Darth Ruger
Member
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2005
- Messages
- 525
Here's the update about the situation with my son's anti-gun 1st grade teacher. For anyone that missed it, here's a link to the thread that explained the situation:
http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=183770
Sorry for the long delay on this. The last couple of weeks have been very hectic for me and I wasn't able to meet with the teacher until a couple of days ago. My first effort was to set up a time to talk with the principal, but she didn't seem to want to get back to me. So I decided to talk with the teacher. I made up my mind not to go over her head, or get really tough with her, unless she started stonewalling and didn't want to concede to my demands. I kept it very polite and tactful, and wasn't going to pull out my claws unless it became necessary. You'll see some points here where I got a certain feeling from her or she gave me a certain impression, without her actually saying what she was feeling. You'll just have to take my word for it in those cases, since I can only relate what happened through the written word, and no one here was there to interact with her face to face and pick up on the subtle facial expressions, body language, reactions, etc, that often give away certain attitudes in a person. What a person doesn't say, and how they react to what you say, often says much more than the words coming out of their mouth, and in this case, she gave me a very different 'vibe' than she was trying to convince me of with her words.
I started by asking how my son was doing with his work, progress in reading, etc, and got those things out of the way. Then I said I had one last thing to ask her about. I pulled out the paper that started all this and showed it to her.
Me: "When we got to the picture of the gun, Eric crossed it out like this (pointing at the picture). He said you told the class they should do this because you don't like guns. Is that right?"
Her: "Oh, yes, well, that's not quite as dramatic as it sounds (her reaction gave me the feeling that she knew right off the bat that she was up the creek without a paddle, or more specifically, that she 'got caught'. She was clearly uncomfortable with the fact that she suddenly had to defend her actions.) That's just a part of our efforts to not allow the kids to be exposed to violence."
Me: "How does this picture constitute that sort of danger?"
Her: "Well, I've had a couple of instances in the past where there was a picture of a gun on a paper and some of the parents got very upset and raised a red flag about it. So we try to keep pictures of guns and things like that out of the classroom, but I didn't notice this one and it slipped through, so I just told the kids 'Oh, that's not suposed to be there, just cross it out' ".
She was a little too nervous to be honest about "other parents" being behind this. That may have happened in the past, but I felt like she was simply trying to get the heat off herself. I also she knew she was lying, because I grilled my son about exactly what she told the class, and she told them to "cross out the picture because I don't like guns", not because some parents made a fuss about guns in past years. But I didn't accuse her of lying. I gave her the benefit of the doubt and pretended I believed she was being honest, then I proceeded to destroy her illusions with pure logic.
Me: "That's taking the fear of violence a bit too far. How can a simple cartoon picture like that cause a fear of violence in anyone?"
Her: "It's just because there's so much violence in the world today, people get upset when their kids are exposed to it." (She was still missing the point.)
Me: "That's a misplaced, irrational fear that causes further misconceptions and blame to be placed where it doesn't belong."
Her: "Oh, I know. My husband's a hunter! (Yeah, sure. She wasn't very convincing, although she said this several times, trying a little too hard to convince me of it. Even if he is a hunter, it's a common thing for married couples to be on opposite sides of the political fence regarding certain issues, so that didn't mean squat to me. Besides, her husband isn't in the classroom teaching my kid. She is.) It's just a part of the freedom from violence thing. (This part almost made me laugh.) Just like there's no guns allowed in the shool, you know, like the sign out there at the entrance that says no guns are allowed in the school..." (It was pretty obvious that she was suddenly afraid I might be carrying, and she was trying to make sure, without actually saying it, that I knew it wasn't allowed.)
Me: "Yeah, I know. Every school is like that, it's the law. (Attempting to ignore her ridiculous fears and get back to my point...) A physical object can't be evil. The only evil is people who do bad things with those physical objects."
