“OK, my daughter loves Harriet Tubman. Tell me what you got!” she says. I explain our product, how we use historical women to teach girls about their worth and potential. The mother says: “But is it woke? I mean, I don’t want to teach my daughter about woke.”
And these people feel qualified to teach history.
The follow-up paragraph is even more amazing, because (like all conservatives) she can’t even say what “woke” is.
And that’s the really insidious part. The teacher is too ignorant of what she is ignorant of. If Harriet Tubman “might be too woke” then how would this women teach the nuance of protests? Of sit ins? Letters from a Birmingham jail? Much less modern protests. Her daughter is going to grow confidently saying things like
“I know all about black history, just not the woke stuff.”
And not even understand the tragic irony.
Or she’ll learn on her own later. It’s sad, but many do it. The line of thinking of “we used to treat black people in utterly horrific ways” -> “we freed them but took a long time to give them the same rights” -> “they’re still mad and saying that racism still is a systemic problem” -> “why” is a path that many white Americans with intellectual curiosity have tread. Some don’t like the answers because they come with expectations, responsibility, guilt, and shame. Others decide that it doesn’t matter and accept what is learned.
It’s a shame she has to start there, but we have to believe that these indoctrinated children aren’t doomed
deleted by creator
Uhhhhh. Yes it is? My niece was going over all of that around 3rd grade. And that’s about the same time I did, this was all in the PNW. I think your school district just had some major omissions.
I went through California school a little under a decade ago and can tell you that the letters from Birmingham Jail and an at least somewhat decent overview of sit-ins were absolutely part of my standard curriculum
Though I’d bet there are plenty of places in this country where that’s not true
Grew up in Ohio. We touched on it. We definitely ignored the socialism and the condemnation of white moderates and the armed resistance (of that eta) aside from the black panthers who were portrayed with a mixed light much like Nat Turner was. But we were a Catholic school so we did condemn any violence.
I think the big thing is that it varies wildly. My area for example had a lot of focus on white resistance to chattel slavery, and acknowledgement of the reality of precolombian civilization. That’s not because we were woke but because those that was the local history of southern Ohio. We could go visit an Underground Railroad stop or one of the great mounds for a field trip.
Meanwhile in somewhere like Virginia, I would expect a lot more focus on the colonial period and early English settlement. And I think in somewhere like Birmingham or Memphis if they don’t focus on the civil rights era that’s on fucking purpose. And I assume texas is doing their own thing and pretending they didn’t secede from Mexico and the US over slavery.
deleted by creator
It was in my school in NJ.
It is at the school I went to, the school my kids went to, and the schools that my wife teaches at.
I went to school in Kansas. This was all taught, even there
That’s because “woke” doesn’t have a concrete definition.
It’s just “what Trump tells me to hate”, there i defined it.
Fox news tells them as well. Either way, people too stupid to have a thought originate from themselves.
I equate it to “progressive”
Which conservatives don’t like because that means they are against progress.
Yes it does. It means you don’t trust politicians or the system, you reexamine your beliefs and look at it critically.
If you don’t think there’s a fascist threat in our country right now, there’s people who are literally burning “woke” books and firing elected “woke” prosecutors. They’re using the word “woke” fairly correctly without understanding what it means, ironically enough, because “non-woke” is whatever lies the party spreads and “woke” is anything that contradicts that
if defining words is that easy for you, can you tell me: “what is a woman?”
some words are more subjective then others and for many feelings and emotions are more important then objective facts to define anything.
Right, so give a vague definition then. Give a conditional definiton. Say “woke is when black people are treated like humans and stuff, you know, like when they say marital rape is bad”. They won’t though, because while that is exactly what it means, they also know they can’t say it out loud.
“Woke” is the thing that opposes their horrible and reprehensible ideas, and they know it. Hell, when DeSantis’ lawyer had to define it in court he went with “the belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them.” It’s weird though, why haven’t conservatives just grasped on to this definition? Because “woke” is a dogwhistle for “someone who isn’t a trash human like me”.
