In an interview Sunday evening with The Post, Palo Alto Unified School District boardmember Rowena Chiu spoke on the recent controversies stemming from the Jan. 23 special board meeting, including her initial sense of unsafety at the meeting, the local discourse on race and future plans.
Here’s the interview, edited just for clarity.
Let’s go back to last week’s meeting, when you said you felt unsafe during the Ethnic Studies debate. What made you feel unsafe, and to what degree did you feel your safety was compromised?
“I felt that the room was very hostile from the moment we walked into the room. There were a number of things, of course, that already made the atmosphere tense.
As I drove into the complex, I saw that there were huge lines outside, both the student door and the parent door. As I walked into the room, and I saw the way it was set up, there were ropes cordoning off, keeping the audience divided from the board members. And there was an unusual protocol of having a group of teachers come and advocate at the front, and a group of students come and advocate at the front.
But once we started the public comment and then moved on to board deliberation, I felt that it did exceed even my initial fears. I think one of the reasons why I really felt so unsafe is because I didn’t feel that there was the opportunity to represent diverse points of view in the boardroom.
In the boardroom, it felt like there was really only one overwhelmingly, one point of view represented there. Therefore the majority of the people stood for one position.
My second point is, not only did the majority of the people in the room stand for one position, but the majority of the people in the room presupposed that my position was opposite as theirs. So, it felt like the room had already made up its mind about me before I even came in, even though, in a world of open democracy, there are supposed to be board deliberations and the process is supposed to be, ‘I haven’t made up my mind.’ But it seemed that I didn’t get the opportunity to ask open-minded questions and engage in genuine intellectual inquiry, because the room had decided this was how I was going to vote.
The room had decided I was in favor of pausing Ethnic Studies, and no matter what I said, nothing could change their mind. My third point is that I feel there was misinformation in the room. There were a number of parents and students that stood up and spoke about the cutting or the elimination of Ethnic Studies, as though the debate in the room was who supports Ethnic Studies and who does not support Ethnic Studies. That was not what I was led to believe the vote would be.
The actual vote on the table is [between] board members who want to see Ethnic Studies in its current format be a mandatory ninth grade requirement starting in the fall, and board members who are concerned that there’s been insufficient community input, and would like to see a pause. But as far as I’m concerned, all five board members very eloquently expressed support for Ethnic Studies in principle, and I feel like that perspective was not at all represented in the room.
I made a speech, which was a three-pronged speech, about how I, as an Asian-American person, would obviously support Ethnic Studies, because I’m one of the four affinity groups being studied.
Secondly, I made the point that I’m somebody who, as a Master’s student, was very enthusiastic about studying my Asian heritage, and that falls under Ethnic Studies. Most of my postgraduate degrees were taken at the School of Oriental and African Studies, where I have a Master’s degree. So I have some experience of studying this really tense and difficult subject.
And then another contentious issue is this issue of if I teach certain Ethnic Studies classes. Now, I want to be very clear about this, because there’s been misinformation here too. If teachers object to me using the word ‘teach’ because they’re saying I don’t have a high school teaching credential, it’s completely true. I don’t have a high school teaching credential.
I am not a tenured professor at Berkeley, so for all the people who are calling Berkeley to ask, ‘Am I on their staff directory?’ No, I’m not, because I don’t have a tenured position at Berkeley or any full-time position at Berkeley, but I never claimed that. I am merely stating that I teach a class on Asian-American women and everyday violence, or Asian-American women and sexual assault, due to my experiences in the #MeToo movement and my lived experience as a Weinstein survivor, and I have now provided proof of that to multiple people.
So I think it’s pretty clear: I teach a class, I don’t have a teaching credential, and I’m not a tenured professor, but I’ve never claimed either of those things. So I actually, and if I’m over explaining this, I want to say at this juncture, I actually feel pretty insulted that my integrity is called into question. I consider myself to be a person who thinks carefully about what they say and to the best of my ability I’m factual and accurate about what I say, and so to insinuate that I blatantly lied about my background — I’m really upset about that.
I think Ethnic Studies is deeply important, and therefore I think it’s very difficult to be in a room where people are treating you as though you are trying to cut or eliminate Ethnic Studies. I tried to lay a very logical path to say, ‘No, no. It’s really important to me. And it’s really important that we do it right.’ So I think it’s important that we respect diverse opinion. That’s actually the very point of Ethnic Studies.”