I then proceeded to explain to her the difference between a physical object and an act of violence. The fact that I had to explain this to her and make a clear distinction between the two spoke volumes about her way of thinking. She was being polite, as was I, and seeming to agree with everything I was saying, but it just didn't seem genuine. You had to be there, but her demeanor, reactions, speech, expressions, being a little too agreeable... I kept getting the feeling that she could see the logic in my arguments, but she still didn't want to believe it anyway, but she felt like she had to. That was the 'vibe' I kept getting from her the whole time. Maybe if she were just someone on the street, she would have felt free to disagree, but being my kids' teacher, in a public school... She was more like a deer in the headlights: she knew she was caught and had no choice but to back down. I then used another example. I pointed to a picture of a car on the same paper.
Me: "Here's a picture of another physical object, a car. Every day, cars are used for bad purposes. Robberies. Rapes. Murders. Drunk driving. Transporting victims of murder to dump the body. Transporting stolen guns. Transporting illegal drugs. Carrying out drug deals. Running from the police and killing innocent bystanders in the process. But I don't see anyone complaining about a picture of a car being on this homework paper. I don't see anyone saying that cars are evil and are responsible for so much violence, even though they're used for these purposes every day."
She continued to agree with me, and I continued making position clear.
Me: "I don't think it's okay for a teacher, or principal, or any staff member of a school to bring personal political beliefs into the classroom and influence the kids to feel, think, and react in a certain way to a certain object. My son is here for an education, not an indoctrination. He'll form his own political beliefs as he gets older. If his beliefs differ from my own when he's an adult, that's up to him; as long as he's been allowed to form his beliefs on his own without them being drummed into him at an early age by a teacher that's supposed to be teaching him how to read and write. If a homework paper has a picture of a gun on it and you don't want that in the curriculum, then use a different paper. If some parents, or teachers, don't want to have any pictures of guns in the classroom or on the homework papers at all so it won't even be an issue, I'm fine with that. But don't give him a paper with a picture of a gun on it and then tell him to cross it out because it's bad. That's just plain wrong, it gives kids the wrong ideas about certain things, and it crosses the line about what the school is supposed to be teaching him."
I then asked Eric, who was playing while we talked, to tell her how what she said made him feel, and she told him that he felt like he should get rid of his BB gun. Then I explained...
Me: "The BB gun I gave him for Christmas. His favorite present that he ever got, that I'm using to teach him marksmanship skills and safety, and that we have fun spending time together with." (She seemed to realize how personal it was for me at this point, and she brought up her husband 'the hunter' again, although all she did was mentioned him without offering any details about him.)
Although I've had to condense it here, our discussion went on for a bit, touching on various other things like video games, movies, etc. I used logic to dispel every irrational fear she brought up. She was being agreeable the whole time, although I didn't feel like it was genuine. Still, I had already decided that even if she didn't agree with me or my point of view, I wasn't going to push it any farther than our private discussion as long as she conceded to my demands. I wrapped it up by saying...
Me: "So, since you seem to understand the logic of my point of view and why an irrational fear of a physical object is misplaced and misinformed, I'd like you to do something as a personal favor to me. I'd like you to tell the class tomorrow that crossing out a picture of a gun, or any other object, simply because somone else doesn't like it, is wrong and they're no longer required to do it. If some other parents don't like that and they want to tell their kid to cross it out, that's up to them. That's a parent's decision and they can do that if they want to. But a teacher shouldn't be telling a whole room full of kids that they should do that, because that's stepping over the line into the area of indoctrination, and not all parents are okay with that. Some parents feel very differently about it than others."
She seemed to understand what I was saying and agreed to do what I asked. No threats were made and I kept it very civil, but I also made it clear that I was determined not to let this sort of thing go unchecked and that I wouldn't take 'no' for an answer. Although I never said it, I was prepared to take it as high up the chain of command as necessary and what happened after this would be up to her, and it was obvious that she realized that. I think she also realized that not all parents are going to stand for that sort of thing, and that I was going to be watching from now on. I thanked her for taking the time to talk to me and all that polite stuff and then we left.
