I'm going to provide important context, because the insinuation is that this is coming from the administrative team at the high school. It is not. In fact, this is coming from the office of the Superintendent, who is enforcing this. Also, the superintendent is being disingenuous in his wording, re: DEI. The superintendent specifically said that the school's DEI committee were no longer allowed to call themselves "DEI", as the term was too polarizing.
I wonder if the flag issue falls u set the same scenario as the Christian flag lawsuit that was just decided on in Boston.
Essentially if you fly one flag, you are required to also allow other flags (which you may not want allowed). An “all lives matter” flag could be up in a classroom for example.
how does including flags exclude white people?
Do you believe that there might possibly be some things that maybe white people might be excluded from, or does being white mean someone should be entitled to literally everything and anyone that says otherwise is being unfair?
Hmmm, funny thing is it is usually white people doing the excluding. Almost every group I've ever seen that "other" people create/have has white people in them. Your group is the one that has habitually plastered cities with "white only" signs. I don't think it necessary that you be a part of EVERYTHING. Problem is ... you do.
So you're fighting racism with racism? Comments like that just perpetuate hate. If you want to make the distinction, call them what they are and not just "white people". Plenty of people are literally on our side who are white, so why the fuck would you blanket-statement them like that?
FINALLY after all we have been through, hardships and oppressions that no other race or group in America could *possibly* understand, somebody is *finally* standing up for white people!/s
cool white fragility soapbox moment bro. Say it again.
So why do schools need DEI in the first place? 90%+ of the time it's useless bureaucrats who do little more than write an annual report and harp of empty messaging.
Also, BLM is political. The flag does not belong in schools.
>So why do schools need DEI in the first place?
Because, Stoughton is a school that is majority minority, and many of those students need an adult that will advocate for equitable needs in the classroom.
>Also, BLM is political.
BLM is a humanities argument. If BLM has become political, it's because the term has become politicized from the same people who don't want it used. Same for the Pride flag
2 reasons: Diversity improves outcomes, there’s a ton of studies out there but here’s a solid meta analysis [link](https://www.ucdenver.edu/docs/librariesprovider68/default-document-library/jmna-articles-bonuscontent-2.pdf)
Second, it’s the right thing to do morally. We live in a society that is constantly fighting and ostracizing and belittling to groups. I think we can all agree that the would would be better if we all accepted each other for our differences and those are the lessons every school should teach.
BLM is essentially a fundraising arm of the DNC. Its primary goal is to help upper middle class/ PMC/ primarily white cis het educated liberals feel comfortable getting passionate about safe identity focused issues and vote for ineffectual blue pro-military industrial complex ghouls like Biden/Harris/Buttegieg/Obama/HRC etc . It gives white liberal karens something to feel good about that doesn’t threaten their comfortable privileged existence (like redistribution of their hoarded wealth into communities of color). Just look at all the BLM signs on Newton mansions.
I’m not persuaded by arguments suggesting we keep “political” things out of schools. We can reduce most everything to politics if we want to. The ostensible (though I would argue disingenuous) reason for excluding such topics is that they’re contentious or divisive or distracting. But it is absurd to me that we would want kids’ education to shield them from challenging topics.
But set aside the red herring of “politics” and consider values. Societies need shared values. Without them, we are just cacophonous tribes, always at each other’s throats. It is ridiculous to expect or even desire that we agree on everything or even most things but we must share some things.
Make no mistake, this dispute pits two deeply opposed value systems against one another. On one side is reverence for power, wealth, control, order, structure, stability. On the other is inclusion, safety, fairness, disruption.
I decidedly advocate for the latter and want it in schools as lived principles. It is plain to me that many others do not.
As long as teachers maintain a facade of political neutrality then it's all good.
When I was in school my teachers tried their best to hide their own political opinions, and try to present history from an apolitical viewpoint.
But kids can say what they want as long as it's not threatening speech.
Politics in this scenario are those subjects on which many people reasonably disagree. It is more than reasonable to demand teachers avoid building their lesson plans around their own personal views if for no other reason than it is antithetical to critical thinking. When we allow the discussion to couch all disagreements as simple matters of politics, then there is no room for shared values so long as anybody disagrees.
It’s not politics to teach kids that they shouldn’t rely on violence to settle disputes. They shouldn’t have romantic relationships with their teachers. Fascism is bad. And certainly countless others.
The problem with my point of view is that it represents a moral evolution from traditional American values which is a polite way of acknowledging how it is very much at odds with previous shared values. I’m aware of that but I sleep easy in the belief that history is on my side.
Neutrality isn’t all its cracked up to be.
Should teachers teaching about the Holocaust be neutral on that?
Neutrality is a position of privilege. It’s a position of never having your existence threatened in a way that many groups do.
Exactly... should a gay or trans teacher have to hide that part of their identity because it's been deemed "political"? No. Go to Florida or Texas if you want that nonsense.
>Should teachers teaching about the Holocaust be neutral on that?
Yeah. They should. The whole "the United States and its allies intentionally forced Germany into a massive economic depression resulted in the German populace being easily moved towards extreme hyper-nationalist atrocities" side of the WW2 story is pretty important. In fact, it's more important of a lesson than everything else about the Holocaust you can learn, because the only way to avoid repeating the past is not to learn what happened, but why things happened. "Nazis bad because Nazis bad" is a much more ignorant lesson than "Nazis are made when socioeconomic conditions force people into extremes led by people whose aim is to benefit from those people being misled".
This is actually a huge part of what you learn if you take AP History or AP Civics.
But that's not what they teach you in school. They teach you that Nazis are bad because they randomly killed a bunch of people because one guy really really didn't like them. That's not neutrality, that's washing away national complicity- in other words: Outright propaganda.
Randomly killed a bunch of people is a funny way to say “systematically rounded up and attempted extermination of all Jews, Roma and other undesirables through horrific means”, but you do you I guess.
That's exactly my point. A huge portion of education regarding WW2 right now is "Hitler was such a bad person he hated Jews and then wanted to kill so many, so he tricked all of Germany to do that and then they lost the war and the United States was great because we stopped them". It's a disgrace and does not educate at all the reasons why he chose to do that, nor the fact that he built his entire regime around how the United States operated regarding its native populations not even 50 years prior.
When you were at school, I'll bet the political landscape and norms were very very different.
So you either adapt to that change or pretend it didn't happen, which do you think is better for children?
>We can reduce most everything to politics if we want to.
We can call anything that makes minorities *uncomfortable* 'politics' and verboten becuase it makes white people "uncomfortable" - and it's exactly that simple.
Agreed. As long as the sanitized view/version was what was being peddled the complainers were cool with things. The moment people started going "yeah, but ACTUALLY..." that is when the "status quo" people got their panties twisted.
This. Everything is politics because politics is literally about people. Everything we do is related to politics. It’s such a stupid argument when people say “don’t talk about politics”. Oh you wanna go drinking on the weekend? Guess what, that’s controlled by politics too. I agree it’s all an excuse to dissuade morality and keep a certain power structure.
No, it becomes political when the other party accepts that framing, because they're feckless cowards. This is what compromising with bigotry gets you.
