Please. You tried to pooh pooh the report based on a tale told by your daughter and your stereotype laden description of others personal experiences. I told you to go read the report. That's not bait.

So, you go get the report and then try and limit "acting white" to young teens only (the part about the landline phones was particularly amusing), as if the researchers couldn't simply ask an elderly 19 or 20 year old - Hey, remember those many many many years ago when you were in high school or jr, high? Did you or anyone you know every look down on.....". It would probably be wise of you to keep reading the report.

Also, here's a interesting part of an article from Ronnie Polanecky's Philly Daily News column of 5/18:

"THE ANNUAL blitz of standardized testing in public schools has just ended, and Erin McNamara Horvat already knows one result the scores will reveal:

The achievement of black students will once again lag behind that of white and Asian kids.

Horvat also knows that blame for the gap - overtly in some quarters, and perhaps subconsciously in many more - will fall on an idea that has been floating around for 20 years:

Black students underperform academically because they fear being accused of "acting white."

The idea was once put forward as an actual educational theory, coined by two educational researchers in 1986 and embraced by the public.

Horvat, an associate professor of urban education at Temple, wants to give it a rest.

"Part of its allure is that it has a ring of truth," says Horvat. "Any parent knows that kids want to be like their peers."

So, for some black kids, fear of "acting white" may indeed cause their low grades.

"However, it's also an attractive explanation because it lets us off the hook. We don't have to worry that thousands of kids aren't getting what they need. We can say, 'They're not achieving because they don't try.' "

Horvat hopes a new book she has co-edited will prick our comfort with the theory.

She and Carla O'Connor, an associate professor at University of Michigan, have just published Beyond Acting White: Reframing the Debate on Black Student Achievement, written by researchers whose studies address the limitations of the theory.

The deconstruction, the book shows, is badly needed.

For instance, one author notes, "acting white" can't explain why black female students excel more than black male students do.

Other authors note that low social class and inferior conditions in schools and communities negatively impact the performance of both black and white students.

How does "acting white" account for that?

Other authors studied high-achieving black students and found kids eager to define "acting black" as being smart.

Another researcher found that the low-achieving black students she studied were far more distressed by their poor grades than they were by any fear of being accused of "acting white."

In other words, this narrow educational theory escaped into the public consciousness - and created another dumb stereotype that black students have to live down.

There's more to like about this myth-busting book, which this column can't explore in depth. Suffice to say it's worth a read, even if its prose - frequently interrupted by bracketed academic references - doesn't make for an easy bedtime read."

"So the high-level female execs have every opportunity to pump breast milk and breast feed, and oh, surprise! the lowly barristas and secretaries have to use the bathroom.

Looking for an example of why the women's movement has never caught fire the way it should have, Ladies? Here's one. And have any of those high-level execs who presumably could at least raise corporate concscience about this even bothered to point out (or even noticed?) the discrepancy? This feminist man is betting no...

Anyone ready to start the discussion about the role of class in American society yet? Because until that discussion begins, Feminism, for far too many women, is going to continue to look (wrongly) like the exclusive province of privileged white women who need support as they angst over the many choices they face."

Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner!!

Anyway, as evidenced here, most of the LWs could really give about flying fig about lowly "barristas" or some mother fliiping bugers at Mickey D's. They pay it lip service and then they go into their breastfeeding experiences and what they want, because as we all know, what's good for them is naturally good for all mothers. See, if you allow them the perks that they want that means you are taking care of the health all children in the US and putting all "the children" before corporate profits. It's sort of a social version of the trickle down theory.

Minerva and Velora,

Great letters. Ignore the snide remarks from the usual entitlement whiners. As an amusing aside, ever notice how "my kids are going to...." never includes going to... be a barrista or Walmart greeter or.... No, not this bunch. Why, they are going to be running the nursing home we apparently are all going to find ourselves in someday. No, mopping the floors and wiping shitty asses for them!