For those who have children here

For those who have children here.
Do you read to your kids?

Other urls found in this thread:

www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/people/swift/
nationalreview.com/article/417997/professor-if-you-read-your-kids-youre-unfairly-disadvantaging-others-katherine-timpf
marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf
archive.is/K07uK
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

This can't be real

If you don't red to your kids, you are setting them up to have nig level intelligence. Of course liberals would want that

are you saying that the negro has a lower inteligence level compared to white folks?

that's pretty reasonable

What a nice professor.

Yeah sure, i read them a couple of greentexts before bedtime.

From the same article

literally Brave New World material

Dimp Timpf

>literally Brave New World material
Fuck that. I'll buyout the city states and issue an embargo and ban on all their luxeries.

The world religion will also be Farts, have fun when I discover the printing press.

>literacy is racist

>((((professor))))

my wife does

At least post his defence and let him speak for himself. In his own words:

"Careless polemical journalism around an interview I did for an Australian radio programme has resulted in serious misrepresentation of the views put forward in my book Family Values: The Ethics of Parent-Child Relationships (Princeton UP 2014), (with Harry Brighouse).

At no point do we suggest that parents should not read bedtime stories to their children. Quite the contrary. Of course they should! All children should get bedtime stories! But it is easy for parents to think only about their own children and forget about or ignore the way in which things they do with and for their children - some of which it is entirely appropriate (indeed morally required) for them to be doing - may have various kinds of effect on other people's children. Perhaps if they kept those effects in mind, they might be more willing to support policies and initiatives that would enable all children to enjoy things like bedtime stories.

In our view it is unfair that some children enjoy the benefits of loving family life, including things like bedtime stories, and some do not. Children who do not receive those benefits have done nothing wrong and do not deserve to be worse off than those who do. Children who enjoy those benefits are better positioned in various competitive contexts than those who do not. In that sense, those who do not enjoy those benefits are unfairly disadvantaged by other children enjoying them. (In other senses, those who do not enjoy those benefits may be better off as a result of other children enjoying them.)"

"In our view it is unfair that some children enjoy the benefits of loving family life, including things like bedtime stories, and some do not. Children who do not receive those benefits have done nothing wrong and do not deserve to be worse off than those who do. Children who enjoy those benefits are better positioned in various competitive contexts than those who do not. In that sense, those who do not enjoy those benefits are unfairly disadvantaged by other children enjoying them. (In other senses, those who do not enjoy those benefits may be better off as a result of other children enjoying them.)

Suppose we are right that parents doing things like reading bedtime stories to their children unfairly disadvantages other children (in the sense of putting them at an unfair disadvantage compared to the children who are receiving the bedtime stories). That does not mean they should not do it. Our book is all about how important it is that they do indeed do things like that. But in our view it would be a good thing if they occasionally reflected on the unfairness suffered by other children, and maybe even took some steps to do something about it.

In our book, we contrast the reading of bedtime stories with the sending of children to elite private schools. We argue that there are much stronger reasons - 'family values' reasons - to protect the former than the latter."

www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/people/swift/

I read with other peoples kids because I am a volunteer in a primary school. All the kids in the year group I work with are white. Is it a form of racism?

>Do you read to your kids?
Obviously because I want to unfairly advantage them

ALL OF MY HATE FOR COMMUNISTS
>we can't make dumb people smart, but equality is more important than civilization, so let's just make the smart people dumb

I don't have kids but sometimes I babysit my cousins, and for bedtime I always make up a story on the spot and they love it.

It usually involves a fox, a bear, a rabbit and a farmer.

...

yeah
Whenever I discuss with braindead lefties the ideas of those ultra marxists about completely abolishing the family, they call me absurd. Nobody could want that, they say. Uh huh. Nobody, right?

Not reading proper and adiquate books to your kids should be punishable.

>In that sense, those who do not enjoy those benefits are unfairly disadvantaged by other children enjoying them.
Wrong, you faggot. Those who do not are unfairly disadvantaged by their OWN SHITTY PARENTS. Someone else having parents that aren't shitty disadvantages no one.

Not real. Not even a good shop. You can tell by the font.

"Let's turn all goyim into literal cattle"

So this guy's defense is that he didn't really want to make people more stupid in the worship of diversity, but instead that he's a shifty jew who wants everyone to feel guilty if they're successful, healthy, and well adjusted. And then to give him guilt money in the guise of "doing something about it." It's literally religion. I hate these people.