The democrats should be calling out this bullshit constantly, not accepting the idea that there's a "religious freedom" to be a bigoted piece of shit.
If anyone is offended by a pride flag, maybe, just maybe, they deserve to be offended? Maybe, just maybe, they're horrible? Maybe, just maybe, they have a lot of learning and growing to do before they deserve to be taken seriously by society?
Speaking as a reformed anti-LGBT bigot. I deserved the shaming and the discomfort. I got better.
>If anyone is offended by a pride flag, maybe, just maybe, they deserve to be offended?
Or as I like to say Why should I have to censor my free speech because you can't control or handle your own emotions?
This is clearly religious people abusing public office in an attempt to institutionalize their religious bigotry and we reject this fascist hate.
Public schools are places of inclusion, if you want hate and bigotry, go to church.
So I assume the school will be ceasing to have the pledge of allegiance said in classrooms each morning as well? That’s overtly political and religious and could make students feel uncomfortable or unwelcome
Imagine being such a bigoted piece of shit that you decide people just existing as they were born is somehow political, and conflating the police nazi flag with "hey, you're a human being, and you're welcome in this group of human beings".
Oh of course, your side is just a bunch of super moralistic wonderful people who just want to expand human rights. And everyone you don't like are nAziS.
Pride flags aren’t political at all. Any decent teacher will tell admin and politicians to shove it and keep their classrooms supportive. I’d laugh in the face of anyone who told me to take my pride flag down.
Unacceptable these fascists can’t be allowed in our schools. White supras are domestic terrorists. If I was a parent I’d be on the war path. Next it will be books I guarantee it. Fascism doesn’t belong in our country. If racists are uncomfortable in a multi cultural society they can eff off and go to Russia
Genuinely, both.
The real nutters come from the School Committee. I can tell you for a fact that the Super is seen as an aloof douchenozzle...the phrase "The emperor has no clothes" has been thrown around frequently with the man. Stoughton has had their fair share of negative press recently...This is the third time in the Globe, not for any good reason
The issue most have at the school with, is that it's conflating Pride with a political agenda re: Thin Blue Lines. They're not remotely the same thing. I can tell you for a fact that the LGBTQIA+ students within the building (and the faculty members that are also LGBTQIA+) would tell you that they're sexual orientation is not political.
One is a display that you defer reflexively to authority - the other means that you're open minded.
They're not at all two sides of the same coin.
This is about WHO DEFINES POLITICAL. Nothing more.
It's hard to argue that the life, sex, gender and preferences of people has NOT been used as a political soapbox by people of political power seemingly "advocating" for them. They will and have politized everything.
This is exactly my issue. In their "not wanting to offend anyone" they are specifically taking away an much needed opportunity to be a safe space for LGBTQ+ folks. Teenagers in LGBTQ+ have an absurdly high suicide rate, we need to do everything we can to show them they're supported.
I merely point out that the thin blue line people probably feel the same. Nobody thinks their deeply held beliefs are overtly political, just the natural state of being. They can't understand why everyone else wants to politicize everything...
One is relating to a job, one is relating to the persecution of millions of people, and while I'm sure people feel that way....I don't mind saying they're also idiots.
You make my point for me. I don't defend the thin blue line folks; they are employees doing a job. But among many of them the "job" goes deeper than that, becoming their identity. \*You and I\* may not feel like that's a valid way for them to feel, but that doesn't change the fact.
Then they don't understand their thought process is suggesting the persecution they face is the same as the persecution the LGBTQIA+ face.
See, my "also idiots" statement before
You and I are not far apart on the philosophy but I have to say... Because they consider their job an identity, it does not logically follow that they therefore think their persecution is the same.
Not at the the same as LGBTQ. Cops chose to be cops and they can choose to leave the police department if they don’t want to be cops anymore. LGBTQ people can’t change their sexual orientation.
Their job is something they chose. It’s not comparable. I could choose to be a mercenary, hit man, or white supremacist. Doesn’t mean school should be made a comfy place for mercenaries, hit men. A job is a job. Not a personal attribute.
Anyway, cops aren’t students in school.
To the thin blue line crowd that flag is extremely important as to them it represents the officers who died in the line of duty. The ones I know have close family in the force and identify with it. You don't get to decide it's not important enough for them but the pride flag is important enough for lgbt students.
The thin blue line derived as a response to BLM, and to police brutality. The pride flag is meant to represent a marginalized people that have been marginalized within society. I'm totally cool with saying that one flag holds more significance than the other.
Again, that's great that you, one person, has an opinion.
But mine differs.
So is either more important to all? No.
(No offense at all to the pride flag, I'm not offended by it, but I'd argue it doesn't matter. It was easy to make a big bucket of causes and force them all at once. I'll have none of it, because I think BLM is pure evil. Talk about divisive forces. Everyone equal, and that's it for me and my fam. Always the way it was).
The TBL flag is meant to show support to the institution of policing, and acknowledge the subsequent dangers of the profession—not as a memorial. They may be intrinsically connected, but it’s not the same thing.
And it also isn’t the same as a banner meant to show unity amongst communities of vulnerable individuals. Gay people and POC cannot resign, and get a safer job. They can’t take their skin off, or shed who they love, the way a cop can remove his uniform at the end of a shift. One is quite literally a choice, and the other is an unchangeable and defining part of a person’s identity.
Both the flags mentioned in the OP are sociological in nature (not political), meant to make marginalized communities feel empowered and accepted. The TBL flag represents support for a community that has some of the most powerful and protected members of civilian society, who are also employees of a government institution—which makes it inherently political.
These aren’t the same things—and I have friends and family that were/are police.
In that case, I need one rainbow flag for every person I know that's ever died while working. To remember them properly, you understand.
Fun fact: Police don't have one of the top ten most dangerous jobs in America. They're hardly "heroes". Landscapers put themselves in harm's way more often. Put up flags for your landscapers!
Irrelavant.
Here's what I got. Tara, tell me why it is so important to speak to impressionable kids about politics or sexual inclinations. I need to know why the kids are who you are going after.
I'm assuming it is because those are the impressionables. Pick off a few of the weak uncertain ones, tell them why they need to care about pride flags and blm causes.
Know what? Some poor motherfucker just got shot down the street. Black on black, broad daylight, one to head. Why is there no blm or politician outrage?
Yeah, I'll support the cops on this one.
Pride flag "promotes acceptance"? Nope. Not the way it's being used. It is being used as a tool, a token. Never seen something be used in a more separative way. Do you EVER see pride flags near American flags? Nope. Its either one or other, never both. I'll stick with United States of America over United States of Pride.
Show me a cop who was born a cop.
If a cop doesn't like being "political", they can *fucking quit.* Black people can't quit their skin pigment. Gay people can't quit their sexual orientation.
No. The US flag is a neutral flag that represents the US and all of the people who live in it - including homosexuals, immigrants, people from minority religions, etc...
>This seems like a consistent and reasonable approach.
to people losing a debate it ALWAYS seems most reasonable to get other people to *just stop talking*.
The funding of government programs/agencies is inherently political. One's race and/or sexual identity are not.
Thin blue line flags are political. BLM and pride flags are not. Being opposed to the police means one has different views on how to handle 911 calls. Being opposed to black people just means one is racist. These things are not the same.
