I remember how it was -- JR
Bizarre moment Rutgers gender study professor tells seminar that it's 'homophobic and violent' to flag how badly LGBT people are treated in Gaza
A Rutgers University professor told a seminar discussing the Israel-Hamas conflict that it is 'violent' and 'homophobic' to raise the issue of how LGBT people are treated in Gaza.
Maya Mikdashi, associate Professor of Women's, Gender, and Sexuality Studies at New Jersey's State University, told students earlier this month that she has been approached by people at pro-Palestine protests who tell her that she would be treated horribly by Hamas.
'So I've been at protests where I'm then told "don't you know what Hamas would do to you, if you were in Palestine",' she said.
'We have to start naming this as homophobic. You cannot rehearse violence to queer people. It's violent.
The event, entitled 'Palestine is a Feminist and Queer Anti-Imperialist Abolition Struggle', took place on March 20 and was co-hosted by the University of Illinois at Chicago's Nadine Naber.
'If you were to say you were experiencing sexism in the SJP [Students for Justice in Palestine] they would say "there goes those Palestinian's again, silencing women in their communities",' Naber told attendees.
'So no one is going to say it. And if you do say it [others] will say you're a "traitor and collaborating with Zionism".'
Naber also argued that rape had been well-documented in the founding of Israel.
Reading from text she said, 'indeed the practices of rape and sexual assault that have been well-documented during the founding of Israel and continued today are not an exception or a secondary impact of colonial violence.
'[They] are part of the settler, colonial white supremacist logics and practices of Israel that conflate colonized women with the land and nature and assume that therefore to dominate the land necessitates dominating Palestinian women's bodies and their reproductive capacities from 1948 until today,' she explained.
Speaking more on why the event focuses on queer people within the Palestinian movement, Naber said: 'We're going to need our organizing to center queer and trans people not only because they are especially vulnerable to colonial violence and the racism and the doxxing, but they also embody exceptionally nuanced wisdom about Zionism because they are living it in all its complexity.'
Queers for Palestine' events and marches, which have proliferated across the US since the start of the war, have been criticized as a misguided show of support for a regime that does not support gay rights.
The Islamic Middle Eastern state follows sharia law, and as noted by Amnesty International, it is not safe for the queer community.
*******************************************
Why Is Marxism—But Not Madison—Being Taught at Montpelier?
James Madison is the Father of our Constitution, and the Robert H. Smith Center for the Constitution at Madison’s Montpelier provides educational programming for teachers, law enforcement officers, and others.
That seems appropriate. After all, not only did Madison—our country’s fourth president—help draft the Constitution, but he also served as a key delegate at the Constitutional Convention, authored the Bill of Rights, and urged ratification of the Constitution through his practical and philosophical arguments in The Federalist Papers.
But these accomplishments are, at best, downplayed at his historic home. Montpelier has no exhibits dedicated to Madison and his contributions.
Worse still, Montpelier is equipping educators to teach Marxist-based theories to elementary, middle, and high school students. And the programs doing this are, in part, funded by the state of Virginia.
Issues surrounding policing and prosecution could be fair game for seminars at Montpelier. The Fourth Amendment protects against “unreasonable searches and seizures.” The Fifth Amendment, among other protections, guarantees that no person shall “be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” The Sixth Amendment guarantees the “right to a speedy and public trial” by an “impartial jury” and the ability to confront those testifying against you. And the Eighth Amendment protects against excessive bail, excessive fines, and cruel and unusual punishments.
Madison drafted all of those.
Yet next week’s “Educator Seminar: Policing and Public Safety” will instead focus on the “history of policing, civil rights, and Constitutional change in African American contexts for the purpose of providing educators with key strategies and historical tools to teach topics in black history about law enforcement, social justice, and the Constitution.”
It will “help teachers be more inspired to teach hard histories that invite students in their classrooms to imagine equitable possibilities for promoting public safety for all.” And it will explore “why community approaches to public safety surfaced to counteract police violence and discrimination within the criminal legal system leading up to today’s age of mass incarceration.”
There’s a lot to unpack in those statements, but underlying all of them is the belief that our criminal justice system is systemically racist and that, as a result, we lock up too many people—particularly too many young black men.
But that’s not true. Our criminal justice system isn’t systemically racist, and mass incarceration is a myth.
If someone commits the crime, they should do the time. And it’s a sad fact that a disproportionate number of young black men commit violent crimes in the United States and often victimize other young black men in the process.
But these aren’t the only terms that stand out. Of particular note in the description are the phrases “equitable” and “hard history.” Equity is about equality of outcomes, not opportunity. And “teaching hard history” is a mantra of the radical Southern Poverty Law Center, which often labels those it disagrees with as “hate groups.”
In fact, the SPLC’s “teaching hard history” curriculum and initiatives are not simply about discussing slavery’s role in American history. Like “The 1619 Project” and other critical race theory programs, they place slavery as the central animating force in America’s Founding. The preface of the curriculum states that “Some say slavery was our country’s original sin, but it is much more than that. Slavery is our country’s origin.”
