Don't Read to Your Children

[Guard Dog]

This is a long article. But it is interesting in the conclusions they draw. I'll sum it up this way "Don't read to your children. It enhances their development and puts the children whose parents don't interact with them at a disadvantage" It is interesting to note that rather than encourage all parents to interact with and enhance the development of their children they would rather discourage those who do to apologize to the children of the ones who don't.

 

That is social justice in a nutshell. Reduce everyone to the lowest common denominator.  

 

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/philosopherszone/new-family-values/6437058

[Nonek]

Rather depressing article, I want my children to excel personally.

 

My little ones love the Sagas of Thor and Loki that i've been reading them (with a few minor edits,) the only problem is finding new material. I think I may soon broach A Wizard of Earthsea by LeGuin.

[Rostere]

Disappointed. I thought this would be about something like "don't read to your children, let them read themselves instead". That would pretty much sum up my childhood.

[Guard Dog]

Children whose parents read to them are more likely to enjoy reading themselves when they learn how. I can't imagine a better gift to give your kids than that.

[Meshugger]

Now, now. We all know that it is better to spread misery equally than trying to make a better world through a positive feedback loop starting from home.

[Nonek]

I was largely unsupervised as a child when it came to my fathers library, and though I may have read a few books at far too early an age, such as the Silmarillion, Lord Foul's Bane, a glut of Moorc*ck, and some of the more graphic Ancient Greek classics, I don't regret it one iota. Though my shortsightedness is a constant irritant that renders the world into a blur without my trusty spectacles, the worlds within my mind are bright and vivid as when I first read of them. I regard it as a fine foundation for a child, to hear of morality, philosophy and adventure that piques the intellect.

 

Though I respect teachers as an undervalued profession, I believe that one must give them the right ingredients to mold, and half that work is done at home.

[Meshugger]

My grandmother read 'Animal Farm' as a bedtime-story when i was 9/10-ish. She thought that it had a good message for kids growing up.

 

She was a teacher.

[Malcador]

"‘I don’t think parents reading their children bedtime stories should constantly have in their minds the way that they are unfairly disadvantaging other people’s children, but I think they should have that thought occasionally,’ quips Swift."

 

Weird way to view things, they're not "disadvantaging" others - just trying to do what parents are to do, improve their kids.

[Blarghagh]

It's the parents who don't read to their kids that are disadvantaging those kids.

[Walsingham]

My father had the best idea ever. He told me that I was too young to read a number of the books in the house. Naturally this guaranteed I read them at the first opportunity!

 

However, I agree with GD. What the hell is wrong with society, where it's considered wrong to achieve excellence??

Edited May 8, 2015 by Walsingham

[Guard Dog]

This is an example of the intellectual left run amok. A case study of why these people should never be voted into in kind of political power to ACT on it. Otherwise reading to your children won't just be discouraged, it will be illegal, Or worse:

 

 

According to Swift, from a purely instrumental position the answer is straightforward.

‘One way philosophers might think about solving the social justice problem would be by simply abolishing the family. If the family is this source of unfairness in society then it looks plausible to think that if we abolished the family there would be a more level playing field.’  

 

It’s not the first time a philosopher has thought about such a drastic solution. Two thousand four hundred years ago another sage reasoned that the care of children should be undertaken by the state.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Wut? Rather than encourage bad parents to do better, you want good parents to do worse? Because of the white supremacist cismale patriarchy? That makes about as much sense as combating obesity by encouraging fit people to work out less and eat worse.

[Monte Carlo]

I thought this article was a clever anti-SJW type trolling. But no, it's serious.

 

Wow.

[ManifestedISO]

I don't see it. It's a presumptuously half-written article, but clearly doesn't protest reading to your kids:

 

 

‘We could prevent elite private schooling without any real hit to healthy family relationships, whereas if we say that you can’t read bedtime stories to your kids because it’s not fair that some kids get them and others don’t, then that would be too big a hit at the core of family life.’

[Amentep]

Its a philosophy based article, so its kind of a "thought experiment".

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

I don't see it. It's a presumptuously half-written article, but clearly doesn't protest reading to your kids:

 

 

‘We could prevent elite private schooling without any real hit to healthy family relationships, whereas if we say that you can’t read bedtime stories to your kids because it’s not fair that some kids get them and others don’t, then that would be too big a hit at the core of family life.’

 

 

Something something outrage culture, projecting, etc.

 

I mean, it's a remarkable feat of illiteracy to take a piece of text and launch into a tirade about how it illustrates everything wrong with the SJWs, when "everything wrong", in this context, would be the exact opposite of what the text actually endorsed.

 

Well, I suppose reading bedtime stories to one's children could help improve the parent's reading comprehension, so the enthusiasm about the activity suddenly makes sense.

Edited May 8, 2015 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Blarghagh]

Hm, I felt that while the interviewee didn't protest reading to your kids, that is what the interviewer was trying to focus on.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Hm, I felt that while the interviewee didn't protest reading to your kids, that is what the interviewer was trying to focus on.

 

...Is now clickbait journalism also the fault of the SJW conspiracy? 

[ShadySands]

 

Hm, I felt that while the interviewee didn't protest reading to your kids, that is what the interviewer was trying to focus on.

 

...Is now clickbait journalism also the fault of the SJW conspiracy? 

 

 

Yes

 

They also faked the moon landing

[Raithe]

 

 

Hm, I felt that while the interviewee didn't protest reading to your kids, that is what the interviewer was trying to focus on.

 

...Is now clickbait journalism also the fault of the SJW conspiracy? 

 

 

Yes

 

They also faked the moon landing

 

 

And shot Kennedy.

[Blarghagh]

 

Hm, I felt that while the interviewee didn't protest reading to your kids, that is what the interviewer was trying to focus on.

 

...Is now clickbait journalism also the fault of the SJW conspiracy? 

 

 

Obviously.

 

(On a side note, SJW conspiracy implies SJWs are organized. The only thing SJWs hate more than non-SJWs is other SJWs.)

[Meshugger]

 

I don't see it. It's a presumptuously half-written article, but clearly doesn't protest reading to your kids:

 

 

‘We could prevent elite private schooling without any real hit to healthy family relationships, whereas if we say that you can’t read bedtime stories to your kids because it’s not fair that some kids get them and others don’t, then that would be too big a hit at the core of family life.’

 

 

Nah, it sounds more like the token drunken rambling at a student speakeasy at 4 AM. Simply dumb masquarading as smart with some eloquent language.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

(The only thing SJWs hate more than non-SJWs is other SJWs.)

 

 

...Let's leave the SJW-bashing to the illiterate rage-addicts, shall we?

[Blarghagh]

I was trying to be sarcastic.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

I was trying to be sarcastic.

 

Poe's Law strikes again!

Edited May 8, 2015 by aluminiumtrioxid