Is Scholastic Press Creating a Generation of Illiterate White Boys?

Spread the love

Loading

PJ Media’s Matt Margolis recently wrote an excellent piece about the kids’ book publisher Scholastic Press pushing the extremism of The Radical Left onto our kids. The post went up shortly after I found myself scratching my head at the flyer from Scholastic that Little Bob had brought home from school. Of course, if we see something that will capture his imagination and stoke a desire to read I don’t mind eating a few bucks. After he & Sister Babe looked through it together, Little Bob wasn’t all that interested in anything. So I decided to flip through and now I see why. The cover page of the pamphlet immediately sent warning signals:
 

 
Right at the top we see the banner proclaiming “CELEBRATING DIVERSITY”, which is of course, Leftspeak for “straight white males need not apply”. If my interpretation sounds a bit extreme, I looked through the entire booklet and will share my findings – let me know in the comments if you agree. But before we proceed let’s go back to this cover page. Although the first two books advertised feature a boy on their covers, as you look across the page they are the only two of the three featuring boys among the 13 offered. It goes downhill from here, and that’s before you see book shown off front and center is authored by near-illiterate leftist Lebron James. Onto page 2!
 

 
In the upper left corner we see three books about a nerdy white boy, of which would be the last sighting of a white boy on these pages. For real, not on the next two:
 

 
And not on the back cover, either:
 

 
So among the 81 titles, only five have white boys on them. Lest this sound like I’m grousing about “representation”, well I guess I am. Given how much The Radical Left likes equity and representation, somehow I don’t think that taking a demographic that’s probably around a quarter of our country’ population featured in 6% of your books. Not all books featured fictional kids from the diversity checklist – there were also some biographies and topical books. And this will shock you, but none of the biographies featured white men. Heaven forbid the kids learn about our founding fathers, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Edison, the Apollo astronauts, war heroes, etc.

And of course, the white boys featured are geeky and awkward. Not that I have any issue with this, as I have a bit of experience with childhood geeky awkwardness. But where are the inspirational stories? Where are the stories targeted toward traditional role models for little boys – such as growing up to be a cop, firefighter, soldier, astronaut, pro athlete, or the guy who runs the big machine? For that matter, while he was hardly an alpha male he was no cuck either – where is Encyclopedia Freakin’ Brown?

Any lefties reading my complaint are probably chuckling, “Ha – now it’s wrong when it’s happening to you?” Just like the “Anti-racist” radical Left, emulating bad past behavior that you know is wrong makes you even worse than our ancestors who didn’t know any better. Even worse, now this is targeting children, another favorite pastime of Left Wing Extremists. The solutions aren’t difficult – blend in more kids and variety, or expand the pages if you don’t want to drop any of your precious “Diversity” books. Because at the end of the day, turning your backs on such a large chunk of our nation’s kids is not good for any of us in the long run. Unless of course, the goal is to destroy America, in which case it all makes sense.

Brother Bob is no longer on Facebook (although you can see his archives there), and is winding down his presence on Twitter, but is ramping up on Minds and Gab, as well as Parler and GETTR, and has his biggest presence on MeWe.

Cross posted from Brother Bob’s Blog

0 0 votes
Article Rating
110 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

If you look up “snowflake” in the dictionary, it now shows a photo of Brother Bob typing up this post. Cucktastic.

That’s a transparent attempt at deflection from your own lameness.

Having handed out Scholastic flyers for the past thirty-two years, I can assure you that the overwhelming majority of books in that time—in the middle grades, at any rate—have featured white male protagonists.

The last flyer came in about a week ago. It included these titles:

Who was Roald Dahl?
Who was Nicholas Tesla?
Who was Stephen Hawking?
Who was Albert Einstein?
Who was Babe Ruth?
Who was John F. Kennedy?
What was D-Day?
What was Pearl Harbor?
10 True Tales of D-Day Heroes
10 True Tales of Vietnam War Heroes
Last Kids on Earth: Thrilling Tales From the Tree House

Are those manly and/or white enough for you? Yes, there were also books with black people, Native Americans, girls, dogs, and dragons as protagonists.

Perhaps you could send your flier to the school district that presented the flier BB is discussing? That would be the only way for yours to cancel out the reality of his.

That would be the only way for yours to cancel out the reality of his.

Incorrect. He’s condemning Scholastic as a whole on the basis of the one flyer he saw from his kid’s class. If that one flyer doesn’t represent the Scholastic offerings as a whole, then his complaint is misguided.

