I’m going to base my views on what the latest legitimate scientific research has to say on the subject. I’m not going to lie awake at night worrying about what wrong conclusions racists are going to reach through deliberate misrepresentation of new data.
Here, I found it:
Naturally, Andy dismisses all evidence on the subject as inconclusive, so anyone making such claims is doing so without good evidence in his opinion.
You found what? Not a single word about Pinker’s scientific conclusions. Fuck you, liar. Stop making shit up.
What policy changes are the right demanding in education?
Well, the religious right in the US seems to think that teaching creationism along side evolution, as an alternative theory, is a good idea. That’s one policy change I’d hate to see implemented in public (really, any) schools.
Also, their CRT bullshit, their abstinence-only sex ed, off the top of my head.
Yeah, that’s what I figured. I agree with you on that.
The right seems to think that re-writing history to pretend that slaves were happy immigrants is a good policy. At least in Texas schoolbooks.
Like I said, I got my ideas from Pinker. Here’s an example of what he says:
“At the time I started writing this book it seemed clear to me that any between sex differences in thinking abilities were due to socialization practices, artifacts, and mistakes in the research. After reviewing a pile of journal articles that stood several feet high, and numerous books and book chapters that dwarfed the stack of journal articles, I changed my mind. The literature on sex differences in cognitive abilities is filled with inconsistent findings, contradictory theories, and emotional claims that are unsupported by the research. Yet despite all the noise in the data, clear and consistent messages could be heard. There are real and in some cases sizable sex differences with respect to some cognitive abilities. Socialization practices are undoubtedly important, but there is also good evidence that biological sex differences play a role in establishing and maintaining cognitive sex differences, a conclusion I wasn’t prepared to make when I began reviewing the relevant literature.”
This captures my assessment perfectly.
Me too.
The CRT stuff is something the left is demanding and right are objecting to, so I don’t count that. Abstinence only sex-ed is an example, though.
I don’t see how either is relevant to @GIGObuster’s post, though.
So what? What did I say that disputes this? Be specific. Your history on this kind of bullshit is terrible.
This is false, but I’m not going open up that can of worms. You should really lay off the American right-wing media bullshit – they are lying to you.
Right. CRT is not being taught in schools, except for college courses about CRT.
Teaching about slavery and racism isn’t CRT - that’s teaching about slavery and racism.
Pinker says there is good evidence that biological sex differences play a role in establishing and maintaining cognitive sex differences.
You say anyone claiming such a thing deserves social opprobrium.
Ergo, you think Pinker deserves social opprobrium for saying it.
Bullshit, you fucking liar. Fuck off with your ongoing, cite free lies.
My words were very specific, and this isn’t what they said.
Which is entirely missing the point. The left are making changes in the curriculum. The right are objecting to those changes. Whatever you call those changes, the right wants to prevent them, which is not the same as trying to institute changes of their own.
Well explain to me the difference, because I am not seeing it.
Yes, the right doesn’t want details of slavery and racism taught in schools. The left does. Do you agree with the right on this, or the left?
I keep going back and forth on whether you’re a mascot for the UK Dunning-Krugers, or a liar.
iiandyiiii wrote, “Supporting the “women are inferior at STEM” side deserves social opprobrium.”
Does Pinker support the “women are inferior at STEM” side? You certainly did not quote him doing so.
This is also incorrect. I live in a state where one of these bills was just vetoed. Yes, the left got some changes successfully passed in the social studies curriculum, to ensure that things like the Wilmington Race Massacre are taught in schools. The right is also trying to make changes to muzzle how teachers talk–and, more importantly, to intimidate teachers. Many of us have, for years, talked about the history of racism in our nation. Like, my own sixth grade teacher had us read Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry in 1984, and we talked about sharecropping and Jim Crow and the Klan and lynchings.
Technically that teaching would be allowed under the vetoed bill, but the effect of the bill was quite clearly to intimidate teachers away from teaching about the history and pervasiveness of racism. It was an attempt to change the curriculum by keeping people from teaching actual history.