Many thanks to MA Informed Parents for such an in-depth report on what is being taught to our children and grandchildren in the guise of combatting biases! Nothing short of brainwashing!
As a former resident of Sutton I'm proud of this program. The schools, based upon student input, realized they needed to address larger issues. Classmates repeatedly using the "n" word to refer to a classmate is far beyond poor treatment. It's audacious racism and indicative of a larger problem. It saddens me that as an organization that supposedly represents parent you're unable to recognize that.
No one is forcing students from the entire state to attend ConCon. Students crave this information because they want to understand. If they object to what is being presented, they can walk away.
What I really can't understand is the vehement objection to this type of programming. Prejudice is perpetuated through ignorance.
Thanks for your comment, and for reading. We make our case against ConCon in our articles, we're not going to adjudicate it again in the comments. If after reading both of our ConCon investigations you honestly "really can't understand" why some parents vehemently object to their tax dollar-supported school presenting a highly-politicized, one-sided conference that included a drag queen showing his underwear to children, I would challenge you to examine your own prejudices.
Key word is "vehement". As a parent I have objections to many things, like teenagers playing football and suffering concussions. Or teenage cheerleaders wearing short skirts on the sidelines. All tax-payer funded. But, I don't impose this view on my community as child abuse.
You called this brainwashing. It's no more brainwashing, or even less, than having kids cite the pledge of allegiance every day.
What you are referring to as "vehemence" is a reflection of the severity of the damage that people feel that ConCon causes, or threatens to cause. And yes, I called it brainwashing, because the conference only puts forward views from one political side of the aisle. If SHS administration find themselves uncomfortable with that categorization, the could remedy it easily by ensuring that their conference presents a wide variety of views on controversial issues and allows students to *actually* hear diverse perspectives. As to the pledge of allegiance... if you are trying to say that teaching kids about the benefits of drag or preaching about the evils of the patriarchy (without offering a counterpoint or the evidence to the contrary) is morally equivalent to (or better than) presenting kids with an opportunity to demonstrate their patriotism by reciting the pledge, then I think we're pretty far apart ideologically and this conversation is not going to bridge that gap.
That said, we do appreciate you reading and taking the time to respond. Enjoy your weekend!
Many thanks to MA Informed Parents for such an in-depth report on what is being taught to our children and grandchildren in the guise of combatting biases! Nothing short of brainwashing!
You're welcome! And yes - it's brainwashing for sure.
As a former resident of Sutton I'm proud of this program. The schools, based upon student input, realized they needed to address larger issues. Classmates repeatedly using the "n" word to refer to a classmate is far beyond poor treatment. It's audacious racism and indicative of a larger problem. It saddens me that as an organization that supposedly represents parent you're unable to recognize that.
No one is forcing students from the entire state to attend ConCon. Students crave this information because they want to understand. If they object to what is being presented, they can walk away.
What I really can't understand is the vehement objection to this type of programming. Prejudice is perpetuated through ignorance.
Thanks for your comment, and for reading. We make our case against ConCon in our articles, we're not going to adjudicate it again in the comments. If after reading both of our ConCon investigations you honestly "really can't understand" why some parents vehemently object to their tax dollar-supported school presenting a highly-politicized, one-sided conference that included a drag queen showing his underwear to children, I would challenge you to examine your own prejudices.
Key word is "vehement". As a parent I have objections to many things, like teenagers playing football and suffering concussions. Or teenage cheerleaders wearing short skirts on the sidelines. All tax-payer funded. But, I don't impose this view on my community as child abuse.
You called this brainwashing. It's no more brainwashing, or even less, than having kids cite the pledge of allegiance every day.
What you are referring to as "vehemence" is a reflection of the severity of the damage that people feel that ConCon causes, or threatens to cause. And yes, I called it brainwashing, because the conference only puts forward views from one political side of the aisle. If SHS administration find themselves uncomfortable with that categorization, the could remedy it easily by ensuring that their conference presents a wide variety of views on controversial issues and allows students to *actually* hear diverse perspectives. As to the pledge of allegiance... if you are trying to say that teaching kids about the benefits of drag or preaching about the evils of the patriarchy (without offering a counterpoint or the evidence to the contrary) is morally equivalent to (or better than) presenting kids with an opportunity to demonstrate their patriotism by reciting the pledge, then I think we're pretty far apart ideologically and this conversation is not going to bridge that gap.
That said, we do appreciate you reading and taking the time to respond. Enjoy your weekend!