If you want to define “woman”, I can do way better than a vague definition though. Of course, the question itself is in bad faith, but I don’t give a shit. In terms of gender: “A woman is anyone who wants to call themselves a woman and wants to be called a woman by others.”
Just as an aside, I’m of the opinion gender is a stupid concept anyway and we should get rid of it entirely.
There are words that are notoriously difficult to define in such a way that every edge case is covered. For those words we use criteria. Listing off essential attributes and marking the entire list as provisionally sufficient. The Greeks figured this out 25 centuries ago, just a fyi. I know it is hard for conservatives to keep up with modern ideas but 2 and a half millennium should be enough time.
A women is one of the sexes, usually identified by their genitals. It is biological.
Not to conflate with feminine, which is one of the genders at the end of the gender spectrum. Which is sociological.
It isn’t so hard once you listen to the science and understand the difference between Biology and Sociology.
deleted by creator
I never said i can. I wanted to show how difficult it is to define something like that.
deleted by creator
You left out the best part.
“What do you mean, ‘woke’?” I ask. She opens her mouth. Half-words and phrases stumble and tumble around. A few talking points from news sources fall out. Finally, she sighs. “I don’t know. Just tell me again what you write.”
I used to sell books, oh, 30 years ago or so now.
The home schoolers were the scariest bunch of people you’ll encounter.
Had one guy ask where the weather control books were, and I was like “You mean seeding clouds to make it rain? I think we have…”
“No! I mean the government weather control programs!”
Had another lady convinced her electricity was going to give her cancer because it came from a nuclear power plant and was radioactive.
We are homeschooling one of our kids because his particular needs were not being met by the local school. Meeting other homeschool families is always nerve-wracking for me. I never know if they’re going to be a normal family adapting to an unusual situation, or tinfoil-hat nuts using homeschool as an excuse to hide their children from the outside world.
The non tinfoil hat group should develop a secret sign, like a manager telling a runner on first to steal, so you do not have to suffer fools.
Like ear tug, ear tug, nose scratch, and then adjust your belt. I want credit if you use this one 😂
Something like “Hey… where can I buy books that align with common core?”
The reaction for that one should do it
This is brilliant!!!
You know the tin foil hat people are going to pick up on this and think it’s all a conspiracy.
The sign is silence when the weirdos get going with the face of “I am letting you talk because I am concerned if I don’t you might attack me in the parking lot but rest assured I am thinking about something else”
This us us exactly.
It’s astounding how little people know about how the world works even without home schooling factored in.
And they vote!
“No! I mean the government weather control programs!”
“Check the science fiction section.”
Careful. You might help create another religion.
The weather control books are in Red Alert 2.
When I hear a woman say “I’m not a feminist” my first thought is “WHY THE HELL NOT??”
For the same reason they oppose public health, public school, trans rights, diversity, equity, and inclusion. They literally don’t know what they are.
I know at least 2 Republicans that when you actually talk about individual policy preferences it comes across as moderate democrat. One of them was a virulent PRO masker because of their job.
I think people just don’t pay attention to actual policies, it’s all just the soundbites and controversy.
because the word feminism has different meanings for different people. for some it means equality and a way to get there. for others it means men are bad and women should get priority treatment. communication is hard when there is no objective meaning for any of the words we are using.
But that second meaning is a bogeyman. No one says “I am a feminist” and means that.
No one? There are 8 billion people screaming out whatever random ideas occurs to them for hours a day across the planet. You can’t make that statement about anything anymore.
Also there is also just plain misinformation campaigns. People creating strawman arguments pretending to be on the other side.
Take a look at the difference between 2nd, 3rd and 4th wave feminism… The consider post feminism arguments.
What most people consider feminism is typically called 2nd wave feminism.
They absolutely do. I’ve met a few of them.
Then they’re not really feminists. Just like the people who say they’re Christian but then say helping the poor is socialist garbage.
