Or, She Works With Children.

Whiteness…. is hostile, it is violent… it is annihilating… That is something we always need to be mindful of as white people.

A reminder that woke anti-white woo doesn’t have to be convincing or coherent, just signalled often, regardless.  

Note the implication that “whiteness,” being white, equals racism and is therefore by default a thing to be discussed in terms of pathology, a thing to be cured. “Colour-blindness” – i.e., not being weirdly fixated by race – is, it turns out, deeply problematic, and must give way to deconstructing “the whiteness=greatness fallacy in white psyches.” Which is what “white psyches” are all about, you see.

This self-confessed “white lady,” Natasha Stovall, is a child psychologist, a stater of pronouns, and an avowed “anti-racist,” which is to say, a seeker of woke status. And hence the racism, of course.

Dr Stovall “specialises in warmth and empathy.” Her rates are between $120-$250 per hour. In case you were tempted. 

Update, via the comments:

Dr Stovall tells us that she is terribly progressive and a child of progressive parents – presumably, the Less Bad White People – and is therefore “part of the solution.” Though one can’t help wondering if the phantom bigotries she invokes and then casually ascribes to others, seemingly based on their pigmentation, may have more to do with her own racial neuroticism – what with her being so terribly progressive and a child of progressive parents.

Commenter sH2 asks, “What the hell is ‘psychic energy’?” – a term, one of several, deployed as if self-evident. Alas, with all of the nebulous rambling and unfinished thoughts – all the y’knows, likes, and kind-ofs – it’s hard to be sure. Beyond the claim that this energy is a thing being “drained” by “whiteness,” a malevolent phenomenon, and which in turn is like a “ghost.” Or something.

Readers who watch Dr Stovall speak, in her area of alleged expertise, may not be given an impression of mental clarity, or of ideas that have been thought through and subjected to stress, even of a routine kind. It seems we must make do with a series of disjointed pronouncements surrounded by rhetorical gas. Such that, were Dr Stovall to sit there chanting “Bad Whitey” over and over again, the dogmatism and idiocy might be slightly more obvious, but the informational content would remain much the same.

When the topic of gender and genitals came up…

In pre-school, of course. 

Koe Creation, the rather animated lady above, is, she says, a “second-generation queerspawn” – by which she means the product of a polyamorous household – and is allegedly, via some unspecified process, an expert in “sex-positive parenting” and “non-violent communication,” on which she offers “guidance.” She – or rather they, because pronouns – works within the “polyamorous and kink communities” and holds workshops in bondage and sadomasochism, and is therefore, obviously, spending lots of time with small children and talking about their bodies.

Update:

Ms Creation, also known as Valkyrie Jacobson-Smith, is now upset that “the trolls” have found her public announcements and have not been overly impressed or encouraged by them. Insufficient enthusiasm – and any kind of demurral – apparently warrants the designation troll. Presumably, the wider public – those outside of “polyamorous and kink communities” – should be thrilled to discover that pre-school children are being taught by a self-styled “expert” in bondage and sadomasochism, and being quizzed on their genitals, and being used as a basis for “intergenerational dialogue around relational identities (such as polyamory, sexuality… and kink).”

Because, hey, there’s nothing creepy or concerning about that at all.

Yes, dear reader, it’s terribly unfair when people fail to affirm your radicalism and subversiveness, with children aged three and four – a subversiveness of which you’re so proud – based on “moments when that rhetoric happened to come up in the classroom.”

It just happened, you see.

Also, open thread. Share ye links and bicker.

Richard Hanania on the ideological capture of state education:

[T]he movement to ban Critical Race Theory is naive if it thinks it’s going to change much about public schools… A CRT ban might mean a teacher won’t say “Ok, kids, today we’re going to learn about Critical Race Theory!” but they’ll still teach variations of the same ideas. Neither Robin DiAngelo nor Ibram X. Kendi, the two thinkers that seem to offend conservatives the most, identifies as a Critical Race Theorist. In fact, the American Federation of Teachers just announced a campaign to bring Kendi’s teachings to every student in the country, and they don’t appear to be deterred by CRT bans. This is their full-time job, and they’ll still be at it whenever public attention has moved on from the controversy of the day… A state can ban CRT, but if it does, kids are still being taught by the same people who thought CRT for kindergartners was a good idea in the first place.