The next day, Friday, I asked Eric if she said anything about it to the class. He said she told the class they didn't have to cross out pictures of guns anymore. She didn't explain why, she just said they don't have to do it anymore and all they have to do is fill in the missing letter in the word under the picture, just like all the other pictures. I didn't expect her to explain it to the kids, because that would mean telling them what she did was wrong, and I still think she's anti-gun anyway. But that's okay, I wasn't expecting to convert her. I had already decided that as long as she backed off and agreed to my request, I would consider it one small victory for the future of the kids in her class and just leave it at that. And she did.
http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=183770
Sorry for the long delay on this. The last couple of weeks have been very hectic for me and I wasn't able to meet with the teacher until a couple of days ago. My first effort was to set up a time to talk with the principal, but she didn't seem to want to get back to me. So I decided to talk with the teacher. I made up my mind not to go over her head, or get really tough with her, unless she started stonewalling and didn't want to concede to my demands. I kept it very polite and tactful, and wasn't going to pull out my claws unless it became necessary. You'll see some points here where I got a certain feeling from her or she gave me a certain impression, without her actually saying what she was feeling. You'll just have to take my word for it in those cases, since I can only relate what happened through the written word, and no one here was there to interact with her face to face and pick up on the subtle facial expressions, body language, reactions, etc, that often give away certain attitudes in a person. What a person doesn't say, and how they react to what you say, often says much more than the words coming out of their mouth, and in this case, she gave me a very different 'vibe' than she was trying to convince me of with her words.
I started by asking how my son was doing with his work, progress in reading, etc, and got those things out of the way. Then I said I had one last thing to ask her about. I pulled out the paper that started all this and showed it to her.
Me: "When we got to the picture of the gun, Eric crossed it out like this (pointing at the picture). He said you told the class they should do this because you don't like guns. Is that right?"
Her: "Oh, yes, well, that's not quite as dramatic as it sounds (her reaction gave me the feeling that she knew right off the bat that she was up the creek without a paddle, or more specifically, that she 'got caught'. She was clearly uncomfortable with the fact that she suddenly had to defend her actions.) That's just a part of our efforts to not allow the kids to be exposed to violence."
Me: "How does this picture constitute that sort of danger?"
Her: "Well, I've had a couple of instances in the past where there was a picture of a gun on a paper and some of the parents got very upset and raised a red flag about it. So we try to keep pictures of guns and things like that out of the classroom, but I didn't notice this one and it slipped through, so I just told the kids 'Oh, that's not suposed to be there, just cross it out' ".
She was a little too nervous to be honest about "other parents" being behind this. That may have happened in the past, but I felt like she was simply trying to get the heat off herself. I also she knew she was lying, because I grilled my son about exactly what she told the class, and she told them to "cross out the picture because I don't like guns", not because some parents made a fuss about guns in past years. But I didn't accuse her of lying. I gave her the benefit of the doubt and pretended I believed she was being honest, then I proceeded to destroy her illusions with pure logic.
Me: "That's taking the fear of violence a bit too far. How can a simple cartoon picture like that cause a fear of violence in anyone?"
Her: "It's just because there's so much violence in the world today, people get upset when their kids are exposed to it." (She was still missing the point.)
Me: "That's a misplaced, irrational fear that causes further misconceptions and blame to be placed where it doesn't belong."
Her: "Oh, I know. My husband's a hunter! (Yeah, sure. She wasn't very convincing, although she said this several times, trying a little too hard to convince me of it. Even if he is a hunter, it's a common thing for married couples to be on opposite sides of the political fence regarding certain issues, so that didn't mean squat to me. Besides, her husband isn't in the classroom teaching my kid. She is.) It's just a part of the freedom from violence thing. (This part almost made me laugh.) Just like there's no guns allowed in the shool, you know, like the sign out there at the entrance that says no guns are allowed in the school..." (It was pretty obvious that she was suddenly afraid I might be carrying, and she was trying to make sure, without actually saying it, that I knew it wasn't allowed.)
Me: "Yeah, I know. Every school is like that, it's the law. (Attempting to ignore her ridiculous fears and get back to my point...) A physical object can't be evil. The only evil is people who do bad things with those physical objects."
I then proceeded to explain to her the difference between a physical object and an act of violence. The fact that I had to explain this to her and make a clear distinction between the two spoke volumes about her way of thinking. She was being polite, as was I, and seeming to agree with everything I was saying, but it just didn't seem genuine. You had to be there, but her demeanor, reactions, speech, expressions, being a little too agreeable... I kept getting the feeling that she could see the logic in my arguments, but she still didn't want to believe it anyway, but she felt like she had to. That was the 'vibe' I kept getting from her the whole time. Maybe if she were just someone on the street, she would have felt free to disagree, but being my kids' teacher, in a public school... She was more like a deer in the headlights: she knew she was caught and had no choice but to back down. I then used another example. I pointed to a picture of a car on the same paper.
