seattle schools say only whites are racist

Parent Cafe
1

<p>from their website
*"Equity and Race Relations </p>

<p>Definitions of Racism </p>

<p>Racism:
The systematic subordination of members of targeted racial groups who have relatively little social power in the United States (Blacks, Latino/as, Native Americans, and Asians), by the members of the agent racial group who have relatively more social power (Whites). The subordination is supported by the actions of individuals, cultural norms and values, and the institutional structures and practices of society. </p>

<p>Individual Racism:
The beliefs, attitudes, and actions of individuals that support or perpetuate racism. Individual racism can occur at both an unconscious and conscious level, and can be both active and passive. Examples include telling a racist joke, using a racial epithet, or believing in the inherent superiority of whites. </p>

<p>Active Racism:
Actions which have as their stated or explicit goal the maintenance of the system of racism and the oppression of those in the targeted racial groups. People who participate in active racism advocate the continued subjugation of members of the targeted groups and protection of “the rights” of members of the agent group. These goals are often supported by a belief in the inferiority of people of color and the superiority of white people, culture, and values. </p>

<p>Passive Racism:
Beliefs, attitudes, and actions that contribute to the maintenance of racism, without openly advocating violence or oppression. The conscious or unconscious maintenance of attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors that support the system of racism, racial prejudice and racial dominance. </p>

<p>Cultural Racism:
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. </p>

<p>Institutional Racism:
The network of institutional structures, policies, and practices that create advantages and benefits for Whites, and discrimination, oppression, and disadvantages for people from targeted racial groups. The advantages created for Whites are often invisible to them, or are considered “rights” available to everyone as opposed to “privileges” awarded to only some individuals and groups. </p>

<p>Source: Teaching for Diversity and Social Justice, 1197 eds. Adams, Bell &Griffin *</p>

<p>and comments
<a href=“http://andrews-dad.blogspot.com/2006/05/seattle-public-schools-define-racism.html[/url]”>http://andrews-dad.blogspot.com/2006/05/seattle-public-schools-define-racism.html&lt;/a&gt;
<a href=“http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/272248_future01.html[/url]”>http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/272248_future01.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>I guess a district who has many principals both some of the best and some of the worst “of color”,
who has a superintendent, chief academic officer-head of finance, head of athletics, half the school board,several schools named for african americans, a school intended to study the history and culture of african americans as well as give extra attention and support to AA students,just a couple of the major positions of power in the district, none of which are filled by caucasians.
To say that racism permeates the district, when in many cases the few whites in the room are parents?
I guess I missed something- the people in power are really the whites- even though they don’t technically hold those job titles?</p>

2

<p>that is certainly some frightening reading there.</p>

<p>D1 is a HS soph. and has had a milder version of this propaganda spouted in her global studies class this year. we live in a poor, rural small upstate NY village, with VERY few minorities. However, my DH and I are both from downstate NY and because of this our kids have been exposed to alot of different people in the course of our travels.</p>

<p>we like our kids to tell us when these kinds of things are said in school because it opens up lots of opportunities for family discussions about OUR beliefs. </p>

<p>I think parents really need to watch out for these kinds of one-sided arguements.
just my .02 – very interesting though</p>

3

<p>Seattle Public Schools did take those definitions down ([link](<a href=“http://www.seattleschools.org/area/equityandrace/definitionofrace.xml]link[/url]”>http://www.seattleschools.org/area/equityandrace/definitionofrace.xml)</a>). I will say I put an e-mail in to our Cross-Cultural Specialist to figure out what “having a future time orientation” even means with respect to “Cultural Racism”; the rest of it I was able to understand, even if I disagreed, but that example was…unknown to me.</p>

4

<p>semantically speaking, they’re right. cultural and instiutional racism is prejuidice that favors the group in power and excludes the group not in power.</p>

5

<p>Considering that most of the books they read in LIt are by minorities( Achebe- Dumas- Johnson-Morrison-Tan- Alexie- et.al)I have a hard time understanding the identifying only whites as writers.</p>

<p>And as a parent who didn’t graduate from high school, who is fairly lowish middle income, whose daughter was doing so poorly in school, that I had to quit my job in an effort to spend more time in the school to help her and other students- it dismays me that the extra programs the district has in place to support struggling students have as a requirement- minority status- not that they are two grades below grade level- not that they make barely above free lunch standards- not parent educational background- but " minority " status/</p>

<p>Of course in the Seattle district- whites only make up 41% of enrolled students in district- so that doesn’t really seem like they are majority if they consider all students who aren’t white to be in same grouping when programs are funded.</p>

6

<p>Whites are slave masters! Down with whites!</p>

<p>In all seriousness, this is political correctness gone truly mad.</p>

7

<p>“…racism is prejuidice that favors the group in power and excludes the group not in power.”</p>