I get where you’re coming from, but I vehemently disagree. That’s just the no true Scotsman fallacy.
The No True Scotsman fallacy isn’t about people who claim to be something arbitrarily. Its about gatekeeping to preserve some kind of integrity or quality for the sake of an argument.
If I say “I’m a communist” but then espouse only fascist beliefs and display an ignorance of primary tenets of communism, am I really a communist just because I say I am?
Again, I get where you’re coming from.
The reality of the situation is that a movement is full of factions. People aren’t a monolith and they think differently and feel differently. Jk Rowling considers herself a feminist, and she is an iteration of what a feminist can look like sadly.
Think of religious sects, they all fall under the same umbrella of Christianity or Judaism or what have you, but have radically different beliefs and feelings.
They get involved in protests and push their agendas just like any other group of people.
Or tankies! They fucking suuuuuuck and they are communist! I like communism by the way, but tankies can eat and then shit out some Lego blocks.
But people do say “I’m NOT a feminist”, meaning not that
Because a lot of modern (so-called 3rd wave) “feminists” are just greedy people demanding things that will advantage them but doing so behind the cover of the group so that it doesn’t look like all the other greedy bastards - it’s rightwing thinking disguised as “for the group”, which is why they worry way more about “the glass ceiling” (which disadvantages high middle class people who aren’t in an “old boys network”, which includes almost all women from thst social strata) rathar than, say, the very low salaries for women who are blue collar workers.
The previous waves of Feminism were of the “we want to be treated like everybody else” (or as I like to think of it: “get out of my way and let me be all that I can be”).
People react very differently to the “gimme shit” crowd than they do the “stop hindering me” one, and sadly the former are a lot louder (as usual for people driven by greed) and have come to dominate the image of Feminism in Anglo-Saxon countries.
With “a lot” you mean the handful of loud obnoxious people who only do that to get attention?
Because that isn’t even close to the majority.
There still are differences in treatment between the sexes, even if you yourself don’t notice them.
For example, just look up what the Bechdel test is and the difference between the reverse Bechdel test. There is still a huge difference how women get treated compared to men in media.
But the other way around also happens. Mothers still get more custody over kids than the Father. Which is ALSO something Feminists fight to fix.
For starters, I’m keenly aware of the disgustingly discrimination against women, especially in the old days - for example, in my home country of Portugal back in the 60s women weren’t allowed to leave the country without authorization from their husbands, very much a “we own you” disgusting level of discrimination - but also in modern days the cultural, legal and economic factors that transform childbirth into a massive torpedo to women’s careers and the main reason in modern days for the clear chasm in income that appears at around the mid-30s between highly educated men and women.
Further, I’m involved in a leftwing party in my country and the “gimme shit” discourse imported from Anglo-Saxon countries is sadly quite common amongst self-identified “Feminists” (mind you, that’s far from the only self-defined group demanding to be given things not given to others - “greed is good” seems to have been interiorised by a whole generation that grew up in the last 4 decades and who think personal upside maximization disguised as “compensation for a group of people identified by things they were born with were otherwise completelly different people than me were discriminated against” is being “Leftwing” because they’re not directly demanding it for themselves), though it’s not the dominant one.
Having lived in that country for over a decade and having also been involved in Politics there, I’ve also seen a lot of that amongst the upper middle classes in Britain around the ages of 30 and below, were it comes from the various flavour of liberals (who are invariably neoliberals, as Britain currently has no real leftwing beyond the Green Party) who again think they’re Leftwing so long as their “gimme” is voice as “give us”.
Meanwhile I’ve met older Feminists and they’re a whole different breed, not to mention women that fought for a better life for all, their whole lives, without ever holding the “Feminist” flag (my country has quite the Leftwing tradition and that was as much women as men).
