|
Post by Vince524 on Oct 14, 2017 19:55:57 GMT -5
This is what you said: And I, like Barack and Michelle, will continue to shovel Seuss on the children in my life in the hopes that they too will test in the top .1% reading level of their age group and grow to love reading and writing as much as I do. Surely you do not think that Dr. Seuss is some sort of "key" to testing in the top .1% reading level, or to loving to read and write? How many children's books have you read lately? Myself, I haven't seen what's out there in the last 5 or 6 years, since my youngest kid started school. Librarians, on the other hand.... I don't think it's that Dr. Seuss is a key, per se. It's that they are very good at inspiring reading in children. It may not work for all kids, and there's no reason to believe that if you don't read Dr. Seuss to your kids you're condemning them to a life of not being in that .1% or that they're only going to pump gas for a living. But the idea that Dr. Seuss is not longer going to do what they've always done is absurd.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2017 20:02:48 GMT -5
I have at this very moment "Oh, The Places You'll Go" on my bookshelf. It was a law school graduation present from a former babysitter, who remembers me burrowed in a corner with a pile of Seuss well before kindergarten. ETA:
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Oct 14, 2017 20:06:36 GMT -5
A lot of my early reading was of the Bible. King James Version. That old-English stuff. That's what I learned to "love." Even though I'm a border-line atheist at this point, I still get sentimental when I read the ye's and thou's and shalts and wherefores and all the rest. It's fucking poetry, goddamnit.
Should I thus encourage my kids to read the Bible, because of how I feel about it, looking back on my childhood?
I'm not anti-Seuss, as I've said from the the beginning. I've said, multiple times: read Dr. Seuss to your kids. But the librarian had a point. The racism of Dr. Seuss wasn't the main point by a long shot, but you and lots of other people aren't, apparently, accepting any of her points, writing her off as smug, insufferable, pretentious, and hypocritical, because she insulted poor, dead, Dr. Seuss.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2017 20:08:32 GMT -5
I have a lot of reasons for writing her off that way, but certainly that is one.
ETA:
I forgot "preachy," "condescending," and "self-righteous."
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Oct 14, 2017 20:32:39 GMT -5
I'd also prefer my kids, if I had any, not to be politically indoctrinated by elementary school staff. Apropos of nothing, this is the exact argument I get to hear all the time as relates to books about two-mommy families, and two-daddy families, and mixed race families, and sex education, and the theory of evolution, and all sorts of other evil "political indoctrination."
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Oct 14, 2017 21:36:04 GMT -5
Anecdotal, sure, but given the books are still incredibly popular 60 years after they were written (my nieces loved them as much as I did), I'm apparently not alone. So yeah, fuck Ms. Soeiro. I'll keep giving and reading those books to kids. An argumentum ad numerum (appeal to popularity) is an transparently terrible logical fallacy. Because your nieces loved Dr. Seuss books as much as you carries absolutely zero weight in a debate. Great if you love Dr. Seuss, but if you don't, what's it mean? This does mean something and nothing good. "Fuck Ms. Soeiro?" Nice. Now who's being rude? How'd you put it, Cassandra? Weren't youthe one who said, " You've just chided me for being all stuffy and prissy because I care about the librarian being rude, dismissing me as being all about "respectability politics". Well, what on earth is getting all freaked out about Melania's nude shots other than "respectability politics"? You pull out your smelling salts for that, but sneer at me because I give a shit about rude behavior?" "Fuck Ms. Soeiro" is rude behavior. If all I say is "fuck Donald Trump" every chance I get, that doesn't convince anybody of anything except of how much I hate him. What are you proving? Didn't you say, " Intellectual honesty matters. Holding people to comparable standards matters. Otherwise, it all comes down to "we can all be total fucking assholes as long as it is in the service of our beliefs." You came at me hard for calling Melania Trump a "trophy wife" and being derisive about her nude pictures, but you've treated Liz Soeiro even worse. This is not the first, but the second time you've said "fuck you" to Soeiro. That's offensive to me and it should be offensive to anyone who claims name-calling drags a debate into the gutter. Say what you will about my dislike for Melania, but you can't say I've dropped the F-bomb on her TWICE. If I did, I'd be gone because even as a public figure you'd never stand for it. Liz Soeiro is not a public figure. What makes it okay to say " fuck Ms. Soeiro," Cassandra? How it that relevant when you're crucifying her for rudeness? This is what you said: Surely you do not think that Dr. Seuss is some sort of "key" to testing in the top .1% reading level, or to loving to read and write? How many children's books have you read lately? Myself, I haven't seen what's out there in the last 5 or 6 years, since my youngest kid started school. Librarians, on the other hand.... No, learning to read is the key. Dr. Seuss is what I loved (indeed, nothing came close). My nieces loved him. A lot of kids love him. He works. They can read other stuff too, fine. But I'm not dumping Seuss on the say-so of a librarian whose letter I find smug, insufferable, pretentious, and hypocritical. I'd also prefer my kids, if I had any, not to be politically indoctrinated by elementary school staff. You can do as you like. I did have kids in elementary school. They seem to have survived being "politically indocrinated" by the elementry school staff just fine. They read just fine too. Because someone reading Dr. Seuss to you doesn't mean it gives you an edge on reading.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Oct 14, 2017 21:37:17 GMT -5
