Proud Moments in Education

The California Senate has just decreed that the accomplishments of gays should be enumerated in the state's school textbooks (thanks to Martin Owens for the tip). This blog is about as gay-friendly as they come, but the measure strikes me as political correctness spun out of control. It's one thing to say that the state may not discriminate against gays; it's quite another to deem it relevant — and mandatory for children to learn — with whom certain historical figures shared their beds. Really, no one cares.

Meanwhile, in Seattle, the public school district has, for some reason, taken it upon itself to define racism — and what a document it is (thanks to Phil Dawdy for the pointer). The screed defines 'Cultural Racism' as 

Those aspects of society that overtly and covertly attribute value and normality to white people and Whiteness, and devalue, stereotype, and label people of color as “other”, different, less than, or render them invisible. Examples of these norms include defining white skin tones as nude or flesh colored, having a future time orientation, emphasizing individualism as opposed to a more collective ideology, defining one form of English as standard, and identifying only Whites as great writers or composers.

So anti-white racism (by the likes of Louis Farrakhan and various Muslim firebrands) doesn't exist. Only whitey can be a racist. Moreover, "emphasizing individualism" is another sign of America's inner Jim Crow, apparently. Who knew?

By the way, isn't it awfully racist to spell 'Whites' and 'Whiteness' with a capital W?

And finally, back in California, a judge has dealt decisively with the problem that many of the state's highschool students can't pass a standard exit exam.

Alameda County Superior Court Judge Robert B. Freedman issued a preliminary injunction against the mandatory testing requirement, ruling it places an unfair burden on poor and minority students who attend low-performing schools.

In other words, if the bar is too high for certain students, let's just remove it altogether. Underperformers who have learned precious little are still allowed to graduate along with the students who did the work, used their brain, and passed the test.

Last year, a RAND Corporation analysis showed that California's schools lag behind those in other states on almost every objective measurement. With 'solutions' like Judge Freedman's, it's not hard to see why.

Comments

[dave]

Poor Shiela Kuehl, If she wasn't a lesbian I guess she just wouldn't exist! Unless her district is 100% homosexual I wonder how this is playing there? Sounds to me a little like malfeasance....using the office to promote her own worldview. I wonder how many historical figures she plans on outing?

[me]

"having a future time orientation"

What in heaven's name does that mean?

[Rogier]

>>What in heaven's name does that mean?<<

I've been beating up my brain over the same thing. Anyone know?

[dave]

Re: "Having a future time orientation"

Apparently we pale folk with our compulsion for plans and schedules have been keepin the brother down...."future time orientation" here contrasted with the idea of "living in the moment".

I'm far more troubled by the statement, "emphasizing individualism as opposed to a more collective ideology". Jeez, just come right out and say you're collectivists!

[Brian]

I think what the document means to imply is that valuing the possibilities and potential of the future in turn devalues those who find meaning in their roots, in their family history and whatnot.

In other words, white people look to the future, black people look to the past?

Ridiculous.

[GreginOz]

Well, guess I'm a rascist! Damn, "future time preference" is a problem? Huh? You mean poor, dumb fucks who can't plan or save for the future, who must gain immediate gratification...are suppposed to be MY equal???HAHAHAHAHAHaaa, I don't think so! Collective Ideology??? Give me my gun... And this "one form of English...is rascist?" Errr, no, IT IS CALLED ENGLISH, not Rapsta grunt. No child left behind...a desk?

[jake]

I don't think they are saying that HAVING future time orientation (fto) is racist. I think they are saying that the assertion that someone is inferior because they DON'T HAVE such time orientation is racist.

A concrete example might be: native americans may be considered inferior because they don't think about the future in the same way as white americans do, i.e traditionally native americans are present time oriented rather than future time oriented. Time orientation affects our thoughts and behaviour, but is a cultural attribute, not a racial one as it is percieved.

Another example might a kid from an underpriveledged background (the majority of underpriveledged kids are from ethnic families) might be considered stupid/lazy/uninterested by his/her school teachers because he/she tends to live in the "now" and not think about the future. In reality though, the nature of the kids life, i.e severe financial restrictions means that thinking about the long term future (which requires an element of financial stabililty) seems at best difficult, at worst futile. So his/her thoughts and behaviour are present time oriented. Rather than understanding
that, a teacher could easily attribute this "attitude" to race rather than social background.

I think that's what the Seattle Public Schools board is trying to get at. It's not how WE think that is racist, it's what we assume about how OTHERS think that can amount to racism.