feel?

 

Eta: nobody is arguing their right to exist. Fred Phelps has a right to his horrible protests. The KKK has a right to their rallies. Rights have nothing at all to do with the discussion. I am only using extreme examples to point out that any rights argument is moot. We agree on that.

Edited July 15, 2011 by Mrs Mungo

[WeeBeaks]

I personally am fine with a yellow only group, one which I am likely not eligible based on SOF anyway! (Catholic here).

 

We have a yellow only group here (Christian, no Catholic), a Catholic group, a Muslim group, an atheist group, an all inclusive group, an unschoolers group, an AP group, etc., etc. Honestly, I think they are all fine and have no desire to demand a group that isn't open to me admit me and my family.

 

There are several groups that want to talk freely about their chosen path (whatever it may be!) without someone else constantly debating them, and they have a right to do so. The unschooler may be sick of hearing contrary evidence for a while, the "school at home" type the same, the AP sick about hearing why they shouldn't, the Muslim sick of not sharing their beliefs among friends or frankly the Christian just wanting to share their Christian beliefs in a supportive atmosphere. And most of them I have met in other groups (inclusive ones) seem to be nonprejudiced, friendly, outgoing people who hold no ill-will against others. But it is not bad IMHO to have one group where people are like you in your love of whatever and not need to defend it for a while, or just not mention your love of X, Y or Z.

[mommaduck]

We have a yellow only group here (Christian, no Catholic), a Catholic group, a Muslim group, an atheist group, an all inclusive group, an unschoolers group, an AP group, etc., etc.

Many areas do not have this many groups. Most have ONE group and it's closed to a select type of people.

[twoforjoy]

Many areas do not have this many groups. Most have ONE group and it's closed to a select type of people.

 

And this is exactly the problem.

 

It's not like there's a ton of co-ops for most people in most parts of the country to choose from. If they have a homeschool support group or co-op available at all, there's likely just one. And if that one group is exclusive, that shuts out people who could use the support.

[Heather in Neverland]

Now, they are certainly free not to do so, and to exercise their right to be as exclusive as they wish. I'm not saying they shouldn't. But, to me, that doesn't mean it's the right thing to do or something to be applauded.

 

. I'm not sure why more homeschooling co-ops can't take the same approach.

 

Well i don't know that anyone is "applauding" their exclusivity as much as they are trying to quell the idea that all exclusive groups are doing it for nefarious reasons.

 

I totally get the idea of a lack of resources making it even more difficult. Let me give you an example:

 

The school where I work is the only American International school on the island. If you are an American and you move here out of choice or because your job brings you here, my school is the one you want to attend.

 

But we are also a Christian school. Very conservative Christian school. We accept students of all faiths and indeed have a huge diversity including Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims and even atheists. We are open to all BUT you will be given a document before you sign up that tells you what we believe and what we teach.

 

We have Americans that come here and want their child to attend an American school. Their choices are limited to say the least. Many get very upset that we require their child to attend bible class or teach about creationism because they are not Christian. We inform them that they are free to pull their child out of our school.

 

But they come back with "but this is the only American school" and insist we should be more inclusive when what they really mean is they want us to change for them because they lack any other resource for American education.

 

I am sorry for that. I really am. But asking us to change who we are to fit them is not fair either.

 

One last example and then I am going to bed. :tongue_smilie: I am a working mom. I always have been. Co-ops are held during the day in every group I have been a part of and you have to help in the group. Well i couldn't because I worked during the day. If I couldn't help then I couldn't let my child attend the co-op classes either I was told.

 

It would have been great for them to have evening classes or weekend classes so we could participate but it is not the group's fault that I work and it isn't fair of me to ask them to change for me.

 

So you see, you just can't be everything that everyone needs. Sometimes you have to set parameters and parameter by definition means that someone will get excluded. At the risk of sounding cavalier... That is life.

[WeeBeaks]

Many areas do not have this many groups. Most have ONE group and it's closed to a select type of people.

 

That is very true, and I'm sorry for those of you in that situation, but I don't think it takes away the right of the group in question to form their own circle.