Kids hate reading though. They'd rather watch cartoons.

Here's the article. They also talk about "simply abolishing the family" to solve social justice problems.

nationalreview.com/article/417997/professor-if-you-read-your-kids-youre-unfairly-disadvantaging-others-katherine-timpf

Not so much any more - my son prefers to read himself and clocks a good 2 hours of reading every day. Every night before bed when he was younger though, and I made sure he could read and write before he started school. To do any less is to fail as a parent.

Also that article is satire.

>are unfairly disadvantaged

That's what he said though. He's not saying, at least here, that children shouldn't have access to these advantages, more that all children should hae access to them.

>shifty jew

He's english. And he's not saying he wants everyone to feel guilty or stop reading to children, more that they should consider policies that support all children. Come on guys, I would have thought out of all the people who know how the lying media misrepresents things, you would be the first to spot it.

Literally just put my son to sleep an hour ago reading Sword Art Online. God I'm a good father.

No, it's unfair to give my child an advantage over underprivileged children who's parents can't read books good.

assuming its the actual novel and not the weeb piece of trash

>you should feel bad if you're giving knowledge for your children
>you should not read to your children to make everyone equally dumb
This kind of people deserve the noose.

did you get to the glopping part yet?

Does it also involve them taking off their clothes and touching eachother in the tickle places?

Its real, we discussed how retarded it was in my english class like two years ago.

Abolishing the family is straight of the communist manifesto. It's one of the pillars.

marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Manifesto.pdf

>straight of
straight out of

>He's not saying, at least here, that children shouldn't have access to these advantages
>those benefits are unfairly disadvantaged by other children enjoying them.
That's literally what he said. He said that the children of shitty parents are disadvantaged by the children of good parents having good parents. This is not the case. The children of shitty parents are disadvantaged by their shitty parents.

>he's not saying he wants everyone to feel guilty or stop reading to children
>in our view it would be a good thing if they occasionally reflected on the unfairness suffered by other children, and maybe even took some steps to do something about it.
That's literally what he said. He wants people to "occasionally reflect on unfairness." He wants them to feel guilty that they're giving their own kids the best they can provide to give them a better shot at life. And of course, he has a money grubbing solution that oh so coincidentally just happens to line his own pockets.

This guy argues like a motherfucking jew. He makes a jewish, communist point. Then he gets called out on how fucking horrible he is, and he backtracks with a "but, but, but!" He tries to hide his bad ideas underneath academic language in the best traditions exposed by the Sokal Hoax. But when you consider his ideas, you understand that actually the media accurately portrayed what he said, and he's just trying to slime his way out of it now.

It's not "real". Basically was just someone trying to pull a check your privilege around caring for a child trying to showcase that it's something many take for granted.

But journalists gotta make money, so they made this sensational story for you dumbshit consumers and you're still biting on the dead horse so they won. Hope you enjoy being part of the problem you worthless fuckers.

We need to kill the communists before it's too late.

You just know that's their ultimate goal. If they'll destroy your history, your religion, your culture, your way of life, they'll eventually destroy your family as well. Then people will simply 'exist' with no purpose, other than slave-like drudgery.

Currently reading volume 3 of the progressive novels

No, I decided to read them to him chronologically. That way, he will be reading to his own grandkids when the progressive novels catch up to that part.

This is bullshit anyways. IQ is 70% heritable by adulthood. That means 70% nature, 30% nurture. As long as children get proper nutrition, the most you'll ever do is give them a 30% edge.

>Basically was just someone trying to pull a check your privilege around caring for a child trying to showcase that it's something many take for granted.

What do these words mean?

archive.is/K07uK

For fuck's sake mate, no.

That's why you got a backhand.

The only people who beat me were nuns.

Some would pay for that

One of my earliest memories is being in nun daycare. All the children were lined up along the wall in the room while one child was in the center being punished. Everyone was crying and scared. The kid in the middle got his pants pulled down and was beaten with a ruler. Then he was made to put his pants back on and go line up with the other children. The nuns then pulled out another child into the center. He screamed as they dragged him by the ear, and they scolded him for not sitting still when he was told to. This sort of thing was a daily occurrence, and usually went on for an hour or so after lunch.

As for me, I was an ornery child who refused to learn his lesson. I realized the nuns were going to beat me basically no matter what I did, so I resolved to always call them penguins and tell them they were going to hell. I had my mouth washed out with soap more times than I can count.