Jump to content

Menu

Mom in Va. who lived through Cultural Revolution addresses school board regarding Critical Race Theory


Fritz
 Share

Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, LucyStoner said:

Here’s a nice breakdown that addresses the the issue from multiple angles.  

https://www.thefire.org/13-important-points-in-the-campus-k-12-critical-race-theory-debate/

“The reality is, as usual, complicated. Proponents of these bills need to realize that they can’t legislate these ideas out of existence, and that the more egregious bills are not only unconstitutional and thus totally futile, but throw fuel on an already raging culture war fire. Opponents of these bills need to read the bills and be honest about what’s actually in them and recognize that their opponents are motivated by something other than a desire to hide the true history of slavery. It is my hope that, wherever you lie on this issue, this article has given you a greater understanding of the opposing side. And if not, you’re welcome to join those yelling at me across both sides of the aisle!”

 

Whatever conversation people are having here, or on high-minded academic/legal grounds, in local communities around the country things are much messier and uglier. On the ground, the laws are being used as an excuse/justification for removing essential historical content, sanctioning teachers, and muzzling students. This is the continuation of a long struggle to sanitize history. And while the lawsuits wend their way through the courts, kids will lose. As always. Textbooks won’t stop being written while this is hashed out and the stripped ones will do damage long after any legal issues are resolved. The Trail of Tears wasn’t a long walk to a new home. Chattel slavery wasn’t the immigration of workers. Still, that’s what many children have been taught thanks to the last version of this kerfluffle. It’s not an esoteric examination of the rights of parents vs. schools, lacking in long-term consequence.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jul/01/aclu-fights-state-bans-teaching-critical-race-theory

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1272682

https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/does-academic-freedom-shield-teachers-as-states-take-aim-at-critical-race-theory/2021/06

 

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Whatever conversation people are having here, or on high-minded academic/legal grounds, in local communities around the country things are much messier and uglier. On the ground, the laws are being used as an excuse/justification for removing essential historical content. This is the continuation of a long struggle to sanitize history. And while the lawsuits wend their way through the courts, kids will lose. As always. Textbooks won’t stop being written while this is hashed out and the stripped ones will do damage long after any legal issues are resolved. The Trail of Tears wasn’t a long walk to a new home. Chattel slavery wasn’t the immigration of workers. Still, that’s what many children have been taught thanks to the last version of this kerfluffle. It’s not an esoteric examination of the rights of parents vs. schools lacking in long-term consequence.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jul/01/aclu-fights-state-bans-teaching-critical-race-theory

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1272682

https://www.edweek.org/policy-politics/does-academic-freedom-shield-teachers-as-states-take-aim-at-critical-race-theory/2021/06

 

The sub headline of that article I posted was, fittingly: 

Who’s going to win? I can’t say for certain, but it’s most likely not the children.

I agree it’s a shitshow and doesn’t serve children or their education well.  

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LucyStoner said:

The sub headline of that article I posted was, fittingly: 

Who’s going to win? I can’t say for certain, but it’s most likely not the children.

I agree it’s a shitshow and doesn’t serve children or their education well.  

With that, I agree.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/28/2021 at 3:23 PM, Melissa Louise said:

 

59 minutes ago, LucyStoner said:

Here’s a nice breakdown that addresses the the issue from multiple angles.  

https://www.thefire.org/13-important-points-in-the-campus-k-12-critical-race-theory-debate/

“The reality is, as usual, complicated. Proponents of these bills need to realize that they can’t legislate these ideas out of existence, and that the more egregious bills are not only unconstitutional and thus totally futile, but throw fuel on an already raging culture war fire. Opponents of these bills need to read the bills and be honest about what’s actually in them and recognize that their opponents are motivated by something other than a desire to hide the true history of slavery. It is my hope that, wherever you lie on this issue, this article has given you a greater understanding of the opposing side. And if not, you’re welcome to join those yelling at me across both sides of the aisle!”

 

 

25 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

re "divisive concept" bills

That's a good rundown, thanks for posting.

I particularly appreciate point 8. Proponents and critics of the divisive concepts bills are largely talking past each other on the issue, which so aptly characterizes this 28-page thread that I feel we're being watched...

 

... and point 12. What is the deeper cause of this battle? A breakdown in societal trust and trust in expertise, particularly along partisan lines. 

 

To the issue raised in the most recent plot twist in the thread... Point 13 is that there are going to be a LOT of lawsuits.

That too is (obviously, always) a battleground of the culture wars.

It was a good article. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that many of us use the American Indians in Children's Literature to find good children's books about Native Americans. Here is a link to their coverage of a Mexican Studies program in Tucson. 

https://americanindiansinchildrensliterature.blogspot.com/2012/01/aicl-coverage-of-arizona-law-that.html

The program was outlawed by the State of Arizona but that was overturned because a federal judge found the ban was motivated by race. 

I was reminded of the Tucson program when I read this article from Chalk Beat. 

As states place new limits on class discussions on race, research suggests they benefit students

Quote

A handful of recent studies have found that students are more engaged in school after taking classes that frankly discuss racism and bigotry — just as some educators like Mason fear such discussions could be threatened by a wave of broad state laws designed to limit the teaching of what some are calling “critical race theory.”

I'm always skeptical of studies about education. It's hard to measure quality. But this feels right to me. When students honestly discuss a problem that see their in their own lives they will be more engaged in school. I saw this in teaching my daughter. 

And thinking back about the teacher who was criticized for not "redirecting" the student, what happens to a student when he/she is "redirected" away from an unprompted response to the news? Don't we want our students to engage thoughtfully with current events? It would be telling a student to not do what a school should want them to do. Would that student be more or less likely to engage in school after that? 

