3 ms·
Throwaway for sensitive topic. I came here to write your comment and was thrilled to find it already here. As a homeschooled kid who considers myself damaged a
by throw787653378 3y ago
Throwaway for sensitive topic.
I came here to write your comment and was thrilled to find it already here. As a homeschooled kid who considers myself damaged as a result, I completely agree. The OP comment is eerily similar to stuff my parents said in the 2000s-early 10s and were totally wrong about.
My parents weren't religious at all and were totally in it for academic enrichment. They were all about the "new wave of homeschooling": high-quality instructional material, study groups, plenty of socialization opportunities with other (homeschooled) kids. I turned out fine academically and probably do at least partially owe my career to it, but the social consequences for both me and my peers were severe.
The issue with playdates and study groups and the like is that the odds are good, but the goods are odd. Homeschooled kids playing with each other is an echo chamber of robotic parent-pleasers (for a while, until the break happens) who're incapable of tackling genuine social dynamics because their foremost, unbelievably deeply inculcated desire is parental praise. I feel it even now - peer approval is meaningless; only that pat on the back matters. This results in a weird simulacra of socialization: kids understand that they're supposed to have friends and social contact, but go through the motions of "this is friendship and social contact" without ever touching the real deal. Friends your parents select for you are fundamentally not real friends, and pretending they are fucks up one's ability to form genuine relationships for a long time.
Homeschooling is the ultimate egotistical project of attempting to form a living, human child - with the fractal of possible futures that implies - into a mirror of one's self. The typical liberal recognizes the abhorrence of that in a context of religious indoctrination, but is totally fine with it in a secular context. Fuck that. It's wrong for all the same reasons, and fundamentally negates the child's identity as a unique human. This is why I don't think better instructional material isn't a solution: the core problem is that one fleshed-out outlook on the nature of reality is way too little. Without multiple sources of approval and validation, it's way too easy to monopolize a kid's perspective. Again, this is realized in contexts of religious indoctrination but ignored outside of it - forcefully indoctrinating kids with a single perspective is wrong, full stop. And no, simply presenting alternative perspectives doesn't work; it'll inevitably be couched in the sort of condesencion that parents are unable to shed. Imagine your dad telling you about rock'n'roll culture: you're hardly likely to go from that to the Twisted Sister video.
Parents, of course, love this dynamic. The problem starts when those kids leave the nest and find that their parents' perspective is not the only one that matters.
The other angle is that, ime, parents who are themselves socially stunted, like mine, are unable to recognize this dynamic and insist that nothing is, or even could be, wrong. Like the parent comment, I've kept in touch with many of the kids I knew and this perspective is far from unique.
To the OP: I beg you, please don't do this. You will probably regret it for most of the rest of your life, and if you don't your kids will.
- floating-io 3y agoI don’t normally comment on this sort of thing (I don’t have kids, am not precisely “normal” (whatever that is) and dislike speaking publicly on sensitive topics, anonymous or otherwise), but this touched a nerve for some reason, so I’ll throw a couple of things out there for you to consider: 1. Parents are not the only ones who push their own desires and beliefs. Thought experiment: how many members of the group that decides the curriculum vote Republican or Independent? Scuttlebutt (unverified by me) is that most folks in US schools and on US school boards are Democrats. Regardless of one’s opinion on political matters, that (if true) would suggest a certain uniformity of thought, and the likely presence of a conscious or unconscious agenda that would then get passed on, deliberately or otherwise, in the resulting curriculum. And that’s before we get to the general tendency of many groups (regardless of type) to naturally attract like-minded souls in the first place. I only used political affiliation as a visible indicator of the phenomenon (assuming that the rumors are true about Democrats and schools, which as I said, I don’t actually know ;), not to promote one or another party, and not to imply that it’s anywhere close to the only factor. 2. IMHO, schools, public or private, do not fix social issues, and in a certain subset of children, may actually create them. I say that as someone who was never homeschooled, and yet has significant issues socializing (though I’ve learned to hide that fact in public over the years, and have a good career). Your thoughts on friendship resonate with me to a degree, and school did not help it one iota. Probably made it worse, actually. I won’t go into my personal opinion on “the right answer,” because it’s irrelevant in the end. I have no kids, and thus no skin in the game, nor do I actually know “the right answer.” Just some food for thought.
- emodendroket 3y ago> 1. Parents are not the only ones who push their own desires and beliefs. Thought experiment: how many members of the group that decides the curriculum vote Republican or Independent? Scuttlebutt (unverified by me) is that most folks in US schools and on US school boards are Democrats. Regardless of one’s opinion on political matters, that (if true) would suggest a certain uniformity of thought, and the likely presence of a conscious or unconscious agenda that would then get passed on, deliberately or otherwise, in the resulting curriculum. Have you taken a look at the news anytime in the past year? "Republicans don't have any influence on school curriculums" is a wild departure from easily observable reality, so much so that I think it kind of renders this comment beneath serious consideration.