 

I don't choose the exclusive groups. But I am weary of defending my choices. It seems locally here that homeschoolers seem very incapable of living and let live without lecturing how a family could do things better if only the other family switched to the 1st family's way of doing things. :001_huh: So weary I have considered joining an exclusive group to take a break for a while. So I have a big sympathy for the exclusive groups though I don't belong to one if that makes sense.

 

Is there truly no open group in your area at all?

[mommaduck]

That is very true, and I'm sorry for those of you in that situation, but I don't think it takes away the right of the group in question to form their own circle.

 

I don't choose the exclusive groups. But I am weary of defending my choices. It seems locally here that homeschoolers seem very incapable of living and let live without lecturing how a family could do things better if only the other family switched to the 1st family's way of doing things. :001_huh: So weary I have considered joining an exclusive group to take a break for a while. So I have a big sympathy for the exclusive groups though I don't belong to one if that makes sense.

 

Is there truly no open group in your area at all?

 

When I lived near St Louis, no. There was one large Christian group (but you could not be RC, EO, JW, or LDS). There MAY have been an inclusive group IN St Louis, but I don't know, it would have been a 45min-1hr trip for me at the very least.

 

Here, I have to go into the next county to get to the inclusive group. I'm "part of it" in one sense, but have never participated because of distance. I drive there once a year for my evaluations. I'm almost equally as far from Philly, but then that would have the city traffic on top of everything.

 

There are several groups in my county. One is hugely Reformed, open to most Christians with the understanding that it's from the Protestant POV, but is rather expensive. There is another group (not certain on religion with it), but it is rather expensive. The anabaptists have split off to have their own thing (apparently they were in "control" of the main group at one time and had a heart attack with others started attending with t-shirts and jeans). We were accepted by the Catholic group along with another Orthodox family. Lastly, there was a Natural Learners group, but that shut down. I have no idea about any other groups being here.

[Murphy101]

Mrs Mungo -

 

Btdt.:grouphug:

 

I've been in very exclusive groups that suddenly got so tight that I no longer qualified. I've been in very open groups that changed policy too. And I've been in a tight group that opened up so much that I didn't want to be in it.

 

Now I just don't join anything very often bc I don't want to deal with the drama and am too busy to get very involved anyways.

 

The one example I would be furious over, possibly bc I'm RC, is the church home school group. If they were claiming to be the St Cecilia Catholic Parish Home School Group/Coop and I was a RC attending St Cecilia Parish as best I could, I'd be upset at being denied acceptance. The parish priest should deal with that injustice if they are using parish facilities or the church bulletin.

 

The rest hurts and is frustrating too. But I've come to expect it.:grouphug:

[twoforjoy]

So you see, you just can't be everything that everyone needs. Sometimes you have to set parameters and parameter by definition means that someone will get excluded. At the risk of sounding cavalier... That is life.

 

But there's exclusion in practice--not everybody can make the meetings, not everybody will get along, not everybody will like the classes being offered, etc.--and exclusion in principle--anybody who isn't X or Y can't join. I don't think anybody is saying that exclusion-in-practice is something that can or must be avoided in all situations. But that's very different from people being excluded for ideological reasons.

 

I just don't think a homeschool support group or co-op should function as a "safe space" for people with certain religious beliefs to get together. There are plenty of other times and places where they could do so. Like at church, for a big one. Or, they could form a prayer group or Bible study. I think it would be much better--and more Christian, quite frankly--for people to use that sort of venue to gather with like-minded people and discuss religious matters without having to worry about anybody disagreeing or getting offended, and to use a homeschool support group or co-op as a place for providing support to all homeschoolers in the community. I guess I don't see why people would feel the need to turn the homeschool support group into a "safe space" for their religious beliefs, rather than simply as a "safe space" for homeschoolers, when there are so many other options available to them if they do want a place to talk about their religious beliefs with only like-minded individuals.

