It, Our Child
The debate over nature vs. nurture has prompted ever more researchers to investigate the subject. One of the more interesting outcomes is that attitudes found in children have been taught, after all. In a study of whether children were “born racist,” researchers found that racist attitudes in some children were actually influenced by subtly racist attitudes in their “liberal” parents:
Vittrup was taken aback — these families volunteered knowing full well it was a study of children’s racial attitudes. Yet once they were aware that the study required talking openly about race, they started dropping out.
It was no surprise that in a liberal city like Austin, every parent was a welcoming multiculturalist, embracing diversity. But according to Vittrup’s entry surveys, hardly any of these white parents had ever talked to their children directly about race. They might have asserted vague principles — like “Everybody’s equal” or “God made all of us” or “Under the skin, we’re all the same” — but they’d almost never called attention to racial differences.
They wanted their children to grow up colorblind. But Vittrup’s first test of the kids revealed they weren’t colorblind at all. Asked how many white people are mean, these children commonly answered, “Almost none.” Asked how many blacks are mean, many answered, “Some,” or “A lot.” Even kids who attended diverse schools answered the questions this way.
More disturbing, Vittrup also asked all the kids a very blunt question: “Do your parents like black people?” Fourteen percent said outright, “No, my parents don’t like black people”; 38 percent of the kids answered, “I don’t know.” In this supposed race-free vacuum being created by parents, kids were left to improvise their own conclusions — many of which would be abhorrent to their parents.
It may turn out that the question of whether Sasha or Storm or Coy was born a girl or boy is inseparable from and intertwined with the issue of what their parents subconsciously wanted them to be, even if they were unaware of it.
So are we free? Can we safely teach our children anything without guilt? Or can we only safely teach them things if it’s OK? Or is the world irredeemably divided into archetypes with which we have to live?
The Three Conjectures at Amazon Kindle for $1.99
Storming the Castle at Amazon Kindle for $3.99
No Way In at Amazon Kindle $8.95, print $9.99
Tip Jar or Subscribe or Unsubscribe
I sense opportunity.
I sense opportunity.
THE LADIES’ ROOM LOUNGE
I remember the day I lost my way
And wandered by mistake
Into a gorgeous ladies’ lounge
And did a double take
Soft lighting, carpet, and soft chairs
And mirrors by the score
Embraced a room of women who
Looked up as through the door
The apparition that was I
Asked pardon for my fault
They looked away as if to say
Too bad, it’s only Walt
THE LADIES’ ROOM LOUNGE
I remember the day I lost my way
And wandered by mistake
Into a gorgeous ladies’ lounge
And did a double take
Soft lighting, carpet, and soft chairs
And mirrors by the score
Embraced a room of women who
Looked up as through the door
The apparition that was I
Asked pardon for my fault
They looked away as if to say
Too bad, it’s only Walt
But you find out if you're Steve Jobs or Albert Einstein or Charles Manson in due time. When you're 4 years old your parents and society owe you a template. When you ask them "where do I knock?" a good parent says "the door". You shouldn't bring kids up asking them questions like "do you think you're a boy or a girl?"
The normative is a guide without which a child would be very much disadvantaged. I am glad I was taught to walk on the floors and button my fly and told never to... (show more)
But you find out if you're Steve Jobs or Albert Einstein or Charles Manson in due time. When you're 4 years old your parents and society owe you a template. When you ask them "where do I knock?" a good parent says "the door". You shouldn't bring kids up asking them questions like "do you think you're a boy or a girl?"
The normative is a guide without which a child would be very much disadvantaged. I am glad I was taught to walk on the floors and button my fly and told never to enter the girl's room. If we don't believe this, let's just take down the traffic signs and disable the stoplights and see what happens.
If in time people find a good reason for not behaving in the normative way they should make that decision as adults and not pursuant to some wacky fad their parents believed in growing up. I wonder how many of these transgender children are going to grow up hating their parents. (show less)
Tod: You know, Mrs. Buckman, you need a license to buy a dog, to drive a car - hell, you even need a license to catch a fish. But they'll let any butt-reaming a-hole be a father.