Sadly it’s got to a point were somebody loudly claiming to be Feminist is almost invariably a “gimme shit” person that’s probably doing more to damage the broader cause of Equality that the much larger mass of Women out there fighting for equal treatment: as I said, what I believe is genuine Feminism is the “get out of the way and let me be all that I can be” kind - capable people who are discriminated against for being women rather than social players who are not against the system being gamed, they just want it to be gamed in their favour.
Mind you, the subversion of the Fight for Equality into competing groups defined by characteristics people were born with (the very same kind of way of reducing people to categories and then generalizing that anchors far right thinking) dominated by people driven by personal upside maximization is not at all specific of the fight for Equality for Women but a far broader phenomenon of subversion of the Modern Left through Divide et Impera techniques.
Perhaps their understanding of feminism has come from the violently extreme “kill all men” types of feminists or the opposing “get back in the kitchen” type of conservative shitbags making up all sorts of scary and mean things about them.
Their understanding of feminism comes from right wing media.
That’s what they said.
Or possibly from extreme left wing media
I think it’s more likely to be from things that actually exist
Those first type of feminists do not exist, it’s a strawman
They absolutely do. They are by no means the majority, but extremes exist in any movement. There are “feminists” who think it’s all about sticking it to the man (literally) or proving feminine superiority. It’s like Christians who don’t read the Bible and think it’s all about damning the gross icky people to hell. That doesn’t mean they’re common (they aren’t), but I’ve seen a few crazies on Tumblr and Twitter.
Edit: J.K.Rowling is one of them (kinda).
Thank you. I hate that some people just cannot accept that extremists exist on “their team”. I had another post downvoted to hell when I made a similar claim and provided plenty of tweets (or whatever the fuck they’re called nowadays) and other evidence. It was met with the same “that’s not real” or worse “it’s just satire”.
who don’t read the Bible and think it’s all about damning the gross icky people to hell
Not all but that is a pretty decent description of most of the NT. The OT god(s) would kill you because you annoyed them but they wouldn’t send you to hell.
And you’re someone who has read the New Testament?
I’ve read maybe 10% and have yet to encounter a single line about damning the gross icky people to hell.
deleted by creator
I don’t consider myself a Christian anymore, but based on what I was taught as a kid, I’d personally take anything that wasn’t explicitly stated to be spoken by God or Jesus with a grain of salt, especially when it comes to books that weren’t written by Jesus’ disciples (excluding Saul/Paul, who never actually met Jesus).
As a kid, I was taught to read the Bible and use my brain (god gave you one, use it) to figure out what it was trying to say, not blindly follow it without question. The reason for that is because I was taught that the Bible is inspired by God, not written by him (unless explicitly stated that the passage came directly from God or Jesus’ mouth). As such, you have humans attempting to understand God’s (and later Jesus’) commands, which means they aren’t always going to be 100% correct and/or there may be historical context that is missing when you take it literally and at face value.
You’re supposed to not just read, but also think about the Bible and decide what parts make sense when taken in context with what is said to be explicitly said by God (it’s part of the reason why some Bibles mark anything said by God/Jesus in red).
For an example, the passage you’ve quoted could be interpreted as a warning about pagans larping as Christians to take advantage of christian kindness and distort the word of God into something else (similar to the merchants in the temple, or like what is happening in Christianity now). You could also read it as an almost complete reversal to what Jesus taught in the early NT.
Which one of these makes more sense?
A) Jesus comes to earth, teaches people about kindness and goodness, hang out with prostitutes and untouchables, dies on the cross for everyone’s sins, becomes a zombie, and declares that the laws of the Old testament had been fulfilled through him so all could be saved. Then a few years later, he changes his mind and inspires Jude to write a letter about how the gays should be cast out and are going to hell.
B) Jude was writing the letter as a warning to keep your guard up around non-christians in case they might persuade you to distort the teachings of Jesus and/or hijack Christianity to turn it into a money-making scheme. It wouldn’t be the first time it happened (the merchants in the temple immediately springs to mind again).