Some of your supporters argue that the backlash against you represents an effort to silence Asian voices and an embracing of ‘cancel culture,’ while others claim that your actions on social media amplified racist rhetoric. How do you respond to both of these perspectives, and what do you think this controversy says about the current discourse on race and education in Palo Alto?
“I think my first comment is going to be: I’m a very new board member. I was just voted in on December 17. And really, these two votes on biology and Ethnic Studies, which occurred within 48 hours of each other, was the first time that we, as new board members, were asked to vote upon something very substantial. So I’m still understanding how this process works, and what my relationship is with PAUSD.
I will say that I have, for a long time, been a social justice advocate, a #MeToo activist and advocate, and obviously my background, which is a globally well known story, as a Weinstein survivor.
So I would say this: the #MeToo movement was literally founded on social media. What is often misunderstood about the movement is that we don’t have a CEO, we don’t have an office, we don’t have a budget. But the movement, and people who speak on behalf of the movement, are largely people who are social justice advocates on social media. So I use social media as a platform for elevating my #MeToo work, in particular, elevating the or shining a light on the issue of the suppression of Asian voices.
My intent of the original X post is to shine a light on Asian suppression. So I made what I believe to be two factual statements: ‘In 1998 I was assaulted by Harvey Weinstein, who told me he liked Chinese girls, and my Asian voice was suppressed.’ Attempted rape is literally the suppression of another person’s will, and of course, for the subsequent NDA, our voices were legally suppressed as well. So I consider that to be a suppression of my Asian voice, and because he racialized my attempted rape, that’s why I often talk about this subject at various schools and universities and workplaces around the world.
My second sentence was, ‘In 2025 as an elected official, my Asian voice was suppressed again.’ And this is predicated on the idea that the speech by Ms. Reynolds was predicated on the idea that Asians can’t use the word unsafe.
Now I noticed there’s been some backpedal in that position, and those people are attempting to argue, well, ‘Ms. Reynolds actually was referring to children in the classroom feeling unsafe. Students who are taking Ethnic Studies feeling unsafe.’ So I’m going to offer that position the benefit of the doubt if Ms. Reynolds’s intent was to comment on students in the classroom feeling unsafe.
One, I wonder whether that’s a tenable position anyway. Two, the impact on the Asian community was still the same. I still had dozens of Asian parents calling me in abject feeling to say, ‘How can we possibly come to school board meetings and speak? The atmosphere is so hostile. Speaking English as a first language, you were very eloquent about Asian issues, and still you were completely suppressed.’ So that’s still the impact, that impact still holds true.
Now, I genuinely felt that Ms. Reynolds was speaking about how I myself, as an Asian person, couldn’t lay claim to the word unsafe, and I personally found this a really difficult moment, and I wasn’t able to respond directly because, in fact, I got cut off at that point. And the response was going to be that, during my campaign, I received a number of death threats that were specifically targeted against me as an Asian person, and I also received death threats targeted towards my children as children of an Asian candidate. So I do feel that as an Asian person, I can make claim to the word unsafe, because we literally need to feel unsafe for being Asian in this instance.
There is anti-Asian hate in this area. But, I agree that amplifying this situation, and amplifying the posts from Asians Against Wokeness, was an error of judgment, because if I put Ms. Reynolds, in any way, at risk as a woman of color who has been at risk myself, it would never have been my intention to put another woman of color at risk. So we come back again to intent and impact. I did not intend to put Ms. Reynolds at risk with that retweet, but when it was pointed out to me that I did, I deleted it right away. And I believe that that was the right thing to do.
But it is true that there are other posts by Asians Against Wokeness that express extreme right-wing views that I don’t condone. It is also true that there are tweets underneath their posts I absolutely don’t condone. By the way, they are anti-Asian and anti-Black. So that’s horrific. It is abhorrent, and I fully condemn that. I in no way wish to be associated with any bigotry or hate speech.”
As you know, there have been calls from the Palo Alto Management Association and members of the public for you to resign. Do you plan to step down? How do you plan to continue serving as a school board member in light of this conflict?
“That really is not an easy question. Of course, it is the responsibility of every school board member, newly elected or not, to really, really consider, ‘Are you serving the community well?’ And so, of course, this thing has given me pause. There are multiple calls from multiple establishment members, former school board trustees, principals and now the teachers union asking for me to step down, so I wouldn’t be a human being if I didn’t spend hours agonizing.
