"There are only two opinions on this sign: Everyone is welcome here, or not everyone is welcome here,” argues Sarah Inama, a sixth-grade history teacher.
I understand uniformity and all, but there’s also a lot of over-sheltering going on. Part of being ready for the world is knowing things out there are rarely fair and most of us get offended at one point or another. You learn to brush it off and grow thicker skin, making you a stronger individual.
I agree, we shouldn’t be coddling folk triggered by messages like “Everyone is Welcome”. They need to toughen up and learn to accept messages of inclusivity.
They SHOULD feel uncomfortable if they don’t like this sign. It’ll put hair on their chest.
I agree with that last part, but I do think the notion that people should not learn that they won’t be offended is not a great life lesson. I also don’t think anyone should be messaging that bullies are right or that they are given a free pass and so on.
But I think instilling a certain amount of resilience in everyone would be beneficial, long term. Life throws a lot of shit at you, including a barrage of offensive things.
Ironically, it actually turns out that the cons are weaponizing this sort of thing by demanding the signs come down, because they are claiming they are “offended”.
I’m not sure why we’re name calling (that’s what bullies do, right?) but I was definitely the receiver of the bullying growing up and have never bullied others.
I think the sign is fine and when I see signs that aren’t inclusive of me, I’m fine with that too. If my kids see something that they are uncomfortable with, I’ll talk to them about it. I’m not going to storm down to the principal and demand to know why someone dared to not include my child. Over-sheltering kids does them an injustice because they’re unprepared. That’s the point I was making, not some pro-bigot diatribe or whatever you’re describing.
We absolutely should be inclusive, and we should also prepare our children for an imperfect world. You can do both.
I don’t see how people are so opposed to the idea that “we should help our children become strong and robust so that they’re not offended by everything”.
Life is a lot easier when you can handle people saying and doing things you don’t like without it breaking you. I’m not saying injustice should be tolerated: Quite the opposite. I’m saying that fighting injustice is easier if you are robust enough withstand it when it’s directed at you.
My impression is that that’s what you mean, in which case I wholly agree.
It’s funny how we interpreted OP’s comment completely oppositely. I interpreted it as
Classrooms should, as a starter, be uniform. However, we need to expose kids to all kinds of things and not overly shelter them from different opinions, therefore these signs should remain.
If I understand correctly, you interpret OP as arguing that the signs should be removed?
I’m saying that taking down the signs is being “overly sheltering” in the sense that it’s showing kids that you can just make anything you don’t like go away. This is an argument to keep the signs in order to help the kids learn to deal with exposure to the world, regardless of whether they like what they see. I honestly have a hard time seeing how OP’s comment can be interpreted differently?
I understand uniformity and all, but there’s also a lot of over-sheltering going on. Part of being ready for the world is knowing things out there are rarely fair and most of us get offended at one point or another. You learn to brush it off and grow thicker skin, making you a stronger individual.
I agree, we shouldn’t be coddling folk triggered by messages like “Everyone is Welcome”. They need to toughen up and learn to accept messages of inclusivity.
They SHOULD feel uncomfortable if they don’t like this sign. It’ll put hair on their chest.
Maybe they should grow thick enough skin to not get offended at this sign.
deleted by creator
I agree with that last part, but I do think the notion that people should not learn that they won’t be offended is not a great life lesson. I also don’t think anyone should be messaging that bullies are right or that they are given a free pass and so on.
But I think instilling a certain amount of resilience in everyone would be beneficial, long term. Life throws a lot of shit at you, including a barrage of offensive things.
Ironically, it actually turns out that the cons are weaponizing this sort of thing by demanding the signs come down, because they are claiming they are “offended”.
I’m not sure why we’re name calling (that’s what bullies do, right?) but I was definitely the receiver of the bullying growing up and have never bullied others.
I think the sign is fine and when I see signs that aren’t inclusive of me, I’m fine with that too. If my kids see something that they are uncomfortable with, I’ll talk to them about it. I’m not going to storm down to the principal and demand to know why someone dared to not include my child. Over-sheltering kids does them an injustice because they’re unprepared. That’s the point I was making, not some pro-bigot diatribe or whatever you’re describing.
We absolutely should be inclusive, and we should also prepare our children for an imperfect world. You can do both.
deleted by creator
Okay then.
I don’t see how people are so opposed to the idea that “we should help our children become strong and robust so that they’re not offended by everything”.
Life is a lot easier when you can handle people saying and doing things you don’t like without it breaking you. I’m not saying injustice should be tolerated: Quite the opposite. I’m saying that fighting injustice is easier if you are robust enough withstand it when it’s directed at you.
My impression is that that’s what you mean, in which case I wholly agree.
deleted by creator
It’s funny how we interpreted OP’s comment completely oppositely. I interpreted it as
If I understand correctly, you interpret OP as arguing that the signs should be removed?
I’m saying that taking down the signs is being “overly sheltering” in the sense that it’s showing kids that you can just make anything you don’t like go away. This is an argument to keep the signs in order to help the kids learn to deal with exposure to the world, regardless of whether they like what they see. I honestly have a hard time seeing how OP’s comment can be interpreted differently?
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]