[Murphy101]

I just don't think a homeschool support group or co-op should function as a "safe space" for people with certain religious beliefs to get together. There are plenty of other times and places where they could do so. Like at church, for a big one. Or, they could form a prayer group or Bible study. I think it would be much better--and more Christian, quite frankly--for people to use that sort of venue to gather with like-minded people and discuss religious matters without having to worry about anybody disagreeing or getting offended, and to use a homeschool support group or co-op as a place for providing support to all homeschoolers in the community. I guess I don't see why people would feel the need to turn the homeschool support group into a "safe space" for their religious beliefs, rather than simply as a "safe space" for homeschoolers, when there are so many other options available to them if they do want a place to talk about their religious beliefs with only like-minded individuals.

 

The fact you feel so differently and strongly about this is exactly why they would not want you in their group/coop. Bottom line is they formed a group/coop bc they completely disagree and do want a group/coop like this. If you don't, then obviously this group/coop is not for you.

[WeeBeaks]

I just don't think a homeschool support group or co-op should function as a "safe space" for people with certain religious beliefs to get together. There are plenty of other times and places where they could do so. Like at church, for a big one. Or, they could form a prayer group or Bible study. I think it would be much better--and more Christian, quite frankly--for people to use that sort of venue to gather with like-minded people and discuss religious matters without having to worry about anybody disagreeing or getting offended, and to use a homeschool support group or co-op as a place for providing support to all homeschoolers in the community. I guess I don't see why people would feel the need to turn the homeschool support group into a "safe space" for their religious beliefs, rather than simply as a "safe space" for homeschoolers, when there are so many other options available to them if they do want a place to talk about their religious beliefs with only like-minded individuals.

 

So by this token then unschooling only groups, or atheist only groups (after all they would no church to meet in), or attached parenting only, or classical or Charlotte Mason education only groups are okay as exclusive groups but not religious-specific groups? We have all the above in our community by the way, so I'm not making this one up. I am unable to see the difference between excluding for religion and excluding for other reasons? It still leaves people out.

[Mariam]

I like this analogy :)

:iagree:

[mommaduck]

So by this token then unschooling only groups, or atheist only groups (after all they would no church to meet in), or attached parenting only, or classical or Charlotte Mason education only groups are okay as exclusive groups but not religious-specific groups? We have all the above in our community by the way, so I'm not making this one up. I am unable to see the difference between excluding for religion and excluding for other reasons? It still leaves people out.

 

Wow..where do you live?!

[WeeBeaks]

Wow..where do you live?!

 

Southern California - HUGE metropolitan area. The homeschoolers here are also very very diverse, and Christian homeschoolers from what I see are not dominant at all.

[mommaduck]

Southern California - HUGE metropolitan area. The homeschoolers here are also very very diverse, and Christian homeschoolers from what I see are not dominant at all.

 

Ah, you have California and then the rest of the country :lol: (and I mean that in good humour, not offensively). That is very unusual compared to the majority of the US, unfortunately. Count yourself VERY blessed.

[twoforjoy]

So by this token then unschooling only groups, or atheist only groups (after all they would no church to meet in), or attached parenting only, or classical or Charlotte Mason education only groups are okay as exclusive groups but not religious-specific groups? We have all the above in our community by the way, so I'm not making this one up. I am unable to see the difference between excluding for religion and excluding for other reasons? It still leaves people out.

 

I don't really see the need for those, no. If many people had an issue finding support as homeschoolers because the only groups available required that you be an unschooler or a CM homeschooler, I'd say that was a big problem and they should change their policy.

 

Again, there's a time and a place to be with the like-minded. If you've got enough people in your group to have a subgroup that meets sometimes to talk about unschooling or classical homeschooling or CM homeschooling or conservative Christian homeschooling, I see no problem with it. But, no, I don't agree that a homeschooling co-op or support group is serving people by excluding people who don't subscribe to any particular ideology.

 

They should be allowed, obviously. But, I don't think that's really the best way of providing support and I do think that the fact that many homeschooling families lack support should be taken into consideration, and people should set aside their "right" to be exclusive in order to serve the most people. They can then have other, informal means of creating "safe spaces."