You could argue that the white student who was offended (to be honest we don't know if the student was offended or the parent was offended which is an important point) might be less likely to engage in school after he/she was offended. I don't want any student to be in a hostile school environment but I don't think the expectation in a high school classroom should be no offense. Being offended is sometimes part of open and honest dialogue. Of course it should be polite and respectful and the comment the student made was not impolite or disrespectful. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Washington Heights high school principal is facing a probe by the New York City Department of Education for allegedly discriminating against white teachers.

The probe was launched after faculty members at High School for Law and Public Service accused principal Paula Lev of discriminating against staff and conspiring to get a white colleague fired.

Faculty filed a complaint with the Education Department and also voted they had 'no confidence' in Lev's leadership.

The complaint, which was obtained by the New York Post, claims that Lev 'flagrantly but unsuccessfully attempted to divide our school by race' and told an employee that she 'was going to get rid of all these white teachers that aren't doing anything for the kids of our community.'

'She definitely has something against white people,' it adds. 

I believe Ms. Lev is not suited for the position of principal because of the comments she has made to me about white people and the malicious ways in which she thinks and speaks. She is not fit to be a leader of a school. 

'As a school staff, we have lost confidence, creditability, trust, and most importantly we have lost hope in Ms. Lev as a principal at the High School for Law & Public Service.'

It is unclear if Lev knew about the complaint, but on the last day of school she laid off the faculty member who filed it and said he was no longer needed at the school and should look for work elsewhere in the DOE.

'He blew the whistle on her and a week later he was (let go),' an unnamed source told the New York Post.

Tensions first flared between Lev and staff in February, when she publicly accused Nick Bacon, the union chapter leader, of being racist after he filed a routine grievance about a scheduling issue affecting faculty members.

Lev confronted Bacon in front of a room of his colleagues and said, 'I wasn't sure what your problem with me was, maybe it's because I am a woman of color and you're a white man?'

Bacon wrote about the incident on March 2 in a letter signed other staff members and sent to Manny Ramirez, the superintendent of District 6. The grievance was solved in Bacon's favor and Ramirez acknowledged in a staff meeting that Lev's comment was 'inappropriate,' but that the two must work together and move past it.

Lev later apologized to Bacon for publicly calling him out, a course told the New York Post. However, she stood by her comment and said it represented how she felt. She also recommended that Bacon read Robin DiAngelo's 2018 book 'White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism.'

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/nyc-schools-faculty-says-principal-is-racist-against-white-staff/ar-AAM1FFa

Four months after the conflict involving Bacon, another faculty member filed the discrimination complaint alleging that Lev had pressured him to help her engineer the ouster of a colleague, an unidentified white female staffer.

https://nypost.com/2021/07/10/washington-heights-school-staffers-have-no-confidence-in-principal-paula-lev-after-race-flap/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

I don't think it's marginally political. The point is that it's hard to know where "politics" ends and "real life" begins. "They don't care about me because I'm black" is both deeply political and deeply personal. 

Yeah..this is the kind of thinking I challenge in my own kids. 'They' + global statement is rarely true.

Clearly, I wouldn't challenge it in this circ, partly because a teacher's role is not to practice CBT on her students. Partly because that would involve ignoring the primary need in the moment. 

I'd observe this as primarily emotional content. That's the salient point for an adult in charge. Kid is distressed; regardless of content, I need to help student self regulate, and direct them to appropriate support. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, LucyStoner said:

Here’s a nice breakdown that addresses the the issue from multiple angles.  

https://www.thefire.org/13-important-points-in-the-campus-k-12-critical-race-theory-debate/

“The reality is, as usual, complicated. Proponents of these bills need to realize that they can’t legislate these ideas out of existence, and that the more egregious bills are not only unconstitutional and thus totally futile, but throw fuel on an already raging culture war fire. Opponents of these bills need to read the bills and be honest about what’s actually in them and recognize that their opponents are motivated by something other than a desire to hide the true history of slavery. It is my hope that, wherever you lie on this issue, this article has given you a greater understanding of the opposing side. And if not, you’re welcome to join those yelling at me across both sides of the aisle!”

 

I posted that link a while back.

I thought it was a good article at the time. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Melissa Louise said:

Yeah..this is the kind of thinking I challenge in my own kids. 'They' + global statement is rarely true.

And yet it captures a certain truth, no? How much sophistication do we expect from a kid? "My life is treated as less valuable by the government and by a substantial segment of the population" is a bit much to expect from a kid. 

 

Just now, Melissa Louise said:

I'd observe this as primarily emotional content. That's the salient point for an adult in charge. Kid is distressed; regardless of content, I need to help student self regulate, and direct them to appropriate support. 

You know, I always figure that part of my job as an adult is not to lie to kids. I tell my kids honestly what I see as their strengths and weaknesses -- not as a "you'll always be like this!" thing, but because it's information they can act on, and kids know whether you tell them or not. 

A kid saying something like is aware of the truth of what he's feeling whether you affirm it or not. All you can change is whether the kid trusts you.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Not_a_Number said:

And yet it captures a certain truth, no? How much sophistication do we expect from a kid? "My life is treated as less valuable by the government and by a substantial segment of the population" is a bit much to expect from a kid. 

 

You know, I always figure that part of my job as an adult is not to lie to kids. I tell my kids honestly what I see as their strengths and weaknesses -- not as a "you'll always be like this!" thing, but because it's information they can act on, and kids know whether you tell them or not. 

A kid saying something like is aware of the truth of what he's feeling whether you affirm it or not. All you can change is whether the kid trusts you.

You can validate the emotion without validating the thought. Imo. That's kind of how psychiatry and clinical psychology work. A good school counsellor ( the appropriate person to provide more extensive support ) is used to helping students in this way. 

It's wild to.me that after decades of trying to break down racial ( and other) stereotyping, any child could be exposed to an adult who amplifies stereotypes. 

It's at that point ( and not before ) I diverge from current trends in education. It doesn't empower any child to encourage a belief that they are hated. 

