Post: #1

SJWs know no limit: they are now going after... babies and toddlers:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...ldren.html

To sum it up: SJW "scientists" discovered that babies distinguish, recognize, 3 races: Asian White African (and kind of associate African features with negative, "angry" feelings)... and, big surprise, babies prefer seeing their own race...

So, they want to "teach" babies not to be race-aware, not to react positively to their own race... So, they designed a strange process, mixing and photo-shopping faces of African people, and showing them to the babies, so that the non-Black babies will ultimately get used to them...

I mean... indoctrinating babies, from such a young age (3 months old!)... leftists know no boundaries!



"
Scientists say babies have a racial bias at the age of three-months old
They tend to respond more frequently to women who are their own race

Children as young as three months old have been found to have a bias towards women who are the same race as themselves.

Now, a University of Delaware scientist has discovered a simple exercise that he claims can undo this unconscious racial biases in young children.

....
In their latest study, published in July in the journal Developmental Science, Quinn and his collaborators in China used photos of African and Asian faces and morphed them together to create ambiguous images that looked equally African and Asian.

Some of the faces had pleasant expressions, while others looked more severe.

When researchers showed the images to four- to six-year-olds in China, the children identified the happy faces as Asian - the category they were used to seeing - and the angry faces as African...

The scientists' wanted to see whether the children's unconscious racial biases could be disrupted.

They showed the youngsters five different African faces and gave each of the individuals a name, repeating the process until the children could identify each of the five faces by name.
"

Post: #2

We should offer a reverse service, whereby babies are tought to identify and shun SJWs types based on their telltale attributes.

I'm reading some books on the Soviet era at the moment, and there's no difference in insanity and desire to control between this and then. I guess that's what happens when a regime just 'collapses' instead of being actively destroyed and purged.

Post: #3

(08-25-2015 04:33 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  We should offer a reverse service, whereby babies are taught to identify and shun SJWs types based on their telltale attributes.

Very good idea: we should show them pictures of land-whales and short-hair lesbian SJWs, badly dressed and bespectacled, and "associate" them with bad feelings...

But, actually, I bet that instinctively, any baby would feel that way, disliking right away fatties and dykes, on sight!

Now, that could be an experiment: do babies react with disgust to pictures of SJW landwhales and tattooed, square-shouldered dykes?

Post: #4

I predict this will have consequences they didn't intend.

Post: #5

SJWs should learn already that nature always wins....

Post: #6

Someone is getting paid for this bullshit!

Post: #7

It's actually very interesting. I'm a visible minority (white) and I often have 1 or 2 year old babies who just stare at me when they see me. They can tell there is something different about my appearance.

It's not every little child who does this, but it happens.

Like many things, this is interesting science to study, but unfortunately, this won't just be studied. It will by conscripted to serve the purposes of whoever needs to create a career in self-victimization.

Post: #8

(08-25-2015 04:12 AM)Going strong Wrote:  Scientists say babies have a racial bias at the age of three-months old
They tend to respond more frequently to women who are their own race

Wait, so what they are saying is that babies like women who look similar to their mother?
That's, like, shocking! The world will never be the same!

Post: #9

Hamster Level: Capybara

Post: #10

^ Let's make this a thing here.

Post: #11

When children learn to devalue others, they can learn to devalue anyone. Including their teachers.

Post: #12

This has the potential to backfire

Post: #13

Will all the white SJW faggots now be banned from adopting Chinese babies?

Post: #14

(08-25-2015 04:12 AM)Going strong Wrote:  Now, a University of Delaware scientist has discovered a simple exercise that he claims can undo this unconscious racial biases in young children.
...
The scientists' wanted to see whether the children's unconscious racial biases could be disrupted.

They showed the youngsters five different African faces and gave each of the individuals a name, repeating the process until the children could identify each of the five faces by name.[/i]
"

Dude: "I was born wanting to peg other dudes."
Society: How courageous! Here's some free shit, government support and more!

Dude: "I was born wanting to be a woman."
Society: How courageous! Here's some free shit, government support and more!

Baby: "I was born three months ago, and want familiar women with tits that feed me."
Society: Outrageous! Racism! Free shit from government support to eliminate this!

Post: #15

It is bad enough that the SJWs super impose their poorly thought out values on the adults around them, but I really find this repellant. Liking things that look similar to you is normal, it is what babies do. It is not racism. It is a baby.

When I was a kid, there was always some girl who liked to put her dress up over her head. Should she go on the sex offender registry?

Should parents force all tomboys to get a sex change before they change their minds?

What these people are doing is depriving children of making their own way in the world! It is completely scandalous.

Look at this shit I saw in the Daily Mail:

A four year old kid decides he wants a little mermaid doll and his dad turns it into an attention manwhoring viral video where he assures his son:

"You have my promise forever to love you and accept you no matter what life you choose."

I mean seriously. A boy wanting a little mermaid doll could mean absolutely anything or nothing, and now dad is making a big deal about it and planting seeds of doubt in his poor son's head about his sexuality, and giving him all sorts of attention for something that shouldn't have meant anything.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...azing.html

And it is being sold in the story as some sort of heartwarming evidence of the man being an amazing father. He is pimping out his kid's childhood to get attention for himself, and being lauded as if he were Gandhi.

This is no joke. There is a serious assault not only on the young, but on meaning. It makes the re-education scenes of A Clockwork Orange seem like a couple of dudes just hanging out.