(or a mother)
Tod: You know, Mrs. Buckman, you need a license to buy a dog, to drive a car - hell, you even need a license to catch a fish. But they'll let any butt-reaming a-hole be a father.
(or a mother)
Still, children are impressionable, and can be taught. I believe they can be falsely taught they are the "wrong" gender and be made to suffer, also. Lord save them from confused, PC parents.
Still, children are impressionable, and can be taught. I believe they can be falsely taught they are the "wrong" gender and be made to suffer, also. Lord save them from confused, PC parents.
As to burning witches—if witchery were real, witches should be burned.
As to burning witches—if witchery were real, witches should be burned.
The truth is that we never have choice. We just get a new form of coercion. One day homosexuality is prohiobited, the next day its prohibited to get help for it. Your form of government might work; but does it exist anywhere?
The truth is that we never have choice. We just get a new form of coercion. One day homosexuality is prohiobited, the next day its prohibited to get help for it. Your form of government might work; but does it exist anywhere?
Sure it does! Saudi Arabia, Iran, and most any fundementalist Muslim country. Of course, if one lives long enough, the U.S. may well become a Christian theocracy if the social conservatives can settle on which brand of church doctine they want to represent christianity and lead the theocracy.
Sure it does! Saudi Arabia, Iran, and most any fundementalist Muslim country. Of course, if one lives long enough, the U.S. may well become a Christian theocracy if the social conservatives can settle on which brand of church doctine they want to represent christianity and lead the theocracy.
"Conversion Therapy, for example, “is a range of pseudo-scientific treatments that aim to change sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual” and is — rightfully — condemned as unnatural."
I don't know what "conversion therapy" is or is supposed to be, but there are a range of therapies for helping people who have homosexual tendencies live a normal life according to their beliefs. The point is not to "change" your tendencies, but to deal with them so that you can live a normal traditional married life.
Of course it isn't perfect, but what therapy is? It is no more "unnatural" then helping a person deal with OCD or kleptomania or ADD or any of the many things... (show more)
"Conversion Therapy, for example, “is a range of pseudo-scientific treatments that aim to change sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual” and is — rightfully — condemned as unnatural."
I don't know what "conversion therapy" is or is supposed to be, but there are a range of therapies for helping people who have homosexual tendencies live a normal life according to their beliefs. The point is not to "change" your tendencies, but to deal with them so that you can live a normal traditional married life.
Of course it isn't perfect, but what therapy is? It is no more "unnatural" then helping a person deal with OCD or kleptomania or ADD or any of the many things people are born with that get in the way of their living the life they wish to live.
What you are suggesting is evil. (And by the way, wasn't homosexuality itself referred to as "unnatural" until recently? I would love to see someone make a statement about homosexuality that does not equally apply to incest.) (show less)
I'm probably in the minority here, but that pic of Bowie is hot :) Some guys can pull that androgynous look off and still be men!
I'm probably in the minority here, but that pic of Bowie is hot :) Some guys can pull that androgynous look off and still be men!
Now, this woman was married to a very confused guy who was now preparing for sex change surgery. But of course, that could not have ANYTHING to do with the childrearing, could it?
Now, this woman was married to a very confused guy who was now preparing for sex change surgery. But of course, that could not have ANYTHING to do with the childrearing, could it?
Am I reading this right? The more liberals twist and try to make their reasoning work, the loonier it gets. The scary thing is that so many people find it reasonable based on nothing so much than that so-called experts deliver these pronouncements.
Am I reading this right? The more liberals twist and try to make their reasoning work, the loonier it gets. The scary thing is that so many people find it reasonable based on nothing so much than that so-called experts deliver these pronouncements.
First bit should read "Of course, gender, which is ..."
First bit should read "Of course, gender, which is ..."