Identity politics in secondary school

[OrchidCarer]

Please be gentle because I’m trying to work out how I feel about this issue.

I have 3 boys at secondary school. A new Head started in September. Since then I’ve noticed the school has increased the amount of teaching time given over to identity politics.

For example:

• Students have special science lessons on LGBTQ+ Scientists. Surely they shouldn’t be recognised for their sexuality but for their achievements? Why is their sexuality even relevant to their job?
• Every subject studies load of ‘Black History’ type subjects – so far my Y9 kid has studied slavery, the slave trade, the Windrush generation this year. This is in history, geography, English. These are presented in a way that makes all black people victims and all white people oppressors. The kids pick up on this and their friendship groups form around race (school is about 30% black, 65% white, 5% other ethnicities).
• Assemblies all the time about how women are downtrodden, oppressed, victims and men are the aggressors, perpetrators. Female dominated classes with a female teacher discussing the patriarchy and similar themes.

I am uncomfortable about all of this division. We are all just human. There is a big difference between educating about past prejudice and forcing stereotypes on kids now.

Concerns

• White straight boys are never in the oppressed group, so are constantly told they are the bad guys. My sons have given up trying to prove everyone wrong – the narrative against them is too strong. My eldest rails at home about the unfairness of it all, how he’s depressed, he can’t do right because he’s a straight white guy, he just wants to go and fight in Ukraine where he’ll be allowed to be a man, doesn’t care if he dies. It’s exhausting to deal with.
• Push towards the far right. If you watch slightly right-wing content, algorithms recommend more. There is a danger that disenchanted boys will turn for comfort to online creators who exploit their anger and encourage sexist, racist and homophobic attitudes.
• Where is the evidence that these interventions make the ‘oppressed’ groups feel supported?
• Women, queer people, and people of colour need allies. We are all on the same side, in the end, and this divisive approach is having the opposite effect to the one intended.

There is a real taboo about saying these things. I raised the LGBTQ+ scientists question and got a dramatically long and patronising lecture in an email back again as though I was the bad guy.

Maybe I am being unreasonable?

Is there anything that I can do or do I just have to watch it all unfold?

I don't think you're being unreasonable, and I was following your argument with general agreement, until you confused me by saying "women, queer people and people of colour need allies. We are all on the same side in the end"... Isn't this the divisiveness that you then criticise in the same paragraph? Or have I misread you? It sounded there like you do think it's everyone Vs the straight white men? What side are we all on? E.g. are the "queer people" necessarily on the same side as a devout Pakistani Muslim (say) but not on the same side as their white male colleagues?

(There is a term for that called the Global Majority gaining ground... Or "the GM" for short. It basically means everyone who is not the mythic evil straight white man, as far as I can make out. Actually, correction, it only refers to race, i.e. not white. I've actually only ever heard it said with a straight face by a middle-class white man who was essentially taking advantage of it as a marketing opportunity. I find it reductive and patronising, while it also manages to be white- and Western-centric...)

Anyway, it doesn't really matter what I think about all that - I'm rambling. What does matter is that identity politics is political (clue's in the name), therefore should not be taught uncritically in schools.

I also agree that an evidence base should be used and developed for any interventions like this. It's hard, as evidence-gathering comes under political attack too. E.g. the Sewell report, attacked because it didn't paint all minorities as victims. And all the flat-earthism of gender ideology. It's hard to discuss this stuff rationally sometimes because some professionals have absorbed it not just as one possible world view, but as a moral imperative. Like the email you received. Perhaps an in-person meeting might be more effective (picking your battles, obviously), and focus on evidence and critical thinking and freedom of thought, since it's supposed to be a place for education? Best of luck.

These are presented in a way that makes all black people victims and all white people oppressors

Well I’m not sure how else you would present slavery….. or Windrush.

It’s uncomfortable because it touches on the fact that people were treated in a certain way because of the colour their skin, as simple as that.

That’s a very painful difficult thing to understand. Some end up pretty defensive about it and see it as an attack on them. When really, the purpose of teaching should be to learn lessons from our history.
In terms of the push to the far right, the best you can do is to disrupt what they’re watching on YouTube etc to mess with the algorithms. Limit the time on YouTube/social media if you can. Keep talking to them.

There’s a lot to unpick there, but why is it a problem to teach kids about LGBT scientists in a way which shows they are LGBT? I’m gay and sexuality was not discussed at all when I went to school which led me to believe it was wrong and a taboo, so the school is clearly trying to show kids positive LGBT role models and normalise it, I don’t see what’s wrong with that?