Children generally trust adults who are kind to them in their moments of distress. Simple kindness is rarer than you think in schools. 

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

And yet it captures a certain truth, no? How much sophistication do we expect from a kid? "My life is treated as less valuable by the government and by a substantial segment of the population" is a bit much to expect from a kid. 

 

You know, I always figure that part of my job as an adult is not to lie to kids. I tell my kids honestly what I see as their strengths and weaknesses -- not as a "you'll always be like this!" thing, but because it's information they can act on, and kids know whether you tell them or not. 

A kid saying something like is aware of the truth of what he's feeling whether you affirm it or not. All you can change is whether the kid trusts you.

This part. On what planet is gaslighting a best practice? This isn’t about interrogating dissociative thoughts. The child isn’t pathological because they’ve observed a pattern of behavior. Who is ‘they’? ‘Are you sure ‘they’ don’t care? How have ‘they’ hurt you, specifically? That is a violation all over again. The child is in distress because the events/feelings are actually distressing. This stuff is distressing.

What it would mean to be in a school that ‘was built for you’ is to have your feelings validated as rational and to be given the tools to deconstruct and/or channel them in constructive ways, e.g. personal excellence and change-making. *That* works. Going from feeling disempowered and powerless to empowered and powerful, not shuttling them off to a shrink so they can be convinced it’s really not so bad, no worries. Some things are objectively, reasonably, bad and their feelings are there to inspire action.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Melissa Louise said:

I posted that link a while back.

I thought it was a good article at the time. 

 

I realized my goof when Plum posted a response to you, me and Pam.  The main writer is interviewed on this week’s episode of Blocked and Reported.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LucyStoner said:

I realized my goof when Plum posted a response to you, me and Pam.  The main writer is interviewed on this week’s episode of Blocked and Reported.  

Your link is more likely to be read, so no drama 🙂

Yep, listened to that the other night. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

This part. On what planet is gaslighting a best practice? This isn’t about interrogating dissociative thoughts. The child isn’t pathological because they’ve observed a pattern of behavior. Who is ‘they’? ‘Are you sure ‘they’ don’t care? How have ‘they’ hurt you, specifically? That is a violation all over again. The child is in distress because the events/feelings are actually distressing. This stuff is distressing.

What it would mean to be in a school that ‘was built for you’ is to have your feelings validated as rational and to be given the tools to deconstruct and/or channel them in constructive ways, e.g. personal excellence and change-making. *That* works. Going from feeling disempowered and powerless to empowered and powerful, not shuttling them off to a shrink so they can be convinced it’s really not so bad, no worries. Some things are objectively, reasonably, bad and their feelings are there to inspire action.

I'm going to have these conversations with my own kids at some point. I'd guess they will be lucky enough not to experience discrimination themselves while we're in NYC, but a cursory study of history will probably raise certain questions for them about where Jews fit into the world... 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LucyStoner said:

I realized my goof when Plum posted a response to you, me and Pam.  The main writer is interviewed on this week’s episode of Blocked and Reported.  

It's a beefy thread...posts easily get lost in the shuffle. I’m just glad the article got a second look. 

I'll add that podcast to my list. 🙂

Edited by Plum
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sneezyone said:

This part. On what planet is gaslighting a best practice? This isn’t about interrogating dissociative thoughts. The child isn’t pathological because they’ve observed a pattern of behavior. Who is ‘they’? ‘Are you sure ‘they’ don’t care? How have ‘they’ hurt you, specifically? That is a violation all over again. The child is in distress because the events/feelings are actually distressing. This stuff is distressing.

What it would mean to be in a school that ‘was built for you’ is to have your feelings validated as rational and to be given the tools to deconstruct and/or channel them in constructive ways, e.g. personal excellence and change-making. *That* works. Going from feeling disempowered and powerless to empowered and powerful, not shuttling them off to a shrink so they can be convinced it’s really not so bad, no worries. Some things are objectively, reasonably, bad and their feelings are there to inspire action.

Why would we expect a teacher to respond to every offhand remark of every student before class? How would that even be possible in the normal American high school classroom with 25+ kids? 

I'm also troubled by the idea that a student has to be *on* during every minute of class. Can you imagine living like that? That sounds very disrespectful to students. Hostile even. Students would quickly learn not to say anything. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

You can validate the emotion without validating the thought. Imo. That's kind of how psychiatry and clinical psychology work. A good school counsellor ( the appropriate person to provide more extensive support ) is used to helping students in this way. 

It's wild to.me that after decades of trying to break down racial ( and other) stereotyping, any child could be exposed to an adult who amplifies stereotypes. 

It's at that point ( and not before ) I diverge from current trends in education. It doesn't empower any child to encourage a belief that they are hated. 

Children generally trust adults who are kind to them in their moments of distress. Simple kindness is rarer than you think in schools.

Thank you.

And while it's outside the scope of this thread, I must say I feel for children who hear that kind of talk at home, regardless of what color they are, but especially if they are in a minority group.  It's like my childhood friends being told they shouldn't expect to do well in math because they were girls, or they shouldn't expect to go to college because they weren't rich or intellectually gifted.

My other unpopular opinion is that I find it disturbing that many people on this thread actually agree with these beliefs, and these are the people who think they care the most about these kids.

Edited by SKL
  • Like 3
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, SKL said:

Thank you.

And while it's outside the scope of this thread, I must say I feel for children who hear that kind of talk at home, regardless of what color they are, but especially if they are in a minority group.  It's like my childhood friends being told they shouldn't expect to do well in math because they were girls, or they shouldn't expect to go to college because they weren't rich or intellectually gifted.

My other unpopular opinion is that I find it disturbing that many people on this thread actually agree with these beliefs, and these are the people who think they care the most about these kids.

It's absolutely bizarre to me that we've spun so far round that the concept of 'they' are like 'this' is now justice. 

'They' aren't like anything. That's the basis of challenging prejudice. 