Or C) Jude didn’t really know what he was talking about and the book/letter is included because it’s referenced in other places of the Bible and theologians would rather err on the side of caution and allow a non-canon book to be included in the Bible than delete something that might be important (iirc the Bible states that you’re not supposed to remove, change or add to anything said in scripture, so from a Christian perspective, I’d imagine if you’re not sure about something then it’s probably better to include something than exclude it).
Imo, B) seems the most likely. If you believe the Christian God is real, then A) is absurd, and C) seems unlikely due to Jude’s proximity to James. It seems like if C) were true, then there would be records of Jude being refuted or rebuked.
No, they do. I have met a couple of them.
deleted by creator
They are a loud rounding error that gets amplified by the current media landscape.
TERFs are dangerous, not just to trans people but to real feminism.
I don’t recall making a claim that they were any significant portion. The statement that they don’t exist is factually incorrect.
I’ve come to the conclusion that religious faith is a kind of mental illness that was made socially acceptable to keep primitive people from constantly killing each other, sticking instead to only occasionally killing each other within a vague set of guidelines.
Those of us free of it don’t need an insane corkscrew of Escheresque logic and imaginary higher authorities using threats commanding us to not be monsters.
I recently came to a different conclusion. It’s not religious faith. It’s just faith. And it’s not a mental illness. It’s human nature - for a significant segment of the human population.
Those people who are religious fanatics, political fanatics (e.g. Trumpists, Chavez sympathizers), pseudoscience fanatics (e.g. flat earthers, anti-vaxx, homeopathy), celebrity fanatics (Andrew Tate followers), etc, they have to share the same common traits. They’re impressionable people, they need to be patt of a group, and they can’t fathom the idea of switching groups.
It’s just that religion-based control came first.
Or maybe those who were very religious in the past got to survive and thus the genetic traits responsible for fanaticism spread like fire?
Regardless, it’s appalling.
Chavez sympathizers
I’m sorry, whom???
Like Hugo Chavez? Are there any people who care enough about him who arent Venezuelan?
Like Tito, Castro, Ho Chi Minh, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Trotsky, Che Guevara are all infinitely more valid than fucking Chavez.
Hell Hoxha and Posadas have bigger followings than Chavez
Hugo Chavez followers. They’re as bad if not worse than Trump or Putin followers.
I’ve been an internet socialist for a long time and I have no idea why you think Venezuelans, specifically, are a big problem on the internet.
Maybe the people you hate aren’t really a cult of personality, but it makes you feel better to think about them that way?
"Tucker tole me "
People in the past weren’t us in different clothes and religion was basically fulfilling political and cultural functions as well. Like today was have mass media and entertainment, at one point religion was basically entertainment as well. People loved having some preacher come to town and do his show, it was what people talked about. Now we have TV shows and movies etc, and a lot of our media has shocking moral implications just as we’d judge religion in the past for. Not all that different. That leads in to civil/civic religion which is practiced by many today and provides a framework for things like a national identity. When you stand for an anthem you’re performing a civil religious ritual, visiting historical/cultural sites is a sort of pilgrimage.
The form that religion evolved through in history was also defined by the conditions of the society and a lot of times compromises with neighboring powers. Viewing religion as a dumb thing for stupid people is intuitively tempting, but it’s ahistorical in that it says more about our views today (including religous/civil religious views) than it does about what people were like in the past.
I mean you might be kinda right?
So there are people who think with or without internal monologue, common knowledge
Some people think that the internal monologue may have first developed as an internal dialogue, between the actor, the person and their body, and the “speaker” who they would have not been able to recognize as their own voice, and instead interpreted as a separate being relaying them direction, commands, and interpretation.
The dissociation between the individual and their internal monologue, and the resulting association of that monologue with a directing and counseling presence, could have been taken as the voice of a higher power guiding them, and by extension, others they got to follow them as the “speaker” of this divinity in their head.
If this sounds a bit crazy to you consider how many evangelicals rant and rave about their personal speaking term relationship with God.
