![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Let's talk about Thanksgiving.
Nov. 27th, 2008 01:20 pm
There's a recent kerfuffle about it, you know. Some (Native American) woman out in CA is upset that her son's kindergarten dressed up in Pilgrim and Indian costumes for the holiday. She says they're inaccurate and offensive. (And they're no more accurate for the Pilgrims than for the Native Americans, let me just note.)
Cue the responses: Oh, PC has gone too far! Oh, whatever happened to teaching children history? Oh, she just wants to ruin children's fun!
Now, the first just annoys me, because what people call "PC going too far" is what I like to call "good manners" - don't do things that you know upset people unless you have a good reason for it. (What constitutes a good reason is something I'm sure you'll enjoy figuring out for yourself.)
It's very funny when you consider people going "PC! TOO FAR!" are often the same people decrying the lack of manners and morals in today's youth. I don't know about you, but I always thought manners and morals started at home. How mannerly and moral is it to teach your children that it's okay to do and say offensive things just because you've always done it?
As far as history goes, I'm all for it. I agree, we should teach children history. Teach them accurate history. And, as much as possible, get rid of textbooks and work from first-hand accounts. That's not happening here, though. The "history" being taught is simply stories. Why teach children fictions that they'll simply have to unlearn later? (And for that matter, why does it matter to teach children the history behind Thanksgiving? Isn't it more important to teach them why we celebrate it now? To talk to them about feeling thankful and appreciating what they have? About sharing with others and helping people with less? Why do we have to bring the past into it at all at that age? Focus on the important things first, then do the history when they're old enough to get the unexpurgated version.)
And the last, "ruining children's fun", that one just pisses me off. (Especially when phrased, as one lovely person put it, as "the needs of the few trampling on the needs of the many". Since when is "dressing up" - no matter how inoffensive the costume - a need of children? It's pleasant, but surely they don't need it? (Surely they can do it on their own time?) Of course, this person went on to say that the NA woman should "go back where she came from", so I'm not entirely sure he got the point.)
As I see it, children won't have their fun ruined if they don't realize they're supposed to be having fun. If you spend the day before Thanksgiving telling stories about what other people you love do for you (and what you do for them), if you make handprint turkeys, if you make pumpkin pudding or popcorn in class? The kids won't realize they're "missing out". In fact, they won't be missing out. They'll be having just as much fun *without* being inaccurate and potentially racist.
But that would require changing instead of whining, I guess.
Cue the responses: Oh, PC has gone too far! Oh, whatever happened to teaching children history? Oh, she just wants to ruin children's fun!
Now, the first just annoys me, because what people call "PC going too far" is what I like to call "good manners" - don't do things that you know upset people unless you have a good reason for it. (What constitutes a good reason is something I'm sure you'll enjoy figuring out for yourself.)
It's very funny when you consider people going "PC! TOO FAR!" are often the same people decrying the lack of manners and morals in today's youth. I don't know about you, but I always thought manners and morals started at home. How mannerly and moral is it to teach your children that it's okay to do and say offensive things just because you've always done it?
As far as history goes, I'm all for it. I agree, we should teach children history. Teach them accurate history. And, as much as possible, get rid of textbooks and work from first-hand accounts. That's not happening here, though. The "history" being taught is simply stories. Why teach children fictions that they'll simply have to unlearn later? (And for that matter, why does it matter to teach children the history behind Thanksgiving? Isn't it more important to teach them why we celebrate it now? To talk to them about feeling thankful and appreciating what they have? About sharing with others and helping people with less? Why do we have to bring the past into it at all at that age? Focus on the important things first, then do the history when they're old enough to get the unexpurgated version.)
And the last, "ruining children's fun", that one just pisses me off. (Especially when phrased, as one lovely person put it, as "the needs of the few trampling on the needs of the many". Since when is "dressing up" - no matter how inoffensive the costume - a need of children? It's pleasant, but surely they don't need it? (Surely they can do it on their own time?) Of course, this person went on to say that the NA woman should "go back where she came from", so I'm not entirely sure he got the point.)
As I see it, children won't have their fun ruined if they don't realize they're supposed to be having fun. If you spend the day before Thanksgiving telling stories about what other people you love do for you (and what you do for them), if you make handprint turkeys, if you make pumpkin pudding or popcorn in class? The kids won't realize they're "missing out". In fact, they won't be missing out. They'll be having just as much fun *without* being inaccurate and potentially racist.
But that would require changing instead of whining, I guess.