Me: "Here's a picture of another physical object, a car. Every day, cars are used for bad purposes. Robberies. Rapes. Murders. Drunk driving. Transporting victims of murder to dump the body. Transporting stolen guns. Transporting illegal drugs. Carrying out drug deals. Running from the police and killing innocent bystanders in the process. But I don't see anyone complaining about a picture of a car being on this homework paper. I don't see anyone saying that cars are evil and are responsible for so much violence, even though they're used for these purposes every day."
She continued to agree with me, and I continued making position clear.
Me: "I don't think it's okay for a teacher, or principal, or any staff member of a school to bring personal political beliefs into the classroom and influence the kids to feel, think, and react in a certain way to a certain object. My son is here for an education, not an indoctrination. He'll form his own political beliefs as he gets older. If his beliefs differ from my own when he's an adult, that's up to him; as long as he's been allowed to form his beliefs on his own without them being drummed into him at an early age by a teacher that's supposed to be teaching him how to read and write. If a homework paper has a picture of a gun on it and you don't want that in the curriculum, then use a different paper. If some parents, or teachers, don't want to have any pictures of guns in the classroom or on the homework papers at all so it won't even be an issue, I'm fine with that. But don't give him a paper with a picture of a gun on it and then tell him to cross it out because it's bad. That's just plain wrong, it gives kids the wrong ideas about certain things, and it crosses the line about what the school is supposed to be teaching him."
I then asked Eric, who was playing while we talked, to tell her how what she said made him feel, and she told him that he felt like he should get rid of his BB gun. Then I explained...
Me: "The BB gun I gave him for Christmas. His favorite present that he ever got, that I'm using to teach him marksmanship skills and safety, and that we have fun spending time together with." (She seemed to realize how personal it was for me at this point, and she brought up her husband 'the hunter' again, although all she did was mentioned him without offering any details about him.)
Although I've had to condense it here, our discussion went on for a bit, touching on various other things like video games, movies, etc. I used logic to dispel every irrational fear she brought up. She was being agreeable the whole time, although I didn't feel like it was genuine. Still, I had already decided that even if she didn't agree with me or my point of view, I wasn't going to push it any farther than our private discussion as long as she conceded to my demands. I wrapped it up by saying...
Me: "So, since you seem to understand the logic of my point of view and why an irrational fear of a physical object is misplaced and misinformed, I'd like you to do something as a personal favor to me. I'd like you to tell the class tomorrow that crossing out a picture of a gun, or any other object, simply because somone else doesn't like it, is wrong and they're no longer required to do it. If some other parents don't like that and they want to tell their kid to cross it out, that's up to them. That's a parent's decision and they can do that if they want to. But a teacher shouldn't be telling a whole room full of kids that they should do that, because that's stepping over the line into the area of indoctrination, and not all parents are okay with that. Some parents feel very differently about it than others."
She seemed to understand what I was saying and agreed to do what I asked. No threats were made and I kept it very civil, but I also made it clear that I was determined not to let this sort of thing go unchecked and that I wouldn't take 'no' for an answer. Although I never said it, I was prepared to take it as high up the chain of command as necessary and what happened after this would be up to her, and it was obvious that she realized that. I think she also realized that not all parents are going to stand for that sort of thing, and that I was going to be watching from now on. I thanked her for taking the time to talk to me and all that polite stuff and then we left.
The next day, Friday, I asked Eric if she said anything about it to the class. He said she told the class they didn't have to cross out pictures of guns anymore. She didn't explain why, she just said they don't have to do it anymore and all they have to do is fill in the missing letter in the word under the picture, just like all the other pictures. I didn't expect her to explain it to the kids, because that would mean telling them what she did was wrong, and I still think she's anti-gun anyway. But that's okay, I wasn't expecting to convert her. I had already decided that as long as she backed off and agreed to my request, I would consider it one small victory for the future of the kids in her class and just leave it at that. And she did.