And I, like Barack and Michelle, will continue to shovel Seuss on the children in my life in the hopes that they too will test in the top .1% reading level of their age group and grow to love reading and writing as much as I do. That's cool, but just so you know invoking the names of Barack and Michelle as if you know them personally and they are co-signing clobbering Liz Soeiro is frontin' at its worst. " Because Barack and Michelle agree with me" does not instantly add gravitas to your perspective. Additionally, I see no cause-and-effect between Green Eggs and Ham and reading in the Top One percentile. FYI, there's no such thing as "the Top One percentile." That's not how percentiles work. If you're in the 1st percentile, you're at the very bottom, not at the top. So, even though your statement is amusingly wrong it's actually sort of correct because, given that parents reading to their children (e.g., reading Green Eggs and Ham) is one of the top predictors of children's academic success, it's definitely a negative correlation; reading books like Green Eggs and Ham to one's kids will help them avoid the 1st percentile and significantly improve their odds of going the opposite direction (to the "top" 99th percentile).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2017 21:50:21 GMT -5
That's cool, but just so you know invoking the names of Barack and Michelle as if you know them personally and they are co-signing clobbering Liz Soeiro is frontin' at its worst. " Because Barack and Michelle agree with me" does not instantly add gravitas to your perspective. Additionally, I see no cause-and-effect between Green Eggs and Ham and reading in the Top One percentile. FYI, there's no such thing as "the Top One percentile." That's not how percentiles work. If you're in the 1st percentile, you're at the very bottom, not at the top. So, even though your statement is amusingly wrong it's actually sort of correct because, given that parents reading to their children (e.g., reading Green Eggs and Ham) is one of the top predictors of children's academic success, it's definitely a negative correlation; reading books like Green Eggs and Ham to one's kids will help them avoid the 1st percentile and significantly improve their odds of going the opposite direction (to the "top" 99th percentile). Pfft. Isn't that just like a nit-picky scientist. I'll bet your parents read The Cat in the Hat to you when you were a tot. You are quite correct, of course. My use of percentiles was not Opty-mal. (And I actually do know how they work, so I have no excuse other than laziness and possibly the Cabernet I'm sipping.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2017 21:52:43 GMT -5
By the way? I still hate Trump. But I'm done identifying with the Resistance.
|
|
|
Post by Vince524 on Oct 14, 2017 21:52:52 GMT -5
Anyone else feel like having a glass of wine now?
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Oct 14, 2017 21:53:19 GMT -5
Additionally, I see no cause-and-effect between Green Eggs and Ham and reading in the Top One percentile. FYI, there's no such thing as "the Top One percentile." That's not how percentiles work. If you're in the 1st percentile, you're at the very bottom, not at the top. So, even though your statement is amusingly wrong it's actually sort of correct because, given that parents reading to their children (e.g., reading Green Eggs and Ham) is one of the top predictors of children's academic success, it's definitely a negative correlation; reading books like Green Eggs and Ham to one's kids will help them avoid the 1st percentile and significantly improve their odds of going the opposite direction (to the "top" 99th percentile). You'll understand if I don't buy your explanation. The way it was explained to me is it means that 99 percent of the group scores lower than you. Dr. Seuss seems not to have played any role in it.
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Oct 14, 2017 21:55:20 GMT -5
"Fuck Ms. Soeiro" is rude behavior. To whom? If she said it to Soeiro's face, then I'd agree. But, you can't be rude to someone who's not here. LOL! This is high comedy. It really is. I applaud the nerve you have to type blatantly misogynist shit and then after you get called out on it, try to deflect by clutching your pearls at the word "fuck." You might not like expletives, but given that most people use them, and you've been in plenty of threads where they've been used and you've not objected, it seems that you're being selectively offended yet again in yet another attempt to take attention away from your own words. You're in famous company because Harvey Weinstein (" but the NRA is really bad too!") and Trump (" but Hillary was really mean to Bill's victims!") have both used deflection for the same reason.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2017 21:58:47 GMT -5
Anyone else feel like having a glass of wine now? I'll share. I have some chocolate, too.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Oct 14, 2017 22:00:13 GMT -5
That's cool, but just so you know invoking the names of Barack and Michelle as if you know them personally and they are co-signing clobbering Liz Soeiro is frontin' at its worst. " Because Barack and Michelle agree with me" does not instantly add gravitas to your perspective. Additionally, I see no cause-and-effect between Green Eggs and Ham and reading in the Top One percentile. FYI, there's no such thing as "the Top One percentile." That's not how percentiles work. If you're in the 1st percentile, you're at the very bottom, not at the top. So, even though your statement is amusingly wrong it's actually sort of correct because, given that parents reading to their children (e.g., reading Green Eggs and Ham) is one of the top predictors of children's academic success, it's definitely a negative correlation; reading books like Green Eggs and Ham to one's kids will help them avoid the 1st percentile and significantly improve their odds of going the opposite direction (to the "top" 99th percentile)." Pardon, but are you doubling down on the idea that not reading Dr. Seuss, specifically, to children will hold back their reading skills?
|
|
|
Post by Optimus on Oct 14, 2017 22:00:49 GMT -5
You'll understand if I don't buy your explanation. The way it was explained to me is it means that 99 percent of the group scores lower than you. Dr. Seuss seems not to have played any role in it. Whoever explained it to you that way had no idea what they were talking about. I do statistics every day. I calculate percentiles all the time. This type of information is easily available on the internet but here, I did the work for you: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentile_rank
|
|