Letter: CRT, DEIG of personal experience

I live in Colorado where CRT/DEIG is alive and well. I'm about to get my two middle school daughters out of school and my 84-year-old mother out of her apartment (she lives with us) to move to Grosse Pointe, which seems more balanced to me.

Therefore, I read the Grosse Pointe News all the time to make sure I don't jump from the frying pan into the fire. Attached is my experience with the pernicious effects of DEIG and how it relates to CRT. For what it's worth.

The relationship between critical race theory and diversity, equity and inclusion, and gender

CRT refers to a theory which focuses on how racism operates in our society to create inequalities. As designed, the CRT was an important way to see how the American legal system codified racial discrimination. The CRT was, and is, an important perspective that sheds light on how power has been used to disenfranchise groups based on their identity.

CRT provides the analytical framework for recognizing inequalities; DEIG provides the "tools" to address this. The natural fix at CRT was to make sure people were treated equally under the laws. DEIG, which is a complete overcorrection, seeks to make everything fair (i.e. equitable) in society.

Unfortunately, DEIG does not address legitimate issues of inequality in society. Instead, he creates identity-based tribes and tries to right the perceived wrongs of those tribes.

Because it is based on critical theory rather than classical Western ideas of logic and proof, it is subjective, inefficient, and divisive. DEIG's "cures" do not respond to data or facts. DEIG hits a fly with a hammer and responds only to subjective feelings of marginalization, victimization, and grievance.

Specifically, it creates an environment where grievances replace gratitude and fairness replaces merit. Most parents know that you can either focus on the worm in the apple (i.e. grievance) or the apple (i.e. gratitude). You can either hire the best candidate or the best candidate to make life fairer. But, you can't have it both ways.

Concretely, here is what the DEIG looks like in middle schools, colleges and high schools where the goal is equity at the expense of academics:

In science, children are asked to draw a scientist, then asked why their "stick figure drawings" look like white men;

American involvement in World War II is taught as a means of oppressing black Americans rather than "the days when American soldiers (black and white) saved the world";

"Freshmen" - an outdated and clearly sexist moniker - are now referred to as ninth-graders to prevent female students from feeling left out;

"Wreath and Garland Sale" evokes Christianity more than other religions and turns into "Holiday Market";

In preschool and kindergarten, children learn to choose their sex and explain what cues they will use to signal that decision, before teaching them about typical sexual development (but, under DEIG, this is not called typical sexual development ; it would be unfair to people who don't identify as male or female);

Health is now called cisgender development; and

The health class is now only for girls "assigned at birth" and boys "assigned at birth". Girls "assigned at birth" who socially transition to boys take health with, finally boys, because they are boys now, anatomy notwithstanding.

Never mind that the CRT is not mentioned in the strategic plan or curriculum of the Grosse Pointe public school system; pay close attention to anything that attempts to "make everyone feel heard" and see if the language seems divisive.

Is the golden rule insufficient? Is there evidence that things are getting worse for marginalized groups? Children these days seem much kinder and more tolerant than previous generations; is this impression not supported by facts?

Most parents spend their lives touting one lesson: Life isn't fair! And, for better or for worse, that understanding makes us all stronger, together.