I hope that that teacher is no longer allowed to twist young minds.

Poor Sidwell. What a poor return for their scholarship funds and teacher salary expenses. I hope that Mr. E. did not set back recruiting of other minorities.

I hope that that teacher is no longer allowed to twist young minds.

Poor Sidwell. What a poor return for their scholarship funds and teacher salary expenses. I hope that Mr. E. did not set back recruiting of other minorities.

I hope that that teacher is no longer allowed to twist youn minds.

Poor Sidwell. What a poor return for their scholarship funds and teacher salary expenses. I hope that Mr. E. did not set back recruiting of other minorities.

Also as someone who attended schools that emphasized critical thinking, you sure were quick to use wikipedia (the favorite go-to source of lazy low-brows) to back up your point.

I don't think that the story would have had the same impact if Cheryl hadn't used your father's real name, though. Yours might well have been omitted: he was a public figure, you weren't.

Unfortunately you have been somewhat outed by the inaccuracies of your article—both in fact and in spirit—by the actual and supposed ‘victim’ in your story. Your response to attack her (‘blunt, naïve, angry’), attack the father, and talk down to your story’s empathy-protagonist (‘sugar’) is surprising. Your readers are calling for you to ‘write a book’ and “send it to the New York Times…” After this post, they may be formulating a different opinion of your journalistic prowess, as well as your personal integrity. The embarrassed one is you, and you chose the wrong response. Please clear your throat and try again. I—and all your readers –are waiting.

I'll speak directly to Rennie at this point:

Let's just say – I remember things differently. And the Wikipedia entry on Chester Crocker is pretty clear on how the rest of the world views your father's legacy at this point. It states among other observations:

Constructive engagement and “the fearlessly soft attitude displayed by Chester Crocker towards apartheid” were blamed by author/journalist Christopher Hitchens for the ten-year delay in implementing United Nations Security Council Resolution 435 and securing Namibia's independence.

He was a public figure then – and now. I'm sorry if you're embarrassed. Yet your comment strikes me, to be blunt, as revisionist, naive, defensive & angry. I certainly understand the instinct to defend your daddy despite what's widely seen as his disastrous and appeasing policies concerning human rights.

I don't agree that there was no connection between our team's singular, unique & intensive focus on South Africa and your father's position at the time. That was pretty obvious then and even more clear in hindsight, sugar. At the same time, it was a long time ago now and it's entirely possible that I may not remember the full sequence of events with as much accuracy as I once did. I can say, however, that I have reported my own impressions or events and of you as accurately as I can. I'm sure JJP readers join me in their interest in and gratitude for your perspective. Thanks for stopping by.

First, contrary to Cheryl’s assertion, I was not then – nor have I ever been – ashamed (palpably or otherwise) of my dad. His contributions to the practice and study of conflict resolution in Africa and elsewhere are widely recognized, and I am very proud of him (as I was when I was 13). I have no idea on what grounds Cheryl could claim to know otherwise.

Second, I remember Mr. E fondly as a dedicated and inspirational teacher, and I believe Cheryl has misinterpreted the situation she describes. No teacher should ever exploit a student in the horrific manner that Cheryl attributes to Mr. E. While Mr. E supported and helped to facilitate the protest described, I do not think that he sought to use me as a pawn to advance his own political agenda.

Third, contrary to Cheryl’s account, my parents were perfectly willing to let me participate in this protest, and I in fact opted to participate (not because I understood the subtleties of the policies at issue, but because I wanted the experience and I – like my Dad – was strongly opposed to apartheid). While it was certainly uncomfortable for me, I did not feel used, ostracized, or otherwise harmed by the planned protest. Incidentally, I did not actually participate in the protest because, at the last minute (ie, the day of), Sidwell learned and informed my parents that the press had been alerted that I would be there. The school and my parents discussed the issue and agreed that it would not be in my best interests to participate. Ultimately, both my parents and the school ensured that the best decision was made for my safety and privacy.

Finally, Cheryl claims that the story could not be told without using names. Yet it would have been very easy to describe us as “a senior Reagan administration official and his daughter,” and the use of our names adds nothing to the story. The claim is disingenuous, and the use of our names is gratuitous and insensitive.

The issues Cheryl attempts to confront in her blog are important, but her misguided attempt to portray my experience (a perspective she cannot know and has never asked, as far as I can remember over the 25 years since the incident she describes), and to manipulate the facts for storytelling effect, only erodes the value of the discussion.

I loved this article. This is why I love the blogosphere. Where else can you find such great nuggets of information. It's very interesting that the kids were able to separate the daughter, from the father's policy that they were protesting. I guess that kind of separation was possible back then. I wonder how it's been over the past 8 years, as this country has gotten so divided.

I LMAO at your reponse to asking the innocent question of ' what are you doing for Easter?' That was very good. I feel you. I didn't have those shocker moments until I went away for summer school. That some people had weekly allowances larger than the entire amount my parents gave me to last the summer blew my mind.

I really would love to know about the Black student life there. How was it between the Black students. Did you all stratify based upon income, 'class', and all the other divisions possible for Black folk, especially in D.C.?

I totally find the taunting from one private school to another to be absolutely hilarious in its absurdity. But, thus is the world of private schools.

If this is what you say this is: an extended, seemingly year-long campaign to get at a man through his daughter, that teacher is not a hero. I remember the ordinary, child-initiated slights of childhood and the loneliness of being outside the group. I cannot imagine a teacher-organized campaign meant to divorce me from my parents. How sad.

If your purpose is to teach the father, not the daughter, you need to rethink your career. I doubt that child got anything out of this except the knowledge that adults are inconceivably cruel.

I believe that her story is describing a place in time where she probably felt different (and powerless) around the children of the powerful. It's a two fold story ; one of familiarity with Mr. E, one of a few blacks at the school at the time, and how standing up against apartheid gave her and the other children power.

The fact that she now believes that Mr. E was pursuing an agenda was a side note and something she figured out later in life. Right or wrong, (attempting to pressure Crocker through the child) it was not Jill's doing, and this is her story to tell it happened to her.

I can't wait to hear Jill's next piece about being a “poor” black kid on scholarship. Having spent the first seven years of my school life in a predominately white school during the late sixties and early seventies and coming from a really “poor” family, I would like to compare notes.