On the other hand, there is a very frightened community, largely of minority groups, that feel their voices are underrepresented, that feel that they have been invisible in all of this. They’re really concerned about the repercussions and the suppression of that view, that alternative view, if I step down. So, I’m caught in a power dynamic and a power struggle that is very difficult for me.
If this were just down to me, personally, I would have stepped down already. I mean, this level of racial hatred for an unpaid volunteer role — this is untenable. I think it’s clear that if it were just about me personally, I would already be gone. No question.
I’m terrified at the idea that my children’s school principals have spoken about and against us in such an obvious way. That’s really terrifying to me. I don’t feel safe to send my children to school. I believe my family is under threat, so I’m very worried about that, and I would have been gone — long gone — if it’s just down to me.
On the other hand, I do represent a certain portion of the community that really feel their voices are not at the table, and that’s why I ran in the first place. That is a huge part of who voted for me. And as difficult as it is, we need to represent groups that aren’t at the table. That’s hard. That’s going to be really, really hard, and no doubt that will continue to cause conflict.”
43 thoughts on “Rowena Chiu speaks with The Post: the full transcript”
We are grateful Rowena for the sacrifices you and your family have made for the community. You genuinely care about us and have taken time to listen to our teachers, parents, students, and the wider community. We admire your bravery and really appreciate you for speaking up and especially representing those whose voices have been underrepresented. We are really fortunate to have you serve on the PAUSD Board and I know you’ll make the schools a better place for all of our children.
Mrs. Rowen Chiu please stay strong don’t let the teachers, students, trustee to bully you like they did at the meeting on Ja.23.25
We need more people like Mrs. Rowen Chiu in our system, a person who has a courage to ask an informative questions, Based on her questions, we learned that the curriculum on the PAUSD web site was not actually the one used to teach.
Mrs. Rowena Chiu correctly expressed her concern of being not safe in the room. Indeed the room was full of bias and violent people who with head shake . teachers’ body language, interruption, expressed their disapproval.
The meeting conducted as an horror movie, I felt intimated just by watching it from home.
Mrs. Rowena Chiu’s feeling was not respected and dismissed, by comparing her unsafely in the room to what Mrs. Reynolds a school employee feels while driving her BMW.
Mrs. Chue is a person of integrity and principle, the only person on the board who can truly work for the mental safety of our children. As such , she was bullied and hence felt unsafe.
Teachers and the Trustee do not like to hear the truth.
I dedicated my time to watching the full 5 hours of the board meeting, so that I could see what happened in that room myself. Rowena was articulate, thoughtful and firm in raising questions like “what is the Ethnics studies curriculum? If the attached document to the board members was a collection of brainstorming content, then it is insufficient information for her to vote to mandate this class.” She further stressed that a large swath of the parent community is extremely nervous of this class without knowing more because these are young minds that we are influencing….and they are children of the parents in the community. Parents need to know what sort of conversations they should be having with their children once this class is out there.
I am a Math Educator in the district. I understand that as an Educator I am put in a position to influence young minds. I take that trust of the parent and student very seriously. PAUSD should do the same and demonstrate that in actions and not just words. Pause the “ethics studies class” for a year…. Share more details of the curriculum- and have a feedback loop from the parent community that helps shape the class. Only then it would be a great offering that we can all be proud of.
Rowena showed moral courage in a room that was pro-ethnic studies by asking for greater transparency from PAUSD, to foster greater TRUST in the parent community. She was fighting for my voice and many other parents and educators like me. I do not know the details of her repost but I do know that two wrongs don’t make a right. It is absolutely wrong that PAUSD is moving full steam ahead on a contentious class without greater transparency and without building trust in the parent community.
It felt to me that the board meeting room was rigged and its audience was set up in a way to achieve a certain desired outcome that two board members vehemently supported instead of being sincerely open to dissenting voices and concerns in the parent community.
Rowena: Thank you for your service. I supported you because you had impressed me with your strong value system of fairness and for representing all voices in the community. I also felt in talking with you then that you would have the courage to maintain independent thought under pressure, a true sign of leadership. I also saw how one staff person from PAUSD lectured you in a disrespectful way. You are an elected official and she is not. You are representing many parents and she is not.