[Mariam]

Ah, you have California and then the rest of the country :lol: (and I mean that in good humour, not offensively). That is very unusual compared to the majority of the US, unfortunately. Count yourself VERY blessed.

 

:iagree: I love CA <3 <3 I'm from there and wish could relocate there....

[Avila]

So by this token then unschooling only groups, or atheist only groups (after all they would no church to meet in), or attached parenting only, or classical or Charlotte Mason education only groups are okay as exclusive groups but not religious-specific groups? We have all the above in our community by the way, so I'm not making this one up. I am unable to see the difference between excluding for religion and excluding for other reasons? It still leaves people out.

 

The difference to me is that the purpose of a knitting group, for example, is to bring people together who like to knit. It really doesn't matter if you knit socks or sweaters, the love of knitting is what the group is there to promote. Someone who doesn't want to knit has no reason to want to join that group.

 

But homeschooling groups, in these cases, don't seem satisfied with having a group based on homeschooling. Having homeschooling in common isn't enough. So they tack on Christian, which is honestly not descriptive enough either, since they get to define who is or isn't Christian for their purposes. It is just harder as a homeschooler because there are often not that many homeschoolers in a given area, and once you divide up like this, people who are excluded from the group are marginalized and don't have the same opportunities that a large group can offer. I can look at their group from the outside as a Christian homeschooler, but I still can't join it. I cannot imagine going to join a knitting group and being told that even though I knit, I don't knit exactly like they do so I need to find another knitting group that fits me better.

 

They have every right to do what they want with their groups. I don't have to like it. I don't have to join it. I have the same right to disagree with them, I guess.

Edited July 15, 2011 by Asenik

[8circles]

I think groups have the right to be exclusive. I happen to think that's not what co-ops or homeschool groups should be for, but I respect the opinions of others that disagree. I think it's interesting that this thread, where many people are suggesting that groups be more descriptive in their title to make it more clear from the get-go who they are open to, is going on at the same time as another thread where it's apparently too difficult to be more specific.

 

I think being as specific as you actually intend to be is always a smart idea.

[WeeBeaks]

So I'm hearing a lot of you are feeling you don't have the support you need in homeschooling so feel you want to join exclusive groups? If you do join these groups, you feel you will have the support you need even though those people are (apparently by their definition) different from you but also homeschoolers?

[Murphy101]

people should set aside their "right" to be exclusive in order to serve the most people. They can then have other, informal means of creating "safe spaces."

 

But the group wasn't created to serve the masses. The group was created to meet the needs or wants of certain individuals.

 

One cannot presume they are gathering as home schoolers even tho it is clear they are not.

 

To use the knitting examples.

 

If the purpose is to gather with other knitters, that would make sense.

 

But in these groups is it not.

 

They are a certain demographic gathering for that reason to knit together.

[twoforjoy]

The difference to me is that the purpose of a knitting group, for example, is to bring people together who like to knit. It really doesn't matter if you knit socks or sweaters, the love of knitting is what the group is there to promote. Someone who doesn't want to knit has no reason to want to join that group.

 

That's a great analogy. For me, I have no idea why I'd feel the need to create a sock-knitters-only knitting group, or a sweater-knitters-only knitting group, or a Christian-only knitters group. And, if a crocheter wanted to join, I'd say, why not? Now, if they wanted the group to change to focusing on crochet, then I'd see it being an issue, and they should be politely reminded that it's a knitting group. But if they just wanted some other fiber crafters to hang out with while they crocheted, and were content to listen to knitting talk while they worked and weren't going to spend the time trying to convince everybody why they should crochet instead, it seems to me that all would be good.

 

And if the knitters felt put out because suddenly they couldn't talk about how much better knitting was than crocheting, I'd say maybe they needed to grow up a little bit, and if it was that important to them to talk about crocheting in a way that would make a crocheter uncomfortable, the people who wanted to do so could grab a drink after the knitting group was over and do it then.

[mommaduck]

So I'm hearing a lot of you are feeling you don't have the support you need in homeschooling so feel you want to join exclusive groups? If you do join these groups, you feel you will have the support you need even though those people are (apparently by their definition) different from you but also homeschoolers?