We are in a very racially diverse school, and there is no way in this world anyone is allowed to stereotype like that, whether it's a 'positive' stereotype - all Asian kids are smart - or a negative one - all Aussie girls are sl**s, all Muslims are terrorists, all boys are a pain in the ass. 

They're discouraged from stereotyping other classes - all kindergarten are babies, all of Year 4 are dumb, Year 6 are rule breakers.

Every single time, back to the same message. Validate the emotion, explore the thinking. 

This is CBT 101. 

I don't know why ppl are getting in a knot about it. Unless they think only 'sick' people can use cognitive strategies as part of dealing with distress, and they have some ableism going on. 

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I'll just say I'll have the ass of anyone who tells my kids their race (or any other demographic) determines anything about their value or ability.

Edited by SKL
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SKL said:

Thank you.

And while it's outside the scope of this thread, I must say I feel for children who hear that kind of talk at home, regardless of what color they are, but especially if they are in a minority group.  It's like my childhood friends being told they shouldn't expect to do well in math because they were girls, or they shouldn't expect to go to college because they weren't rich or intellectually gifted.

My other unpopular opinion is that I find it disturbing that many people on this thread actually agree with these beliefs, and these are the people who think they care the most about these kids.

For the umpteenth time, the message that life sucks, discriminations exists, and sometimes you have to work twice as hard and be twice as good to go half as far undergirds A TON of the successes and breakthroughs minorities have had. None of that = you’re less valuable or less capable because X. It means, ‘I see you. I hear you. I know your worth and I know what you can do so don’t let the burdens and barriers get you down…WORK!’ It is nothing like the bolded straw man, an oft repeated and still spurious comparison. 

Don’t feel bad for kids who hear ‘I feel you, push through anyway’, feel bad for the ones who are told, ‘Everything’s fine, dear, you’re just imagining things’. They’re the ones internalizing systemic issues as personal problems/failings and ignoring everything else that comes out of the speaker’s mouth as untrustworthy. 

Someone asked earlier in the thread what kinds of messages have helped and would make schools more welcoming, historically and in my own family, those are it. They may not be effective in the context of a majority individual’s experience where it’s assumed and understood that problems are born of happenstance. They work in the context of overcoming systemic barriers to success.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SKL said:

And while it's outside the scope of this thread, I must say I feel for children who hear that kind of talk at home, regardless of what color they are, but especially if they are in a minority group.  It's like my childhood friends being told they shouldn't expect to do well in math because they were girls, or they shouldn't expect to go to college because they weren't rich or intellectually gifted.

My other unpopular opinion is that I find it disturbing that many people on this thread actually agree with these beliefs, and these are the people who think they care the most about these kids.

That’s not what anyone is saying at all. None of this is about telling kids they aren’t every bit as capable and deserving of succeeding as any other student. What are you seeing anywhere on this thread suggesting “many people on this thread actually agree with these beliefs?”

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ll just say this too while I’m at it…

MLK is lionized all over the world and yet no one deigns to misunderstand what he meant when he talked about the ‘white liberal’ as a group. No one pretends to misunderstand who the ‘they’ was that activists were railing against. Being willfully ignorant when a child uses that same language to describe what he’s seeing/feeling is a choice, an invalidating one.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Melissa Louise said:

It's absolutely bizarre to me that we've spun so far round that the concept of 'they' are like 'this' is now justice. 

'They' aren't like anything. That's the basis of challenging prejudice. 

We are in a very racially diverse school, and there is no way in this world anyone is allowed to stereotype like that, whether it's a 'positive' stereotype - all Asian kids are smart - or a negative one - all Aussie girls are sl**s, all Muslims are terrorists, all boys are a pain in the ass. 

They're discouraged from stereotyping other classes - all kindergarten are babies, all of Year 4 are dumb, Year 6 are rule breakers.

Every single time, back to the same message. Validate the emotion, explore the thinking. 

This is CBT 101. 

I don't know why ppl are getting in a knot about it. Unless they think only 'sick' people can use cognitive strategies as part of dealing with distress, and they have some ableism going on. 


Well, how would you like a student who is frustrated by the fact that society on average treats him different to react? What would he be allowed to say that wouldn’t result in you trying to argue him out of his feelings?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This popped up in Politico today, a brief summary of how Mexican American students and families fought for and received court approval to give their children more information about their own history as part of court-ordered desegregation. This was after former AZ Governor Jan Brewer sought to ban Chicano studies programs. For those interested in other ethnic groups… https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/07/11/tucson-unified-school-districts-mexican-american-studies-program-498926

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:


Well, how would you like a student who is frustrated by the fact that society on average treats him different to react? What would he be allowed to say that wouldn’t result in you trying to argue him out of his feelings?

I wouldn't argue him out of his feelings at all. 

Distress has several components - physical, affective and cognitive. 

At school, I mainly look after the first two, and try not to inadvertently reinforce any cognitive distortions that may be being expressed. 

But when I was dealing with my own kids, I also routinely dealt with cognition. 

If it were my kid saying that 'they all hate me because I'm brown', after dealing with the physical and emotional need ( hugs, glass of water, tissues, listening to child ), at some later, calmer point, I'd address the belief contributing to the distress as well.

Firstly, it's unlikely 'they' all are of one mind. That's unhealthy thinking.

Secondly, it's likely that other children have in the past shown they did not 'hate' my kid. In fact, it's likely s/he is liked by several others. It's good for kid to have evidence that they do, in fact have friends and allies. 

If there was a specific hateful kid or group, I'd try to get more info. What are the hateful behaviours ? I'd book a meeting with whomever was in charge to discuss these harmful behaviours and require them to be dealt with.

When I've had these convos ( esp with one particular kid) I'd often find out she was feeling angry about things in the broader culture. Beauty standards were big for her at one time. I helped her write letters to the editor to teen magazines calling then on their always white models as away of her processing racist beauty standards. 