You can’t just say “we’re all human, so why do we need to talk about race/sexuality/gender?” because that’s not reality, people have and do suffer because they’re not straight white males and being a fellow human matters not one bit.

If your sons feel uncomfortable with being taught how straight white males have dominated, harassed, brutalised etc women and marginalised groups then good, that’s the point.

I think it is challenging to teach a mixed group of kids about the history of race / oppression without it becoming a case of 'white=bad'. The lessons ought to focus on the common humanity that connects everyone, as well as giving the historical facts. Everyone has some struggles and everyone wants to do better.

You could tell the school that your kids are struggling with isolation / feeling useless and that the current curriculum isn't helping. Approaches like this might be better

Iggly - I think the difference is that they're making it sound almost like an innate quality of each race - the original sin of whiteness, the innate tragedy of being black. I think you can teach the historical events of the last few hundred years and the ongoing ramifications of them, without it turning into a lesson on critical race theory. (This isn't me starting an argument about CRT, it's me saying that's where I draw the line at school).

I certainly agree we need to learn lessons from our past, slavery is obviously a huge and relevant one that shows man's capacity to dehumanise his fellow man, so yes - draw that lesson from slavery, definitely.

What I don't want is for children to leave a classroom with a new, or exacerbated, division or resentment or confusion between them because of things that people - maybe people unrelated to them - did centuries ago. They shouldn't have to feel responsible for the past. And it's not always clear-cut in terms of how we each should personally identify with the past - e.g. I've seen one or two episodes of Who Do You Think You Are where the celeb goes to the Caribbean and is horrified to find out that their freed black ancestor bought himself some slaves. Whereas Joe Bloggs white Brit celeb's poor ancestors benefited indirectly from all this by being able to put sugar in their tea and probably little else. Look, it's not my specialist subject so I'll bow out of the topic of Atlantic slavery before I make an idiot of myself... I hope I've managed to make sense in the meantime.

(Not the OP by the way, though rereading my post I seem to be responding as if I am!)

I think you are being a little bit unreasonable. It is still very recent that these things are being taught in schools at all. The school my DD goes to is c. 50% BAME and they have never done a text in English by a non-white person (and only one text by a woman). That's pretty crap. So in a lot of ways it's good that your DSs' school is trying.

Your "we are all just human" argument doesn't take into account that there are lots of structural inequalities in society e.g. the gender pay gap, multiple inequalities related to ethnicity and class around education, wealth, health. It is important that all young people understand this.

Having said that, it sounds like these issues are being tackled in a way that's not getting through to your sons - so it's clearly not working that well and is actually counter-productive. Might that be a way to start a conversation with the head? To say: I understand what you are trying to do, but it's not having the right impact?

@HelloCrocus It's not just about the past though is it - inequalities are alive and well in the present. To take your slavery example, yes there may be individual examples of black people benefitting financially from slavery but the overall legacy of slavery and colonialism is that white people have better life outcomes (on average of course) than black people.

@HelloCrocus

Iggly - I think the difference is that they're making it sound almost like an innate quality of each race - the original sin of whiteness, the innate tragedy of being black. I think you can teach the historical events of the last few hundred years and the ongoing ramifications of them, without it turning into a lesson on critical race theory. (This isn't me starting an argument about CRT, it's me saying that's where I draw the line at school).

I certainly agree we need to learn lessons from our past, slavery is obviously a huge and relevant one that shows man's capacity to dehumanise his fellow man, so yes - draw that lesson from slavery, definitely.

What I don't want is for children to leave a classroom with a new, or exacerbated, division or resentment or confusion between them because of things that people - maybe people unrelated to them - did centuries ago. They shouldn't have to feel responsible for the past. And it's not always clear-cut in terms of how we each should personally identify with the past - e.g. I've seen one or two episodes of Who Do You Think You Are where the celeb goes to the Caribbean and is horrified to find out that their freed black ancestor bought himself some slaves. Whereas Joe Bloggs white Brit celeb's poor ancestors benefited indirectly from all this by being able to put sugar in their tea and probably little else. Look, it's not my specialist subject so I'll bow out of the topic of Atlantic slavery before I make an idiot of myself... I hope I've managed to make sense in the meantime.

(Not the OP by the way, though rereading my post I seem to be responding as if I am!)

Yes I agree with what you are saying.

But it’s a fine line to tread, to talk about the “inane tragedy of being black” etc without letting our ancestors off the hook.

Without showing we have learnt then we continue with our divisions. I always wonder how Germany as a nation recovered after the Nazi years for example? We don’t seem to have learned the lessons of the British Empire, for example, especially when we still have legacies from that and treat it with rose tinted glasses.