 

I think it's more accurate to say that we wish those groups were more inclusive to start with.

[Murphy101]

As an aside

 

My town happens to actually have a baby blanket only knitting group. They knit blankets for babies in NICUs.

[twoforjoy]

So I'm hearing a lot of you are feeling you don't have the support you need in homeschooling so feel you want to join exclusive groups? If you do join these groups, you feel you will have the support you need even though those people are (apparently by their definition) different from you but also homeschoolers?

 

I actually don't want to join any groups. ;) I don't really feel the need for homeschooler-only support.

 

But, I know enough people who have had bad experiences with exclusive groups to think that they are not a particularly positive addition to the homeschool community or that they are they loving and serving the community.

[mommaduck]

I think groups have the right to be exclusive. I happen to think that's not what co-ops or homeschool groups should be for, but I respect the opinions of others that disagree. I think it's interesting that this thread, where many people are suggesting that groups be more descriptive in their title to make it more clear from the get-go who they are open to, is going on at the same time as another thread where it's apparently too difficult to be more specific.

 

I think being as specific as you actually intend to be is always a smart idea.

 

For two entirely different reasons (again Apples & Oranges).

[*Lulu*]

Here is why SOF's make me twitchy-

 

We have at least one local group that meets for glorified playdates, takes field trips, and NOTHING ELSE. There is no instruction being given to anyone. It is completely a social club. HOWEVER, you must sign a SOF to participate. And it is not just for the parent joining, but for the whole family. So my friend who is a believer and is raising her children in her faith, but is married to a non-believer cannot join.

 

I completely agree that it is their right to be exclusive.

 

I can almost wrap my mind around a SOF in an instruction focused group.

 

I cannot for the life of me understand why we all need to be walking in spiritual lockstep to watch the firefighters show us how the siren works.

Edited July 15, 2011 by BLA5
missplaced "a"

[Mrs Mungo]

So I'm hearing a lot of you are feeling you don't have the support you need in homeschooling so feel you want to join exclusive groups? If you do join these groups, you feel you will have the support you need even though those people are (apparently by their definition) different from you but also homeschoolers?

 

I don't believe in a literal 7 day creation. My friend's beliefs lined up perfectly, but she had recently moved so had not been a member of her church very long. These are not some sort of giant moral differences that one would need to overcome. If they were, I could understand it. And like BLA5, most of these groups I have dealt with are for field trips and park days; they are not instructional co-ops.

[*Lulu*]

Also, if you want to be a small exclusive group, maybe you shouldn't advertise to the homeschool community at large in your area?

[Avila]

So I'm hearing a lot of you are feeling you don't have the support you need in homeschooling so feel you want to join exclusive groups? If you do join these groups, you feel you will have the support you need even though those people are (apparently by their definition) different from you but also homeschoolers?

 

Personally? No. I no longer have any interest in a SOF group.

 

But these groups are usually the large group in town. The leadership who set up the group are not people I would likely feel supported by. But the other 75% of the group who join because this is the largest group that has the most to offer and who do not usually care about the exclusive SOF? Those are often people who I would like to meet and who I might very well have things in common with and feel supported by. But I likely won't meet too many of them with them involved in a big group with lots of activities and me over here outside of it. Our activities and circles likely won't overlap. There are usually lots of people in those big groups who are in them for the advantage of being in a big group and not because they necessarily want to never meet anyone else who couldn't join that group.

 

Either way, it doesn't matter. My family personally manages just fine either way. But I do feel bad for other families, especially ones new to an area or just starting to homeschool who really could use those opportunities.

Edited July 15, 2011 by Asenik

[asta]

I think it's more accurate to say that we wish those groups were more inclusive to start with.

 

:iagree:

 

I think the biggest difficulty is that most of us don't live in big places. We live in small places that have one (if any) group. And if it is exclusive, well, that's it.

 

And as to starting a new one... BWA HA HA HA HA!

 

Guess what? People don't like change. Your average person would rather lie through their teeth and sign a statement of faith that goes against their stated core belief system then show up for the "new group" that only has 5 people (because it is brand new and trying to grow!).