If a teacher, under the guise of validating her feelings, had agreed with her that it was reasonable to believe 'they' hate her b/C she's brown - without any evidence that this is the case,and both student and teacher relying on mind-reading - I would find that psychologically clumsy behaviour, and I wouldn't be very happy about it.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Melissa Louise
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only one person in this thread said the child felt ‘they hated’ him. It wasn’t the person who actually spoke with the child. The child said ‘they’ didn’t ‘care’. There is, in fact, plenty of evidence for a child to draw that conclusion. If people REALLY cared, they’d do something about the proliferation of handguns. If people really cared, they’d have done something to repair the damage of redlining in and around Memphis. If people really cared, they’d increase funding for family support services in the area. If people really cared his brother’s death would merit more than a footnote in a local paper or blurb on TV about gang violence when he wasn’t even in a gang. All of those ‘people’ are ‘they’. The child wasn’t talking about a singular incident but about an observed pattern of policy and practice.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

I wouldn't argue him out of his feelings at all. 

Distress has several components - physical, affective and cognitive. 

At school, I mainly look after the first two, and try not to inadvertently reinforce any cognitive distortions that may be being expressed. 

But when I was dealing with my own kids, I also routinely dealt with cognition. 

If it were my kid saying that 'they all hate me because I'm brown', after dealing with the physical and emotional need ( hugs, glass of water, tissues, listening to child ), at some later, calmer point, I'd address the belief contributing to the distress as well.

Firstly, it's unlikely 'they' all are of one mind. That's unhealthy thinking.

Secondly, it's likely that other children have in the past shown they did not 'hate' my kid. In fact, it's likely s/he is liked by several others. It's good for kid to have evidence that they do, in fact have friends and allies. 

If there was a specific hateful kid or group, I'd try to get more info. What are the hateful behaviours ? I'd book a meeting with whomever was in charge to discuss these harmful behaviours and require them to be dealt with.

When I've had these convos ( esp with one particular kid) I'd often find out she was feeling angry about things in the broader culture. Beauty standards were big for her at one time. I helped her write letters to the editor to teen magazines calling then on their always white models as away of her processing racist beauty standards. 

If a teacher, under the guise of validating her feelings, had agreed with her that it was reasonable to believe 'they' hate her b/C she's brown - without any evidence that this is the case,and both student and teacher relying on mind-reading - I would find that psychologically clumsy behaviour, and I wouldn't be very happy about it.

 

 

 

 

I feel like we’re reading two different threads.  The post that started this particular line wasn’t about a kid feeling like nobody wants to play with them because they’re different. It was about a kid noticing that shootings involving white students get more national attention than shootings involving black students.   

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Only one person in this thread said the child felt ‘they hated’ him. It wasn’t the person who actually spoke with the child. The child said ‘they’ didn’t ‘care’. There is, in fact, plenty of evidence for a child to draw that conclusion. If people REALLY cared, they’d do something about the proliferation of handguns. If people really cared, they’d have done something to repair the damage of redlining in and around Memphis. If people really cared, they’d increase funding for family support services in the area. If people really cared his brother’s death would merit more than a footnote in a local paper or blurb on TV about gang violence when he wasn’t even in a gang. All of those ‘people’ are ‘they’. The child wasn’t talking about a singular incident but about an observed pattern of policy and practice.

In context, not so much.  In context, the child was talking about a big outpouring of horror and sympathy in one case and not in the other.  That’s a fair critique and it needs to be addressed, but your laundry list is not proof of lack of addressing it.  A bunch of partisan political action proposals such as you are proposing is not in play in either case on either side.  It is interesting to go through the thought exercise of what someone who is not your political match would have as a laundry list.  I’m not sure what it would be, but it might be Midnight Basketball, and encouraging churches to work physically in the area a la the Nehemiah Project, and encouraging involvement of fathers, and offering parenting classes, and increasing grants to job training programs.  

The truth is, I would not entirely reject or entirely endorse either laundry list, but the truth also is, there was no political laundry list from the shootings in Colorado comparable to yours or in opposition to yours.  The policy laundry lists are separate issues, and tacking either one onto this incident is untrue to it.

Also, the Columbine incident was not a gang one. It got more attention because it was so unique and new.  My view is that we should be a lot further along with the gang warfare s**t than we are, because it has been around for a long long time.  But I can see why Columbine was news.  It was because it was a new kind of thing.  Having said that, I agree that the news media reports as if it expects POC violence but not White violence, which is messed up.

Edited by Carol in Cal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Danae said:

I feel like we’re reading two different threads.  The post that started this particular line wasn’t about a kid feeling like nobody wants to play with them because they’re different. It was about a kid noticing that shootings involving white students get more national attention than shootings involving black students.   

They don't care about brown people, was the original statement, I think? They being the white student cohort? 

It's the same deal. 'They all' statements are rarely helpful.

Probably some of the white kids don't care. Some are ignorant. Some are overwhelmed with other issues. Some care. 

This is because white children, like all other cohorts of children, vary in empathy, knowledge, capacity. 

It is two different convos because I'm talking to the people I don't have on ignore ( and presumably, vice versa). 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Carol in Cal. said:

In context, not so much.  In context, the child was talking about a big outpouring of horror and sympathy in one case and not in the other.  That’s a fair critique and it needs to be addressed, but your laundry list is not proof of lack of addressing it.  A bunch of partisan political action proposals such as you are proposing is not in play in either case on either side.  It is interesting to go through the thought exercise of what someone who is not your political match would have as a laundry list.  I’m not sure what it would be, but it might be Midnight Basketball, and encouraging churches to work physically in the area a la the Nehemiah Project, and encouraging involvement of fathers, and offering parenting classes, and increasing grants to job training programs.  

