Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Very Interesting Side by Side Comparisons of CA and TX History Textbooks

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Very Interesting Side by Side Comparisons of CA and TX History Textbooks

    Unfortunately, one needs to have a NYT subscription but for those who are able to read the whole article, here is the link

    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...gtype=Homepage

    Some representative snippets
    .

    California notes the suburban dream of the 1950s was inaccessible to many African-Americans

    Texas does not.



    ...
    California states that the federal government failed to recognize nonbinary gender identities and female leaders in its early relations with Native Americans.

    Texas does not mention gender roles or gender identity in its discussion of efforts to “Americanize” Native Americans.


    ...

    Both states focus on women’s fight against discrimination in the workplace. Only California says birth control played a role, by “allowing women to exert greater control over their sexuality and family planning.”





    For every case, there are actually two images showing the relevant pages from the CA and TX textbooks

    I read some new things which were not in the textbooks when my children were students (and I developed a habit to actually read all their history related textbooks at the end of semester when I wanted to learn more about the US history).
    My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

  • #2
    I don’t know about the US but I suspect that failing to recognize non binary gender identities doesn’t rank very highly on the list of complaints of Canadian First Nations.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by DingBat View Post
      I don’t know about the US but I suspect that failing to recognize non binary gender identities doesn’t rank very highly on the list of complaints of Canadian First Nations.
      This was one of the things that was not in my kids' textbook (in CA).

      I did some quick research and found that wiki actually mentions a cultural anthropology term used to describe certain native American figures who did not have the usual gender roles

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-spirit

      The term two spirit was adopted in English, and created in Ojibwe, in 1990 at the third annual Native American/First Nations gay and lesbian conference in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, as a replacement for berdache.[4]

      ...


      Since historically, many "berdache/two-spirit" individuals held religious or spiritual roles, the term two spirit creates a disconnection from the past.

      ...

      [In Ojibwe cultures] Sex usually determined one's gender, and therefore one's work, but the Ojibwe accepted variation. Men who chose to function as women were called ikwekaazo, meaning 'one who endeavors to be like a woman'. Women who functioned as men were called ininiikaazo, meaning, 'one who endeavors to be like a man'. The French called these people berdaches. Ikwekaazo and ininiikaazo could take spouses of their own sex. Their mates were not considered ikwekaazo or ininiikaazo, however, because their function in society was still in keeping with their sex. If widowed, the spouse of an ikwekaazoor ininiikaazo could remarry someone of the opposite sex or another ikwekaazo or ininiikaazo. The ikwekaazowag worked and dressed like women. The ininiikaazowag worked and dressed like men. Both were considered to be strong spiritually, and they were always honoured, especially during ceremonies.
      [28]

      https://crl.ucsd.edu/~elman/Courses/...s/williams.pdf

      and also

      https://www.britannica.com/topic/berdache

      The term berdache was first used in Italian in the 15th century, recorded in French in 1548, in Spanish (cognate term) in the first quarter of the 16th century, and first applied to American Indians by the Spanish in the late 16th century. The term was published in The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents, Volume 59, published between 1667 and 1669. The Jesuits recorded the observations of numerous missionaries and traders who had witnessed men in women’s clothing, work roles, and sexual roles.
      My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

      Comment


      • #4
        Another term of which I was not aware was the "Lavender Scare"

        The same link describes how besides the "Red Scare" (which is mentioned in both states and it is common knowledge) California also mentions (while TX does not) the systematic targeting of gays in the government (Lavender Scare) because they were perceived as national security risk.

        The interesting thing is that at a time when society had stigmatized and even criminalized sexual behavior, it was logical to argue that such characteristic could be exploited by foreign secret services to blackmail gays in key government positions who just had to hide their sexual identity.
        I see such information important for highlighting the consequences that regulations and laws on morality can bring to common people.





        My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

        Comment


        • #5
          I read through the article. The NYT's bias in favor of Progressivism and the Left shows all through it.

          For instance, if you scroll down some a topic is headed with:

          White resistance to black progress
          is covered differently in the two states.
          The NYT sides with California's racist interpretation (eg., a "White Privilege" version) of suburban flight that isn't present in the Texas version.

          The California version has highlighted: "Movement of some white (sic) Americans from cities to suburbs was driven by a desire to get away from more culturally diverse neighborhoods."

