Because that’s a great way to teach Civil War History, right y’all?
No. No. No. No. No. No.
You do not have a mock auction and sell black students to teach a class about Civil War.
I don’t care whether your intentions are noble or not. You just don’t do it. And if you are a teacher and you don’t think about the fact that such an exercise will be deeply hurtful to your black students and their families, then you need to get your damn head examined:
A letter to parents with children at Sewells Point Elementary School was sent home last week, following the April 1 incident.
Officials say teacher Jessica Boyle separated black and mixed-race students from their white peers and then put them up for sale.
The letter from Principal Mary B. Wrushen says, in part, “Although her actions were well intended to meet the instructional objectives, the activity presented was inappropriate for the students.”
Norfolk Public Schools Communications Director Elizabeth Mather says there are policies in place to prevent inappropriate lesson plans.
She said the teacher in this case did not present the lesson plan to the principal for review.
She noted that all teachers follow an approved curriculum, but they’re responsible for making their lesson plans, which are supposed to be approved by principals.
Boyle has been in Norfolk Public Schools since 2005.
Jon Bershad of Mediaite who defended Boyle’s actions (sort of), writes:
Now, I’m going to take a potentially unpopular stance here and defend Boyle. I obviously don’t know what went down in the classroom but, in theory, this isn’t the worst idea in the world. Let me explain.
Take, for example, the Holocaust Museum in Washington DC. They have a tour where each guest selects a card with a real person’s name on it. They follow this person’s story throughout and, at the end, they learn whether their person (which the guest is relating to at this point) dies. Just like that.
Is this pleasant? No. However, if you talk to someone who went to that museum when they were young, they instantly remember their visit. It is an incredibly effective way of getting young people to truly understand the unthinkable. I’m sure Boyle was trying to give her class a similar experience.
I must admit, that I began furiously to write this post immediately after I read these paragraphs. “No No No No. The Holocaust tour is different. WTF?!”
During the Holocaust tour, they don’t separate the Jewish students from the non-Jewish students and then have the non-Jews act as Nazis and the Jews act as… well… Jews. The Holocaust tour is a teaching moment for the entire class without humiliating any specific student. The students all participate and they all learn something (hopefully) about what it might have been like to be Jewish during the Holocaust.
But that wasn’t the case here. Here, the teacher segregated the black students and then fucking sold them. How humiliating and embarrassing and awful that must have been for those students. And, whatever message the teacher was attempting to convey immediately got lost.
It is, quite simply, one of the dumbest ideas a teacher could devise (aside from having students parade around school in KKK robes).
As I read these paragraphs, my outrage-o-meter steadily climbed. (Shocking, I know.)
But then I finished reading Bershad’s article:
Now, it’s in execution that Boyle really slipped up. The obvious problem is that she actually separated the kids by race. Had she just chosen a group at random and told them they were now the “slaves,” I doubt we’d ever hear about this story. But, since a white teacher actually set aside her black students, there’s no way this wasn’t going to cause a problem. Some things you just don’t do and any person, especially a teacher, should know better.
Ah, there it is!
::holsters flame-thrower::
The obvious problem is separating the kids — obvious problem is obvious.
But there’s another problem — the Charleston Problem, and that is, the narrative regarding the reasons this country fought itself in the Civil War have been coopted by idiots who like to put on their fanciest Confederate gear and pretend shoot one another. They see it as a celebration of history. I see it as a yearning for a Simpler Time, when it was all mint juleps, and seersucker, and field negroes. It makes me exceedingly uncomfortable.
In my view, it is a period of history that should be taught, but not revered or celebrated. The “War of Northern Aggression” is over, jackasses. Move on.
Let me relay a quick personal story: The summer after our sophomore year, my friend Amanda and I spent the summer in Atlanta. She was participating in a summer program at a hospital, I went along for the ride because I didn’t have anything else to do that summer. One weekend we went on a whitewater rafting trip in Tennessee (I don’t remember the name of the river) with some of the people in her summer program. As we drove farther and farther away from Atlanta and deeper and deeper into what I thought of as Confederate Country, I began to feel more and more uncomfortable. It was just a feeling that I had — nebulous, but stark.