The truth is, I would not entirely reject or entirely endorse either laundry list, but the truth also is, there was no political laundry list from the shootings in Colorado comparable to yours or in opposition to yours.  The policy laundry lists are separate issues, and tacking either one onto this incident is untrue to it.

KIDS AND PARENTS AREN’T STUPID. Urban homicide isn’t a priority, just a convenient deflection for some (to avoid the assault weapons and illegal/straw sales issues) and pet projects/initiatives don’t have broad community reach or significant funding. The things I listed are indications a child might look to or hear about in the home and use to determine whether or not people really care about his/her plight. This is one of those times where I encourage you NOT to take my word for it. Go talk to a bunch of people living in affected communities and see what *they* say. As a kid in such a neighborhood, I’d have said the exact same thing and meant it with every fiber of my being. By 10 years old, I knew very well how my neighborhood was perceived and how much what happened there didn’t matter.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

KIDS AND PARENTS AREN’T STUPID. Urban homicide isn’t a priority, just a convenient deflection for some (to avoid the assault weapons and illegal/straw sales issues) and pet projects/initiatives don’t have broad community reach or significant funding. The things I listed are indications a child might look to or hear about in the home and use to determine whether or not people really care about his/her plight. This is one of those times where I encourage you NOT to take my word for it. Go talk to a bunch of people living in affected communities and see what *they* say. As a kid in such a neighborhood, I’d have said the exact same thing and meant it with every fiber of my being. By 10 years old, I knew very well how my neighborhood was perceived.

As is often the case you are arguing with something that I didn’t say and not taking up the points I actually made, which is that your laundry list is flawed and whether it happens or not has little to do with whether people care about a gang killing even if it is ‘collateral damage’ to the actual gang stuff, a phrase I hate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Carol in Cal. said:

As is often the case you are arguing with something that I didn’t say and not taking up the points I actually made, which is that your laundry list is flawed and whether it happens or not has little to do with whether people care about a gang killing even if it is ‘collateral damage’ to the actual gang stuff, a phrase I hate.

They were EXEMPLARS, not an exhaustive list. I’m sure you can come up with your own and take issue with that too.

Edited by Sneezyone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sneezyone said:

They were EXEMPLARS, not an exhaustive list. I’m sure you can come up with your own and take issue with that too.

Answering a kid with lengthy policy stuff that takes years to implement is not going to satisfy the immediate issue on any level.  There needs to be support right in the moment and from then on.  The policy stuff needs to happen but it’s not going to address this kid.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Carol in Cal. said:

Answering a kid with lengthy policy stuff that takes years to implement is not going to satisfy the immediate issue on any level.  There needs to be support right in the moment and from then on.  The policy stuff needs to happen but it’s not going to address this kid.  

Did I say answer the kid like that? No. No, I did not. My EXEMPLAR reply to the child was quite different. Feel free to reread it. I offered the list of EXEMPLAR policies/practices by way of explanation for why a kid might reasonably believe that no one cared. Having lost my own sibling in a similar incident when I was 18, yeah, it’s a perfectly reasonable belief. I wouldn’t expect a 10 yo to articulate those feelings or a rationale as well as an adult but dismissal isn’t an appropriate response in either case.

ETA: whenever the pushback is this strong, methinks me struck a nerve.

Edited by Sneezyone
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

They don't care about brown people, was the original statement, I think? They being the white student cohort? 

It's the same deal. 'They all' statements are rarely helpful.

Probably some of the white kids don't care. Some are ignorant. Some are overwhelmed with other issues. Some care. 

This is because white children, like all other cohorts of children, vary in empathy, knowledge, capacity. 

It is two different convos because I'm talking to the people I don't have on ignore ( and presumably, vice versa). 

 

I doubt it.  Since the statement was “they only care because they’re white kids. They could blow up our school and it wouldn’t make any difference”  and presumably his fellow students would care about their own school being blown up.  “They” the national media and its audience only care because “they” the Littleton victims were white. “They” the school shooters could have attacked the student’s school and it would have been tut-tutted as gang violence.  None of the “they”s in that paragraph referred to the student’s classmates.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Danae said:

I doubt it.  Since the statement was “they only care because they’re white kids. They could blow up our school and it wouldn’t make any difference”  and presumably his fellow students would care about their own school being blown up.  “They” the national media and its audience only care because “they” the Littleton victims were white. “They” the school shooters could have attacked the student’s school and it would have been tut-tutted as gang violence.  None of the “they”s in that paragraph referred to the student’s classmates.

Ok.

I was wrong. 

I'm sorry. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

KIDS AND PARENTS AREN’T STUPID. Urban homicide isn’t a priority, just a convenient deflection for some (to avoid the assault weapons and illegal/straw sales issues) and pet projects/initiatives don’t have broad community reach or significant funding. The things I listed are indications a child might look to or hear about in the home and use to determine whether or not people really care about his/her plight. This is one of those times where I encourage you NOT to take my word for it. Go talk to a bunch of people living in affected communities and see what *they* say. As a kid in such a neighborhood, I’d have said the exact same thing and meant it with every fiber of my being. By 10 years old, I knew very well how my neighborhood was perceived and how much what happened there didn’t matter.

I am perplexed as to why BLM makes no noise about this. Their focus is only on, the small by comparison, number of blacks killed by the police. If you weren't killed by a police officer they don't appear to care. Week in and week out we see high numbers of homicides in pretty much all the major cities and yet not a peep from BLM. Ulterior motives? Btw, as I am sure your are aware these homicides are not likely to be committed with legally purchased weapons. I do wonder what their lack of concern says to black children about how much their lives matter to BLM.

 

Edited by Fritz
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fritz said:

I am perplexed as to why BLM makes no noise about this. Their focus is only on, the small by comparison, number of blacks killed by the police. If you weren't killed by a police officer they don't appear to care. Week in and week out we see high numbers of homicides in pretty much all the major cities and yet not a peep from BLM. Ulterior motives? Btw, as I am sure your are aware these homicides are not likely to be committed with legally purchased weapons. I do wonder what their lack of concern says to black children about how much their lives matter to BLM.

