Little kids already know who is smart

The London Daily Mail reports:

Children associate being ‘brilliant’ with white men, but not black men, a shocking new study suggests.

Researchers surveyed 200 children and found that, regardless of their own race, they linked the stereotype of intelligence with white men much more than white women.

However, by contrast, the stereotype wasn’t applied to black men, as black women were seen by the children as smarter. ...

For the study, published in the Journal of Social Issues, the team recruited 200 five and six-year-olds from public elementary schools in New York City. ...

The team says that policies that help children understand what ‘intellectual ability’ is might ‘reverse this inequity’.

The full paper: The acquisition of gender stereotypes about intellectual ability: Intersections with race.

This is funny. It is like professors writing an academic paper on whether the emperor has no clothes. All the adults agree that he is wearing clothes, but the 5-6yo children say he is naked. So the professors recommend policies for brainwashing the kids into thinking that the emperor is wearing clothes.

Even tho the academic paper has a section on "limitations" of their work, they never address the possibility that the kids could be right. I am sure that they would just cite an authority to show the kids wrong, if they could.

No, it is pretty clear that this paper is about brainwashing kids to unlearn the truth.

Another Daily Mail article says that a Kenyan used laser-guided Nike shoes and an army of pacers to run a sub-2-hour marathon. No one accepts this as a record, because of the obvious cheating involved.

Joanna Schroeder writes in a NY Times op-ed:

Racists Are Recruiting. Watch Your White Sons.

Parents need to understand how white supremacists prey on teen boys, so they can intervene. ...

The first sign was a seemingly innocuous word, used lightheartedly: “triggered.”

As my 11- and 14-year-old sons and their friends talked and bantered — phones in hand, as always — in the back seat of the car, one of them shouted it in response to a meme, and they all laughed uproariously.

I almost lost control of the car. That’s because I know that word — often used to mock people who are hurt or offended by racism as overly sensitive — is a calling card of the alt-right, which the Anti-Defamation League defines as “a segment of the white supremacist movement consisting of a loose network of racists and anti-Semites who reject mainstream conservatism in favor of politics that embrace implicit or explicit racism, anti-Semitism and white supremacy.” People associated with this group are known for trolling those who disagree with them, and calling critics “triggered” is a favorite tactic.

No, this is just crazy Jewish propaganda. The alt-right is not a white supremacist movement, and "triggered" is not a codeword. The word is in common use by right and left wingers.

Again it appears that kids have a firmer grasp on reality than adults writing for the NY Times.

the “white genocide” — which the Anti-Defamation League defines as the white-supremacist belief that the white race is “dying” because of growing nonwhite populations and “forced assimilation.”

But of course, it’s not just that we want to prevent our sons from becoming perpetrators of mass shootings. We want to raise them to be the kind of men who would never march with the neo-Nazis who chanted “Jews will not replace us” in Charlottesville before one of them killed a counterprotester, Heather Heyer.

More Jewish propaganda. Apparently she thinks that being a killer neo-Nazi is the same as not wanting Jews to commit genocide against Whites.

The term "genocide" was popularized by Jews, and defined by them to be broader than killing an ethnic group. An accepted definition of genocide is:

the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group

Today there are those who are actively working towards white genocide, and those working against it. White supremacists want whites to be supreme, while others merely oppose its destruction. There is a difference.

By publishing articles like this, the NY Times shows that it is firmly on the side of destroying whites.

Many of these spots are created and promoted by organizations like PragerU, which, Dr. Duffy notes, is not an accredited university but a propaganda machine that introduces viewers to extremist views via video.

This is more crazy name-calling paranoia. I have watched a bunch of PragerU videos, and none of them are extremist. Prager is a religious Jew with mainstream conservative views. His videos are some of the least radical political videos you can find.

Google may lead them to white nationalist outlets like The Daily Stormer, where hate and harassment are normalized. Often, they have no idea which sources are reputable.

They may also find videos by more mainstream figures, including members of the so-called intellectual dark web like Jordan Peterson, a Canadian psychologist and professor at the University of Toronto, whose conservative perspectives on feminism and gender are very popular among young men and often are a path to more extreme content and ideologies.

I have also watched a bunch of Peterson videos, and they are all completely innocuous. He has rules for life like petting a cat and cleaning up your room. He is quite centrist in all his views. He is not a right-winger, and never expresses any extreme views.

On the other hand, The Daily Stormer does believe in triggering people. It offends like the new Joker movie offends. It shocks you into re-examining your beliefs. If you want to stay in your comfort zone, then don't watch the movie and don't view the web site.

Parents also need to encourage our sons how to think critically about the things they’re hearing online. One term I’ve debunked in this way for my kids is “snowflake.” An insult embraced by moderate conservatives and the alt-right alike, it’s used to dismiss people who complain about racism, sexism or homophobia as laughably delicate.

She misunderstands the term.

Snowflake is a 2010s derogatory slang term for a person, implying that they have an inflated sense of uniqueness, an unwarranted sense of entitlement, or are overly-emotional, easily offended, and unable to deal with opposing opinions. ...

It is popularly believed, but not proven, that each actual snowflake has a unique structure. ...

1996 novel Fight Club, which contains the quote: "you are not special, you are not a beautiful and unique snowflake".

The point of the metaphor is that snowflakes are supposed to be beautiful and unique, not delicate.

Who is more of a delicate snowflake? The person who wants people to stop racial slurs or mocking of gay people or the person who is upset and offended by the use of the phrase “Happy Holidays” — a common talking point during Fox News’s infamous War on Christmas segments?

Again, she misunderstands. No one is upset and offended by "Happy Holidays". Fox's Bill O'Reilly merely disagreed with what had been a campaign to eliminate "Merry Christmas". It was the leftist non-Christians who were triggered by "Merry Christmas", and who sought to marginalize Christian expressions.

Yes, there really are campaigns to diminish the power and influence of Whites and Christians. Just read the NY Times, where it publishes anti-White and anti-Christian propaganda every day.