At one point, we needed to stop for gas, so we pulled into a gas station behind a pick-up truck with a Confederate flag hanging in the window. On the bumper of the truck, someone had haphazardly slapped on a bumper sticker; “I love coon hunting,” it read.
Now, I knew that “coon” is also a word for “raccoon.” I also knew that coon had another meaning, and that there was no way in hell I was getting out of that car. In fact, both Amanda and I reflexively ducked when we saw the truck (we were sitting in the backseat).
Our white friends who were sitting in the front looked at us like we were nuts, and asked if we wanted to go into the store and get drinks. “Hell no! Get the gas and let’s get the fuck out of here!” we yelled practically in unison. I remember thinking “I really have to pee, but I’m not going in there. I’ll probably get murdered in the bathroom — in the bathroom. Gross. I’m not going out like that.”
I went on that whitewater rafting trip almost twenty years ago — when I was 18 years old — and I can still picture that truck in my mind. I can still feel the dread that washed over me when I read that bumper sticker. And I could still feel the panic wondering what the hell was taking those white girls so long in that store.
So, whatever Boyle’s intent was, I doubt a “Whoops, my bad!” will heal the wounds that the black students felt that day and will feel for days to come.
[via Mediaite]
I know this teacher and know for a fact that the media has this all wrong. The teacher is not allowed to speak with the media due to her contract and the only side being told is that of one of the parents. In the time to come, all will be told.
ominous!
not really, more like people shaking their heads wondering how the heck one reporter can get it so wrong and create a complete work of fiction and call it reporting.
This discussion has been beaten more than a dead horse on my local news facebook page. You guys seem determined to make the teacher out to be a hate filled racial mongeral – and she isn’t. Her lesson wasn’t to hurt anyone or cause such a ripple throughout the community. In fact one middle aged AA woman said that her high school teacher did a similar lesson when she was in school – she wasn’t offended or angered by it.
To the one post below that compares the Holocaust Museum to this and says that when they line people up for the gas chamber to let them know. Could you be more off base? The students in this lesson were not hurt, or offended ….. the brutal protest came after a parent learned of this. The poor students are probably terrified because they feel that they got their teacher in trouble.
Someone said it very well earlier…. if you look for something to offend you – it will. If you want to take everything as a personal attack – then it will be. If you want to carry around the chains of the past like those of Jacob Marley in a Christmas Carol… then you will. Only you can free yourself, only you can move forward and only you can decide to move beyond the past and stop hiding behind it like a badge.
oh please. was “keesha” the blackest name you could think of?
you hit all the right buttons -
“this black lady wasn’t offended” so what’s the big deal?
This one is fantastic to bring out if you feel at all backed into a corner. If, for example, the Marginalised Person™ is making sense and you’re beginning to get the unpleasant feeling that you were wrong about something, just whip up your friend – your black friend, or your trans friend, your friend with a mental illness, or your friend who is a sex worker, and vehemently express how they completely and stridently support your opinions on these issues.
Of course, you must make out as though you are entirely oblivious to internalised stigma and how your friends may have been adversely affected by discrimination wielded by the Privileged®. And, as established by the steps above, it is imperative that you discount the diversity of experience whilst seeming to support it. After all, your friend is proof that there are different opinions amongst this Marginalised Group™ but the fact they agree with you means you don’t have to in the least give credence to ideas alternative to your own, and certainly not from the Marginalised Person™ in question.
Plus it gives you that handy progressive veneer – see, all their accusations of racism/sexism/ableism/what have you are totally groundless because you have friends who are representatives from that group which shows how open-minded and awesomely cool you really are!
You know what the best part about this step is?
The friend doesn’t even have to exist!