 

Quote

When an opponent of Black Lives Matters talks about “blacks killing blacks” it’s almost always to deflect attention away from police brutality. As if one issue makes the other more acceptable.

Stop using 'black-on-black' crime to deflect away from police brutality

Bringing up 'Black on Black Crime' Is Racist

Quote

There is no shortage of articles and books critique this idea as a form of anti-Black racism.

It perplexes me when this is raised an issue like it's insightful and new and hasn't been discussed like a million times already. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Stop using 'black-on-black' crime to deflect away from police brutality

Bringing up 'Black on Black Crime' Is Racist

It perplexes me when this is raised an issue like it's insightful and new and hasn't been discussed like a million times already. 

It's perverse that I prefaced my comments with "Urban homicide isn’t a priority, just a convenient deflection for some" only to have that confirmed almost immediately. I'm tempted to ask how things are going with opioids and white on white crime but that isn't relevant either. It wouldn't surprise me, however, if a white child expressed the same sentiment for similar reasons.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Critical race theory battles are driving frustrated, exhausted educators out of their jobs

Quote

The local backlash to addressing race in schools has been fueled in part by national conservative groups and activists, who see the anti-critical race theory fights as a winning political issue and have helped parents mobilize. As more parents confronted administrators over diversity and equity initiatives over the past year, their activism has been highlighted by conservative media, amplifying the pressure on districts.

“A single school district can’t combat a national propaganda machine that’s intent on pushing a particular narrative and driving wedges in communities,” said Tracey Benson, associate executive director of the Arizona School Boards Association.

 

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/6/2021 at 3:43 PM, Ordinary Shoes said:

I had a long argument with someone about segregation academies. He'd never heard the term before. He kept insisting that the small, private, "Christian" schools founded in the south in the 1960s and 1970s were opened for religious reasons. He linked to "about" sections on school websites to make his argument. 

There is so much ignorance about racial history in this country. I was born in Oklahoma in the 1970s. My town still had segregated schools when I was born. What? Did anyone ever discuss that? Of course not. I knew that an old, unused school building had been the "black" school but I was shocked to learn that the schools were still segregated long after Brown. 

 

I started kindergarten in 1968.  I lived in Arlington, VA.   That was our last year of segregation.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

It's perverse that I prefaced my comments with "Urban homicide isn’t a priority, just a convenient deflection for some" only to have that confirmed almost immediately. I'm tempted to ask how things are going with opioids and white on white crime but that isn't relevant either. It wouldn't surprise me, however, if a white child expressed the same sentiment for similar reasons.

I get that BLM are racial grifters and really have little interest in "black lives". What I don't get is why no one calls them out on it. Their agenda to defund the police is most harmful to those they claim to represent. This seems especially harmful to black children who live in those cities that are seeing these senseless murders (often including children) week after week. What does that say to black children when they have heard and seen BLM burn and loot their cities in the name of BLM and are completely silent about these soaring murder rates in their neighborhoods?

 https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/apr/13/going-grifting-via-black-lives-matter/

The fentanyl epidemic and the resulting deaths are rising at an alarming rate. The current political party in power endorses both defunding the police and open borders allowing for both of these issues to increase. I think we can guess how concerned they are by the increasing deaths from these issues.

https://www.newsweek.com/texas-sees-800-incase-fentanyl-coming-across-border-1594690

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://nypost.com/2021/07/14/california-school-district-mandates-ethnic-studies-course-based-on-crt/

A small school district has become the first in California to enforce mandatory “ethnic studies” lessons based on critical race theory, including for preschoolers — setting aside $40 million to implement it.

The board of trustees of the Hayward Unified School District in the Bay Area voted unanimously late last month to approve the program for all grades, starting in preschool — making it a “graduation requirement” by next year.

The Hayward board approved $40 million to to cover recruiting, training and materials for the policy — despite community fears that it could encourage antisemitism, Jewish News Syndicate noted.

 

The policy is being pushed throughout the state, with San Diego Unified School District expected to approve a similar plan later this summer, the Wall Street Journal said.

The Salinas Union High School District, meanwhile, recently hired “Rethinking Ethnic Studies” author R. Tolteka Cuauhtin to prep its teachers to implement a similar course — paying $1,500 an hour.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/californias-ethnic-studies-gold-rush-11626129598

 

High-school students in California could soon be required to take at least one semester of something called “ethnic studies” to graduate. The California Senate Education Committee holds hearings this week on Assembly Bill 101, which passed the lower house 58-9 in May. If A.B. 101 becomes law, it will line the pockets of a waiting diversity industry with hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer funds, as well as federal coronavirus relief money.

In response to the Covid-19 pandemic, Congress passed the Cares Act in March 2020. The legislation provided $2.2 trillion of financial assistance to individuals, businesses and state institutions. Of that $2.2 trillion, $16.2 billion was set aside for primary and secondary education. The California Education Department received $2 billion.

These funds were intended to cover a variety of difficulties caused by pandemic-related budget shortfalls. The U.S. Department of Education recommended that the money be used to prevent teacher layoffs, preserve mental-health programs, and improve school ventilation. But the feds also urged state education departments to use the money to “advance equity” given the “disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on communities of color.” This opened the door for California to spend its federal windfall in a way that most Americans would likely find reprehensible.

Sacramento lawmakers passed a bill in 2016 requiring the state Board of Education to create a model curriculum in ethnic studies and recommend that each district make the curriculum required learning for grades 9-12 beginning in the 2021-22 school year. The first draft of the ethnic studies model curriculum, or ESMC, provoked a public outcry when it was published in August 2019. While the bill stipulated that the model curriculum should prepare students to appreciate the contributions of all cultures, it contained significant anti-Semitic sentiment, such as a poem insinuating that Jews control the media. The proposed curriculum even went so far as to endorse the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement, an anti-Israel lobby.

