STEINER WALDORF SCHOOLS AND INSTITUTIONS #2

[zzooey]

The steiner waldorf thread ran to a halt because apparently a 1000 messages are a maximum. Let's continue here!!

You're welcome, Pete, although once again you fail to stipulate your own postulate as true even for the purposes of a discussion.

"you fail to stipulate your own postulate as true..."

What can that possibly mean?

She always talks that way, Janni, don't bother trying to make sense of it.

Isenhart, what "captive audience" would that be at Mothering? Is participation there obligatory for some people?

And I guess you've dropped the question of whether Steiner held some races at the top of a hierarchy, and are going to worry about other postulates instead?

Isenhart can turn pretty nasty when you point out the nonsense in what she writes, but she doesn't have the attention span to be embarrassed about it for long, and will come back very soon for more of the same, on a slightly changed topic. Sort of like that guy Filo, for those who followed his musings on the critics list awhile back.

what did the elephant say to the naked man in the jungle?

The general anthroposophical apology for the racist elements in Steiner goes like this: Anything that has the word spiritual attached can't be racist. That's it - that's all you need to know. I am a spiritual person, who follows a spiritual philosophy (I go to anthroposophical study groups or what have you) - I cannot be a racist - it isn't possible. Steiner spoke of the spirit worlds, he went into some kind of a trance and learned all about spirit worlds and the astral plane - this is the mark of an advanced soul and thus Steiner can't have been racist - it isn't possible. I send my kids to this holistic place and I eat organic foods and buy expensive natural cotton fiber clothing for my children. I therefore cannot be a racist - it isn't possible. Isenhart is always happy to demonstrate this thinking for us, it is pretty much as deep as her thinking goes.

How do you eat with that?

I just took a quick peek at the Waldorf discussion at Mothering and I see a thread entitled "Where do you buy little baskets?" - this is a good Waldorf thread, this is what the moderators and the Waldorf defenders of the faith over there want to see. Deborah and Linda breathe sighs of relief when "Where do you buy little baskets" rise to the top of the list again, or "How do you dye felt" or "Which grain do you eat on Tuesday" or "How do you advise I shut out my relatives who won't do everything in the correct Steiner method."

Those are examples of "supportive" threads, "nonadversarial" threads, non-"agenda"-based threads.

I tried a number of times in my ornery way to point out, a couple of years ago, that this pabulum is just as f*ing "agenda-based" as anything critical of the education that anyone might post, but no one was impressed by my reasoning. Or, I suspect, they took my point, and they realize full well they're pushing an "agenda." It's just that the PRO Steiner agenda is welcome at Mothering and critical perspectives - unless buffered by dozens of exculpatory "Where do you buy little basket" posts - are not.

What? Eat with what?

And there's a lot of superiourity in that as well. We're spiritual, so unlike the rest of you, we can say anything, we're still the good people. Nothing can bring us down from that position. Racist junk that noone else would get away with believing in, is ok because they do it from a superiour viewpoint.

"You're welcome, Pete, although once again you fail to stipulate your own postulate as true even for the purposes of a discussion."

Which postulate? That Anthroposophists lack the humor (humour)gene? You want me to stipulate that this is true so that we can discuss this?

You've lost me already... What do you care do discuss? And what truth do you feel I'm backing away from?

NorthernRefugee -

"If the blonds and blue-eyed people die out, the human race will become increasingly dense...Blond hair actually bestows intelligence. In the case of fair people, less nourishment is driven into the eyes and hair; it remains instead in the brain and endows it with intelligence. Brown- and dark-haired people drive the substances into their eyes and hair that the fair people retain in their brains."

I am at a loss for words
I hope for my families sake its true lol we could do with some brain cells staying in!!!!!

Seriously there is no one going to post on here saying they believe this to be the truth

Some of the Anthropologists and Stiener people on this site type quite eloquently they cannot believe this stuff unless they are being brain washed,
I am gobsmacked that the that the U.K government gives them money that is a disgusting use of my tax money and everyone elses that could be used to help raise the standards of education for all children

Diana - I love your posts.

Does it hurt when you stipulate a postulate?

And where do you buy those little baskets?

"What? Eat with what?"

See the elephant joke a little earlier in the thread.

"Anything that has the word spiritual attached can't be racist."

Kinda like that - yes. Maybe more like - "there is no such thing as racism in the spirit world". But then... That's not exactly true either. In fact, Steiner set up a system of spiritual hierarchies just like he set up racial hierarchies. So yeah... there IS such a thing as spiritual racism... only as humans, we're removed from it. In fact, as humans, we wouldn't even know spiritual racism existed if (lucky us) Steiner hadn't told us all about it.