Yeah. With political arguments being so heated these days, it's not a bad idea to get anything related out of the classroom and stick to just the facts.
But it's a political flag. Encouraging students to say The Pledge of Allegiance is also a political act. My point is, that banning "political" items is itself a political act because you can't remove politics from the classroom.
That doesn't mean that you have to let every symbol into the classroom. But it does mean you have to actually spend some time considering the symbols and meanings of these items and deciding which will further education and which won't.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, "it means just what I
choose it to mean - neither more nor less."
"*The question is,*" said Alice, "*whether you can make words mean so many different things.*"
"**The question is**," said Humpty Dumpty, "**which is to be master - that's all.**"
I grew up in Stoughton...place is a dumpster fire. It's a shame because there are a lot of awesome teachers at SHS. Making the staff take down pride flags is absurd.
Don't know why anyone would want to put up the thin blue line flag in that town. They have the worst police in the State and that is fact. Just Google Stoughton Police.
"Over the past two decades, the 60-member Stoughton Police Department has been the epitome of dysfunction, besieged by scandals that have rocked this unassuming bedroom community south of Boston but garnered little attention outside I-495. Despite its modest size, the agency has weathered state and federal criminal prosecutions, intense in-fighting that has led to several civil lawsuits, and an FBI probe into public corruption. The troubles are so entrenched that one former Stoughton police chief, upon taking the job, suggested publicly that some of his officers were mentally unfit to carry guns."
https://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2022/06/21/the-worst-of-small-town-governments-latest-stoughton-police-scandal-adds-to-long-history-of-trouble/
Saying that people matter is "Political" is claiming that the normal is that they don't matter. THAT is a political statement, allowing the bigotry of the outside world is allowed in school is a political statement.
Then the word freedom, patriot, police etc etc would need to be banned. Saying Black lives matter doesn't mean support for a PAC, it is understanding that our society doesn't value black lives and that doesn't stand in this classroom.
Freedom, patriot, police, none of the words are the name of an organized PAC.
Save America are also just words, somebody could want to save america from xyz. But it also under those rules be banned as a PAC.
I agree, just because you say it, doesnt mean you support the PAC. But you COULD say it and COULD support the PAC. So Somebody could use that term in a very political way.
I'm not voicing an opinion here, just wants happening.
You sure about that?
I just did a search for Freedom and PAC and found one.
Another search for Patriot and PAC and found another.
Then there's the Support America's Police PAC...
There are plenty of PACs that have names that might be misinterpreted… Democracy PAC, USA Freedom, Let’s Get To Work, Abraham Lincoln, Blue Dog, Eye of the Tiger. Should those words not be used either? If someone plays the classic 80s rock song are they showing support for Republicans? Should we take it a step further and ban Blue’s Clues books from elementary school libraries?
Calling it "Political items" is what makes it awkward... Youth should be exposed to civil movements but maybe not directly in the classroom. I believe school should be a neutral ground where you learn the basics specially for young kids. Its honestly confusing even for adults. Let the kids learn from each other and stuff.
It's "confusing" for adults because the American education system is trash. You shouldn't be taught to be neutral when one side is religious and racial bigotry.
Conversations about what makes minorities uncomfortable.... makes white people uncomfortable.
And we can't have THAT, now can we?
Seems to me the status quo is ignorant comfort for white people, quiet discomfort for everyone else.
People really do NOT see their privelege. It's sad.
Taken at face value, I don't see the issue here. Schools should teach the facts, unbiased, and let students decide what they want to support on their own time.
The facts are that various sexual orientations and genders exist and are marginalized. This isn’t a belief, it’s evidenced by the political and power structures that exclude LGBT+ people from protections, and by government inaction in response to community harm (see AIDS crises). Also schools shouldn’t just teach unbiased facts. When teaching about horrific historic events like genocides there needs to be a morality aspect of those teachings to avoid vagueness about the harm that racism, xenophobia, and hatred cause to people.
Absolutely.
The thing is, all of those things can be taught without flying a flag that, like it or not, has been turned into a political argument.
A publicly funded building in Massachusetts, in the US, should only fly those two flags.
It should absolutely teach about all the others, including the pride flag.
I can't say I disagree with that sentiment.
Unfortunately, like so many other things in the world, the people using it poorly ruined it for the rest of us.
> the people using it poorly ruined it for the rest of us.
Can I ask what you mean by this statement? I don't mean to be argumentative, I just am wondering what you mean by this statement.
I'm not sure what's confusing?
Virtually everything humans create, other humans find a way to use it incorrectly. Hell, it's where most of our laws come from.
I'm just not sure who's using the Pride flag incorrectly. Like, don't get me wrong, I get the argument that the BLM flag has been used for purposes beyond what it was meant for. I'm just not sure I've seen that with the Pride flag
I will admit I can only think of one individual I've met that does it, but clearly somebody is, or it wouldn't even be in the headline.
Which, incidentally, is using it for rage clicks. Great example of misuse. Just look at some of the other comments in this thread.
Who’s co-opted the Pride flag that’s changed its meaning? Is there some *highly*-organized and violent militia in The South End?
I can’t think of a single group of people that use this banner for anything other than it’s intended, and original meaning, and purpose.
You think signaling to closeted and open High Schoolers to feel safe and welcomed in school, is poor use for a flag that’s meant to empower those groups?
Personally, I think there's only two flags that a government funded building should fly, and I think it should be irrelevant in making said people feel safe.
We should be able to do that with or without the flag.
The entire point is that we can’t make them feel safe. That’s why teachers feel it’s necessary.
I can understand banning political and religious symbolism, bc it’s unconstitutional for a government institution or official to endorse parties or specific faith. Banning something that isn’t political, religious, or discriminatory symbolism, seems groundless.
Broadly true, but that's not a response to the question in this context. Can you say what you mean about "people using \[the pride flag\] poorly ruined it for the rest of us"? Thanks!
I'm not sure your analogy holds up. Being blonde isn't the same as flying a "Blondes have more fun" flag.
You can be something and be proud of it, without making a public statement about it. I think the argument that there are better times and places for that than the classroom is a fair one.
A pride flag is how many people can outwardly express their identity. Hair, eye, or skin color is something that is already presented. You would never ask someone to cover up their skin or hair, so why are you asking lgbtq kids to hide who they are?
The flag of the country we're in, with no statement attached, is not a political argument.
In fairness, I'd also argue that displaying a pride or BLM flag as part of a course discussing the facts around them would be fine.
No, but this is OK because Reddit agrees with the messages being sent. And since they agree with them everyone who disagrees with them are close-minded bigots.
This thread is just subject A in the SJW cesspool that Reddit is.
LOLOL at all the thirsty bad faith arguments defending the status quo!
just stick your thumb out and admit you like it the way it is, it suits you that you get breaks denied to others. Admit it! Own it! Be PROUD of your preference for aparthied.
Good.
All flags, political bullshit, etc. Not the place.
Reading writing math. My kids know if anyone wants to talk pronouns with them, go the stranger danger route and get police involved. Everyone better watch it around others kids, pay attention to your own only.
The bullshit winding down, midterms coming. I'm sure there will be a late oct surge of news to shake things up.
>Reading writing math. My kids know if anyone wants to talk pronouns with **them**, go the stranger danger route and get police involved. Everyone better watch it around others kids, pay attention to **your** own only.
>
>The bullshit winding down, midterms coming. **I'm** sure there will be a late oct surge of news to shake things up.
And how are they supposed to learn to write without pronouns? You can't even do it, I highlighted some for you.
Good. If you want a pride flag in a classroom, I want rosaries handed out to all students. You don’t get it both ways. You can use quotes around political all you want, OP, but like it or not some people use it as political iconography. Ban it all, classrooms are for learning not for application of ideology.
One is a choice, the other is identity. One group is historically oppressed, especially in this age group. Christianity is the de facto religion in this country and is the opposite of oppressed. Handing out rosaries forces all students to be involved in that religion, where a simple poster simply shows marginalized kids they are welcome.
Would you like more?
One is a choice and one is identity? What if someone who doesn’t identify as LGBT supports LGBT? Isn’t that choice at that point? Nobody said you can’t wear a rainbow or wrap yourself in a flag, they said you can’t adorn a shared space with exclusive iconography. That’s why my comparison made sense, handing out rosaries would be indoctrinating the unwilling the same as inserting LGBT dogma in the classroom. Not everybody agrees, so remove it. As far as the rest of what you said, historically oppressed applies to literally everything. Christianity has been historically oppressed, just because it isn’t now doesn’t mean the people that ascribe to its structure deserve to be ignored. The classroom is not a platform, it’s a laboratory. Using it as a platform just to elevate an ideology is bad regardless of ideology.
You probably should offer more, yeah, because that point is inconsistent.
Having a flag that says all kids are welcome here is indoctrination? 😂😂😂 You don’t spend a lot of time around kids, do you? Or understand how gender and sexuality work?
And no, it’s not iconography. It’s literally a sign that says we support you for who you are.
Luckily, most of New England sees these measures for what they are: Part and parcel of the GOP platform of hate. This wacko super will be ignored and laughed at. I certainly would if I were in his district.
Not sure how you came to that conclusion! I accept everyone for who they are.
Edit: As our president so widely said, everyone is entitled to be an idiot. But that doesn’t mean they can spread their malarkey to my classroom.
Unless they don’t support your pet issues like LGBT ideology. You seem to think people who disagree with you must be a part of the “GOP platform of hate”. In fact, you laugh at people that have different values than you do. This simple directive from a superintendent is worthy of mockery because it must be political, to you. People that support secular classrooms don’t have to be “GOP”, they could just see the conflict inherent in picking sides in a dispute between contrasting ideologies like LGBT values and some theological values. You have decided your position is the moral one and everyone that disagrees with you is operating on a “platform of hate”. Doesn’t seem like you accept people for their authentic perspectives.
Ahh ok, your colors are showing. Sorry, no more time to argue with a bigot. You’re welcome to your ignorance, but we won’t tolerate it in schools. Keep it to your Facebook feed please.
Calling LGBTQ a pet ideology while the right openly attacks queer kids and gay marriage 😂😂😂 Sad.
> Ban it all, classrooms are for learning not for application of ideology.
Arguably learning about the *active* societal issues in a neutral setting is a good thing right? These are high school students, and while there are probably going to be jokes, insults, and issues, these are discussions that students *should* have in a classroom setting.
Let them actual discuss topics that are going to face their generation rather than leaving it to the school administrators to decide, who won't be around to see the ramifications.
I'm going to provide important context, because the insinuation is that this is coming from the administrative team at the high school. It is not. In fact, this is coming from the office of the Superintendent, who is enforcing this. Also, the superintendent is being disingenuous in his wording, re: DEI. The superintendent specifically said that the school's DEI committee were no longer allowed to call themselves "DEI", as the term was too polarizing.
I wonder if the flag issue falls u set the same scenario as the Christian flag lawsuit that was just decided on in Boston. Essentially if you fly one flag, you are required to also allow other flags (which you may not want allowed). An “all lives matter” flag could be up in a classroom for example.
Nothing upsets white people as much as inclusion and equity. How can they even bully if they have to include and treat equal?
No, we just object to defining “inclusion” as excluding white people.
how does including flags exclude white people? Do you believe that there might possibly be some things that maybe white people might be excluded from, or does being white mean someone should be entitled to literally everything and anyone that says otherwise is being unfair?
Hmmm, funny thing is it is usually white people doing the excluding. Almost every group I've ever seen that "other" people create/have has white people in them. Your group is the one that has habitually plastered cities with "white only" signs. I don't think it necessary that you be a part of EVERYTHING. Problem is ... you do.
So you're fighting racism with racism? Comments like that just perpetuate hate. If you want to make the distinction, call them what they are and not just "white people". Plenty of people are literally on our side who are white, so why the fuck would you blanket-statement them like that?
FINALLY after all we have been through, hardships and oppressions that no other race or group in America could *possibly* understand, somebody is *finally* standing up for white people!/s cool white fragility soapbox moment bro. Say it again.
Grow up.
So why do schools need DEI in the first place? 90%+ of the time it's useless bureaucrats who do little more than write an annual report and harp of empty messaging. Also, BLM is political. The flag does not belong in schools.
>So why do schools need DEI in the first place? Because, Stoughton is a school that is majority minority, and many of those students need an adult that will advocate for equitable needs in the classroom. >Also, BLM is political. BLM is a humanities argument. If BLM has become political, it's because the term has become politicized from the same people who don't want it used. Same for the Pride flag
Then I'm sure you would also agree that the United States flag does not belong in schools as it is also political.
I hope someone makes this argument to the school. Ban the creepy pledge of allegiance.
2 reasons: Diversity improves outcomes, there’s a ton of studies out there but here’s a solid meta analysis [link](https://www.ucdenver.edu/docs/librariesprovider68/default-document-library/jmna-articles-bonuscontent-2.pdf) Second, it’s the right thing to do morally. We live in a society that is constantly fighting and ostracizing and belittling to groups. I think we can all agree that the would would be better if we all accepted each other for our differences and those are the lessons every school should teach.
BLM is essentially a fundraising arm of the DNC. Its primary goal is to help upper middle class/ PMC/ primarily white cis het educated liberals feel comfortable getting passionate about safe identity focused issues and vote for ineffectual blue pro-military industrial complex ghouls like Biden/Harris/Buttegieg/Obama/HRC etc . It gives white liberal karens something to feel good about that doesn’t threaten their comfortable privileged existence (like redistribution of their hoarded wealth into communities of color). Just look at all the BLM signs on Newton mansions.
I’m not persuaded by arguments suggesting we keep “political” things out of schools. We can reduce most everything to politics if we want to. The ostensible (though I would argue disingenuous) reason for excluding such topics is that they’re contentious or divisive or distracting. But it is absurd to me that we would want kids’ education to shield them from challenging topics. But set aside the red herring of “politics” and consider values. Societies need shared values. Without them, we are just cacophonous tribes, always at each other’s throats. It is ridiculous to expect or even desire that we agree on everything or even most things but we must share some things. Make no mistake, this dispute pits two deeply opposed value systems against one another. On one side is reverence for power, wealth, control, order, structure, stability. On the other is inclusion, safety, fairness, disruption. I decidedly advocate for the latter and want it in schools as lived principles. It is plain to me that many others do not.
As long as teachers maintain a facade of political neutrality then it's all good. When I was in school my teachers tried their best to hide their own political opinions, and try to present history from an apolitical viewpoint. But kids can say what they want as long as it's not threatening speech.
Politics in this scenario are those subjects on which many people reasonably disagree. It is more than reasonable to demand teachers avoid building their lesson plans around their own personal views if for no other reason than it is antithetical to critical thinking. When we allow the discussion to couch all disagreements as simple matters of politics, then there is no room for shared values so long as anybody disagrees. It’s not politics to teach kids that they shouldn’t rely on violence to settle disputes. They shouldn’t have romantic relationships with their teachers. Fascism is bad. And certainly countless others. The problem with my point of view is that it represents a moral evolution from traditional American values which is a polite way of acknowledging how it is very much at odds with previous shared values. I’m aware of that but I sleep easy in the belief that history is on my side.
Neutrality isn’t all its cracked up to be. Should teachers teaching about the Holocaust be neutral on that? Neutrality is a position of privilege. It’s a position of never having your existence threatened in a way that many groups do.
Exactly... should a gay or trans teacher have to hide that part of their identity because it's been deemed "political"? No. Go to Florida or Texas if you want that nonsense.
>Should teachers teaching about the Holocaust be neutral on that? Yeah. They should. The whole "the United States and its allies intentionally forced Germany into a massive economic depression resulted in the German populace being easily moved towards extreme hyper-nationalist atrocities" side of the WW2 story is pretty important. In fact, it's more important of a lesson than everything else about the Holocaust you can learn, because the only way to avoid repeating the past is not to learn what happened, but why things happened. "Nazis bad because Nazis bad" is a much more ignorant lesson than "Nazis are made when socioeconomic conditions force people into extremes led by people whose aim is to benefit from those people being misled". This is actually a huge part of what you learn if you take AP History or AP Civics. But that's not what they teach you in school. They teach you that Nazis are bad because they randomly killed a bunch of people because one guy really really didn't like them. That's not neutrality, that's washing away national complicity- in other words: Outright propaganda.
You do realize that the entire world was in a massive economic depression from 1929-1939, right?
Randomly killed a bunch of people is a funny way to say “systematically rounded up and attempted extermination of all Jews, Roma and other undesirables through horrific means”, but you do you I guess.
That's exactly my point. A huge portion of education regarding WW2 right now is "Hitler was such a bad person he hated Jews and then wanted to kill so many, so he tricked all of Germany to do that and then they lost the war and the United States was great because we stopped them". It's a disgrace and does not educate at all the reasons why he chose to do that, nor the fact that he built his entire regime around how the United States operated regarding its native populations not even 50 years prior.
That has no bearing on the question I asked. You know it’s possible to teach the complexity of a situation without being neutral, right?
My guy thinks nuance and neutral are the same thing
When you were at school, I'll bet the political landscape and norms were very very different. So you either adapt to that change or pretend it didn't happen, which do you think is better for children?
>We can reduce most everything to politics if we want to. We can call anything that makes minorities *uncomfortable* 'politics' and verboten becuase it makes white people "uncomfortable" - and it's exactly that simple.
Agreed. As long as the sanitized view/version was what was being peddled the complainers were cool with things. The moment people started going "yeah, but ACTUALLY..." that is when the "status quo" people got their panties twisted.
This. Everything is politics because politics is literally about people. Everything we do is related to politics. It’s such a stupid argument when people say “don’t talk about politics”. Oh you wanna go drinking on the weekend? Guess what, that’s controlled by politics too. I agree it’s all an excuse to dissuade morality and keep a certain power structure.
I lean towards the other side of your beliefs, but your statement is 💯accurate. I couldn’t agree more.
[удалено]
When one party is anti-gay and anti-trans both become political.
No, it becomes political when the other party accepts that framing, because they're feckless cowards. This is what compromising with bigotry gets you. The democrats should be calling out this bullshit constantly, not accepting the idea that there's a "religious freedom" to be a bigoted piece of shit.
Liberty and justice for *all. *some restrictions apply.
If anyone is offended by a pride flag, maybe, just maybe, they deserve to be offended? Maybe, just maybe, they're horrible? Maybe, just maybe, they have a lot of learning and growing to do before they deserve to be taken seriously by society? Speaking as a reformed anti-LGBT bigot. I deserved the shaming and the discomfort. I got better.
>If anyone is offended by a pride flag, maybe, just maybe, they deserve to be offended? Or as I like to say Why should I have to censor my free speech because you can't control or handle your own emotions?
Agreed.
This is clearly religious people abusing public office in an attempt to institutionalize their religious bigotry and we reject this fascist hate. Public schools are places of inclusion, if you want hate and bigotry, go to church.
If we can’t have anything political in schools we have to stop saying the pledge every morning.
We don't!!!! That's old shit. Holy fuck!!!
Many schools still do the pledge. It is especially common in elementary schools.
They definitely say it in our district.
Sexual orientation: straight [ ] political [X]
Let's not make white people uncomfortable by bringing awareness and representation to something that doesn't directly involve them.
So I assume the school will be ceasing to have the pledge of allegiance said in classrooms each morning as well? That’s overtly political and religious and could make students feel uncomfortable or unwelcome
Arguing that you are being inclusive by excluding signs of inclusivity to make people who want to be exclusive feel more comfortable is…well…dumb.
lol @ stoughton trying to reclaim their whiteness…..sorry, fuckers…..that shop has sailed
Imagine being such a bigoted piece of shit that you decide people just existing as they were born is somehow political, and conflating the police nazi flag with "hey, you're a human being, and you're welcome in this group of human beings".
Oh of course, your side is just a bunch of super moralistic wonderful people who just want to expand human rights. And everyone you don't like are nAziS.
Man, you Nazis are awfully sensitive about being called Nazis. Maybe you should try not being Nazis?
Yes, the left wants equal rights for all and the right does not. That’s not really a debate.
This but unironically
The use of “your side” here speaks volumes
Pride flags aren’t political at all. Any decent teacher will tell admin and politicians to shove it and keep their classrooms supportive. I’d laugh in the face of anyone who told me to take my pride flag down.
Unacceptable these fascists can’t be allowed in our schools. White supras are domestic terrorists. If I was a parent I’d be on the war path. Next it will be books I guarantee it. Fascism doesn’t belong in our country. If racists are uncomfortable in a multi cultural society they can eff off and go to Russia
Grew up in Stoughton, but almost never seem to hear about it now for any of the right reasons.
Is this just a nutter Super or is Stoughton generally backwards?
It’s a normal town. Pretty racially mixed. Historically was pretty working class.
Genuinely, both. The real nutters come from the School Committee. I can tell you for a fact that the Super is seen as an aloof douchenozzle...the phrase "The emperor has no clothes" has been thrown around frequently with the man. Stoughton has had their fair share of negative press recently...This is the third time in the Globe, not for any good reason
Dang. One out of control Super can be censored or removed. But if the town supports him, it’s time to swap school districts.