And you are trying to disprove him with ONE FLYER. The one he presented happens to be from the much-discussed Virginia education system. If you read the article, he criticizes the “Scholastic Press” organization which, as he proves with evidence, presents radical leftist indoctrination. You have a flyer from a school system that doesn’t. Does that prove BB is presenting a false argument? Well… nope. It simply shows there are some schools that still try to educate instead of indoctrinate.

And you are trying to disprove him with ONE FLYER. 

Incorrect again. I’m speaking from the experience of having used Scholastic Book Clubs in my classroom for the past thirty-two years.

You have a flyer from a school system that doesn’t. Does that prove BB is presenting a false argument? Well… nope. It simply shows there are some schools that still try to educate instead of indoctrinate.

The Scholastic offerings don’t vary from district to district. The same flyers go to all fifth-grade teachers in the country, all third-grade teachers in the country, and so on. You clearly don’t know what you’re talking about. Maybe you should sit this one out, champ. At the very least, learn some facts before you start pounding the keys.

Watch out Mikey has pulled both the race and gender card, duck and cover! How much abuse does it take for a white male to be trained to attack himself?

In what way have I attacked myself?

You can see the flyers on the Scholastic web site.

I can assure you that the overwhelming majority of books in that time—in the middle grades, at any rate—have featured white male protagonists.

Probably because the majority of people in the US are white, and the women buying these books are married to white males…raising their white male and female children.

*peruses all the special Black Content on Netflix, Amazon Prime, and every other steaming service”

Hmmm…movies and books about Obama, Oprah, Johnson from BET…wow.

It’s a shame all those evil white men NEVER did anything to help lift Black Voices and Lives up to be equal.

Those idiots from PETA have said feeding your kid meat is a form of Child Abuse while they try to force their stupid ideologies and lifestyles on the kids

What does that have to do with anything?

Much more than your post on handing out flyers, has anything to do with Children who cant pass tests so the school just drops testing.
Has teaching changed any in the past 30 years?

Much more than your post on handing out flyers

How do you figure?

Has teaching changed in the last 30 years? Are the children even learning the basics anymore? I can point to test scores dropping like a rock since Carter while we spend more on each student.
Why do you hate children?

Last edited 2 years ago by kitt

Scholastic has created a generation of thoughtful and enthusiastic young readers, and provided them with commendable heroes. Harry Potter, anyone?

“Illiterate white boys” are generally their parents’ fault.

Last edited 2 years ago by Greg

The author has been culture cancelled Greggie.

The author has been culture cancelled Greggie.

Culture-cancelled all the way to the bank. I really feel for her.

“Culture-cancelled all the way to the bank. I really feel for her.”
Just like a stereotype leftist, jealous of someone elses success. She had no silver spoon.
Shame on you. The author was cancelled because she knew science. xx xy

Just like a stereotype leftist, jealous of someone elses success. She had no silver spoon.

Just like a stereotypical Righty to not understand that being cancelled would mean that she has no way to get her ideas out in the public. She’s still selling her old books and publishing more. The Harry Potterverse is doing just fine. What you’re describing is people disagreeing with her. Disagreement and cancellation are not the same thing. Shame on you for not understanding that.

The author has been culture cancelled Greggie.

Only by those who have no culture, Miss Kitty. She’s widely respected, and enormously wealthy from what she created.

To all appearances, you’re basing your entire burst of performative outrage on the book flyer for one month.

I don’t see the left encouraging it, so much as trying to be supportive of parents who wind up in that situation. I think it’s a result of an overly materialistic consumer culture, where people are made to believe that happiness comes from the endless acquisition of more and better things. It’s making us shallow, selfish, unhappy, and incapable of recognizing what truly matters.

Last edited 2 years ago by Greg

“Illiterate white boys” are generally their parents’ fault.

Yet when parents take an active part in their children’s education, the FBI deems them “terrorists” and threatens to “investigate” them.

Yet when parents take an active part in their children’s education, the FBI….

How about you provide a specific example of that? Preferably without going off on a rant about one of your favorite political hot-button issues…

Last edited 2 years ago by Greg

Where is it that you spend your waking hours? Do you rely entirely upon leftist media to tell you what to say, what to ask and what to answer? Do you know ANYTHING outside the leftist propaganda bubble?

