>Well, this program doesn't cost anything in taxes. It's run by the PTO.
>
That's questionable.
PTO includes parents and teachers.
Here in Hamilton, that organization takes up a lot time of teachers, administrators and board members.
While that time may not be directly compensated, it adds to the total time those people spend on their jobs and they consider that.
There's no free lunch. You're paying those people one way or the other.

>I understand the original thinking, too. Something like: "Moms tend to get involved with the school, so let's have an event to bring in the dads." There's plenty of research that says parents being involved with the school is good for education, so noble goals. But:
>
>a) these days, there are plenty of families where neither mom nor dad is involved with the school, so getting either into the building is a win;
>b) these days, there are plenty of kids who have no mom or no dad or neither, and they probably already feel pretty lousy about it, so the school shouldn't pile on;
>c) these days, there are kids who have two moms or two dads, and so a gendered event can leave them out, too.
>

>Bottom line: I'm all for events that encourage those caring for kids to come to the school. It shows kids that parents think school is important. It engages the parents. Everything I've ever heard indicates that in general, getting parents into the building is a win. But we should design such programs so that kids who are already "others" in some way aren't reminded once again of their otherness.
>
Otherness is a fact of life and those kids are being reminded of it every day.
I just think this like this are a needless waste of time.