Originally Posted By TomSawyer This should be fun... <a href="http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1142722231554&call_pageid=970599119419" target="_blank">http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/ cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1142722231554&call_pageid=970599119419</a> "Remember the whiny, insecure kid in nursery school, the one who always thought everyone was out to get him, and was always running to the teacher with complaints? Chances are he grew up to be a conservative." <snip> "In the 1960s Jack Block and his wife and fellow professor Jeanne Block (now deceased) began tracking more than 100 nursery school kids as part of a general study of personality. The kids' personalities were rated at the time by teachers and assistants who had known them for months. There's no reason to think political bias skewed the ratings — the investigators were not looking at political orientation back then. Even if they had been, it's unlikely that 3- and 4-year-olds would have had much idea about their political leanings. A few decades later, Block followed up with more surveys, looking again at personality, and this time at politics, too. The whiny kids tended to grow up conservative, and turned into rigid young adults who hewed closely to traditional gender roles and were uncomfortable with ambiguity. "The confident kids turned out liberal and were still hanging loose, turning into bright, non-conforming adults with wide interests. The girls were still outgoing, but the young men tended to turn a little introspective." The study was done by a professor at Berkeley, so of course none of our conservative WE folks are going to give it any credence... but I thought it was amusing enough to post.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By cape cod joe You know I'm odd No seriously Tom, you know I don't like to use a broad brush with to paint any group into a certain niche. When each human being is given a discrete personna by God, I don't like to think that if a person is brought up a certain way, he or she unequivocally turns out a certain way. Granted you and I both try our darndest to inculcate certain values to our offspring, but I don't like the GENERALIZATION that the study portrayed or any generalization for that matter. It takes away free choice, don't you think?
Originally Posted By TomSawyer The study didn't report a generalization - it reported the findings of the study. I don't really understand how you think a study can take away someone's free choice - it is observing the choices that have already been made, not forcing choices to be made.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<And all Blacks eat fried chicken Tom.>> Doesn't everyone eat fried chicken? Life without fried chicken would be very sad indeed.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I like fried chicken, baked chicken, chicken cordon bleu, chicken quesilldias, chicken caciatore, chicken soup, chicken nuggets, chicken pot pie. Oh...and hamburgers.
Originally Posted By woody It seems to me that the Liberals are uncomfortable with the ambiguities of the Iraq War. The Liberals are rigid with their anti-war arguments and conspiracy theories. "young men tended to turn a little introspective." I'm sure they mean FLIP-FLOPPERS like John Kerry. See TomS, I can give credence to this report.
Originally Posted By friendofdd >>>The whiny kids tended to grow up conservative, and turned into rigid young adults who hewed closely to traditional gender roles and were uncomfortable with ambiguity. "The confident kids turned out liberal and were still hanging loose, turning into bright, non-conforming adults with wide interests. The girls were still outgoing, but the young men tended to turn a little introspective.">>> What are the odds that each group, as adults, thinks theirs is the better way, even with the conservatives portrayed in this negative fashion?
Originally Posted By cape cod joe last post before 5 holes Woody --It proves nothing, hence my indictment that the study was a non-provable generalization, that I was not able to get across to Tom Sawyer
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Of course it proves nothing. But it's interesting that some people are whining about it.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>hence my indictment that the study was a non-provable generalization, that I was not able to get across to Tom Sawyer<< I understood what you were saying, but it was wrong.
Originally Posted By cmpaley I think this thread kinda shows that conervatives do tend to get annoyed rather easily. I think of whining as an inherently selfish act: "I'm bothered by this" (insert whiny voice). I don't think of that when I hear liberals point out problems. Just an observation.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper So, had the article concluded that the whiny kids tended to be Democrats later in life and it had been posted by Beau, you think there would not have been a response from liberals on this site. There would have been.
Originally Posted By cape cod joe As an Independent I'm curious as to how Tom can say I'm wrong. For crying out loud TS it's an opinion that you can't construe so how can it be slam-dunked as "wrong." As we both know, I'm wrong plenty enough as it is, but this is strictly opinion. What am I wrong about out of curiosity here or are you just funnin me?
Originally Posted By TomSawyer You're wrong that the study made a generalization, ccj. It's no more of a generalization than saying something like "Of the 94 cars waiting for the Martha's Vineyard ferry, 56 of them have Massachusetts license plates." My headline was, of course, a generalization. But you said the study was a generalization, which is wrong.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Without getting in to the whole whiny thing, I think it is very fair to say that conservatives tend to be more rigid and absolute in their views. Their abhorrence of situational ethics is a good example of that.
