This guy’s name is ACTUALLY Fedora? I’m not sure we can blame him for his opinions, when his name is the symbol of neckbeards everywhere.

I agree with all of that, but all I was trying to point out is that in our current culture, status is so directly tied to wealth and the myth of the meritocracy, that middle and upper class men (and some women!) think that anybody who has less wealth than they do is inherently lower and deserving of whatever happens…

I guess what’s terrible to me about it is that people have the capacity to identify their own sociopathic behavior that might be influenced by Dunbar’s number, but choose not to. Instead, we ask our leaders to find a psychological work-around to trick us into being decent. It shouldn’t be that way.

It’s a little disturbing that the only way some men approve of feminism comes from their being superior by default.

I disagree with the assertion that this is a part of the nature of man. Many anthropologists theorize that hunter-gatherers were egalitarian, and that our current society of selfishness is learned, not innate:

This was my takeaway:

Actually, a really good potter should have a decent understanding of thermo, and a background in geology/materials chemistry couldn’t hurt either.

I’ve received a bunch of replies asking why selfishness for one’s own children is bad. If you ask this question, then you likely disagree with me about everything, including my assertion that an ideal society is an egalitarian society, but I thought that I would put this out there:

Also, to add a story:

That’s how every person who is too dumb or evil to see beyond themselves has acted throughout history.

TBH, I have no ideas for what to do with your primary school dilemma. I teach high school science. I try to bring in guest speakers when appropriate, and parents are hugely helpful. Even though I have a PhD, students don’t see me as a “real” scientist, but they are pretty stoked when I can call upon people who are in…

You went to school during a shitty time in education. Sucks, but most classrooms are differentiated (or should be) now, and require students to learn collaboratively.

They should be spending their resources improving the school that their student attends for everybody.

Parents like the author (ie rich, college educated ones) are engaging in selfish behavior on both fronts. They are removing students who are well supported at home from school. Students who are well supported at home are typically better students than students who do not have support at home. Classrooms with a higher…

Was it unanticipated? Or accepted that rich racists (both overt racists and the crunchy granola type of racist) would opt out of society? I’m genuinely curious about the history. My bet would be that people understood at the time what would happen, but knew that it was a shitty excuse for not doing what was right.

Students who have significant home resources bring more to the classroom than they “take away” in the form of my attention. Not a universal truth, but a reasonable generalization.

In a strictly selfish sense, for affluent families with highly educated parents, I could see homeschooling as a net good for the child. As a teacher myself, I mourn the loss of students who have decent support systems to the general classroom. The damage removing students who have great advantages does to everybody…

People “need” to learn about science so that they don’t turn into anti-vax morons

There is this thing called satire. You should read about it.

Reasonable people can wait until they see you again to get their shit back, and crazy people (you) drive out of their way to re-obtain junk that is just going to sit in their cabinet until the next dinner party anyways.