That’s right, the friend can be nothing more than a figment of your imagination, conjured up to provide you with vicarious backup in your hour of need! How is the Marginalised Person™ going to prove it, after all! They can have their suspicions but that’s hardly hard evidence.
You’re definitely ahead in the game now!
and then my favorite, you’re taking shit too personally:
Similar to You’re Being Overemotional and yet with particular uses of its own.
You see, when you say “you’re taking things too personally” you demonstrate your ignorance that these issues ARE personal for them!
That’s highly insulting and is sure to rub anyone up the wrong way. That you’re already refusing to consider their reality is giving them a pretty good indication of how the conversation is going to degress, yet the natural human need for understanding will probably compel them to try and reason with you, or at least to point you in the direction of some educational resources that will help you gain insight into their experiences. This can enable you to once again make a demand for them to personally educate you instead.
By denying the conversation is personal for them, you also reveal your own detachment: there’s really nothing at stake for you in getting into this argument, you’re just doing it for kicks. They will be all too aware of this, and it will begin to work on their emotions, preparing them nicely for the next steps you will take them through.
and then the icing on your cake of condescension:
you enjoy being offended!
Closely related to the above point, it’s another critical element of a successful deraling. You really need to make sure the Marginalised Person knows you consider their issues to be completely trivial. It’s insensitive in the extreme – it also exemplifies your lack of awareness and empathy.
By demonstrating you have absolutely no concept of what a particular issue or point may mean to them both within their conversation with you and beyond it, you get to show off just how cocooned and protected in Privilege® you really are. Remember how maddening this is for a Marginalised Person™ – it’s a Privilege® they do not share and will probably never know so to witness it being so blithely owned and used to diminish their experience is bound to get their blood pumping.
But absolutely best of all, you are being obnoxious and hurtful enough to tell them outright that they enjoy facing discrimination and prejduice. Enjoy it so much, in fact, that they “look” for reasons to be hurt and offended! Wow. This one is almost breathtakingly perfect as a derailment tactic, it lacks any sort of conceivable class and humility and goes straight to smug viciousness. The very idea that anyone enjoys being hurt and discriminated against as a daily practice is so preposterous it could only be believed by a Privileged Person® who’s never really experienced or known what it’s like.
The fact is, many Marginalised People™ go out of their way to avoid these sorts of debates and confrontations because it’s such a painful and unenjoyable experience. Those you are encountering in this circumstance have likely made a conscious choice to do so, even knowing it will probably go bad. For you to spit in the face of their choice in putting themselves on the line by suggesting it’s all fun and games for them just adds a particularly piquant insult to injury.
and i’m so sure the students are terrified because they got their teacher in trouble. are you kidding me?
This AA woman, whatever that means, is middle aged and probably lived in a time when ppl were not as comfortable expressing their outrage. And that you used AA to describe her says you probably dont know much about anything, and that one woman experienced it,whether true or not, doesnt make it right. Besides that, I highly doubt you know every single one of those kids feelings about the experiences. As a child, I was able to completely grasp the nature of slavery, without becoming a slave and being auctioned myself. This was dumb, and if she isnt an idiot, or racist, she shouldve known better.
I always believe there’s two sides to every story. That said, I just can’t imagine a side on which the teacher is the victim here. Everyone makes mistakes, uses bad judgement. I get that. She can learn from this or actually believe and frame herself as the victim. If she chooses the latter, it makes her actions all the more insidious.
k, the big problem for me, is that in all likelihood, the AA kids and biracial kids are more well-versed in the cause and trauma of slavery. As an AA myself, my first lesson about slavery WAS NOT a lesson at school. The reality of enslaved Blacks was known to me seems like since I learned to read and understand. For many American born Blacks whose family history in America can be traced back to slaves, you will learn about slavery from older fam, neighborhood, pastors, councilers, etc.
So the attempt to show the kids how it would feel would have been a better idea if it was the White kids who were made to be “treated” like slaves. I might be exaggerating, but I don’t believe that most white kids grow up learing the lessons of the past as it pertains to slavery.