The community stands with PAUSD board member Rowena Chiu and we denounce the persistent dismissal of anti-Asian discrimination. Ms. Chiu’s efforts to spotlight Asian oppression—past and present—deserve recognition, not resistance.
Downplaying the Asian American experience ignores both history and reality. During COVID-19, Asian students endured harassment and physical attacks, often feeling unsafe in their own schools. Yet, these concerns were sidelined. Ms. Reynolds’ remarks trivializing this oppression exemplify a systemic bias that continues to permeate PAUSD.
Minimizing Asian discrimination reinforces a harmful status quo. We call on PAUSD to confront these injustices, amplify marginalized voices, and uphold its commitment to equity. We stand with Rowena Chiu in demanding accountability and meaningful change.
Rowena – thank you – and fyi
Anti discrimination laws forbid racial discrimination, such as the labeling of a group of people with a shared skin color or shared heritage as “oppressors,” in a false Marxist framework/theory that pits races and shared skin colors against one another. Instead of sharing information about other ethnicities, the PAUSD curriculum teaches Critical Race Theory (CRT) tenets. CRT is derived from Marxism, a failed ideology, but which has been resurrected by substituting race for class in order to create Critical Race Theory, which is not history, but instead is a contested political and religious ideology based on envy and hate. It should not be in Palo Alto schools.
Rowena – thank you – and fyi
Anti discrimination laws forbid racial discrimination, such as labeling a group of people with a shared skin color or heritage as “oppressors,” in a false Marxist framework/theory that pits races and those with shared skin colors against one another. Instead of sharing information about other ethnicities, the PAUSD curriculum teaches Critical Race Theory tenets. Marxism is a failed ideology, but resurrected by substituting race for class to create Critical Race Theory, which is not history, but a contested political and really a religious ideology based on envy and hate.
We love you Rowena!!! Stay strong!!!
Thank you Rowena for your work- We support you and we need you in the board! I’m not asian, but you still represent me as the voice of critical thinking, respectful questioning, rational decision making, and true care for all kids and their education. We need more people like you and less people who are there for politics or that can not tolerate a different opinion, or that will push their views without listening to others. Stay strong. Palo Alto voted you in and wants you to stay!
Thank you Rowena for speaking up and being brave! This community needs more people like you. Stay strong we are here to support you.
The Asian voice has been stifled for so many years in this school district that the matter had to boil over one day or another! Well, it has happened!
Asians have a leader and a voice in the board now, after SO many years of trying and toiling. Obviously, it is a threat to the status quo!
To the 13 ex- board members, principals, and everyone who signed the letter to ask Rowena to step down: please spend your time more productively by having *all* students’ best interest in mind; actually listening to *all* parents’ voices. Spend your effort where it will matter! And also do give it a thought who makes this school district #1 in all rankings!
Unfortunately, Reynolds didn’t say anything about Asians not being able to be unsafe. She said that there’s a difference between being actually unsafe, and being in a situation that’s uncomfortable.
Put simply, Chiu is simply not telling the truth about what was said. She lost a vote, didn’t like being in a room where people disagreed with her. And decided to lash out at a black woman in response.
The tortured explanation about her falsehood about teaching ethnic studies is also a tell. In fact, she doesn’t appear to actually teach such a class. Where is it in the curriculum? Can anyone produce a link?
Chiu is stirring up racial division for her own purposes. It’s really disappointing. She should certainly resign.
Rowena used “unsafe” specifically because that’s how she felt – she was the minority voice in the room from the start of a meeting with a hostile tone towards anyone who would raise questions about the course. What gives Ms. Reynolds the right to correct Rowena’s “feelings”? How does Ms. Reynolds know how Rowena felt? By giving an example of her husband driving home, what Ms. Reynolds implied unfortunately was that black people may feel unsafe, but what Ms. Rowena felt was only uncomfortable. Ms. Reynolds was dismissive, insensitive and oppressive.
Spot on.
We are so lucky to have Rowena in our community! A true heroine! People should be ashamed and be held accountable for threatening her and her family. If these people are the educators then we can’t have them. The community will stand up to these bullies until we drive them out.
Rowena,
Thank you.
I am grateful you answered these tough questions.
I hope that the school board, other educators in the district , and the parent community can finally see the curriculum and materials that will be taught next year.