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/577065-state-school-board-leaves-national-association-saying-they-called

https://www.newsweek.com/concerned-about-your-childs-school-you-might-domestic-terrorist-opinion-1635751

This would almost be funny, if NSBA wasn’t actually asking the feds to prosecute parents who voice widely held opinions as “domestic terrorists.” Scarier still: U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland has determined that these flimsy complaints provide a sufficient basis for the creation “of a task force, consisting of representatives from the [Department of Justice’s] Criminal Division, National Security Division, Civil Rights Division, the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, the FBI, the community Relations Service and the Office of Justice Programs.”

Seriously… really?

Are you unaware of the threats that the crazy parents in question made against teachers at parent/teacher meetings? They were behaving like effin’ terrorists, who, by definition, seek to get their way through intimidation and fear.

‘Threatened, Intimidated, Bullied’: Educators Under Attack Over Mask Mandates

Who is Behind the Attacks on Educators and Public Schools?

Last edited 2 years ago by Greg

Greg do you actually remember what kicked off the “violence”, a schoolboard covering up a rape, transferring the rapist to another school where he raped another girl?
The CRT which didnt exist? But dont tell us we cant put it into the curriculum under a different name.
Where in science is it good for kids to breathe CO2? The CDC changed parameters of early speech to cover up the damage masks cause.
We will gladly follow the science when the schoolboards get the degrees to make life changing decisions for the kids.

Parents who did follow the science understood that children could be the carriers of an infection that has thus far killed 939 thousand Americans. They, of course, weren’t the ones raising hell and threatening teachers and school board members.

Last edited 2 years ago by Greg

The investigation is separate from a civil tax fraud probe being run by New York Attorney General Letitia James, which Trump was deposed for.

I wonder how much taxpayer money was wasted pursuing THAT tantrum?

We have a generation of parents who have minimal understanding of adult social responsibilities. They think the entire definition of freedom is getting their way, and being able to do whatever the hell they want. They don’t realize that individual rights come with social responsibilities.

Go fu€k yourself

As I have told you before, your own personal habits are of no interest to me.

I thought you might be a Russian troll. The right-wing blogs and forums are infested with them.

Last edited 2 years ago by Greg

Yeah, they come on and try to justify the failed leftist agenda.

No, not all parents are liberals.

Miss the memo masks dont work have nebver ever been proved to work, the virus is smaller than the weave.
Most of the kids are wearing cloth because the higher grade masks dont fit. The higher grade masks must fit to be of any use.

Masks catch much larger respired moisture droplets carrying the virus.

Over 2 years in, and something so basic still hasn’t registered?

Over two years, it has been SHOWN by comparison and data that the masks don’t work, never worked and will never work.

I guess surgeons should stop wearing them in the operating room.

This country is doomed, because the right has managed to weaponize stupid.

You know surgeons are not children …dont you, they never touch the masks. They are not being used for viruses either.

They are not being used for viruses either.

Neither are the masks used in schools. Those are being used to prevent the spread of virus-laden droplets.

Neither are the masks used in schools. Those are being used to prevent the spread of virus-laden droplets.

So, the virus only exists in droplets?

So, the virus only exists in droplets?

No, but stopping some of the spread is better than stopping none of the spread.

If you don’t know the difference between bacteria and a virus, maybe you should just shut up.

Says the guy who can’t tell us why hundreds of thousands died instead of being given drugs that could have saved them.

Even one life? Isn’t that the vax-Nazi mantra?

No not one scientific study not a single one.
Take your covid religion a cram it.

Mask do not work
Lockdowns do not work
Vaccines do not work.

No not one scientific study not a single one.

Wrong again, believe it or not, and this study was focusing on disposable surgical masks, not N95 masks.

Highly acclaimed peer-reviewed Bangladesh study shows that masks don’t work at all.

But we had to download the original data from github to see that because they didn’t mention it in the paper. The bottom line: mask are a complete joke with no science to back it up. Pure politics.

The Bangladesh mask study written by scientists from Stanford and Yale is now published in Science!!! So now nobody in mainstream medicine can attack the study.

The nice thing is the study showed that masks don’t work, but you’d never know it from reading the paper. You’d only know it if you saw the actual data. And they don’t show you the actual data. They only want you to see the data that supports the “masks work” narrative. They do NOT want you to see the data that doesn’t.

When you actually look at the data, the study showed masks make NO difference.

We asked the authors for the original data and we plotted the results for purple masks vs. placebo.

Link

Bangladesh a shit hole where sanitation of any kind would show anything they want.

That makes no sense in any way at all.