@Iggly re Germany - it took them many decades, a long period of denial and not talking about it, tons of intergenerational controversy and stacks of drama well into the 1980s/1990s. Not an easy process - and of course there was only a tiny Jewish population post-war so that is a big difference from the UK and slavery.

@rotherweird I get that, but what's less clear to me is the ideal role of a secondary school in all that. And I really don't have an answer, but I think if they are going to tackle it, then it needs to be done well, otherwise it could backfire and be quite damaging. In theory teachers should be the experts in getting information across to kids in an appropriate manner, but they are not likely to be experts in the topic of specific structural inequalities, and are therefore vulnerable to using prewritten materials from other organisations that have a political message. And that's where the lines get blurred and critical thinking might be lost. Because these aren't universities, they're secondary schools.

I think YABU. Never heard of schools teaching about the patriarchy, that sounds great to me. And I very much doubt your sons are being called slave owners or told they are bad evil oppressors, sounds like defensiveness about being faced with the facts that as white males, yes they have privileges that other groups don't. It's always the mother of sons who has an issue with these things on Mumsnet. 🙄

I think if your son is genuinely wanting to go to Ukraine and be a man that is unlikely to be something that has come about since a new head arrived at his school in September. Your description of him is really concerning, I hope you can talk to someone and him about his mental health. Also, in any school, if he says that and staff get wind of it that ought to be noted.

@HelloCrocus Yes I do see what you mean. I think that's a general hazard of secondary schools, they are a blunt instrument (e.g. children are liable to emerge hating Shakespeare and Dickens). I also cringe at a lot of the mindset stuff that could in theory be really good but is often delivered in a way that is trite and meaningless.

We must always remember that slavery continues to be a huge problem today.

www.theguardian.com/news/2019/feb/25/modern-slavery-trafficking-persons-one-in-200

I think there is an issue with how issues are handled. In the case of history it is different in that if the syllabus covers the 19th century then the slave trade and the abolitionist would be covered just as the suffragetes would be if this were in the 1900s. These historical topics have been taught in schools since the 1960s it is the approach now that is the problem ie presenting it as the fault of people who live today which clearly it isn't. Teaching history and the facts surrounding this is very different from presenting groups as victims - and teaching about patriarchy in other sessions. I don't believe that scientist should be studied because they have a sexual preference - what is worse is the I have a child who brought homework about the work of AlanTuring in computing , the homework of a powerpoint had to include slides on his private life - this is irrelevant to the topic and for yearn 9 is not appropriate in my view.
I feel we are in a society which is now saying that if you are white and male then you are wrong and it is not in my view the way that schools should be operating.

I feel we are in a society which is now saying that if you are white and male then you are wrong and it is not in my view the way that schools should be operating.

We must live in completely different societies, perhaps on different planets even. Because where I live, society is ran by (predominantly white) men, and women have never been so hated in my lifetime.

I am uncomfortable about all of this division.
We are all just human.

I’m guessing you’re white then.
There is division in the world and many people are still treated less than human.

Just look how many women are raped or killed by men every single day. We absolutely have a problem and it’s not going to go away by ignoring it.

What’s odd is that my school is the opposite - we have to concentrate on white boys.

As a female Science teacher I honestly find this difficult to swallow, as if a white male wants to become a scientist literally nothing will stand in their way. Whereas females and other races have a much more difficult time having a career in the STEM industry.

I find it uncomfortable talking about slavery in a classroom - not because it will offend the white students but because it could make the black and mixed race students feel uncomfortable.
I don’t teach history luckily so I’m able to just have a selection of people so all of the students can aspire to be like them.

It’s uncomfortable but whilst there is still division then it needs to be spoken about.

It’s easier to speak about the past and past mistakes but what needs to be taught is what can be done now.
Racism, slavery, inequality, domestic violence etc is all still really relevant in today’s society so maybe you could speak to the school and ask if after they learn about these things could they do something so they feel like they’re actually helping - fundraising, volunteering etc so your son’s aren’t feeling like they’re just the bad guys all of the time.

I agree with you OP and I would be very worried.

You are absolutely right that this is the kind of teaching that leads straight to radicalization. One of the more chilling things I've heard in recent years was listing to a black academic talk about interviewing a white supremacist - the real kind - who told him how much he appreciated the current type of anti-racism because it was the exact flip side of what he believed. And when people like your sons got tired of being demonized, they still had taken in all that race essentialism without even realizing it and it led straight to him.