I hope that an investigation will happen at the way this mandatory class was forced through. The community needs to know why opposing voices weren’t heard at this last minute meeting? Why was the room already packed with supporters of the ethnic studies program when the doors opened to the public?
Why were security guards not letting members of the community in the meeting?
How come Rowena had to uncover that the students who took the pilot class were selected by their 8th grade teachers, and that this was not a lottery? The community was led to believe that it was a random sampling/lotto of students.
Why were materials shared one day before the meeting, to the public, that were full of liberated ethnic materials?
How could the board approve a class for all incoming ninth graders, when no one knows what is being taught?
I imagine that there a ton of Brown Act violations, here.
Please know that you were voted in to this role because our voices and concerns have been silenced. I hope you can remain strong and fight for our community.
We want snd need transparency. We need to be heard. We are terrified of a required class that can divide our community.
Our family moved to Palo Alto because of the schools. We stretched our finances to be here. Now, we are thinking that we may have made the wrong decision.
Please Rowena, keep fighting for us.
We will keep fighting for you.
It’s heartbreaking to see how people twist the truth, and cling on any weak strand they can just to demonize Rowena as a mean to get a political advantage.
Great interview. I wish more people in Palo Alto would read it.
Rowena, I am so sorry that you and your family have to go through this. We are very grateful for everything you have done for the community. Stay strong!
Let’s call the police / FBI and investigate these disgusting racist threats against Rowena and her family. These vile human beings should not be allowed to hide in the bushes in Palo Alto and make shadowy threats against democratically elected officials. Simply because Rowena has the ‘gumption’ to ask basic questions in a board meeting while exercising her rights to oversee the school district, she has endured jeers, interruption, putdowns, online abuse. Palo Alto claims that they are a progressive, tolerant town, but this Ethnic Studies debacle reveal that it is nothing like that. The supporters only care about the political win, shutting down opponents, not giving them a voice, the district sending the team of principals and vice principals to pull a political move to go after Rowena instead of actually doing their day job of teaching. It really reveals the true color of Palo Alto, a town hijacked by a vocal minority whose only focus is self interest and privilege preservation. Its worse than overt, in-your-face racism in other parts of the country, because its masquerading as something benign when its totally toxic and cancerous.
Agree the police should investigate the threats towards Rowena’s family. Don’t let those people hide!
Thank you, Rowena! You’re truly amazing!
You are courageous. You asked the hard questions. You repeatedly asked for those of us that could not be there.
This meeting was wrongly managed and the vote was rushed. It was a mockery of civic processes. Many bragged after the vote that democracy won and should be ashamed of themselves.
The room was not created to foster discussion.
Two school Board meetings were scheduled in the same week in the evening. Working parents could not attend and many that could weren’t allowed in. There was selective admittance by the principal on who could be in the room when it was “full”. The materials weren’t even provided for families to review. How is this allowed?
Rowena, thank you for representing us and not giving up! We are all here for you!
Hearing what you have been through is heartbreaking, and we thank you for everything you do. We are incredibly proud to have you standing up for our students and representing our community with such courage.
As a parent, part of me wishes you could step away from these conflicts and brutal attacks to protect yourself and your children. Yet, at the same time, we need your voice, your strength, and your unwavering dedication now more than ever. Please stay strong, knowing that you are not alone—we will stand by you and fight for you, just as you have fought for us.
Dear Rowena,
Bless your heart. I’m so sorry to see that you’re facing so much pressure simply for speaking up in a community that supposedly values equity and inclusion—especially at a meeting about ethnic studies. The irony is hard to ignore.
As a PAUSD parent, I can’t thank you enough for having the courage to speak up and represent a more balanced perspective. It pains me to know that you’ve had to endure so much just to run for the board, and it’s even more distressing that you now have to worry about the safety of your children and family. This is not what Palo Alto is supposed to be.
I truly believe you never intended to cause any harm to Ms. Reynolds. I hope the PAUSD board, principals, and teachers will approach this situation with fairness and consider the full context—not just a part of it. It’s both unfair and unjustified to call for your resignation.
We stand with you. Stay strong, stay brave, and continue to be a voice for balance in our community.
To the broader Palo Alto community: if we can’t allow someone to express a different opinion, what kind of place are we creating?