Oh got it thanks Pete.

Likewise Janni

There were multiple suggestions as to where to buy the baskets, like nine posts in a few minutes' time. They were obviously relieved to be talking about something other than whether maybe an unsavory, poorly disguised theory of racial categories and racial hierarchies lurks somewhere in Steinerland.

And I don't know about Deborah, but I can tell you Linda doesn't care where to buy little baskets. Linda is there to challenge critics and/or soothe doubters and innocent questioners of Waldorf on those threads (and the occasional totally innocent VICTIM of a recent Steiner fiasco who just wants to tell what happened). Linda is the definition of an "agenda" based poster at Mothering.

They're really nutty over there. I was reading a little in the temperament thread. They're even getting nervous about that now. David says his school splits into 5 groups instead of four - for the Olympics. Why distort something like that. There are four teams for the four temperaments. Here is a Waldorf description.

Sorry - I meant four groupings - not teams. They don't compete in teams... they compete as individuals... Cholerics with cholerics... etc.

Just went to see what the latest was over there, and read the thread about the little boy who wants to read, his mother says hesitantly, guiltily, and slightly resentfully, "What harm can it do?"

My question is WHY can't someone who defends Steiner, believes in Steiner, even own up to what the philosophy holds. Why do people have to act like bluetrain is bad and wrong and inserting an evil influence for pointing out WHAT THE PHILOSOPHY SAYS. The philosophy DOES say that it is harmful to him to read - a Steiner teacher who is being honest will definitely tell you it is not desirable for him to read at this age. Why do they deny it if they believe in it?

My answer is I think most of them DO KNOW AND FEEL deep down that something is wrong there - that to be true to their own children they have to wiggle and slide around the facts at the Steiner school. No one can come right out and sign on the dotted line with half the wacko stuff the school actually espouses. People like Linda and Deborah are there to lie outright about what the philosphy teaches; the other mums there are just ordinary Steiner mums - nervous, neurotic, insecure in their parenting and looking for guidance. They're actually perfectly aware two-thirds of it is bats. They don't have the confidence to leave and go it alone without a structure like that, even a wacky structure from a questionable guru is better than no structure. That's my take. And I actually mean no offense to any of those mothers because I was just like that when we were in Steiner, that's why I see it.

When my DS1 was in kindergarten he was already a fluent reader, having been (unhappily) in another school. By the end of KG he was bored rigid by ring time and his KG teacher confessed to me in a conspiratorial way that she had given him a book and sent him off to read! You could tell this was a REALLY big deal for her!!

DS1 would have been doing the Olympics this term had he not left Steiner. I have never before heard this about them grouping them according to the temperaments, even though I have many friends whose children have been through it.

What an extraordinary labelling experience that must be for the children!

Diana, I so agree with Janni, your posts are spot on YAY!

Janni
"Does it hurt when you stipulate a postulate?"

OOf,! ouch! I'm clutching my postulate....

Apparently, according to a discussion site in the US, one of their rules is not to mention it's name on other discussion boards.

People get alerts from the moderator about it apparently.

They watch these discussions, and then try and guess who is who.
Strange.
Is it legal to do that?

I think Diana's description of Steiner Waldorf parents is so true,

"I think most of them DO KNOW AND FEEL deep down that something is wrong there - that to be true to their own children they have to wiggle and slide around the facts at the Steiner school. No one can come right out and sign on the dotted line with half the wacko stuff the school actually espouses. People like Linda and Deborah are there to lie outright about what the philosphy teaches; the other mums there are just ordinary Steiner mums - nervous, neurotic, insecure in their parenting and looking for guidance. They're actually perfectly aware two-thirds of it is bats. They don't have the confidence to leave and go it alone without a structure like that, even a wacky structure from a questionable guru is better than no structure."

There's some real complacence in Steiner Waldorf circles too.....

One Steiner Waldorf parent explains what attracted her to the education, which wasn't the usual things like delayed academics, the spiritual or natural healthy aspects, it was because the students "were very cool."

Talk about superficial reason ...

the same mother likens living with her Steiner educated children to living with The Bloomsbury Group. So that means living with a bunch of middle class, bourgois diletantes, who look down on those they feel are inferior, make some second rate crafts and sleep around in various strange combinations.
Yes, sounds like Steiner school kids, the exception being that the Bloomsbury group could actually paint rather than copy.

I also second Diana's description of the mental gymnastics which Steiner mums (in particular) perform, to reassure themselves they're doing right by their children, even though they know it's all a bit strange..