So basically, deific religion might derive from people who have an internal monologue but who don’t identify with the speaker of that internal monologue.
Not really a mental disorder so much as a mode of thought that is prone to lead people into believing firmly that they are personally in contact with a separate being who personally directs their behavior and actions and values.
Deus Causa Sui
“I do have one question, though ― do you teach feminism? I mean, I believe in equality, but I am not a feminist, and I don’t want to teach it to my daughter.”
I take the approach I used in Missouri.
“What do you mean?” I ask her.
“Well, do you teach that women are better than men?”
“No, I teach all genders are equal and should be treated as such.”
She buys three kits.
Jesus wept.
This is the problem with the kind of disinformation the right wing media pushes. If you describe something in as objective truthful a way as possible, suddenly none of this shit is controversial.
I’ve seen people totally on board with a description of public health turn around and just rail against how Obama care is Communist.
So much of this just depends entirely on ignorance. Kinda why these people are homeschooling in the first place.
I don’t see any problem whatsoever with this story?
In America, right wing supporters are often the dullest tools in the shed. They’re sure they’re right, but they don’t understand how anything works, historical context, how to discern truth from bullshit, or what words mean.
“I Love the Poorly Educated” -Donald J. Trump
Americans’ obsession with Jesus and the Bible is so weird.
Just a really weird loud subsect. They’re so loud now because they finally realize they’re the minority and they don’t like it. So they throw tantrums like children because their lifestyle is a commitment to low education and blind faith in a corrupt version of reality and a misinterpretation of their own faith.
Sadly, the Internet (troll farms, social media, etc.) has enabled easy access to loudness, to make it seem like they speak for everyone, when they don’t.
There are plenty of Americans that are Christian and not apeshit. There are also plenty of Americans that are neither Christian, nor apeshit. These two groups just don’t go around screaming about it all day because they’re normal, sane, properly educated people.
I was homeschooled. I ‘graduated’ without a valid diploma and had to get a GED. I don’t speak to my parents and my child is currently enjoying his day at public preschool. All my church friends who were raised similarly also are in similar situations. That’s about all I’ll say about it.
I was homeschooled up until 12. I went to college at 15. That’s about all I’ll say about it.
Was college homeschooled as well?
The U in PragerU is for College. /s
No, two years of community college and transferred to a state university as a junior at 17
Yeah, I know. It is hard to keep a lie going
Technically it’s a junior college program because I still had some high school requirements until I was 16 and took the high school proficiency exam. After passing that I did not have to attend any classes in the program.
At 17 I transferred to a state university as a junior because I accumulated enough credits in the community college.
The name of the homeschool teacher? Albert Einstein.
That’s about all I’ll say about it.
thank you for saying it! good homeschool experiences tend to be under rated. Not all homeschool kids have religious nutbags or unschooling types for parents.
Of course not all homeschooling is bad. But these days it does seem that homeschooling tends to skew towards the ultra-conservative MAGA Jesus crowd.
source: salon.com articles and reddit/lemmy
Yes, but also no. Home school gets some seriously unfair treatment in the media, but living it every day myself I can confirm there are quite a few home schooling parents that absolutely earn that criticism.
One of the hardest parts of home schooling my own kids is finding other home schoolers to meet up with that aren’t frigging nuts.
Eh, even if the parents are educating, the social development of such folks as I have seen is horribly stunted, and stunted during some key formative years. Doesn’t help when the parents are telling the kids they are so smart that no school could hope to teach them right.
Even if you acquire knowledge, life can suck if you can’t deal with people.
As a home school parent, socialization is really the hardest and most expensive part. We use an online, self-paced version of the state curriculum (provided by the state, so yes it fully “counts”) so that part is pretty easy. But keeping them involved in communities outside the home, with other kids and adults, is a constant effort. They can finish a whole week of curriculum work for all their core subjects in 8 hours or so (hence the online self-paced school), but all the extra curriculars and meetups that keep them socially active consume most of the rest of the week (and many of them are pretty expensive).
