Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That article talked about how children as young as 6 months absorb their parents attidudes on race and reflect that in various testing. But it was more observable when they were older.
I call BS on that. There is no way that a 6 month old baby can learn or understand racial attitudes. And it is highly unlikely that most parents will bother to teach their baby about such things. They’re trying to figure out how to turn over and crawl at that age.
I call BS on that. There is no way that a 6 month old baby can learn or understand racial attitudes. And it is highly unlikely that most parents will bother to teach their baby about such things.
Well, regardless there seems to be a pretty clear train of thought along these lines on offer by the folks who claim to be our moral betters.
I call BS on that. There is no way that a 6 month old baby can learn or understand racial attitudes. And it is highly unlikely that most parents will bother to teach their baby about such things. They’re trying to figure out how to turn over and crawl at that age.
Kids copy what their parents do. It said "as early as 6 months," but found it much more observabable in kids 4-7, which probably means only a few of their study participants showed anything at the 6 month mark.
Read the article and find out what was wrong with their methodology. I'm not the one who ran it. It was done in 2009 btw.
The most interesting part of it was not the baby part, it was the older kids responses. They got white families from the Austin, TX area, and they asked the kids a pretty simple question "Do your parents like black people?" 38% of the kids answered "no." These parents were asked what they taught their kids about race and almost all of them responded with something about "equality." So clearly many white people say one thing and do another, and their kids know the difference between saying and doing. If there's anything kids pick up on, it's when their parents walk is contrary to their talk.
Last edited by redguard57; 07-27-2021 at 11:54 AM..
imo, the allies didn't loose their political battles --- law's were changed. To step up and be counted does not need to be a part of the process, political or otherwise. It's a lesson in humility, some people do not need to be taught.
"I can say with great confidence we are going to see a lot of lawsuits coming out of K-12 curriculum in the next several years. CRT opponents may sue to enforce some of these laws over defiant individual schools, school boards, and teachers, and may sue on behalf of individual students and their families claiming violations of free speech rights and the right to be free from compelled speech and other violations of the right to private conscience. Supporters will sue to assert the independence of school boards, individual schools, and teachers’ unions, and even potentially in the name of the free speech rights of students. Doubtlessly, individual parents who probably didn’t think of themselves as on either side of this issue will sue if they believe their children have been mistreated, discriminated against, or if the school has created a hostile environment." (my bold for emphasis)
Seems to me the schools that have been sued over 'prayers', need a reminder in what happens when they tick off, parents. imo, if they keep this up, CRT will be that reminder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redguard57
Good. I welcome the courts getting involved. If I were a teaxjer in one of the bam states I'd teach about race every day on the hope the cops arrest me or somebody sues me.
If a person sticks with the facts as related by science, there won't be a problem. It's when they teach alternate science, there's an issue, that may be brought up in a court of law, near you. Here is a sample:
If I were the administators of schools, I'd be careful of the people I plan on ticking off. They will not go quiet into the night, as it's not their mo.
Kids copy what their parents do. It said "as early as 6 months," but found it much more observabable in kids 4-7, which probably means only a few of their study participants showed anything at the 6 month mark.
Read the article and find out what was wrong with their methodology. I'm not the one who ran it. It was done in 2009 btw.
The most interesting part of it was not the baby part, it was the older kids responses. They got white families from the Austin, TX area, and they asked the kids a pretty simple question "Do your parents like black people?" 38% of the kids answered "no." These parents were asked what they taught their kids about race and almost all of them responded with something about "equality." So clearly many white people say one thing and do another, and their kids know the difference between saying and doing. If there's anything kids pick up on, it's when their parents walk is contrary to their talk.
The last paragraph in the article is the one I picked"
"And when the children were reading a book on Martin Luther King Jr. and the civil-rights movement, both a black and a white child noticed that white people were nowhere to be found in the story. Troubled, they decided to find out just where in history both peoples were."
I chose it for a reason, (history is complicated because people are complicated) as you were talking about allies --- Children do not like it (in essence what the 60s was all about with college students in the u.s) when they find out they've been lied to and they learn at an early age to miss trust adults. So what happens when those children grow up to find out, everyone was in the marches for civil rights? I think they learn not to trust.
Do you have kids, I do ... trust is one of those things that is easy when they are young, because at that age the adult isn't seen as someone who can do wrong. It's much later in life, the teenage years that it gets tougher to maintain trust, child to a parent, because it is then children learns their parent can do wrong. That is also more times than not the time that the children will do the exact opposite of what their parents would want them to do --- Trust in a relationship is a difficult thing to maintain.
imo, we should work harder at establishing the facts for children, not the perception of the facts. least we continue to be found out in a lie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redguard57
If there's anything kids pick up on, it's when their parents walk is contrary to their talk.
Several years ago a black female co-worker of mine and I were talking about her newest, youngest member of her family. She told me that her child had a shown a certain 'fear' when around white people. What she did to correct that behavior, she enrolled her child into an all white daycare --- problem solving that's what we do as parents. However, since being a part of this thread, I have a question. How hard would it be if the situation was reversed and a white parent decided to enroll their child into an all black daycare? Just something to think about ...