The state Board but added explicit references to critical race theory and neo-Marxism. The introduction of the new curriculum states that ethnic studies is “housed in the conceptual model of the ‘double helix’ which interweaves holistic humanization and critical consciousness.” In a footnote, the idea of “holistic humanization” is tied to the work of Tara J. Yosso, a widely cited critical race theorist. “Critical consciousness” refers to Paulo Freire’s theory that people must become aware and critical of oppressors (mainly white males) to bring about a Marxist revolution.of Education produced a new version of the model curriculum. It removed the outright anti-Semitism,

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/black-lives-matter-blames-us-praises-cuban-regime-social-media-erupts

The common denominator here is their support of Marxism., which seems to be their real intent. Seems like the parent in the OP was exactly right.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of the critical academic voices in terms of CRT have talked a lot about the fact that groups like BLM focus on only certain types of problems while ignoring those that affect racialised communities most - gang violence etc - and in fact that the ideas like defunding the police tend to be extremely unpopular in those communities.

But this kind of gets to what the problem is, at least in high school level programs. If they are presenting a CRT perspective as if it is the only approach, they aren't teaching appropriately. because it's not the only way of thinking. Any more than it would be ok to teach with a humanist, or Jewish, POV undergirding everything. If the students aren't ready to explicitly understand that there are different perspectives, and be exposed to them, then they aren't ready to be taught as if one of those perspectives is undoubtably the truth, either.  If you can read Coats in the classroom they should also be capable of reading West or Reed or McWhorter, all of whom, from different perspectives, take a different POV than Coates and are in some cases explicitly critical of him, in a more or less friendly way.

At a university students should, simply by taking classes from different people, be exposed to different perspectives, which they then have to sort out for themselves. Unfortunately that is something that is becoming a challenge which is a serious problem for academia, but that's a different kind of problem than high schools have, and lower level schools for children, where the school itself has to do much more interpretation for students and is acting much more within the limits of what parents believe.

Ultimately, as long as more and more parents see their kids learning things they really disagree with, we'll see parents trying to use whatever tools they have to stop it. And that is likely to be a broad spectrum approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

https://www.foxnews.com/us/biden-admin-promotes-radical-group-critical-race-theory-schools

The Biden administration's guidance for school reopening promoted a radical activist group’s handbook that advocates for educators to "disrupt Whiteness and other forms of oppression."

 

The Department of Education linked to the Abolitionist Teaching Network’s "Guide for Racial Justice & Abolitionist Social and Emotional Learning" in its handbook intended to help schools reopen after the COVID-19 pandemic and recommend how they should spend billions of dollars they collectively received through the American Rescue Plan.

The Abolitionist Teaching Network’s website includes links to various materials and media that include language often associated with critical race theory, though the group avoids using the exact phrase.

"Abolitionist Teachers" should "[b]uild a school culture that engages in healing and advocacy. This requires a commitment to learning from students, families, and educators who disrupt Whiteness and other forms of oppression," the group states in its guide.

 

 

"If you don’t recognize that White supremacy is in everything we do, then we got a problem," Love, who also chairs the board of directors, said. "I want us to be feared."

Edited by Fritz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Fritz said:

 

The Department of Education linked to the Abolitionist Teaching Network’s "Guide for Racial Justice & Abolitionist Social and Emotional Learning" in its handbook intended to help schools reopen after the COVID-19 pandemic and recommend how they should spend billions of dollars they collectively received through the American Rescue Plan.

That sounds like a great resource, although I can’t find where it’s actually linked in the DOE document.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/13/2021 at 11:10 AM, Fritz said:

I get that BLM are racial grifters and really have little interest in "black lives". What I don't get is why no one calls them out on it. Their agenda to defund the police is most harmful to those they claim to represent. This seems especially harmful to black children who live in those cities that are seeing these senseless murders (often including children) week after week. What does that say to black children when they have heard and seen BLM burn and loot their cities in the name of BLM and are completely silent about these soaring murder rates in their neighborhoods?

 https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/apr/13/going-grifting-via-black-lives-matter/

The fentanyl epidemic and the resulting deaths are rising at an alarming rate. The current political party in power endorses both defunding the police and open borders allowing for both of these issues to increase. I think we can guess how concerned they are by the increasing deaths from these issues.

https://www.newsweek.com/texas-sees-800-incase-fentanyl-coming-across-border-1594690

 

"Defund the police" generally means to put more money into social services, mental health, and training vs tactical weapons. That's the stuff that helps with addiction problems. 

And the current political party sure as crap doesn't endorse open borders. 

As for why one group focuses on one issue, why do ANY groups focus on one issue? Why don't Mothers Against Drunk Driving focus on lead poisoning? 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, ktgrok said:

"Defund the police" generally means to put more money into social services, mental health, and training vs tactical weapons. That's the stuff that helps with addiction problems. 

And the current political party sure as crap doesn't endorse open borders. 

As for why one group focuses on one issue, why do ANY groups focus on one issue? Why don't Mothers Against Drunk Driving focus on lead poisoning? 

Yep - obviously a bunch of grifters! When was the last time MADD said anything about carseats, huh? I think they want babies to die in car accidents otherwise they would say something! 

Oh and they're only against drinking and driving. What about drinking without driving? They obviously don't care about alcoholism. 

Bunch of grifters...

 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ktgrok said:

"Defund the police" generally means to put more money into social services, mental health, and training vs tactical weapons. That's the stuff that helps with addiction problems. 

And the current political party sure as crap doesn't endorse open borders. 

As for why one group focuses on one issue, why do ANY groups focus on one issue? Why don't Mothers Against Drunk Driving focus on lead poisoning? 

How's the defunding working out so far in those cities that have implemented it?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...