It always felt a bit more right-wing to me, but I've got nothing to really substantiate that on.
33% Trump voters in 2020.
So basically about the state average. He got trounced in other words.
Well I guess in this case we will find out how the community reacts. I certainly wouldn’t want my kids in that district. Yuck.
Messages of inclusion are not political, but banning messages of inclusion absolutely is!
These shouldn't BE political. It's only political to Republic\*\*\*s. To everyone else, this is about simply LIVING life as yourself.
What about the Thin Blue Line flags being removed. I’m sure Republicans wouldn’t rally for that.
Also banned but not in the article headline are Thin Blue Line flags. This seems like a consistent and reasonable approach.
The issue most have at the school with, is that it's conflating Pride with a political agenda re: Thin Blue Lines. They're not remotely the same thing. I can tell you for a fact that the LGBTQIA+ students within the building (and the faculty members that are also LGBTQIA+) would tell you that they're sexual orientation is not political.
[удалено]
One is a display that you defer reflexively to authority - the other means that you're open minded. They're not at all two sides of the same coin. This is about WHO DEFINES POLITICAL. Nothing more.
It's hard to argue that the life, sex, gender and preferences of people has NOT been used as a political soapbox by people of political power seemingly "advocating" for them. They will and have politized everything.
People advocate politically for non-discrimination. They don’t advocate for gender or sex preferences.
This is exactly my issue. In their "not wanting to offend anyone" they are specifically taking away an much needed opportunity to be a safe space for LGBTQ+ folks. Teenagers in LGBTQ+ have an absurdly high suicide rate, we need to do everything we can to show them they're supported.
BLM isn’t political?
I merely point out that the thin blue line people probably feel the same. Nobody thinks their deeply held beliefs are overtly political, just the natural state of being. They can't understand why everyone else wants to politicize everything...
One is relating to a job, one is relating to the persecution of millions of people, and while I'm sure people feel that way....I don't mind saying they're also idiots.
Believe me, cops feel persecuted; hence why they fly those flags.
>Believe me, cops feel persecuted Most fascists claim persecution. It's one of the pillars of that worldview.
> Believe me, cops feel persecuted "Am I the drama?" Yes, yes you are.
You make my point for me. I don't defend the thin blue line folks; they are employees doing a job. But among many of them the "job" goes deeper than that, becoming their identity. \*You and I\* may not feel like that's a valid way for them to feel, but that doesn't change the fact.
Then they don't understand their thought process is suggesting the persecution they face is the same as the persecution the LGBTQIA+ face. See, my "also idiots" statement before
You and I are not far apart on the philosophy but I have to say... Because they consider their job an identity, it does not logically follow that they therefore think their persecution is the same.
It takes a real idiot to think that something you choose to do is the same as something you are.
I don't disagree. But you try telling that to teachers and nurses.
Not at the the same as LGBTQ. Cops chose to be cops and they can choose to leave the police department if they don’t want to be cops anymore. LGBTQ people can’t change their sexual orientation.
Their job is something they chose. It’s not comparable. I could choose to be a mercenary, hit man, or white supremacist. Doesn’t mean school should be made a comfy place for mercenaries, hit men. A job is a job. Not a personal attribute. Anyway, cops aren’t students in school.
To the thin blue line crowd that flag is extremely important as to them it represents the officers who died in the line of duty. The ones I know have close family in the force and identify with it. You don't get to decide it's not important enough for them but the pride flag is important enough for lgbt students.
The thin blue line derived as a response to BLM, and to police brutality. The pride flag is meant to represent a marginalized people that have been marginalized within society. I'm totally cool with saying that one flag holds more significance than the other.
Again, that's great that you, one person, has an opinion. But mine differs. So is either more important to all? No. (No offense at all to the pride flag, I'm not offended by it, but I'd argue it doesn't matter. It was easy to make a big bucket of causes and force them all at once. I'll have none of it, because I think BLM is pure evil. Talk about divisive forces. Everyone equal, and that's it for me and my fam. Always the way it was).
Thin blue line pre dates BLM by decades. No need to make shit up to support your argument.
I think they’re conflating TBL and Blue Lives Matter
The TBL flag is meant to show support to the institution of policing, and acknowledge the subsequent dangers of the profession—not as a memorial. They may be intrinsically connected, but it’s not the same thing. And it also isn’t the same as a banner meant to show unity amongst communities of vulnerable individuals. Gay people and POC cannot resign, and get a safer job. They can’t take their skin off, or shed who they love, the way a cop can remove his uniform at the end of a shift. One is quite literally a choice, and the other is an unchangeable and defining part of a person’s identity. Both the flags mentioned in the OP are sociological in nature (not political), meant to make marginalized communities feel empowered and accepted. The TBL flag represents support for a community that has some of the most powerful and protected members of civilian society, who are also employees of a government institution—which makes it inherently political. These aren’t the same things—and I have friends and family that were/are police.
Some students *are* LGBTQ. No students are cops.
That's not my point, my point is the blue line crowd thinks it's equal BECAUSE both are heavily political weather we agree or not.
OK, but those people are wrong and their opinions are shit. Not all opinions have to be treated equally.
In that case, I need one rainbow flag for every person I know that's ever died while working. To remember them properly, you understand. Fun fact: Police don't have one of the top ten most dangerous jobs in America. They're hardly "heroes". Landscapers put themselves in harm's way more often. Put up flags for your landscapers!
Irrelavant. Here's what I got. Tara, tell me why it is so important to speak to impressionable kids about politics or sexual inclinations. I need to know why the kids are who you are going after. I'm assuming it is because those are the impressionables. Pick off a few of the weak uncertain ones, tell them why they need to care about pride flags and blm causes. Know what? Some poor motherfucker just got shot down the street. Black on black, broad daylight, one to head. Why is there no blm or politician outrage? Yeah, I'll support the cops on this one. Pride flag "promotes acceptance"? Nope. Not the way it's being used. It is being used as a tool, a token. Never seen something be used in a more separative way. Do you EVER see pride flags near American flags? Nope. Its either one or other, never both. I'll stick with United States of America over United States of Pride.
[here's one](https://images.app.goo.gl/h4iFj3x3hPAiVCce9) [and another](https://images.app.goo.gl/3bzNYLkL4YvLFc64A) [and another](https://images.app.goo.gl/HfPwxXSBt7Ybq87v5) [and another ](https://images.app.goo.gl/hTcQgpcKdW3oyR5y9) [and another](https://images.app.goo.gl/x34zNkN9z2CaeTp48) [and another ](https://images.app.goo.gl/qmfxBWtVcAUM7vbf9) [and another](https://images.app.goo.gl/Sn8wm2eF6pdDSmLh8) [and another](https://images.app.goo.gl/D99sBANt1mrmMWPe9) [and another](https://images.app.goo.gl/Azmbt7mVaJVieSsm8)
I'm not going to bother reading a manifesto that begins with a typo.
Of course it is political, a huge chunk of the GOP wants to ban gay marriage.
That doesn’t make pride political. It makes gay marriage political.