To Ms. Reynolds: I’m sorry to see that you experienced some terrible cyber bullying. I strongly condemn those. I hope you can put yourself in Ms. Rowena’s shoes and realize that your actions caused her pain first, and that your actions represented the opposite of what ethnics study stood for.
To the principals and teachers of Rowena’s children: please treat the kids fairly. You know the right thing to do as educators. We trust that you’ll make the right decisions.
Rowena, thank you for representing our voices. You are incredibly brave and deserve the utmost respect from our community.
I was also at the board meeting that day, and I physically felt unsafe—just as Rowena did. The moment I stepped into the room, I could sense the hostility. The space was packed with people advocating for Ethnic Studies to become a mandatory course.
Rowena simply suggested that Ethnic Studies remain an elective rather than a graduation requirement until a well-defined curriculum is in place. However, supporters of the mandatory course immediately stood up in unison, held up signs, snapped their fingers in protest, and repeatedly interrupted her speech.
In that atmosphere, I felt an overwhelming sense of pressure. I feared that expressing a different opinion might lead to personal attacks or even have consequences for my child in PAUSD schools. Because of how unsafe I felt, I left the meeting early at 8:30 PM.
I deeply admire Rowena for standing her ground and staying until the very end of the meeting, despite the immense pressure.
Always eloquent, courageous, and caring. Rowena is standing up for honest Palo Alto values. I spoke to several people in that room who also felt unsafe and left early.
Clearly, there are powerful forces that don’t want parents to know what their children are being taught and are attacking Rowena on many levels to distract from the fact that Liberated Ethnic Studies is actually being taught in our schools. The problem with Liberated Ethnic Studies was played out in real-time through the key interchange in the Jan 23rd meeting during which Chiu’s advocacy for her community as feeling “unsafe” was questioned and re-labled by Reynolds as feeling “uncomfortable” ultimately comparing it to how some people feel in a math class. That is not only dismissive but it borders on negligence.
Key statements below:
Chiu explained to the student board representative where the concerns around fear are coming from. “…The fear is based on an ideological framework around oppressor-oppressed that will make some students in this school district feel unsafe…Now, whilst I may not be a part of that affinity group, I have great empathy with any situation where some students feel unsafe. As a school district, we need to take time …” (all three board members supported providing ethnic studies, repeatedly asked for copies of the curriculum and for time to get parent feedback).
Reynolds reply: “I worry about the word ‘safe’ as a person who has to worry about my husband driving and coming home if he gets pulled over…So the word ‘safety’ is something we have to be aware of what that means. Now, being uncomfortable — absolutely. I feel uncomfortable sitting up here naming that I worry about my husband…”
The exchange between Rowena Chiu and Danae Reynolds powerfully demonstrated the dangerously dismissive attitude of the administration towards Ethnic Studies. If the PAUSD administration dismisses a Trustee’s feeling “unsafe” and gaslights her to mislabel their feelings as being “uncomfortable”, this is indoctrination. How exactly are our children going to feel?? And Chiu, as the person who feels unsafe is denigrated with frivolous criticisms (she teaches a class at Berkeley and Princeton and that’s bad???). Don’t be distracted!
Provoking “uncomfortable conversations” is integral to Liberated Ethnic Studies and this, combined with “resisting” “oppressors” defined by their identity is how certain groups can feel targeted just because of their race or culture. Furthermore, throughout the meeting, students were praised for being capable of these “difficult conversations” and they are also being graded for these classes. This dynamic defines “resisting” (often a euphemism for aggression of some kind) the “oppressor” identity as virtuous. People who criticize this model are afraid to speak up or else they will be bullied, canceled, and attacked as Rowena is being now. That is not Palo Alto values and we must not allow it!!! Support Rowena!
What’s Happening in PAUSD?
• Asian students denied recommendation letters, course changes, proper math placement.
• Denied mental health and disability services.
• Parents who speak up? Labeled as “tiger parents.” Blamed instead of heard.
Meanwhile…
• The false narrative that PA suicide victims were mostly Asian males? Repeated again and again.
• Fact: SCC records show zero Asian male suicide victims in the past seven years
This isn’t just bias. It’s a pattern. It’s systemic. It warrants a federal investigation.
#StopAsianHate
As an Asian and PALY parent, I feel deeply upset when the school district officer Mrs Raynolds compared her husband being pulled over by police with Asian’s oppression history. She not only escalated an disagreement to “oppression Olympics”, but the conclusion that her husband is the one who can feel unsafe is very opposite of “E” in the DEI. She created a hierarchy of races. Until today, when her remarks were how this controversy started, she hasn’t apologized for her inappropriate speech in a public school officer’s capacity. Nor did our school district said anything other than condemning Rowena’s repost. It’s so disappointing considering that 40% of PA high school students are Asians. Even more concerning is that Mrs Raynolds is the one who is putting together the Ethnic Studies curriculum that she just pushed the board to approve as a graduation requirement! If this is her mindset, imagine what our kids are going to learn in this course! I urge that all the parents with same concerns keep a tab on it and request the school district to share the complete curriculum before it’s taught as a requirement.
In Rowena’s repost she said nothing inflammatory that even the petition for her resignation from PAUSD principals can’t deny. The accusation is that the repost had broadened the impact of the post that “villainized” Mrs Raynolds. If this is a right cause for resignation, these principals should have turned in their own resignation letters, as the news that brought so much spotlight on Mrs Raynaolds’s condescending words only have them to thank for. We had no idea what happened in X until the petitions from these principals came to light. Many of us don’t even use X and now we do (in order to see what exactly happened) also thanks to them. If they believe that Rowena needs to resign for repost, they and all of journalists should resign for the very same reason.
100% agreed! I didn’t know about the X account until the PAMA and former trustees orchestrated this collective bullying action. They are the ones who propelled that X account into prominence, sparking a surge of clicks!
Ms. Reynolds should resign. After watching the video, it is evident that she is implying the word ‘SAFE’ can only be used by individuals of a certain race, which clearly reflects a racist mindset. As the person responsible for designing a curriculum to teach our children about ES, we need someone who is unbiased.
PAUSD leadership’s actions—13 former trustees, the Palo Alto Management Association (representing principals and administrators), and the teachers’ union (PAEA) calling for Ms. Chiu’s resignation while staying silent on Ms. Reynolds’ remarks—have sent a clear message: Asians don’t have the right to feel unsafe. With the community rightfully outraged, this feels like nothing short of an orchestrated attack on Asians in PAUSD.
I admire and continue to support Rowena Chiu. I am particularly glad that she acknowledges her error in judgment in briefly re-posting on X the re-post that inflamed such a disproportionate backlash against her. If we were all to be judged on one error in judgment, which among us would be deemed innocent? It was inconsistent with her overall deportment and life’s work. Clearly, taking that as a whole, she is not a racist. Rather than a rush to judgment and a call for her resignation, a call for clarification and a meeting between the parties would have been an appropriate response by those who call themselves educators. Instead, they’ve given us all a lesson in how to inflame and divide a community. Rowena Chiu was elected by a large margin to challenge the status quo and this has just proven how much that is needed.
The community, which includes me, stands with Rowena. The district establishment wants her gone. Any question as to WHY she got elected with the most votes? And Rowena doesn’t just represent “a portion” of the PAUSD community, she represents a majority. According to PAUSD, at 40%, the single largest demographic is Asian and I think their numbers are off or at least something happens to those demographics between middle and high school because when I take a visual head count at Paly, Asian is 70%.
The hypocrisy of the electeds and execs who signed the letter calling for her resignation is off the charts. If any of these people, most of whom have some to considerable power in this community, had, like I have, spent the past forty years advocating for building denser housing, I’d give some credence to their assertion. But truth is, only one of them has been active in advocating for housing. Not only have the rest of them not advocated for housing, but a lot of them have advocated against it.
If they can’t translate their convictions on equity and empathy and dismantling of systems of oppression to real action in their own lives in probably the only issue that really matters, they should shut up and stay out of it.
Besides, if you’ve read this article you now know just what kind of a stellar human and intellect Rowena is. Who wouldn’t want her on the school board?
As for stress it’s causing her? Clearly she had no inkling that the work she’s been draw to in dowdy old Palo Alto was going to be orders of magnitude more significant than her MeToo work. 🙂
I speak as someone who is fourth generation Bay Area, lifetime resident of Palo Alto, graduate of Palo Alto High School, and whose children attended Paly. My mother was Scots/Irish Catholic. My father was eastern/Central European Jew. Like the vast majority of people not indigenous to the Americas, I come from oppressed peoples who came to the Americas seeking freedom from oppression.
Rowena, thank you for representing our voice! Be strong. We all stand by your side.
Rowena, I am so sorry you and your family are experiencing this treatment that would make anyone of any race feel unsafe. No one gets to determine how you feel. You represent transparency, authenticity, and a critical voices in our community. Not only were you voted in with a vast base of support, you stood on your principles. I and my fellow Palo Alto voters stand by you and are grateful for your leadership, compassion, and balanced approach.
Ms. Chiu helped “dox” a black employee and place their safety at great risk. But that was “never her intention.” She shared a racist post about that employee and piled on with her own “Oppression Olympics” story, but that was “an error of judgment.” She insults all women who have experienced sexual assault by making the false equivalency that serving on the School Board is as “suppressing” and “hostile” as being told to keep quiet about sexual assault. Finally she’s “terrified” for herself and her family but never once takes full responsibility for the terror she unleashed on a district employee. Now she martyrs herself for the sake of her followers.
Do you even know what dox means? The profile was posted by PAUSD by PAUSD employees and had been available for years. The director of curriculum was not speaking in the capacity of a private citizen, but a public employee. She made an insulting comment to Asians and many parents whose concerns she just dismissed, and rightly received criticism for it.
DOUBLESPEAK, do you honestly believe that Rowena intentionally wanted to cause harm to Ms. Reynolds? What would Rowena gain from doing so? The original post that Rowena retweeted was not racist; it was simply stating facts. However, the comments posted later were offensive and disturbing. As soon as Rowena realized this, she took down her post. Please read the statement she released today, where Rowena explained and apologized:
“My intent in that moment was to elevate the Asian perspective, reiterate how I felt during the meeting, and self-validate my feelings. I do not identify with, nor am I associated with, the group that made the original post. I fully acknowledge that in reposting, I may have overlooked any possible impact on the individual identified in the repost, and I am so immeasurably sorry.”
On the other hand, why isn’t there more discussion about what Ms. Reynolds did to Rowena during the meeting? Please read my earlier post. Those calling for Rowena’s resignation are only focusing on the second half of the story while ignoring the first. The question is: why are they disregarding the full context?
It’s unfortunate that both individuals were hurt. Rowena has apologized. It’s time for Ms. Reynolds to do the same, so the entire community can begin to heal and move forward in unity.
Yes I do believe Ms. Chiu meant to hurt Ms. Reynolds. She can backtrack all she wants with her calculating doublespeak but I’m not buying it. “When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.”
I see this situation quite differently. It appears that Ms. Reynolds is the one who helped “dox” an Asian volunteer, placing their safety at great risk. She has openly dismissed the concerns of others while amplifying her own “Oppression Olympics” narrative.
Furthermore, she has disrespected survivors of sexual assault by trivializing their experiences. Despite the impact of her actions, she has never taken full responsibility for the harm she inflicted on Rowena.
I firmly believe that Ms. Reynolds has hurt Ms. Chiu, and she owes her a sincere apology.
Rowena, thank you for representing our values and courageously speaking out for our community! Stay strong—PAUSD has silenced our voices as concerned parents for too long. It’s time for change!
DOUBLESPEAK, I’m astounded by how you define ‘first time’ as starting from the moment of the repost. Why are you ignoring what happened at the meeting? Reynolds was dismissive, insensitive, and oppressive. She silenced Rowena, and that’s bullying. Imagine if someone verbally bullies you, you make a post, then that person faces backlash, and now everyone blames you, saying you should bear all the consequences. Does that make any sense to you?
If you consider yourself a fair person, start by looking at the full picture—not just a fragment of it. Serving as a school board member is a volunteer role that demands a tremendous amount of time and effort. Rowena is simply trying to offer a more balanced voice of the community. Pls stop demonizing her for a moment of misjudgment (the repost) that led to unintended consequences.
Rowena is the racist here. She targeted black educator who did nothing wrong because she knew she could. She used her power in a despicable way. Backing her shoes lack of knowledge of the facts or blind adoration.
You obviously didn’t even read her repost……
I’m curious about these people who call Rowena a racist while a black employee, Miss Raynalds, is the one who told an Asian woman, Rowena, that there is a distinction between uncomfortable and unsafe and then started talking about how unsafe should fit with the feeling when her husband is pulled over by the police.
These people turned a blind eye to racism against Asian and cried racist against black. Does it already make them racists themselves?