Of course kids should learn history, but spending huge swathes of their time learning racialized interpretations of it, as if they were not even controversial among historians, is crazy. Even something like slavery - modern slavery of Africans and their descendents is a tiny sliver of the history of slavery in human societies, and it can't be understood without looking at those societies as well. Yet I consistently meet young people who aren't even aware that slaves historically were of all races and enslaved by all races. But even the amount of time spend on this stuff is out of proportion, and kids end up missing out on so much other stuff.

I doubt though you can get the school to change - I'd remove them.

White straight men are easily the most privileged people in our society… if your sons fit into this category I’m not sure why you wouldn’t want them to be aware of that fact?

Meh. Lots of issues. These conversations need to be had, but context is everything.
I think who teaches is really important. I teach primary (upper KS2) and ensure that I address issues arising from our curriculum and place them in a historical and political context, including class analysis and exploration of how narratives benefit the powerful, as a matter of course. It has to be done if you are to facilitate learning and understanding in depth. My colleague, on the other hand, 25 years my junior and largely uninterested in anything vaguely 'struggle' or 'inequality' but all about empowerment, has managed to deliver inanely 1-dimensional content when the opportunity has presented itself to explore some real, important historical issues, events, movements and figures. Missed opportunities.
I am lucky to work with a community of parents who support and expect their children to be having these conversations, and who would roast me as a professional if I did not step up and create relevant learning opportunities when openings arose.
My DC's primary, which is largely white suburban, used to be totally underwhelming in this respect, until they appointed a black member of SLT who radically re-worked how conversations around race, class and sex are supported at their school. It irks me that it took the appointment of a black colleague for my DC's school to find a proactive stance in these matters, when it should have been happening all along, but there we are, that's the issue right there.

YABU

If your sons are uncomfortable I suggest they find ways to channel that discomfort into improving the world around them.

Learning about LGBT scientists or the historical context to the oppression faced by many in society will do them no harm.

I’m placing a bet on you being one of the “political correctness gone mad” types and are blowing it out of proportion anyway.

Is there anything else you object to your children being taught? Everything you listed sounds both accurate and age appropriate

@MangyInseam

I agree with you OP and I would be very worried.

You are absolutely right that this is the kind of teaching that leads straight to radicalization. One of the more chilling things I've heard in recent years was listing to a black academic talk about interviewing a white supremacist - the real kind - who told him how much he appreciated the current type of anti-racism because it was the exact flip side of what he believed. And when people like your sons got tired of being demonized, they still had taken in all that race essentialism without even realizing it and it led straight to him.

Of course kids should learn history, but spending huge swathes of their time learning racialized interpretations of it, as if they were not even controversial among historians, is crazy. Even something like slavery - modern slavery of Africans and their descendents is a tiny sliver of the history of slavery in human societies, and it can't be understood without looking at those societies as well. Yet I consistently meet young people who aren't even aware that slaves historically were of all races and enslaved by all races. But even the amount of time spend on this stuff is out of proportion, and kids end up missing out on so much other stuff.

I doubt though you can get the school to change - I'd remove them.

I’m not disagreeing that all types of slavery should be taught, however I think you would find it hard to argue that the triangle trade hasn’t had the most impact on the world today.

It’s like saying world war 2 should be taught as if it was equivalent to other wars. Same for Holocaust vs other genocides etc etc

OP 2-3 women die a week in this country at the hands of men.

Sexual assaults including rape have dramatically risen in secondary schools. 9 out of 10 victims are girls. 8 out of 10 perpetrators are boys.

Men commit 98% of sexually violent crime.

I mean I could go on. It's statistics.

Sorry if it makes you uncomfortable.

I’m not disagreeing that all types of slavery should be taught, however I think you would find it hard to argue that the triangle trade hasn’t had the most impact on the world today.

The real issue is that children don't even understand that because they have an utterly warped view of the whole idea of slavery and why it happens. Slavery is a completely ubiquitous human institution until about five seconds ago, and what's more, almost universally it was not seen as controversial or weird or problematic in those societies. On the contrary it was seen as just and the natural order of things.

You cannot understand the modern slave trade without understanding that and how and why that thinking began to change, and how it happened.

Students however are not taught in a way that allows them to understand the values and thoughts of very different cultures and times, or how the constructions in those societies functioned structurally, or in many cases even much about those cultures at all. So they never do understand the societies they are presented with, or our own society. They have one lens and it is not a sophisticated one.

OP, you might try picking up John McWhorter's new book on identity politics, he also has quite a few podcasts talking about it. He discusses a lot of the points you mention.