So NO, I don’t think the kids have learned much. The blacks kids learned that even if ur half-white, you will have to play the role of slaves. The white kids learned???
It sounds like extremely bad judgment, though as Lulu says there may be more to the story. I don’t think it’s a firing offense if the teacher has an otherwise good track record.
(facepalm)
Oh for chrissake.
I read about the first instance of this, and yeah, no. Just–no. Obviously, if there is more to the story, I want to hear it. However, there’s this incident
as well.
I don’t think this kind of experience is one that should happen in school because there just isn’t enough time to explore it thoroughly. And, it definitely shouldn’t be done by making the non-white students be the slaves.
If anyone had any doubt about what mind-bogglingly stupid looks like, I think that teacher’s photo is available.
And Lulu, untold parts of the story or not, there are in fact some things that are simply not done. This is one of them.
My point is exactly that. This didn’t happen, at least the way the media is portraying it. I wish I could say more but until Jessica gives me the go ahead, I really can’t say anything more.
I’m having a fairly difficult time believing you. “It didn’t happen that way but I can’t tell you what really happened!” is not something I can take seriously, nor should anyone.
I happen to live in an evidence-based world. So do you, and I suggest you offer something concrete sooner rather than later.
Is there any possibility that the teacher was trying to do a Jane Elliot, but messed it up?
Her method worked as well as if she were trying to emulate Jane Goodall.
Wow, Tattoosydney, thank you for that link. I just thought I’d hop over and see what you were talking about and got sucked into watching the whole hour. Amazing. And yes, she ends by explicitly saying that this is not a teaching exercise that all teachers could just pop out of a hat and do; that kids could be seriously damaged by it and she doesn’t recommend doing it without specific training.
Honestly, it’s like she was preaching directly to this Boyle person.
Sigh.
Another personal anecdote:
I was driving from Atlanta to Charlotte a year ago, and I stopped at a Stuckey’s on the way. (Not that far from the Big Peach, if anyone knows that stretch of I-85.) They had a cooking show on the TV, and the very nice old folks working there started talking about Christmas meals. Then they started laughing about how to cook their Chanukah ham. Being a Jew from New York, I chose not to pipe up with any suggestions. I grabbed my salted nut log and went to the checkout. As I started to walk out, one of the good ol’ boys said “And what about the chicken feet stew for Kwanzaa!?”
So…of course the same attitudes are still out there, although you’re less likely to die these days.
To That Guy With The Ponytail….Actually I have known Jessica since before she was born. To believe I would make that up and that I am not being honest shows me that even when the truth comes out, you will still not believe me. Hasn’t anyone ever told you not to believe “everything you read”?
Given that I’m “reading” your comment, I think you ought to consider that last sentence of yours a bit more carefully.
If you have verifiable information and it is contrary to what we’ve been reading/seeing, perhaps you might care enough for Jessica to bring out what would exonerate her?
Assertions mean nothing without something factual behind them.
You want me to believe you, prove what you say. Give me a reason to accept your assertion.
Or don’t.
And then accept that I will believe what comes from multiply-sourced material and not that originating with one person asserting something to the contrary, without any substantiation.
Those are your choices.
I am unable to say who I am because I know Jessica. She could be fired for me speaking about this. If you trace all the information you will find that it comes from the Virginian Pilot. The reporter has the letter sent by the principal to the parents. His evidence consists of a parent’s re-telling of the account and statements issued from the school. Jessica has been unable to say anything because of the contract she signed upon being hired. Since the report came out, she has been forced to take time off of work due to threats against her. I would love to give you my actual name and give you all the facts that I have, but for Jessica’s safety and well being I can not do so at this time. If you truley want answers call the reporter and see who he has spoken to and what evidenc he actually has to prove what he says happened in Jessica’s class on April 1, 2011.
You’re a lulu all right.
Have you never seen, read, nor heard the overriding dictum of reporting? “If your mother tells you she loves you, check it out!”