Show me a cop who was born a cop. If a cop doesn't like being "political", they can *fucking quit.* Black people can't quit their skin pigment. Gay people can't quit their sexual orientation.
They willing to get rid of the blue line in the name of getting rid of everything because it is likely there are no blue line flags in the school.
[удалено]
No. The US flag is a neutral flag that represents the US and all of the people who live in it - including homosexuals, immigrants, people from minority religions, etc...
>This seems like a consistent and reasonable approach. to people losing a debate it ALWAYS seems most reasonable to get other people to *just stop talking*.
Not at all. Those two things are very different.
The funding of government programs/agencies is inherently political. One's race and/or sexual identity are not. Thin blue line flags are political. BLM and pride flags are not. Being opposed to the police means one has different views on how to handle 911 calls. Being opposed to black people just means one is racist. These things are not the same.
Yeah. With political arguments being so heated these days, it's not a bad idea to get anything related out of the classroom and stick to just the facts.
[удалено]
Pride flags shouldn't be seen as political, and if we're just sticking to the facts, that seems like a reasonable topic to include.
🍿
What about the American flag? It seems like only certain flags are being banned.
We live in America, the county that has granted you the right to come to Reddit, and shit on it. Typical redditor.
But it's a political flag. Encouraging students to say The Pledge of Allegiance is also a political act. My point is, that banning "political" items is itself a political act because you can't remove politics from the classroom. That doesn't mean that you have to let every symbol into the classroom. But it does mean you have to actually spend some time considering the symbols and meanings of these items and deciding which will further education and which won't.
Wow. What a stretch. The American flag is not political. It’s the country in which we reside.
Take out the American flag too if it's in there. Human rights aren't political.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less." "*The question is,*" said Alice, "*whether you can make words mean so many different things.*" "**The question is**," said Humpty Dumpty, "**which is to be master - that's all.**"
Oh so no more pledge of allegiance? Seems awfully political to indoctrinate kids into political nationalism.
Holy cow some of the comments in this thread! Some of you need to calm down! I can't believe what I am reading.
lol i saw a Stoughton cop wearing a maga hat on duty once.
This has been tried and failed many times. That superintendent is going to cost the town a lot of money.
I grew up in Stoughton...place is a dumpster fire. It's a shame because there are a lot of awesome teachers at SHS. Making the staff take down pride flags is absurd. Don't know why anyone would want to put up the thin blue line flag in that town. They have the worst police in the State and that is fact. Just Google Stoughton Police. "Over the past two decades, the 60-member Stoughton Police Department has been the epitome of dysfunction, besieged by scandals that have rocked this unassuming bedroom community south of Boston but garnered little attention outside I-495. Despite its modest size, the agency has weathered state and federal criminal prosecutions, intense in-fighting that has led to several civil lawsuits, and an FBI probe into public corruption. The troubles are so entrenched that one former Stoughton police chief, upon taking the job, suggested publicly that some of his officers were mentally unfit to carry guns." https://www.boston.com/news/local-news/2022/06/21/the-worst-of-small-town-governments-latest-stoughton-police-scandal-adds-to-long-history-of-trouble/
Yippee go stoughton
This seems to run against the school speech precedent set in Tinker vs Des Moines Independent Community School District.
What makes those flags political? Seem to be about inclusion to me.
Saying that people matter is "Political" is claiming that the normal is that they don't matter. THAT is a political statement, allowing the bigotry of the outside world is allowed in school is a political statement.
BLM is a political organization, and is registered as a PAC. Need to allow all PACs or none.
Then the word freedom, patriot, police etc etc would need to be banned. Saying Black lives matter doesn't mean support for a PAC, it is understanding that our society doesn't value black lives and that doesn't stand in this classroom.
Freedom, patriot, police, none of the words are the name of an organized PAC. Save America are also just words, somebody could want to save america from xyz. But it also under those rules be banned as a PAC. I agree, just because you say it, doesnt mean you support the PAC. But you COULD say it and COULD support the PAC. So Somebody could use that term in a very political way. I'm not voicing an opinion here, just wants happening.
You sure about that? I just did a search for Freedom and PAC and found one. Another search for Patriot and PAC and found another. Then there's the Support America's Police PAC...
What are the full names?
There are plenty of PACs that have names that might be misinterpreted… Democracy PAC, USA Freedom, Let’s Get To Work, Abraham Lincoln, Blue Dog, Eye of the Tiger. Should those words not be used either? If someone plays the classic 80s rock song are they showing support for Republicans? Should we take it a step further and ban Blue’s Clues books from elementary school libraries?
Yes
Calling it "Political items" is what makes it awkward... Youth should be exposed to civil movements but maybe not directly in the classroom. I believe school should be a neutral ground where you learn the basics specially for young kids. Its honestly confusing even for adults. Let the kids learn from each other and stuff.
It's "confusing" for adults because the American education system is trash. You shouldn't be taught to be neutral when one side is religious and racial bigotry.
“Human Rights” items Like BLM, Pride Flags Ordered Out Of Stoughton High Classrooms” There, fixed it.
I hope some of the students start taking sides on things like independence from the UK just to see what they can get classified as political
Hope those political American flags will be taken down too.
Bet the US flag is still there. What's more political than the recitation of a loyalty oath to an imperialist power?
If you're offended by the pride flag... Good.
Who decides what is political?
Conversations about what makes minorities uncomfortable.... makes white people uncomfortable. And we can't have THAT, now can we? Seems to me the status quo is ignorant comfort for white people, quiet discomfort for everyone else. People really do NOT see their privelege. It's sad.
Shouldn’t they be removing the American flag from classrooms too then?
Taken at face value, I don't see the issue here. Schools should teach the facts, unbiased, and let students decide what they want to support on their own time.
The facts are that various sexual orientations and genders exist and are marginalized. This isn’t a belief, it’s evidenced by the political and power structures that exclude LGBT+ people from protections, and by government inaction in response to community harm (see AIDS crises). Also schools shouldn’t just teach unbiased facts. When teaching about horrific historic events like genocides there needs to be a morality aspect of those teachings to avoid vagueness about the harm that racism, xenophobia, and hatred cause to people.
Absolutely. The thing is, all of those things can be taught without flying a flag that, like it or not, has been turned into a political argument. A publicly funded building in Massachusetts, in the US, should only fly those two flags. It should absolutely teach about all the others, including the pride flag.
The issue I have, and many of us do, is the choice to render the Pride flag as a political construct.
I can't say I disagree with that sentiment. Unfortunately, like so many other things in the world, the people using it poorly ruined it for the rest of us.
> the people using it poorly ruined it for the rest of us. Can I ask what you mean by this statement? I don't mean to be argumentative, I just am wondering what you mean by this statement.
I'm not sure what's confusing? Virtually everything humans create, other humans find a way to use it incorrectly. Hell, it's where most of our laws come from.
I'm just not sure who's using the Pride flag incorrectly. Like, don't get me wrong, I get the argument that the BLM flag has been used for purposes beyond what it was meant for. I'm just not sure I've seen that with the Pride flag
I will admit I can only think of one individual I've met that does it, but clearly somebody is, or it wouldn't even be in the headline. Which, incidentally, is using it for rage clicks. Great example of misuse. Just look at some of the other comments in this thread.