Anyone can find a study to confirm their biases.

Dismissed.

Anyone can find a study to confirm their biases.

Interestingly enough, that’s the diametrical opposite of kitt’s point. She specifically said that not one single study supports the use of masks.

If you want to contradict kitt, respond directly to her; don’t do it passive-aggressively through me.

You precious 1 study was debunked so again not 1 single study.

And this one you cited still doesn’t

Highly acclaimed peer-reviewed Bangladesh study shows that masks don’t work at all.

But we had to download the original data from github to see that because they didn’t mention it in the paper. The bottom line: mask are a complete joke with no science to back it up. Pure politics.

The Bangladesh mask study written by scientists from Stanford and Yale is now published in Science!!! So now nobody in mainstream medicine can attack the study.

The nice thing is the study showed that masks don’t work, but you’d never know it from reading the paper. You’d only know it if you saw the actual data. And they don’t show you the actual data. They only want you to see the data that supports the “masks work” narrative. They do NOT want you to see the data that doesn’t.

When you actually look at the data, the study showed masks make NO difference.

We asked the authors for the original data and we plotted the results for purple masks vs. placebo.

Link

The important thing to realize about efficacy is that the range from 0% to 20% is barely better than nothing. Here, even a 20% efficacy corresponds to a reduction of risk by a factor of 1.25x. 1.25x is not literally nothing, but it’s also not enough to halt a highly contagious respiratory infection. For what it’s worth, a vaccine with 20% efficacy would not be approved. Another major flaw of using efficacy as a metric is that it is highly nonlinear. The difference between 10% and 20% efficacy is very small whereas the difference between 85% and 95% is huge, corresponding to a 7-fold and 20-fold risk reduction respectively. Efficacy is a nonlinear metric, but these percentages are bandied around as if they are linear effects, and this adds confusion to the public dialogue.

To further dive into the absurdity of efficacy, let’s examine the claim that “cloth masks” worked less well than “surgical masks.” This is too strong an observation to be gleaned from the data. The preprint provides two stratified calculations to estimate the efficacy of types of masks. In the first case, the authors analyzed villages randomized to only be given surgical masks and their matched control villages. In this case there were 190 pairs of villages consisting of nC=103,247 individuals in the control group and nT=113,082 individuals in the treatment group. They observed iC=774 symptomatic and seropositive individuals in the control group and iT=756 symptomatic and seropositive individuals in the treatment group. This is a difference of 18 individuals. The corresponding efficacy is 11%, still woefully low.

We can do a similar analysis for the villages only given cloth masks. There were 96 pairs of villages consisting of nC=53,691 individuals in the control group and nT=57,415 individuals in the treatment group. They observed iC=332 symptomatic and seropositive individuals in the control group and iT=330 symptomatic and seropositive individuals in the treatment group. This is a difference of only 2 individuals. Certainly, no one would put much faith in an intervention where we see a difference of 2 cases in a study with over one hundred thousand people. However, to further demonstrate the absurdity of the notion of efficacy, the observed efficacy for cloth masks in this study is 7%. I think in many people’s minds, the difference between 7% and 11% is small. And 7% should be considered “no effect” as should 11%.

http://www.argmin.net/2021/11/23/mask-rct-revisited/

But N95’s are not the norm, nor are they discarded after every use (say, going to a grocery store). They are infection TRANSMITTERS.

But N95’s are not the norm, nor are they discarded after every use (say, going to a grocery store). They are infection TRANSMITTERS.

That’s why I specified that the beneficial results came from simple disposable masks. That’s why I specifically wrote that I was not referring to N95 masks.

So, you base your trust and support for masks on the use of masks that no one uses? Well, THAT’S intelligent.

I tend to rely on reality.

So, you base your trust and support for masks on the use of masks that no one uses? 

I’ve said twice that I’m not referring to N95s.

I’ve said twice that I’m not referring to N95s.

Then you refer to the useless, more decorative, version of the face diaper. At any rate, you are defending the pointless. You base your support of wearing masks on studies where a more effective mask is used, which is useless in your argument. Forcing people to do something not only useless in preventing the spread of a virus, but actually HARMFUL, is pretty stupid. It may be entertaining for those forcing the mandates upon defenseless people, but it’s stupid as a preventative.

Miss the memo masks dont work have nebver ever been proved to work, the virus is smaller than the weave.

That’s like saying that fishing nets can’t catch fish because water flows right through them. The masks don’t stop the virus; the masks stop the virus-laden droplets, which are easily stopped by the masks.