And yes, I have also seen some slapdash reporting in my gray-hair-inducing years on earth. Deliberate misrepresentation of the Jayson Blair/Janet Cooke variety, though, is far less common. In fact, those instances stand out precisely because of their rarity.
Reporters don’t just dash off character-assassinating screeds and push them onto the front page of even a small paper. There are editors to get past, and they are not widely known as a species for being charitable toward questionable material.
From your comments, you likely know her family, are of a possibly older generation, and have remained in contact. Were I inclined, I could probably find out a lot more with a bit of digging.
I’m not.
Your claims, LuLu, are the ones at variance with how the story is reported. You either are sitting on information that would save this person’s livelihood or are muddying the waters.
Perhaps another reporter might be interested in your information. They know very well how to deal with and preserve source anonymity, and a good journalist would be on this like slime on a Newt. A rival paper’s assignment editor would be ringing your phone off the hook for this info, you do realize that?
Here’s a hint: Begin your conversation with the term “on background” and restate it regularly. The reporter must explicitly agree or do not continue. Here is not the place for your comments.
There is no need to contact the reporter. You, Lulu, have painted a good enough picture inside of Ms. Boyle’s psyche. According to your statements, the children misunderstood what happened. After all, they were the ones who informed their parents, who in turn, spoke with the principal. Based off what you have said the reporter has the statements and the letter issued by the school, who have deemed what she did as inappropriate enough to warrant a letter sent to the parents to let them know where the school (and school system) stood on what transpired. The media has talked to a student in the class and a couple of parents. Most reporters would love to tell both sides, especially since (according to you) it’s just a misunderstanding. Unfortunately Ms. Boyle has been told by her lawyer or union rep not to speak out. You want to defend your friend, but sometimes silence is best. Because before you replied, those who read this blog just felt she was another person with no tact, but that was just speculation. By responding, you proved they were right in their assumption. And based off what you said neither of you get it. Bottomline: It doesn’t matter if it’s a misunderstanding. Ms. Boyle has children in her class who do not understand why this took place and are hurt by her actions.
I’m guessing the teacher’s next lesson is going to be how the hispanics took the white man’s agricultural and custodial jobs by making the hispanic kids work on the landscaping and picking the puke of the white kids in school. Then its straight to how the gays are going to ruin the sanctity of marriage if they get the right to marry each other by separating the LGBT kids and reading all the bible passages that condemns homosexuals to death. It’s the past, present and future of xenophobic curriculum.
Reporters have been calling and if my 30 years of age is considered an older generation, then that is news to me. Again, I am only looking to inform the public to the best of my ability (If I could go to the media I would). Even if I wasn’t personally involved, I would research for myself the truth. I have seen many news reports that do not have all their facts straight. The way media spins stories today is not reporting. Also, if I am not mistaken, here is a place to discuss and express opinions. I had no idea that my opinions aren’t welcomed. For now I guess it’s goodbye. I hope that someday someone doesn’t say something about you and you find yourself alone with no one to defend you.
LuLu, you don’t get it. If you are claiming this story is baseless, where is your evidence? How can you demonstrate that? What did she do or say that is at variance with what was reported? And were you there in the room to see and hear that?
That’s because, in a sentence, your word alone (or anyone’s, for that matter) is not enough. Facts are required.
The “older generation” came from knowing Boyle “before her birth” – maybe you’re an older sibling or other relative, then? A neighbor? See how assertions only fuel speculation?
Facts. Not “I know her.” and repetition of that. Facts.
And the point is not that your discussion isn’t welcome here, it’s that your attempts to excuse Boyle’s actions are pointless here. If you can demonstrate (note: that’s a critical term, “demonstrate” – not merely assert) that things were badly/erroneously reported, you have a clear moral obligation to take it to someone who can thus clear her of what then would be a baseless allegation. Bringing it here serves no purpose whatsoever.
Perhaps you had not noticed that a blog is not that sort of place.