Home schooling is not for the faint of heart, and it’s certainly not the easy button some people treat it as.
Opinions are like assholes my friend, everyone’s got one but we don’t need to share them just for the hell of it… you do you, but this was a dumb thing to say so i’m going to file it with all the rest of the dumb shit people say. have a nice day
Tuition paid using the money you stole from the public education system.
How many poorer kids do you think that money would have helped get into college that didn’t go so you could at 15?
how did they steal money from the public education system for being homeschooled?
Every student not in public education is money not in public education, literally every state that permits home schooling sees to that via those god forsaken voucher programs.
I’m not in favor of the voucher programs, but you’re diluting the opposition to them by claiming some incredibly misinformed bullshit. Just seems funny that we’re talking about education systems, and yours seems to have failed you.
The voucher program hands parents the money the schools would have gotten for having their child enrolled and lets them spend it on a private school with an agenda or a homeschooling program with an agenda instead.
Literally it exists entirely to take money that should have gone to the public school system and letting all the rich and white families siphon it off to totally not segregated private school classrooms and totally not creationist and quiverfull homeschool programs.
If ya don’t believe me just look at the rate of adoption of these kinds of programs and enrollment of rich and white kids in these kinds of programs pre and post Brown V Board.
These systems were concocted by segregationists for segregationists to maintain educational segregation and inequality.
This feels like you’re a bit defensive about your understanding of the subject. Somehow you’ve been led to believe that this affects every kid not in public school. That’s demonstrably false.
We homeschool in North Carolina and get exactly zero dollars for it. You’re correct in general about the terrible effect that vouchers have on public schooling but incorrect about it being applied to homeschooling. I don’t know if it’s different in other states.
I didn’t receive any money for it
dumb take
It’s literally what they’re doing, if you think it’s dumb take it up with the dumb politicians who have it out for education that’s legally required to not teach kids the world’s 6000 years old.
I would have spent the same money going to college anyway? I just did it earlier, this post makes no sense
Dumbass Christian Karens
I have often read sovereign citizen groups on Facebook, and they all “homeschool”, which means the big kids babysit the little ones all day long, and sometimes CPS gets involved and removes the kids and terminates their parental rights because they realize the kids aren’t getting educated and are having the shit best out of them routinely. I think homeschooling can be very dangerous for a child.
I’m not very for homeschooling and it has its place, the problem is that it lacks regulation.
There should be an official education program and tests to make sure kids are learning essential things instead of just babysitting siblings or exclusively learning religious or survivalist stuff.
Yes agreed. But a lot of it is right wing psychos who are just not educating them.
“Not all women are good,” he explains.
“Not all men are good,” I respond.
That’s an amazingly pithy pair of lines
Sounds like something from an unpublished Frog and Toad book
Because a parent working, without any accreditation or training since they were a fucking literal child, totally sounds like a preferable route. Give me a fucking break, it’s an assault on standardized education.
To make it worse, the kid will have a large drop in socialization opportunities and isolated relatively speaking. You just do not get that kind of social utopia ever again in your entire fucking life… the life experiences the child misses out on is significant. You can’t schedule enough playdates to make up for that.
I’m a product of homeschooling, and cannot begin to tell you how detrimental it was to my adult life and being able to function in society.
100% of my socialization growing up came from church. While I have siblings who grew up to be very successful, they all stayed in the church.
It’s a cult. It’s child abuse. You are robbing your child of critical life experience and social development. It also makes it so that anyone escaping from growing up in that will have an extremely difficult time rebuilding their life outside of religion.
While I agree that being homeschooled in a religious community hindered me in a ton of ways I think the one benefit for me was not having to mask my adhd, my mental health now is better for it, but that’s a small victory in a sea of failure.
Well I didn’t have to mask, but I also didn’t get my ADHD, bipolar or anxiety recognized/diagnosed until well into my adult life, lmao.