Somewhat related. And also. And, you know, for eight-year-olds. 

An emeritus professor, who wishes to remain anonymous, on the ideology of “white fragility” and its trajectory:

The fundamental claim of White Fragility ideology is that income, wealth, academic, and other outcome gaps are solely the result of white supremacy and can only be eradicated through “anti-racist” measures—that is, by addressing white supremacy, white privilege, and white racism. The behaviour of individuals in groups experiencing negative outcomes is never admitted as a possible driver of disparate outcomes…

If one believes (as is asserted in White Fragility) that all inequality between whites and blacks is due to racism, then racism is a very evil thing indeed and must be eradicated. The mildest action that might be taken to attempt to accomplish this goal is the voluntary re-education of whites. However, according to White Fragility dogma, whites benefit enormously from white racism… [and] are generally unaware that they are doing this. It follows that, given the benefits whites receive from racism, their denial of their own racism, and the discomfort associated with re-education, it is unlikely that many whites would voluntarily submit to re-education. Moreover, even if whites were to voluntarily submit to re-education, according to White Fragility dogma, it is not possible for whites to free themselves of racism. The author, Robin DiAngelo, who is white, makes her living trying to re-educate whites and works very hard at trying to eliminate her own self-confessed racism, but admits that she is still not free of racism.

“The teacher did not appear to know she was being recorded.”

The inclusive, caring world of sixth grade education.

More here. 

Also, open thread. Share ye links and bicker. 

And yet they say you must gargle it.

In her blueprint, [Tigard-Tualatin School District Director of Equity and Inclusion, Zinnia Un] describes the new oppressor as an amalgamation of “whiteness,” “colour-blindness,” “individualism,” and “meritocracy”… For Un, they are the values of white society, the primary impediment to social justice.

What is the solution to pathological whiteness? According to Un and the Tigard-Tualatin School District, the answer lies with a new form of “white identity development.” In a series of “antiracist resources” provided to teachers, the Department of Equity and Inclusion includes a handful of strategies for this identity transformation… Couched in the language of professional development, the process assumes that whites are born “racist,” even if they “don’t purposely or consciously act in a racist way.”

The first step in the training document is “contact,” defined as confronting whites with “active racism or real-world experiences that highlight their whiteness.” The goal is to provoke an emotional rupture that brings the subject to the next step, “disintegration,” in which he or she feels intense “white guilt” and “white shame,” and admits: “I feel bad for being white.”

Christopher F Rufo on the indoctrination of children, and their teachers, in Portland schools.

Once suitably ashamed and disintegrated, the victim – and the word victim is entirely apt – is quizzed on whether their submission to this psychological abuse has resulted in sleep deprivation and broken relationships – these are good signs, apparently. Signs of “change-making” and “solidarity.” Of emerging wokeness.

At which point, readers may recall the openly sadistic ravings of “diversity” pioneer Jane Elliott, another psychological molester of children, and who described, with satisfaction, how one of her younger victims went from being a “brilliant, self-confident, excited little girl to a frightened, timid, uncertain little almost-person.” This state of demoralisation and neurosis – of children being manipulated and bullied, and bullied again, until they feel “discomfort, guilt, shame, embarrassment and humiliation” – is an achievement, you see. The way white children should feel – if they are to be saved.

If the prospect of eight-year-olds being told that they are “of course” racists, by definition, and that they are, on account of being white, complicit in oppression and murder… if that sounds too grotesque to actually be happening – in taxpayer-funded schools – do read Mr Rufo’s article in full.

Update, via the comments: