I 100% absolutely, completely understand this sentiment and recognize even offering that perhaps there are unintended consequences to this makes me a grouch. So be it.

Teaching is not a calling.

Anti-union people like to bag on teacher unions focusing on teacher work conditions. In effect, though, union leaders are saying if we don't focus on what teachers need, society sure as heck isn't. (Not Shanker, though.)

Saying, "it's about them, not us" has a different meaning in a society where teachers don't have to work multiple jobs. Where they don't have to use their own funds to do to their jobs well.

This #PairedTexts is a consequence of "about them, not us." https://twitter.com/JennBinis/status/1135245959481442305

And this mini-rant is a reminder that rhetorical language that positions teachers as greedy, selfish, or otherwise uncaring about children because they dare to consider their own needs is so deeply rooted in sexism, it feels uncomfortable to even frame it that way.

("That tweet doesn't say that, Jenn, it's saying school should be about children and their needs." Yes! You're right. But everyone* who becomes a teacher knows that. It's spelled out in the job title. And! how do you think we ended up with a profession that's 80% women?!?)

*Me claiming everyone who becomes a teacher automatically considers things from student's pov is as meaningless as presuming teachers need a reminder to be empathetic.

Also. If you want to know what students think about change... ask them. No lens needed.