<p>I don’t understand what they are talking about - “in power.” Government in general, school board, City government - what?</p>

8

<p>Sorry, I am not a parent or an adult or whatever, I just happened to stuble across this thread and felt compelled to respond to the post made by Tookie (an ironic name considering the content of his post).</p>

<p>When they say “in power” they mean the race that controls the mindset of society, and most of the economic power as well.</p>

<p>To elucidate a little, if I were to tell you a story about a person I saw on the road the other day, immeadiately your mind (and do not try and deny this) would assume that this person was white, unless I specified otherwise. Or another example, if you were to go into a drugstore and buy “flesh-colored” band-aides, you wouldn’t bat an eye to the fact that to a significant percentage of the country, they are far from being “flesh-colored.”</p>

<p>The Seattle School system isn’t trying to say that white people are bad, as ChuckNorris would joke, it is simply trying to say that at the moment, the race that holds the power over the mindsets of the people is the race that has held that power since 1492: the white race.</p>

9

<p>Seattle school system:
“These goals are often supported by a belief in the inferiority of people of color and the superiority of white people, culture, and values”</p>

<p>Just Browsing: “The Seattle School system isn’t trying to say that white people are bad, as ChuckNorris would joke, it is simply trying to say that at the moment, the race that holds the power over the mindsets of the people is the race that has held that power since 1492: the white race.”</p>

<p>I actually do believe that the Seattle school system is assuming that all white people have a prejudiced mind set. This is outrageous, and just feeds into stereotypes, which I think is what the school system doesn’t like for blacks, but obviously thinks is OK for whites. As to who’s in power, many large cities are NOT run by whites, and have black mayors and majority black City Councils, and have for decades.</p>

<p>I think that this statement by the Seattle school district is inflammatory and stinks not only of reverse racism, but also of the type of generalizations that they want to avoid. </p>

<p>It fails to acknowledge the many people of all colors in this country who have fought for equality and for laws that support it, such as antidiscrimation in housing, employment, etc.</p>

<p>If this were not just the work of some narrow-minded, misguided administrators and teachers, I would have to conclude that they want to go back many years to the tensions that were even more prominent prior to the civil rights movement. I will, however, take it for what I hope it is, just some really stupid people in power who went too far.</p>

10

<p>Thats what I meant. This is crazy stuff. Why not just say that all blacks are murderous, all hispanics are thiefs, and all Jews are greedy. Saying all whites are racist is incredibly racist and idiotic…You really need to graduate from an Ivy League school to come up with a statement as idiotic as that.</p>

11

<p>Dr Hollins is repsonsible for the website
I like her- however- she has a very narrow view of what matters to Seattle school children.
She is the director of equity and race relations
whose mission is to insure that minorities which seem to mean african americans- are adaquately served in the district.</p>

<p>However- we do not have a similar charge for gay or low income students- for students whose needs fall under 504 or idea. For bilingual students or gifted students. For students who are in foster care or living on their own. Many groups have need in an urban district, not just black children.
The person highest up in charge of gifted- is also in charge of bilingual and special ed- she mostly goes around trying to put out fires with a glass of water.
<a href=“http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0622/mossback.php[/url]”>http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0622/mossback.php&lt;/a&gt;
Caprice didn’t actually attend an Ivy- she has a BA from Seattle UNiversity and her MA & Phd from the California school of professional psychology/</p>

12

<p><<i actually=“” do=“” believe=“” that=“” the=“” seattle=“” school=“” system=“” is=“” assuming=“” all=“” white=“” people=“” have=“” a=“” prejudiced=“” mind=“” set.=“”>></i></p><i actually=“” do=“” believe=“” that=“” the=“” seattle=“” school=“” system=“” is=“” assuming=“” all=“” white=“” people=“” have=“” a=“” prejudiced=“” mind=“” set.=“”>

<p>That is far from being correct. You must reread their statement againt. In fact, you only posted the bottom half of their statement on that matter, here is the full section:
<<active racism:=“” actions=“” which=“” have=“” as=“” their=“” stated=“” or=“” explicit=“” goal=“” the=“” maintenance=“” of=“” system=“” racism=“” and=“” oppression=“” those=“” in=“” targeted=“” racial=“” groups.=“” people=“” who=“” participate=“” active=“” advocate=“” continued=“” subjugation=“” members=“” groups=“” protection=“” “the=“” rights”=“” agent=“” group.=“” these=“” goals=“” are=“” often=“” supported=“” by=“” a=“” belief=“” inferiority=“” color=“” superiority=“” white=“” people,=“” culture,=“” values.=“”>></active></p>

<p>They aren’t saying white people are racist, they are saying people in groups like the KKK are racist.</p>

