>Look guise I found this soooper scary article about one British retard’s opinion
>now go feign outrage at this clickbait pls
Etc etc etc

FAKE

>>511452597 (OP)
>At one point, Swift even flirted with the idea of “simply abolishing the family” as a way of “solving the social justice problem”

>>511452599
https://www.nationalreview.com/2015/05/professor-if-you-read-your-kids-youre-unfairly-disadvantaging-others-katherine-timpf/

my three year old already has a couple of 5 page books memorized. get mogged.

>>511452597 (OP)
Historians will have a field day figuring out how soi destroyed a nation.

>>511452603
It will be a guarded secret and anything published by "historians" will be misinformation.

>>511452603
>>511452604
>>>/pol/andfuckingstaythere

>>511452603
Hate the onions but not the slurper.

>professor
>university/academia

>>511452597 (OP)
ccru, this ur uni?

>>511452597 (OP)
Off with her head!

>>511452609
What was that anon? You want her promoted to education secretary?

>>511452608
Warwick restructured the CCRU out of existence, remember?

How is that not just factually true though? People educate their kids and send them to good schools so they can have an advantage over others for the most part.

>>511452612
"advantaging" your kids is not equal to disadvantaging others. Everyone is free to read to their kid. If they somehow were withholding books from others, that would be disadvantaging.
Academics are dumb these days.

guys this is obvious ragebait clickbait, stop falling for it

>>511452600
>At one point, Swift even flirted with the idea of “simply abolishing the family”
the swift wikipedia is a deep rabbit hole.

>>511452614
let's not act like the soi current wasnt the main vibe being pushed for the past decade from all vectors

>>511452597 (OP)
My mom would read children's stories to me. My dad would read Baron Munchausen, The Odyssey and whatever issues of MAD magazine were on hand.

>>511452616
If you read the article that the ABC article that The Nation cites as the source, you'd know that The Nation article is total ragebait and a deliberate twisting of the words and message of the professor.
https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/philosopherszone/new-family-values/6437058

>>511452597 (OP)
If you follow the link to the original article he’s basically just saying that as a philosopher it’s his job to take up every faggy position and defend nonsense like this. That “solutions” that are unworkable are still looked at by philosophers interested in social justice issues.
Looking at his bio he’s also doing some “give all you can” type effective altruism.
So what you got is a clickbait distortion of a yawn of an article about a nobody professor and the only reason you pretended to care was to post that he was a jew.
Congrats.

>>511452618
>>511452619
So what if this thread twists the truth a little? The Other Side is always lying, so it's only fair if My Side twists the truth sometimes too.

>>511452620
You don't need to waste time twisting the truth literally just report accurately and you'll be outraged enough

>>511452618
And that's a good thing, because it has been the same modus operandi of intellectuals for the last century and more: throw out the seed of some insane idea, couch it in some variation of "well I don't mean it, like, radically", and rely on your students that go on into journalism, entertainment, schools, counseling etc. to implement the actual, full-on insane version. That's exactly what happened with wokeness.

And there's nothing milquetoast about the whole complex of his ideas: he advocates for banning private schools because of unfair advantages (having gone to one himself ofc); and he says that while bedtime reading does confer advantage too, it's "ok" because it also strengthens familial bonds - but parents still should "think about" the unfairness they're perpetuating once in a while.
So the overall implication is, it is immoral to want your child to do well and succeed. Only if it's coupled to something emotionally nice, like bonding during bedtime stories, can you have a more or less clean conscience. Other than that, your first thoughts should be with other people's children and their success - I guess non-white new arrivals that bless us with diversity, for example. How far is it really from simply advocating that the privileged (=white) should simply stop breeding? Then they could focus all their energies on helping the needy, who of course cannot be expected to stop.

So yeah, it's great when a "philosopher" like that gets "misrepresented" - that means of course, his motte-and-bailey bullshit is disregarded, and the logical implication of his position is attacked as is. The only thing better would be outright destroying this bastard's career. Oh well, let's see what the future brings.

>>511452597 (OP)

I am trying to see where he is coming from but this is hard to justify even as a leftist. Maybe the point is that the rich and privelage should think about how their actions (not reading bed time Stories but economic class exploitation) disadvantages other children who cannot have these experiences.

>>511452612
It is, but it's the idea that it is morally righteous to make sure that your children are stupid enough so that tyrone and laqueesha can compete that is retarded. It's only natural to want your children to succeed and only a sick and degenerate culture would think that it would be righteous to sabotage them for the benefit of some other group.

>>511452613
>"advantaging" your kids is not equal to disadvantaging others. Everyone is free to read to their kid. If they somehow were withholding books from others, that would be disadvantaging.
>Academics are dumb these days.
Then you have your teacher who published about her "work". To make little boys and girls more equal? You have to withhold the spatial learning toys boys grab for. Building block, legos, etc. Only females are allowed to play with those in HER kindergarten and classroom. Its her personal contribution to make the world a better place.

>>511452597 (OP)
Oh well commie, sorry you found out at age 54 it took that long to know its a survival of the fittest world and some people get "advantages" and its so super sad.

>>511452613
It is in a competitive economy
I agree there's nothing immoral about it (except insofar as spiritual things and art are subordinated to profit)

>>511452627
economy isn't a zero sum game retard

>>511452597 (OP)
ok shlomo

>>511452597 (OP)
>>511452601
>ten fucking years ago

>>511452597 (OP)
Kek tranny /lit/ mods actually moved this to /pol/

>>511452597 (OP)
>yet another apolitical thread
Are there even jannies anymore?