If a person sticks with the facts as related by science, there won't be a problem. It's when they teach alternate science, there's an issue, that may be brought up in a court of law, near you. Here is a sample:
If I were the administators of schools, I'd be careful of the people I plan on ticking off. They will not go quiet into the night, as it's not their mo.
As I said before: GOOD.
I would challenge them to fire me or put me in jail. I don't teach minors so parents are not relevant. But I already put all my lectures on youtube for students to review, so anyone can view them. Most instructors have been doing this since the pandemic.
If somebody wants to violate my free speech and academic freedom because they disapprove of something, I happily invite it. I WELCOME challenges to my professional integrity because it forces the challenger to have to prove their argument. I'll meet them in the pit of hell. I don't fear ANYONE's half-baked complaints. I'm the professional who studied for a decade to master my subject. They are not. I would GLADLY put my career on the line for integrity, that's how much I stand behind my work.
So if they say I'm teaching some "alternative science?" F***ing prove it. Prove I'm teaching it, prove what I'm teaching is false or malfeasant, and prove you're not violating my free speech. God, I hope someone challenges me in this manner, I will LOVE it. My only regret is that I don't live in one of these CRT ban states.
I would challenge them to fire me or put me in jail. I don't teach minors so parents are not relevant. But I already put all my lectures on youtube for students to review, so anyone can view them. Most instructors have been doing this since the pandemic.
If somebody wants to violate my free speech and academic freedom because they disapprove of something, I happily invite it. I WELCOME challenges to my professional integrity because it forces the challenger to have to prove their argument. I'll meet them in the pit of hell. I don't fear ANYONE's half-baked complaints. I'm the professional who studied for a decade to master my subject. They are not. I would GLADLY put my career on the line for integrity, that's how much I stand behind my work.
So if they say I'm teaching some "alternative science?" F***ing prove it. Prove I'm teaching it, prove what I'm teaching is false or malfeasant, and prove you're not violating my free speech. God, I hope someone challenges me in this manner, I will LOVE it. My only regret is that I don't live in one of these CRT ban states.
I'm sure many teachers and administrators will intentionlly violate specific provisions of these laws to see how courts respond to their lawsuits. Some of you will win, more of you will lose.
I'm sure many teachers and administrators will intentionlly violate specific provisions of these laws to see how courts respond to their lawsuits. Some of you will win, more of you will lose.
Oh it's a Scopes Monkey Trial waiting to happen. I'm going to love it when no prosecutor can accurately define what the laws actually ban and then they get into the history and sociology of race. In court you can't you can't use Ben Shapiro's Youtube editorials as evidence.
I would challenge them to fire me or put me in jail. I don't teach minors so parents are not relevant. But I already put all my lectures on youtube for students to review, so anyone can view them. Most instructors have been doing this since the pandemic.
If somebody wants to violate my free speech and academic freedom because they disapprove of something, I happily invite it. I WELCOME challenges to my professional integrity because it forces the challenger to have to prove their argument. I'll meet them in the pit of hell. I don't fear ANYONE's half-baked complaints. I'm the professional who studied for a decade to master my subject. They are not. I would GLADLY put my career on the line for integrity, that's how much I stand behind my work.
So if they say I'm teaching some "alternative science?" F***ing prove it. Prove I'm teaching it, prove what I'm teaching is false or malfeasant, and prove you're not violating my free speech. God, I hope someone challenges me in this manner, I will LOVE it. My only regret is that I don't live in one of these CRT ban states.
This is a good thing, because it means you are not going to mind this: Going All In
"Finally, the NEA passed a resolution to “research the organizations” that oppose critical race theory—including grassroots parent organizations—and provide resources to groups and individuals targeting them. The national teachers’ union will use union dues, collected from public employees paid by taxpayers, to attack parents who oppose the racial indoctrination of their children."
This petition contends that the CRT curriculum put students like Clark, a mixed-race boy being raised in a Christian household, in “a deliberately designed, psychologically abusive dilemma: participate in the exercise in violation of his conscience and be branded with a pejorative label; or conscientiously refrain from participation, and suffer isolation from his classmates and be maligned by the same labeling regardless.
<snip>
If advocates of Critical Race Theory want to defend its importance, they should start by agreeing to debate the theory on its merits—something none of its most prominent proponents, like Ibram X. Kendi, have agreed to do even after repeated invitations. Why should they when they are constantly rewarded merely for denouncing “whiteness” (to say nothing of cashing in on their ideology by publishing anti-racist baby books)? But as the increasing number of lawsuits and legislative action suggests (and the outraged reactions of liberal Times readers to Goldberg’s column shows), the resistance to CRT indoctrination is growing, and not only among conservatives.”
I firmly believe there are some things people in authority should leave alone --- teaching about race is one of those things.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