As for your last sentence, I have in fact been on the front page of my local metro section, in full color, above the fold, and on every local broadcast outlet at the same time, involved in a highly controversial story. That has exactly what to do with mock slave auctions in grade-school classrooms?
After making a comment like “I have known Jessica since BEFORE she was born”, one easily might assume you were older than 30,Lulu, as Jessica does not seem to be older than that, and most people that close in age would not say that one “knew” the other before she was born. Not a normal thing for one of your generation to say.
No matter how you wrap it, what she did was foolish, and WRONG. Would she seperate the Jewish students and the Japanese students during WWII/Holocaust studies? Separate the Chinese kids and make them “work” on a railroad? How about throwing potatoes at the Irish kids and making them skip lunch?
She could have had the best intentions in the world, it was still a boneheaded thing to try do without clearing it with the administration and the parents FIRST, and having some training to boot.
BONEHEADED.
This shouldn’t be controversial. Too many hugboxes in the world to shelter children nowadays, not enough actual, non-abstract experience to actually show them, as opposed to just telling them, what life was like.
Can your kneejerk, hysterical reactions and use some common sense. This teacher obviously did not harbor racist views because she wanted to make both her black and white students know what slave auctions felt like on either end; that’s called personalizing the experience. This is several times more effective than just reading bland Times New Roman font words on a printed page with one or two artists’ renditions added.
I applaud her for her bravery. When you pillory people who are teaching to make a point for having politically incorrect viewpoints or methodologies, you are contributing to the dumbing down and sissifying of America and the American public education system.
Well, THIS ought to take it in an entertaining direction…
who is accusing her of harboring racist views? i’m simply stating that the exercise was dumb-headed.
and lulu, don’t be absurd — you could go to a reporter and tell your story in confidence and then that reporter could get the other side of the story out. instead you keep reiterating that you know her and that it didn’t happen this way.
either kids were sold in a mock auction or they weren’t.
if they weren’t, then what’s the story? if they were, then it was stupid — end of story.
your comments are beyond ridiculous.
Actually she can’t. For her to go to the media would reflect on her friend who is a teacher. This is similar to having a gag order placed on you, and anyone else “in the know”. For her – or anyone else to speak to the media on the teachers behalf would get the teacher into trouble. Besides – anything that she says in defense of the teacher would be taken as hear-say at best.
a gag order does not apply to the subject of the gag order and “anyone they know.”
the media is not bound by any rules of evidence. whether or not it’s hearsay is entirely irrelevant.
IAAL and your statements are absurd.
Jessica is speaking to her attorney on Thursday regarding holding a press conference. I have spoken with her and she has allowed me to say that I am her identical triplet sibling…so if anyone knows more about what is going on inside her head, it’s me. The reason I havn’t said anything is because I didn’t want to get my sister in anymore trouble and possibly fired. I am not a coward. I am thinking about my sister’s future and defending her the only way I am able to.
“Besides – anything that she says in defense of the teacher would be taken as hear-say at best.”
And what exactly are these second-hand “I know but I cant say” apologetics?
Actually, you and the others who have flocked here to anonymously defend the teacher have no obligations to be quiet about what you know, as you are spouting off here quite voluminously.
What you mean is that you are not willing to stand up in the public square under your own actual name and speak your defense of the teacher, either because you are cowards, you are also teachers or administrators in that school, or because you have absolutely no first-hand knowledge of anything that happened and no basis of expertise upon which your opinions draw. But something about this story just eats your guts out, so you come here to defend a total stranger who made a glaringly obvious error in judgment.
I wonder what that something is…
“Because she wanted to make both her black and white students know what slave auctions felt like on either end; that’s called personalizing the experience.”