          The Texas version has highlighted: "Some people wished to escape the crime and congestion of the city."

          The California version is bigoted. It makes assumptions about one group of Americans and their motives without proof. It goes on to make an issue out of race and racism that is totally lacking in the Texas version. Seems to me this is just more bigotry and racism coming from the Left like it so often does.

          Of course, my experience with McGraw-Hill textbooks is they are generally crap so it really is kind of a moot point trying as the NYT does to point out the differences. It's more easily apparent in their science and math textbooks where idiocy, wrong information, and the same sort of political correctness are apparent.

          Comment


          • #6
            When I was teaching we were asked to review some text books some companies were trying to sell us. There were about four different companies and they were written on different levels. One was great! It had software and other teacher aids! I was tempted to keep it!

            In Student Teacher class, we were floored to see how the curriculum had changed since we were in high school. I learned about the Seneca Falls conference. This was a lesson on how Woman's Rights started. Can someone say "Politically Correct"? We had to cover a large number different subjects. How do you cover Greek and Roman civilization with a day or two each?

            Pruitt
            Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

            Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

            by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

            Comment


            • #7
              I remember one particularly idiotic one where the lesson was on electricity. It told the student that turbines produce electricity and at another point said that a generator was "two magnets connect by a wire." All that is utterly stupid and so wrong it hurts.

              Comment


              • #8
                Too bad California Students rank second to last. I guess they probably won't make that good of indoctrinated revolutionaries because they won't be able to read the socialist tracts. They will just get confused and attack the rich politicians that California sends to Congress and the Silicon Valley executives.

                We hunt the hunters

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by DingBat View Post
                  I don’t know about the US but I suspect that failing to recognize non binary gender identities doesn’t rank very highly on the list of complaints of Canadian First Nations.
                  A friend of mine was invited to the annual Ottawa Pow Wow up in Michigan a couple of years ago, and was positively surprised to find that the traditional dance competitions these days accept non-gender-specific entrants. So I wouldn't be altogether too sure about that.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The problem with bringing up Native American cultural norms or ideas is that they're mostly, if not entirely, irrelevant to the other 98% of the population and the nation as a whole. That is, they are no more relevant than say Japanese culture, or the culture of the Aztecs.

                    Yes, yes... The Left makes a social equivalence argument that all cultures have equal relevance but that's just moronic. That argument falls apart once you begin to look at specifics from various cultures and compare them.

                    So, arguing that in Native American culture gender fluidity, to use the now popular with the Left term, is accepted doesn't argue that American culture and society as a whole has to somehow accept that as well outside Native American cultures on reservations.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Go back and watch Little Big Man. Little Horse would have stole the movie if not for Chief Dan George. He was always asking if Jack Crabb wanted to go lie on Soft Furs...

                      Pruitt
                      Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

                      Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

                      by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                        I read through the article. The NYT's bias in favor of Progressivism and the Left shows all through it.

                        For instance, if you scroll down some a topic is headed with:



                        The NYT sides with California's racist interpretation (eg., a "White Privilege" version) of suburban flight that isn't present in the Texas version.

                        The California version has highlighted: "Movement of some white (sic) Americans from cities to suburbs was driven by a desire to get away from more culturally diverse neighborhoods."

                        The Texas version has highlighted: "Some people wished to escape the crime and congestion of the city."

                        The California version is bigoted. It makes assumptions about one group of Americans and their motives without proof. It goes on to make an issue out of race and racism that is totally lacking in the Texas version. Seems to me this is just more bigotry and racism coming from the Left like it so often does.

                        Of course, my experience with McGraw-Hill textbooks is they are generally crap so it really is kind of a moot point trying as the NYT does to point out the differences. It's more easily apparent in their science and math textbooks where idiocy, wrong information, and the same sort of political correctness are apparent.
                        The NYT is a credible journalistic/news organization. They just don't hire anyone off the street like your media does.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The truth is we don't know very much about ourselves. Because most of science is reductionist it struggles with complex chaotic systems. This is true of everything from climate change to human dimorphism.

                          We could turn to psychological and other social sciences to understand human sexuality but any honest appraisal of those sciences will note they are lacking in rigor. If we turn to biology and neurology the important role of culture may be minimized.

                          We now have hybrid sciences such as evolutionary psychology that in theory could answer important questions about human sexuality but they rely heavily on statistical analysis that most people find unsatisfying.