I also didn’t get treated for my adhd until the last few years, in fact the main reason I was pulled into homeschooling is because my mother didn’t want me medicated, she’s still a fucking moron.
I’ve yet to get medicated. Last time I tried I had the wrong diagnosis and ended up in grippy socks, and I’m currently living by myself, so starting new meds is kinda frightening tbh.
I did drink/smoke way too much as a coping mechanism, because yakno meds that help someone be able to function like a normal person are EVIL, but letting ur kid go undiagnosed and untreated is so fucking healthy for their long-term mental health.
My parents also managed to fuck up my math track to put me a year behind, and when I found their error and tried to catch up, they didn’t support at all.
Homeschool parents are [very often] imbeciles.
deleted by creator
I homeschooled my kid k-12. When I started, I had no idea how many religious hs-ers there were. I used a secular curriculum, and never even thought about teaching anything regarding religion one way or another. Once I started looking around at all the creationist curricula out there–yikes.
Anyhoo, long story short, my son went on to a college degree (he actually started college classes online at 15–one of the perks of hs-ing for us), and he’s an atheist. Secular homeschoolers do exist!
ETA some links–these are a few secular homeschool curricula. There’s a lot more out there, but this is the majority of what I used through the years:
https://www.calverthomeschool.com/
https://www.keystoneschoolonline.com/
https://www.thinkwell.com/ (Primarily math–the professor that does most of the math instruction is wonderful.)
Secular homeschool graduate here. Parents homeschooled my brother and I because the public school system was drastically underfunded and we were in quite an education desert. I always hate articles like this, as folks tend to paint broad strokes about homeschoolers… But there’s a reason we never had other homeschooled friends growing up; there were a lot of crazy ones, especially in Michigan, as there is virtually no regulation.
We are heading down the HS route for our two girls as the oldest has issues that meant that she couldn’t attend school half of last term. My wife has taken her to a couple of meetups and already she come across the Christian and the anti-vax members - even here in far flung New Zealand
We had to pull my daughter out of her middle school and put her in an online school for reasons I don’t wish to go into, but thankfully the online school is run by the county school corporation and she has a curriculum built by accredited teachers who are also there to talk to the kids by phone, videoconference or in person during school hours. And they are so receptive too. Suddenly I feel like educators care about my child.
But homeschooling? I would never even think of it. I don’t know the first thing about pedagogy and neither does my wife. We did a less formal version of online schooling that was hastily put together during COVID while she was still in elementary school and it relied on me doing a lot of the teaching and I sucked at it. There’s a big difference between being able to do fourth grade math and being able to teach a fourth grader how to do fourth grade math. A lot of those kids are getting so underserved by having parents, even well-meaning parents, who are not educators try to give their education.
And that doesn’t even go into the “my son is learning to be a Christian as a homeschooler” bullshit.
There are definitely kids who would be better served by an alternative to regular public or private school, even school they can do from home. But educators need to be behind it, not parents. Not unless those parents have degrees in education.
exactly, parents trying to homeschool a dozen different subjects is always the worst option
That’s what co-ops are for. We had one day a week where various parents would teach on their specialty, like theatre, biology, writing, music, etc.
I was homeschooled (and very grateful for it), and mom was NOT my teacher. She would organize a lot of things like extracurriculars (mostly for socialization), but the studying I did by myself. She’d tell me where to read and do exercises in the books, and that’s it. And the testing in the end of the quarter would be done by a teacher in the school I was assigned to.
Every time I see articles in this topic, it just solidifies my opinion that homeschooling should not be allowed. We live in a community, and part of that means learning a common set of skills, social interaction with others in your community, and secular, science-based lessons.
As a homeschool survivor I wholeheartedly agree. I’m middle aged now and I still struggle with basic social skills.
I went to school and have the same issues lol
I was homeschooled through middle school because the public school administration wanted to put me on Ritalin despite the school psychiatrist’s objections.
Public schools aren’t perfect either.