So viruses are as large as fish now? minnows cant be caught with the nets that are used on coho.

So viruses are as large as fish now?

I can almost believe you really think that’s what I’m saying.

What I was saying is your analogy was very poor. I give you a d minus.

A Minneapolis Middle School paper is offering “protest tips and etiquette” to children as young as 11-years old, to assist them in their “protesting adventures.
How to burn down a local business101?

But only protest approved topics. For instance, protesting the 2nd Amendment, free days out of class with no punishment, protest the stupid, pointless, useless mask mandates, expulsion.

minnows cant be caught with the nets that are used on coho.

But they can be used to catch the coho. To extend your analogy, some of the small fish are inside the larger fish; some of the virus is inside the droplets.

Indeed, but the question is lost in the nuance.

HOW MUCH really, and is it worth taking away Constitutional rights…especially with a government actively working to supplant known Covid treatments to line the pockets of their pharma donors?

You can’t require masks when you ban Ivermectin. You’re not trying to save lives at all.

Studies showed that the masks ATOMIZE the droplets of a cough or sneeze, which caused the virus to remain suspended in the air LONGER and more infectious.

The kids also breathe harder taking the virus deeper into the lungs.

I was beginning to read by the time I started school. That was because my parents read to me. Education begins in the home. So does any lack of appreciation for it.

Last edited 2 years ago by Greg

Mikey already says that doesnt count see his reply to Nan

Mikey already says that doesnt count see his reply to Nan

What did I say doesn’t count?

go back and check

go back and check

I did. Whatever you’re referring to is not apparent.

Sad you squandered it all.

That’s why the children of Biden voters have the lowest grades in school and are more inclined to gender dysphoria and suicide.

The Left represents the less educated, less cultured part of America.

When I was a youngster, Scholastic was way too male-oriented in its focus.
But, that was then.
Any parent who cedes his/her child’s education to teachers at public schools will end up with Leftist drones in their home.

You really must overpower the propaganda from the school with your own home education.
Go to libraries together, helping your young ones to get ahold of physics, chemestry, math educational books – like the old Life series used to have.
They made learning fun.
I remember being so young that I 1st just looked at all the photos and art.
Later I’d read the rest of these books.
comment image
Still later I was accepted at both Cal Tech and MIT.

So you read books as a kid? You get no prize for that; that’s what was expected of you.

Now the left wants to provide all the material for reading and that material supports the leftist ideology while eliminating any other concepts.

Scholastic sells books. If people didn’t want the books they sell, they would sell different books. Why do you hate the free market?

If people didn’t want the books they sell, they would sell different books. 

Not necessarily.

Not necessarily.

How do you figure, Professor?

^^ This idiot obviously doesn’t know how the publishing, and entertainment industries work.

How do you figure, Professor?

CNN, for example. Because of their total dishonesty and lack of credibility, they have practically no viewership. Fox trounces them. Yet, true to their propaganda roots and purpose, they maintain the failing business model.

So, is Scholastic wants to indoctrinate more than it wants to get a return on investment, and they have the financial support from those seeking to indoctrinate a generation of youth, they will do exactly what they are doing, Student.

Last edited 2 years ago by Just Plain Bill

That’s not the question. The question is schools teaching ideology and inappropriate content to elementary school children.

Teaching theories is just fine. Teaching one theory as the truth isn’t how we do things in this country.

I have seen post after post about “banning books” where what they are actually talking about is some schools removing certain books from their offerings. The books aren’t banned and no one is banned from reading them, but the left wants to make sure whatever leftist propaganda is available is fed to students.

Making students mentally weak and anti-American is the left’s goal and this takes precedence over education.

It is everywhere not just childrens books but movies as well, loads of princesses no male heroes allowed, not past ,present or future even in galaxies far far away.
Nuclear families shown as dysfunctional, or where children must show the parents a lesson in life. Disney is the worst offender, look what adults they churn out after the female child stars have to go out on their own.Children of Hollywood, seems they cant function as adults.

Last edited 2 years ago by kitt

test

Is Scholastic Press Creating a Generation of Illiterate White Boys?

Of course it is. And so is the left. We used to call it “dumbing down” but now it’s called “social justice”

You still haven’t made it clear how reading a book that doesn’t happen to have a white male protagonist makes young white males illiterate.

Because they are reading tripe from illiterate token writers instead of literature from those who know what they are doing, regardless of their race.