Post: #16

Huxley would be proud, next step is the caste system.

Post: #17

Now I know why Republicans are against abortion. The fewer abortions there are, the more unborn children they can teach to be racist, since we all know that all preferences, thoughts and behaviors are a result of social conditioning and inborn traits and differences don't exist. Oh except for sexual orientation and gender identity. Well actually gender is socially constructed. Well actually for trans people it's inborn but if you're a masculine man or feminine woman it's because society told you to be that way.

Post: #18

All right, this thread is still chapping my ass. The thing is, theories like "Everything is Rape," or "Everything is Racism" are just so ridiculously recent, that the idea that you would act on them as if they were articles of faith like the Bible or the Constitution is the height of madness, and on top of that, that you would take these pipe dreams that can barely be considered theories and impose them on babies and children is actual child abuse.

And I bet that the people in the labs Teaching Babies Not To Be Racist are feeling so virtuous, like they are thankful that they can use their training to "make a difference" when all they are doing is virtue signalling for their own self aggrandizement.

There are real rapists and real racists out there, so why not go after them? This is a travesty, a celebration of disingenuous reductionism.

About twenty five years ago, a million years before the red pill, I remember eavesdropping on a couple of teachers talking about a student, and they were both using the hushed tones and raised eyebrows that signal seriousness, but mask the female love of drama. They were talking about a student, a boy of course, and one said, "Garrett did again." And the other, "What, expose himself?" "Yes."

The kid was 5 years old.

Sex offenders in the park expose themselves. 5 years old do not. They are just learning the rules, and to use that sort of overheated language to describe something that was basically innocent is extremely brutal. In those days though, thinking myself a nice guy, I didn't even consider calling those witches out.

And you know the other reason women love making trumped up charges against other people. Diversion. As long as they are talking about someone else, no one is examining their behavior, which they rightly know they need to keep in the shadows.

Man, I am still mad about this. I am literally shaking, heh.

And you know this sort of heightened vigilance (for the actions of others) will always be worse for men than women. What's next?

Oh look, that boy baby is moving his arms and legs more than the girl baby, he must be practicing domestic violence. We need to educate! Retrain!

Seriously, I am pissed off at this shit. I am going to take a self imposed mini two hour ban from the forum just to make sure I don't take my inchoate rage out on you, my brothers.

Post: #19

It's gonna fail.

Post: #20

(08-25-2015 09:08 AM)Coldfire Wrote:  ^ Let's make this a thing here.

Your wish has already been granted

/thread-31013-...pid1083184

Capybaras are a hilarious looking animal.

Post: #21

This reminds me of my left-handed aunt who wasn't allowed to write with her left hand in Catholic school. They tied it behind her back and forced her to write right-handed.

Back then, they associated left-handedness with the devil. Today we look at people who identify with their own race as evil.

In both cases, we're attempting to upend what nature gave us. Is there that big a difference.

PS: The same people who want to alter the way babies perceive race would have a fit if we attempted to alter the way they perceive gender through "gay conversion therapy."

Post: #22

I notice pictures of men were not used in the experiment. I feel...triggered.

Also, the researcher.

Post: #23

This is so ridiculous. Nothing is safe from indoctrination from these SJW types. A baby has nothing but innocence at 3 months and has to completely rely on the care from its Mother first and other family members next.

Is it really such a surprise that a 3 month old child gets happy when there a pictures of people that look like its closest family members that it completely relies on for survival and spends all its time with. A baby from china may not even have seen a black or white person ever so of course the baby will be a little scared when it sees a person it has no idea existed until it was just shown a picture.

The sad part is these people are getting paid to attempt to reverse what helped the human species eventually be the dominant species of the world. The regular hampster is strong but the academic hampster is even stronger because they are indoctrinated... I mean educated.

Post: #24

I believe this is hamster-ese for "I can't find an alpha to give me his seed, so I will try to ruin everyone else's children."

A three month old child has seen very little beyond its parents, can comprehend less of it, let alone remember any of it. Of course a child will want something familiar. On a recent flight, my nine month old daughter kept staring at a black man sitting behind us. You could see the gears turning in her head trying to process that the man had different colored skin. But then the guy did a quick "peek-a-boo" with his hands and ahe thought he was the funniest thing ever. That's just how babies are.

I'll end my rant with one question, did they see if black babies are racist towards whites?

Post: #25

(08-25-2015 06:31 AM)Suits Wrote:  It's actually very interesting. I'm a visible minority (white) and I often have 1 or 2 year old babies who just stare at me when they see me. They can tell there is something different about my appearance.

It's not every little child who does this, but it happens.

Like many things, this is interesting science to study, but unfortunately, this won't just be studied. It will by conscripted to serve the purposes of whoever needs to create a career in self-victimization.

I get this frequently too. Those babies hone in on me when I'm on the train, walking around or anything really. Me being the mature person I am while on the train, usually opt to have a staring contest with each and every baby. I am the undefeated champion by the way.

Quote:Children as young as three months old have been found to have a bias towards women who are the same race as themselves.

I'm curious how they measure this, and how they determine exactly what would be a positive or negative bias. Going on a purely color based scale, what baby wouldn't be shocked when they saw a (nearly) inverted color version of their mother come over to care for them. I reckon baby version of me would be confused as fuck as to what I am supposed to do.

As for the Asians not being threatening, how could any baby honesly be upset at their perma smile face ^_^ <---- I mean shit, that's all I see here 24/7