 

Ask me how I know.

 

I watched a woman LIE TO A PRIEST about signing a statement of faith that deliberately excluded Catholics. He had just told her she could NOT sign it and be in communion with the Church! She did it anyway and LIED to him!

 

People will do strange things to get a cheesy geography class and a picnic, let me tell you...

 

 

asta

[asta]

But the other 75% of the group who joins because this is the largest group that has the most to offer and who do not usually care about the exclusive SOF? Those are often people who I would like to meet and who I might very well have things in common with and feel supported by. But I likely won't meet too many of them with them involved in a big group with lots of activities and me over here outside of it. Our activities and circles likely won't overlap. There are usually lots of people in those big groups who are in them for the advantage of being in a big group and not because they necessarily want to never meet anyone else who couldn't join that group.

 

 

Exactly.

[Carol in Cal.]

As an aside

 

My town happens to actually have a baby blanket only knitting group. They knit blankets for babies in NICUs.

 

Well.

 

That is APPALLING.

 

Do you mean to tell me that they would EXCLUDE those who knit cute little CAPS for babies in NICU's?

 

(Shakes head. Walks away...)

 

:lol:

[Mrs Mungo]

Well.

 

That is APPALLING.

 

Do you mean to tell me that they would EXCLUDE those who knit cute little CAPS for babies in NICU's?

 

(Shakes head. Walks away...)

 

:lol:

 

It's more like they won't accept people who knit caps for babies in the NICU in their free time. You must sign a statement saying you have never knit a cap.

[Carol in Cal.]

It's more like they won't accept people who knit caps for babies in the NICU in their free time. You must sign a statement saying you have never knit a cap.

 

Worse and worse...

 

:lol:

[Avila]

As an aside

 

My town happens to actually have a baby blanket only knitting group. They knit blankets for babies in NICUs.

 

And I would never seek to join that group if I had no interest in knitting baby blankets. Really. But if I DID knit AND I knit baby blankets, I would have a reasonable expectation of being able to join that group.

 

It would be more like me showing up to their group as a knitter who knits baby blankets and then being told I still can't join because they ONLY use wool and I showed up with acrylic in my bag. Even if I was willing to just knit with wool at the meetings, I still couldn't join the group because I own acrylic yarn.

Edited July 15, 2011 by Asenik

[Murphy101]

Well.

 

That is APPALLING.

 

Do you mean to tell me that they would EXCLUDE those who knit cute little CAPS for babies in NICU's?

 

(Shakes head. Walks away...)

 

:lol:

 

If they weren't also knitting baby blankets? Yes. I happen to have asked!

[Mrs Mungo]

And I would never seek to join that group if I had no interest in knitting baby blankets. Really. But if I DID knit AND I knit baby blankets, I would have a reasonable expectation of being able to join that group.

 

Right. This is the point. You find a group called "knitting blankets for babies in the NICU." You think "great, this is what I've been looking for!" But, you show up to the first meeting and are told they don't want you or your blankets because they only use wool and you've been using acrylic.

[Carol in Cal.]

And I would never seek to join that group if I had no interest in knitting baby blankets. Really. But if I DID knit AND I knit baby blankets, I would have a reasonable expectation of being able to join that group.

 

Nope, you couldn't.

 

Because I have it on good authority (pulled out of the air dot com) that the baby blankets in question MUST only be knit of cotton, and Egyptian long-staple Pima cotton at that. Just because YOU think you knit baby blankets does not mean that you ACTUALLY knit baby blankets. Because everybody knows that REAL baby blankets are never knit of wool.

 

Please, get it straight.

 

:lol:

[Mrs Mungo]

Nope, you couldn't.

 

Because I have it on good authority (pulled out of the air dot com) that the baby blankets in question MUST only be knit of cotton, and Egyptian long-staple Pima cotton at that. Just because YOU think you knit baby blankets does not mean that you ACTUALLY knit baby blankets. Because everybody knows that REAL baby blankets are never knit of wool.

 

Please, get it straight.

 

:lol:

 

HA! Great minds...