Thread by @AlsoACarpenter

In light of these anti-CRT laws re: education, it is important to understand that there has been a couple hundred years of school curriculum and K - 12 teaching that has made children of color much more than just uncomfortable, and this is no exception in today.

Thread:

2/ Many have rightly suggested that parents of color should also show up to school board meetings and petition legislators to put an end to this as well. And we must. The problem is, those with power (mainly White people, even many "progressives") will ultimately opt for

3/ "race-neutral" readings and texts. This might seem grand and liberal on its face, but, as discussed the other day, those with power (mainly White people) almost always see books covering historical events with Black people as "black history" and therefore "racial," but books

4/ covering historical events with entirely White people are considered "non-racial"; they're just "history books." Same goes for literature. As such, Morrison's Beloved is considered "racial" and therefore subject to greater scrutiny (now banned in some states) while Catcher in

5/ the Rye is considered definitely non-racial, just a book about humans (a universal human?) growing up, or whatever. Heck, even Mitchell's Gone With the Wind is considered non-racial and is just an historical novel with some powerful romance. (It's just like how the TV show

6/ Friends is a comedy about young professionals in the city and is "not racial." Living Single, on the other hand, is a Black comedy about Black young professionals in the city and is most certainly "racial.")

The point is, the "neutral" always defaults to the dominant as the

7/ dominant narrative always appears natural, neutral, and plain common-sense. When White children are made uncomfortable, it is because of "racial" material; when children of color are made uncomfortable, they just need to learn to deal with it, because it's just the compelling

8/ nature of literature, exploring universal human issues, or it is just factual history.

And what we have here, in the end, is a real-life example, right before our eyes, of the failure of liberalism's attempt to treat individuals "neutrally and objectively when subject to

9/ collective power" (Peller), even though treating things that are different as though they are the same is quite a bit identical to treating things that are the same as though they are different. Becoming aware of the social Asymmetry due to centuries of legally and socially

10/ subordinated circumstances of peoples of color is required if we are to understand the context necessary to even have these discussions. I think Dr. King expresses this sentiment quite well:

11/11 There simply is no escape: we, as a society, either need to commit to antiracism and truth-telling, even in schools, or commit to racism; there is no "neutral," at least not in our society.

*Typo in very first sentence of the thread. Lovely.

(I'm also pretty sure this is what @DrIbram was saying last week.)