This curriculum is also about forming students into activists. For example, it notes that those in K-2 should “examine how power is gained” and be able to “contrast equity and equality, identifying current problems where there is a need to fight for equity.”
This overlap is no coincidence. Hasan Kwame Jeffries, the host of the SPLC’s “Teaching Hard History” podcast as well as an author of the curriculum standards quoted above, also serves as the chairman of the board at Montpelier, which is the historic home’s governing body. (Currently, no Madison scholars are on the board.)
Jeffries—the brother of House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y.—helped develop and appears in a video in Montpelier’s basement featuring encounters with police officers and protesters carrying signs that read “Stop police brutality,” “I can’t breathe,” and “Black Lives Matter.”
Per the Montpelier website, “[f]rom mass incarceration, to the achievement gap, to housing discrimination, and the vicious cycle of poverty, violence, and lack of opportunity throughout America’s inner cities, the legacies of 200 years of African American bondage are still with us.”
It’s sad that Montpelier has chosen to focus on a Marxist-motivated movement fueled by critical race theory, instead of on the many astounding achievements of the home’s former owner and the Father of our Constitution, James Madison.
It’s a disservice to the public, teachers, and students
https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/03/28/why-is-marxism-not-madison-being-taught-montpelier/
***************************************************Colorado Liberals Chip Away at School Choice
Liberal Democrats introduced a bill to tighten the state’s grip on charter schools in Colorado.
House Bill 1363 would tighten regulations on Colorado’s 260 charter schools bringing rules in line with public schools, The Colorado Sun reports.
The bill would allow school districts to limit the number of charter schools allowed to operate in the state. Public school districts would have the authority to limit their existence. Any district that is losing students would have the right to eliminate the competition presented by charter schools.
School boards would also have the power to refuse to renew an existing charter school. Even if a school has been operating for years, they can be denied renewal at the discretion of the school board. Appeal options are limited.
HB 1363 would also require charter schools to pay rent to use public school facilities. Under current Colorado law, charter schools are allowed to use facilities owned by the public school district and fees cannot exceed $12 per year. The proposed bill would eliminate the $12 cap.
Advocates for the bill say it will provide more transparency. Charter schools will be required to post any laws and policies they are exempt from in an accessible and understandable manner.
Opponents to the bill say that they will lose the autonomy and independence that have made charter schools successful.
Under HB 1363 charter schools would lose freedom to make decisions such as hiring and firing of teachers, The Federalist reports. It would eliminate waivers that currently allow charter schools to choose curricula and study materials.
Under the new law, all decisions will be made by Colorado State Board of Education, which is dominated by Democrats.
“The sponsors’ intent is clear: to end Colorado’s longstanding, highly successful charter school movement,” write Rob Moulton and Tim Hannan for The Federalist. “Effectively every line in the 55-page bill represents a full frontal assault on charters and the hundreds of thousands of families they serve across Colorado.”
Colorado is already facing declining enrollment in seven out of ten of the largest school districts. If this bill passes, those districts immediately have the authority to deny a request to open a new charter school or reject an existing school charter renewal.
“Declining enrollment suggests more choice and innovation, not less, would be a strategy worth pursuing,” Moulton and Hannan write. “The sponsors clearly disagree, preferring to add an extra padlock to the chains holding families in their traditional public schools.”
Charter schools are very popular in the state of Colorado, Fox 13 reports. They continue to grow, but this bill would make expansion of charters far more difficult.
The office of the Governor, Jared Polis (D), provided a statement expressing his opposition to the proposed bill.
“Colorado is a national leader in education access, innovation, and choice,” the statement reads. “Public charter schools are a popular option in Colorado, serving around 15 percent of our school-aged children. This bill would weaken, rather than strengthen, school choice in Colorado and the Governor strongly opposes it.”
The bill’s sponsors say they want to require charter schools to be transparent with the state and the public, KOAA reports. They would like to track enrollment, teacher retention, and finances for the schools.
They would have the right to require that charter schools submit their expenses and report revenue. Any school that does not submit the required reporting could have their charter revoked.
The Colorado League of Charter Schools says that the freedom from reporting requirements and the ability to choose learning materials is key to the success of Colorado’s charter schools.
“Our current public education system is ill-equipped to consistently provide high-quality options to all learners because of its top-down, overly static, overly bureaucratic approach,” the organization’s website states. “What we need instead is a bottom-up approach that empowers educators, families and communities and allows for new ideas in the public education space.”
“Autonomy and accountability lie at the heart of what makes charter schools successful. Without school-level control over such key factors as staffing, budget, and educational program, charter schools would not have the tools necessary to innovate and be responsive to their students and families in the way their communities need.”
Democrats control both houses in the legislature and the Governor is a Democrat but, on this bill, there is not uniform support from Democrats. It is expected to be reviewed in committee in April.
https://heartlanddailynews.com/2024/04/colorado-liberals-chip-away-at-school-choice/
******************************************************My other blogs: Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
******************************************************
No comments:
Post a Comment