<p>I can assure you that the Seattle School system does not define all white people as being prejudiced. Also mind you, even though they say only white people can be racist, they do not say that only white people can be prejudiced.
However, what I believe they ARE saying is that all white people are benificiaries of white priveledge, whether they like it or not. Does that mean they are racist? No. But, if they help contribute to the continuation of white priveledge, then yes.</p>
</i>

13

<p>*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. *</p>

<p>having a future time orientation is racist
so planning ahead- trying to prepare for high school graduation, retirement etc is racist?
Only whites as composers?
Do white men ( or women) run the most successful music programs in the district? ( no- Tsut at Garfield is Japanese and Acox also at Garfield is AA)
emphasizing individualism is racist?
So when blacks are teased by their peers for doing well in class- they should conform to the ( IMO) racist view that blacks are underperformers instead?
One form of English as standard is racist?
If they want to speak slang outside of school fine, but if these students don’t know proper English, they will not be able to acheive their potential in further academics or in their careers.
I know whites who have skin tones from alabaster to dk olive, having bandaids that call one color “flesh” isn’t really going to mentally harm anyone unless you are seeking out a reason to be.</p>

14

<p>This is why this ‘review’ or ‘study’ whatever is garbage. Individualism is racist? Individualism is the antidote to racism.</p>

15

<p>You know the “Future Time Orientation” thing is the only part of it I don’t really understand. I would doubt they mean what you are talking about, as that has really nothing to do with race. If I find out what it means, I’ll be sure to get back to you.</p>

<p>I think you guys miss the point on the collective ideology thing though. In an individualistic culture (as we are talking about culture here… see their deffinitions) those who work hard succeed, and those who don’t, fail. When you look at this in regard to race, one is lead to the conclusion that because black people tend to be in much more unfortunate socio-economic classes, it means they weren’t working hard to succeed.
Which I think even you can agree is a racist outlook.</p>

<p>As for the English thing. It is not racist to point out that everyone is going to need to speak proper English to do well in this world, the Seattle School system isn’t saying that either. What they are saying is racist is saying that Black Vernacular English is “slang.” The argument here is that because BVE has its roots in African language, it isn’t just some slang/code that black people talk to one another in. Though it is certainly agreed that proper English is more respectable and will help you suceed in the world more.
BVE does create a whole host of problems though, namely that when black kids start in school, they and their teacher are speaking two different kinds of English. Ideally all of these students will learn to speak proper English in the end, however it becomes very difficult when BVE is surrounding them.
When teaching Spanish-Speaking students, school systems often teach them in a much different style than they would for someone who speaks English; simply because it is going to help them learn better. No such program exists for people who grow up speaking BVE.</p>

16

<p>

Gotta disagree with you on that one - having the color “flesh” defined in a particular way does make a statement for people further away from that color. It is a part of establishing “the other” that can do real harm. Sure, the “white” spectrum surrounds the “flesh” color. But that’s only true for whites.</p>

<p>Also - in terms of only identifying whites a great composers - the facts that there are people who aren’t white in the music industry and that there are musicians who aren’t white who are fantastic are not counterpoints to what SPS said. If books or teachers only use the white composers and musicians as examples of greatness, though, therein lies the problem.</p>

17

<p><<gotta disagree=“” with=“” you=“” on=“” that=“” one=“” -=“” having=“” the=“” color=“” “flesh”=“” defined=“” in=“” a=“” particular=“” way=“” does=“” make=“” statement=“” for=“” people=“” further=“” away=“” from=“” color.=“” it=“” is=“” part=“” of=“” establishing=“” “the=”" other"=“” can=“” do=“” real=“” harm.=“” sure,=“” “white”=“” spectrum=“” surrounds=“” but=“” that’s=“” only=“” true=“” whites.=“”>></gotta></p>

<p>Very well stated, couldn’t agree more.</p>

18

<p>I think racist is a person or institution that considers a persons race when they determine how to respond to that person, whether to accept or deny their contribution or to include or exclude them from events. I do not think that racist is a term limited only to whites. </p>

<p>Accordingly, when we alter admission policies to college to accomodate people based upon their race it is racist, but an argument can be made that it is justified to the extent it contributes to the institutions goals, or it is provided to compensate for more extensive problems. If a voter supports or rejects a candidate simply because of their race, or if a person decides to sit next to or away from another person on a bus based upon race…this is racist. </p>

<p>Given the definition originally posted…Could a person be a racist in Japan but not a racist in Chicago, because different groups are in charge?</p>

19

<p>I think the definition provided is pseudo analysis trying to pose as fact. Racism is more or less what you said Mr.B- believing that a man’s character is the function of his race.</p>

20

<p>Are the groups in charge really that different though? The US still is the main economic powerhouse in the world and Japan was imperialized for centuries by white Europeans.</p>

<p>Affirmative Action is hardly racist. It is a corrective measure to the fact that white people have benifits in this country that black people (and other people of color) don’t.</p>