So what you are saying is that she wanted black students to feel like animals, and less than human, and make the white kids feel like bigoted slave masters? Because if she wants them to know what a slave auction felt like, that is most likely, what it felt like. Why would we want to know what slavery feels like? That is the dumbest thing ive heard in a while. If we want to know what it feels like, hey! Why dont we go back? Youre dumb for saying that, understanding a historical era is not the same as wanting to know what it feels like, role playing is appropriate when it doesnt disadvantage a group of people!
I told myself I wasn’t going to repost…but the truth is she did not separate the white, mixed and black kids and sell them. She did separate them into groups and I am not sure of the exact ratios but what i know for sure was the she did not auction them off. The white students didn’t buy the black students. Only two parents were upset. they only learned about this the next day. No one went home crying and upset believing that they had been made fun of or belittled. It was the parents who reacted to their nine and ten year olds retelling of what happened the day before.
Proof?
“It was the parents who reacted to their nine and ten year olds retelling of what happened the day before.” Your words. Then why is the principal (and school system) disturbed enough to order a full investigation and sent a letter to reassure the parents that Ms. Boyle was out of line? You presume to know that none of the students were upset. And even if the children weren’t, and just casually mentioned it to their parents (another of your presumptions), it was enough to become this big of an issue because Ms. Boyle was out of line. Again, you are not getting it, and your friend doesn’t either. But I welcome Ms. Boyle’s explanation.
I do not presume anything. This happened on a Friday. The letter went home on Wenesday and by Friday April 8th had made its way to the media. Ms. Boyle continued to teach these students and there was no further issue. Ms. Boyle was trying to explain to one student what Slavery was and for some reason he didn’t understand. She then tried to show him how families became separated during this horrible time in American History. She never auctioned anyone, none of the kids bought each other. One of the parents who for some strange reason wanted to remain nameless in the article was apparently still upset and insisted on bringing her complaints to the media. Jessica is unable to comment and therefore the school issued statements without a full understanding of what actually happened. Besides when you put a headline about black students being sold in mock auction, it’s bound to catch someones eyes, especially since the anniversary of the civil war was fast approaching.
You’re implying that she arranged this demonstration for the benefit of one student who didn’t understand. Isn’t that like explaining to a child what waterboarding is by pushing their face underwater?
But if you actually just read what I wrote, you would see that what she did isn’t what you think. Everyone is upset because she reportedly had a mock auction in which black students were bought and sold by white students when this didn’t actually occur. I myself am trying to explain to my five year old that a long time ago parents and children weren’t allowed to stay with each other. That is all she was trying to do. What would you have done if a child asked you what slavery was and nothing you said was sinking in?
It says to me that the child is too young. Give them a reading list and if they want to they’ll figure it out on their own.
Once more information comes to light, I will happily publish a retraction or an update.
If what you’re saying is true, then it truly is unfortunate.
I guess we shall see.
It would be interesting to hear what the children thought about it, rather than assume all sorts of things and just flatly insist that its wrong.
“Take, for example, the Holocaust Museum in Washington DC. They have a tour where each guest selects a card with a real person’s name on it. They follow this person’s story throughout and, at the end, they learn whether their person (which the guest is relating to at this point) dies. Just like that.”
Uh huh. Well when they have people walking through a gas chamber, get back to me. I know. I know. Black folks are suppose to “get over it”. “Don’t be so sensitive”. I’m waiting for these folks to tell the Jewish people the same thing.
I tweeted this story to Emanuel Cleaver head of the Congressional Black Caucus as a way of bringing attention this story and this matter. I would really like all of them to address this.
Before something like this becomes norm.
Just thought you would want to know
http://hamptonroads.com/2011/05/norfolk-teacher-sues-virginianpilot-libel
“Boyle is on administrative leave with pay while the school division investigates. She is seeking $10 million.”
Ten million! LOL. Damages to her reputation due to this story must equal $50K/year for the next 200 years.
actually, the lawyer came up with that number. The paper needs to feel the effect of not reporting the story correctly. Besides, you always ask for more because you never get what you ask for and the lawyer gets their cut as well.
Oh, good. So the end result will be that the newspaper gives money to a lawyer.