                          The bottom line is that we don't even understand consciousness yet alone the interplay between consciousness and sexual instinct. Still the fact that many languages have extensive gendered expressions speaks to how important the concept of gender is to cognition. That is not to say we should confuse sex with gender. What it does mean is that the confusion over sex and gender degrades cognition.

                          There is even some physical evidence to support how dangerous mucking around with cultural norms can be.

                          Brain white matter fractional anisotropy remained unchanged in the GD girl during pubertal suppression with GnRHa for 28 months, which may be related to the reduced serum testosterone levels and/or to the patient's baseline low average cognitive
                          performance.Global performance on the Weschler scale was slightly lower during pubertal suppression compared to baseline, predominantly due to a reduction in operational memory. Either a baseline of low average cognition or the hormonal status could play a role in cognitive performance during pubertal suppression. The voice pattern during the follow-up seemed to reflect testosterone levels under suppression by GnRHa treatment.
                          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5694455/

                          While the above is more likely due to the violence done to the brain by hormonal augmentation than cultural effects it still shows that shifts in cultural norms have physiological side effects that effect cognitive ability.

                          If not the goal then at least one of the side effects of accepting gender fluidity as a key consequence of the influence of post modernism is reduced general cognitive ability. Just as communism proved intellectually dysgenic in ever country besides East Germany the replacement utopian ideologies likely are having the same effect. It is as if woke culture is intentionally dumbing society down. It is just one of the "drugs" and cultural phenomenons introduced in the 1960s that are reducing societies ability to maintain complexity.

                          We live in a harsh but stable environment subject to sudden existential shifts. The importation of cultural norms evolutionarily selected for in easy but unstable environments such as those associated with hunter gather societies is ludicrous.
                          We hunt the hunters

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                            The problem with bringing up Native American cultural norms or ideas is that they're mostly, if not entirely, irrelevant to the other 98% of the population and the nation as a whole. That is, they are no more relevant than say Japanese culture, or the culture of the Aztecs.

                            Yes, yes... The Left makes a social equivalence argument that all cultures have equal relevance but that's just moronic. That argument falls apart once you begin to look at specifics from various cultures and compare them.

                            So, arguing that in Native American culture gender fluidity, to use the now popular with the Left term, is accepted doesn't argue that American culture and society as a whole has to somehow accept that as well outside Native American cultures on reservations.
                            The study of other cultures does not imply an effort to adopt their norms. Yes, students learn about the human sacrifices in the Aztec culture and other such irrelevant in modern times cultural norms. I have not heard any complaint against studying such irrelevant topics. And of course, if a topic is relevant to 2% of the population today (and I do not know if this percentage is correct), it still has value

                            Bypassing the fact that I have not read any argument in middle and highschool textbooks that all cultures have equal relevance (nor that their norms have moral equivalency), how can one compare cultures when he does not learn about their norms that are not that relevant today? And comparative studies are actually very useful in every field, including history.

                            So, yes, we agree that the teaching itself of some Native American cultures accepting gender fluidity doe not mean that American society as a whole will have to accept gender fluidity anymore than the teaching of human sacrifice in some Native cultures teaches us that we have to accept the same. But the knowledge of how gender fluidity in other cultures can still raise some interesting questions about ourselves and our culture: Why our more tolerant in general culture became less tolerant to that part of the population which was gender fluid? Is there a legitimate fear that gender fluidity can destroy our society and corrupt our families or is such fear an excuse for justifying a more oppressive moral system?
                            My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              In 20 years of teaching, part of which was teaching history, I have never seen an adequate middle or high school history book. I finally would not use one and had the students construct their own from handouts and notes. I told them if they did a conscientious job with it they could use it for reference in high school. Some of them did.

                              I was tasked one year with buying a new history text which would supposedly last for five years. The one I finally chose and justified before the central office was the best of a bad lot. Too much 'gee whiz' stuff and not enough text or subjects. What was noteworthy was what was left out.

                              The publisher representative of one that I did not choose was irate and wanted to see me. Before she arrived, I marked the pages in the Revolutionary and Civil War chapters that had errors, and it was more than a few. When she saw that she packed up and left and I heard nothing further from her.
                              We are not now that strength which in old days
                              Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                              Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                              To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X