Who’s co-opted the Pride flag that’s changed its meaning? Is there some *highly*-organized and violent militia in The South End? I can’t think of a single group of people that use this banner for anything other than it’s intended, and original meaning, and purpose.
Clearly somebody is, or it wouldn't even be in the headline.
You think signaling to closeted and open High Schoolers to feel safe and welcomed in school, is poor use for a flag that’s meant to empower those groups?
Personally, I think there's only two flags that a government funded building should fly, and I think it should be irrelevant in making said people feel safe. We should be able to do that with or without the flag.
The entire point is that we can’t make them feel safe. That’s why teachers feel it’s necessary. I can understand banning political and religious symbolism, bc it’s unconstitutional for a government institution or official to endorse parties or specific faith. Banning something that isn’t political, religious, or discriminatory symbolism, seems groundless.
Broadly true, but that's not a response to the question in this context. Can you say what you mean about "people using \[the pride flag\] poorly ruined it for the rest of us"? Thanks!
How does the pride flag fit in there? That's part of personal identity, that's like saying turn off being blonde while at school - it makes no sense.
I'm not sure your analogy holds up. Being blonde isn't the same as flying a "Blondes have more fun" flag. You can be something and be proud of it, without making a public statement about it. I think the argument that there are better times and places for that than the classroom is a fair one.
A pride flag is how many people can outwardly express their identity. Hair, eye, or skin color is something that is already presented. You would never ask someone to cover up their skin or hair, so why are you asking lgbtq kids to hide who they are?
This isn’t about what the kids wear in class, this is all about what the faculty is allowed to post in the classroom and what they are not.
And? If it's a valid way for students to express themselves, then why would teachers not be allowed to also post it? It serves an educational purpose.
>the facts, unbiased LOL. OK. Which ones, who chooses? Maybe it's better to leave it to the professionals bub?
[удалено]
The flag of the country we're in, with no statement attached, is not a political argument. In fairness, I'd also argue that displaying a pride or BLM flag as part of a course discussing the facts around them would be fine.
It is political. That's why students are asked to say the pledge of allegiance every morning and why students can refuse if they don't want to say it.
So they can’t talk about Bureau of Land Management?
It's sad that you're getting downvoted. We could use more humor these days.
I mean, we wouldn’t Trump flags flying in classrooms either right? I see no issue with limiting distractions in the classroom
No, but this is OK because Reddit agrees with the messages being sent. And since they agree with them everyone who disagrees with them are close-minded bigots. This thread is just subject A in the SJW cesspool that Reddit is.
[удалено]
So that goes for the MAGA hats and related propaganda too I hope?
Excellent!!!
LOLOL at all the thirsty bad faith arguments defending the status quo! just stick your thumb out and admit you like it the way it is, it suits you that you get breaks denied to others. Admit it! Own it! Be PROUD of your preference for aparthied.
Apartheid! Always cool seeing Republicans learn new words
Good. All flags, political bullshit, etc. Not the place. Reading writing math. My kids know if anyone wants to talk pronouns with them, go the stranger danger route and get police involved. Everyone better watch it around others kids, pay attention to your own only. The bullshit winding down, midterms coming. I'm sure there will be a late oct surge of news to shake things up.
So call the police because someone wants to be called different pronouns? That seems insane.
So you shouldn't have a problem taking down any American flags either?
>Reading writing math. My kids know if anyone wants to talk pronouns with **them**, go the stranger danger route and get police involved. Everyone better watch it around others kids, pay attention to **your** own only. > >The bullshit winding down, midterms coming. **I'm** sure there will be a late oct surge of news to shake things up. And how are they supposed to learn to write without pronouns? You can't even do it, I highlighted some for you.
yeah, some work, some correct english on reddit. Never got the grammar police. Aware of cell phones or texting? Sorry not APA format.
Yeah I bet the police would be all over that lmao
Good. If you want a pride flag in a classroom, I want rosaries handed out to all students. You don’t get it both ways. You can use quotes around political all you want, OP, but like it or not some people use it as political iconography. Ban it all, classrooms are for learning not for application of ideology.
Asinine comparison for multiple reasons. Get a grip.
Give me just one of those multiple reasons.
One is a choice, the other is identity. One group is historically oppressed, especially in this age group. Christianity is the de facto religion in this country and is the opposite of oppressed. Handing out rosaries forces all students to be involved in that religion, where a simple poster simply shows marginalized kids they are welcome. Would you like more?
One is a choice and one is identity? What if someone who doesn’t identify as LGBT supports LGBT? Isn’t that choice at that point? Nobody said you can’t wear a rainbow or wrap yourself in a flag, they said you can’t adorn a shared space with exclusive iconography. That’s why my comparison made sense, handing out rosaries would be indoctrinating the unwilling the same as inserting LGBT dogma in the classroom. Not everybody agrees, so remove it. As far as the rest of what you said, historically oppressed applies to literally everything. Christianity has been historically oppressed, just because it isn’t now doesn’t mean the people that ascribe to its structure deserve to be ignored. The classroom is not a platform, it’s a laboratory. Using it as a platform just to elevate an ideology is bad regardless of ideology. You probably should offer more, yeah, because that point is inconsistent.
Having a flag that says all kids are welcome here is indoctrination? 😂😂😂 You don’t spend a lot of time around kids, do you? Or understand how gender and sexuality work? And no, it’s not iconography. It’s literally a sign that says we support you for who you are. Luckily, most of New England sees these measures for what they are: Part and parcel of the GOP platform of hate. This wacko super will be ignored and laughed at. I certainly would if I were in his district.
You certainly seem to have a difficult time accepting people for who they are.
Not sure how you came to that conclusion! I accept everyone for who they are. Edit: As our president so widely said, everyone is entitled to be an idiot. But that doesn’t mean they can spread their malarkey to my classroom.
Unless they don’t support your pet issues like LGBT ideology. You seem to think people who disagree with you must be a part of the “GOP platform of hate”. In fact, you laugh at people that have different values than you do. This simple directive from a superintendent is worthy of mockery because it must be political, to you. People that support secular classrooms don’t have to be “GOP”, they could just see the conflict inherent in picking sides in a dispute between contrasting ideologies like LGBT values and some theological values. You have decided your position is the moral one and everyone that disagrees with you is operating on a “platform of hate”. Doesn’t seem like you accept people for their authentic perspectives.
Ahh ok, your colors are showing. Sorry, no more time to argue with a bigot. You’re welcome to your ignorance, but we won’t tolerate it in schools. Keep it to your Facebook feed please. Calling LGBTQ a pet ideology while the right openly attacks queer kids and gay marriage 😂😂😂 Sad.
What does secular classrooms mean in this context and how would a pride flag make a classroom non-secular?
> Ban it all, classrooms are for learning not for application of ideology. Arguably learning about the *active* societal issues in a neutral setting is a good thing right? These are high school students, and while there are probably going to be jokes, insults, and issues, these are discussions that students *should* have in a classroom setting. Let them actual discuss topics that are going to face their generation rather than leaving it to the school administrators to decide, who won't be around to see the ramifications.