ContraCostaTimes.com | 01/02/2007 | Some say Oprah went overboard with school
A lot of folks are jumping on Oprah’s case about opening a multi-million dollar school for girls in South Africa. I have absolutely no problem with the school itself and her reasons for opening it:
“This is what I want to do. I wanted to take girls with that ‘it’ quality and give them an opportunity to make a difference in the world. … These girls deserve to be surrounded by beauty, and beauty does inspire. I wanted this to be a place of honor for them because these girls have never been treated with kindness. They’ve never been told they are pretty or have wonderful dimples. I wanted to hear those things as a child.”
Y’all know I know how that feels. But what I do have a problem with her supposed reason as to why she didn’t built this type of school in the US:
Winfrey, who does have some pretty cute dimples, selected the 152 girls who will attend the school out of an application pool of more than 3,500. She said she decided to build in South Africa, rather than the United States, because inner-city kids in America don’t appreciate the value of a free education. (emphasis mine)
“I became so frustrated with visiting inner-city schools (in the United States) that I just stopped going. The sense that you need to learn just isn’t there. If you ask the kids what they want or need, they will say an iPod or some sneakers. In South Africa, they don’t ask for money or toys. They ask for uniforms so they can go to school.”
This is also coming from a woman who, correct me if I’m wrong, although gives some wonderful life-coach-type tips, also has a tendency to flaunt her power (and money) by giving away cars to her studio audience, making a big deal out of being “discriminated against” at hoity-toity shops in Paris, and so on.
Not that I’m placing the entire blame on media stars - parents need to pull their fingers out also - but Winfrey needs to realize that when someone shows off their bling sooo much, sooo publicly, that’s what kids are going to see. Although I honor Winfrey for everything she has achieved, in some sense, she’s part of the problem.
I try not to use the phrase “blaming the victim” that much, but her view seems to lean in that direction.
Comments (10)
I liked her point that any kid who wants an education in the USA has one available if they choose to participate.
I used to believe that no one person should have all the money that Oprah has. Now I believe it shows the rest of us what is possible with a dream, focus, and hard work.
It’s her money, and she’s putting it where she thinks it will do the most good. I’m good with that.
I have absolutely no problem with the way she uses her money. I have a problem with her reasons for not doing the same in the US. If she doesn’t want to build a school in the US, that’s fine, but saying that “inner-city children don’t know the worth of a free education” was uncalled for.
I am a HUGE Oprah fan, however I found myself being a bit disturbed also as to her reasoning for not opening a similiar school in the US also. Her statement lumps all inter city kids into one group - you can’t tell me that there aren’t 152 girls in the inner city that wouldn’t want to attend a school like the one she is building in Africa.
Kyla is right - it’s her money and she can do what she pleases with it - however, I think ignoring American kids based on the reasons she provided is sad.
Look, lets be honest with ourselves here, many (not all) inner city kids would not value what Oprah has provided for these girls in South Africa. In America the primary and secondary education is FREE! I think a lot of Americans do not appreciate that they don’t have to pay for books, school fees, uniform fees, teachers salary, even transportation is covered for students in the states. Parents in countries like South Africa have to come up with these fees as well as pay their taxes to the government. Oprah is providing for these girls in South Africa, the basics and with the basics these girls can shape the face of their nations.
Inner-city as well as suburban American kids are not taught by their parents or society the value of the basics. Many of these kids do not take advantage of the opportunities that are available in US public schools. I’m not talking being given laptops and having a state of the art gym facility. I’m talking having a library that’s available to them to read books on the topics they choose to study. I’m talking teachers that are paid on a consistent basis. Oprah was correct in building a school where she could do the most good and have the most impact.
So is it right that we just give up on inner-city kids? Should we just say, “Screw em. They don’t appreciate the basics so let’s put our energy somewhere else”?
Are American children that hopeless?
Free education doesn’t always equate to having a good education. A lot of inner city schoolchildren are struggling to compete with suburban schoolchildren. In many cases, suburban schoolchildren are far ahead of inner city kids academically. With inequities like that in our FREE education system, we need to drop some more dollars or dismantle and rebuild it. That’s what the No Child Left Behind Act is supposed to do - give every child the same education. And until that happens, FREE education for some inner city kids is not going to be enough. The playing field needs to be leveled and I think the Bill Gates Foundation is trying to do that here in the U.S. Poorly educated kids is everyone’s problem, not just parents and celebrities.
As for what Oprah is doing, I think it’s great. I’m not going to knock her about using her money and life to help African girls.
Yolanda - You know, that’s a good point about the “free” issue. Yes, education in the US is “free,” but what are the children getting? As for the NCLBA, if the teachers unions would work with the damned thing instead of being against it from the start, it could be the start of something.
Dear lord, I’ve just criticized unions. I’m losing my edge.:-)
Ok, first point - if Oprah had built a $120 million dollar mansion in Beverly Hills, tearing down 4 $40 million dollars mansions to make the space (just like Aaron Spelling did) no one would be bitching at all. Not one media source would be comparing it to how that money could be better on inner city schools.
Second point - we can help inner city schools and very easily. The Anthony Robbins Foundation is in over 2,500 inner city schools teaching kids how to unlock their potential and rise to whatever level they desire. The Foundation is also in over 400 prisons letting inmates know that every decision can be life altering and that it is totally their choice if they go back to prison after release.
Go to anthonyrobbinsfoundation (dot) com to see the other great work being done. And unlike some foundations, where 10% or less of donations get to the programs, 87 cents of every dollar is actually spent directly on the programs. 13% does not cover all the administrative costs, Anthony covers most of it from his own pocket.
How do I know, I know the woman who runs it, she’s a veterinarian. And, I know hundreds of people who do work with the foundation.
So, the gov’t may have given up, the parents may have given up, the churches may have given up, but not everyone has. Want to make that difference? Send a few dollars to the foundation, and call and see where you can donate some time.
Third point - If you had a blind policy of never criticizing unions, you have just regained your edge.
Kyla - You know what…how about I offer you space to post something about Anthony Robbins? I’m being serious. The guy still gives me the willies. What is the pull? I know it’s off topic, but still.
And again, I have no problem with what OW does with her money…at all. I have problem with the broad brush she painted inner-city children with.
I’ll spend some time and write something that makes sense later. I made fun of Anthony Robbins for about 25 years. I thought he was all positive-thinking bullshit. He is not.
Now that I understand what he does, I totally respect and appreciate him.