Racist babies? Infants prefer to learn from adults of their own skin color, study says

Another academic study blows up the “race is a social construct” nonsense theory that liberals love. We’re not “one race, the human race.” Race is real. Even babies know it.

RT.com

Babies who aren’t old enough to walk or talk still manage to exhibit racial bias, according to a new study. The research found that infants prefer to learn from adults who share their skin color.
As part of the study, researchers from the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) and the University of Toronto – along with collaborators from the US, UK, France and China – gave infants a series of videos to watch.

In each video, a female adult looked at one of the four corners of the screen. In some videos, an animal image appeared in the direction she had looked. In other films, an animal image appeared at a non-looked at location.

The results showed that the infants followed the gaze of members of their own race more than they followed the gaze of members of other races.

“This occurred when the faces were slightly unreliable, as they are in the natural environment…” a press release from the University of Toronto states. “This result suggests that, under uncertainty, infants are biased to learn information from own-race adults as opposed to other-race adults.”

Infants under the age of six months were not found to show such bias, according to the study, which was published in the journal Child Development on Monday.

The findings follow a separate study which was conducted by the same researchers and published in the journal Developmental Science in January.

In that study, the researchers played a sequence of videos for three- to 10-month infants. The films depicted female adults with a neutral facial expression.

Before viewing each face, infants heard a music clip. They then participated in one of four music-face combinations: happy music followed by own-race faces; sad music followed by own-race faces; happy music followed by other-race faces; and sad music followed by other-race faces.

The research found that infants aged six- to nine-months looked longer at own-race faces when paired with happy music as opposed to sad music. They looked longer at other-race faces when paired with sad music compared to with happy music.

“Results showed that after six months of age, infants begin to associate own-race faces with happy music and other-race faces with sad music,” the press release states.

As with the first study, infants under the age of six months were not found to have the same bias.

Dr. Kang Lee, a professor at OISE’s Jackman Institute of Child Study and the lead author of both pieces of research, said the findings of both studies are “significant for many reasons.”

“The results show that race-based bias already exists around the second half of a child’s first year. This challenges the popular view that race-based bias first emerges only during the preschool years,” he said.

Meanwhile, Dr. Naiqi (Gabriel) Xiao, first author of the two papers and a postdoctoral fellow at Princeton University, said the findings are notable because they contradict the belief that racial bias is associated with negative experiences a person may have had with other-race individuals. In other words, the children in the study were simply too young to have memories of such experiences.

Pointing to previous studies which indicate that many babies typically experience 90 percent of own-race faces, Lee said that racial interactions during infancy may influence our perceptions about race in adulthood.

“These findings thus point to the possibility that aspects of racial bias later in life may arise from our lack of exposure to other-race individuals in infancy,” he said.

Lee concluded that it is important to identify the starting point of racial bias in order to find ways of preventing it.

Tucker Carlson interview the amiable Dr. Kang Lee in this youtube clip. Tucker gives Dr. Lee a bit of a hard time, but Dr.Lee is NOT one of Tucker’s liberal idiots that he loves to destroy.

Interestingly, dogs are racist too, but only toward blacks. I wish academics would do a study on that.

Entitled Muzzie Making a Stink About Request by Airport Security to Remove Hijab

AGHNIA ADZKIA. IT’S ALL ABOUT HER “RIGHTS.”

Muh discrimination.

A Muslim student is asked by the nice airport security lady to remove her head scarf.

Her response? DISCRIMINATION!

metro.co.uk

A woman was told by airport security that she was not allowed to board when she tried to get on her plane to London – because she was wearing a hijab.

The student refused to remove her headscarf after watching nuns walk through without being asked to remove their habits.

Aghnia Adzkia claims she was discriminated against by Italian airport staff.

The Indonesian citizen filmed her experience at Ciampino Airport in the Italian capital of Rome.

The security official can be heard saying: ‘You are not safe.

‘You could hide something in your hair. If you don’t take it off, we do not know if there’s something inside, okay? You are not safe for us.’

She had refused to take off her hijab on principle claiming she was being unfairly targeted.

The Goldsmith university student claims a male security officer then dragged her out of the security area in ‘indecent way’ grabbing her bag and shouting at her to be quiet.

THE NICE ITALIAN SECURITY LADY PUT SAFETY FIRST.

Speaking to MailOnline, Ms Adzkia said: ‘I completely understand about what is going in the world lately. I stand against terrorism and that’s not Islam.

Ms Adzkia can be seen repeatedly demanding to see the law stating that the hijab must be removed at an airport security check.

‘Yet, what I’ve experienced in Rome was shocking, the way they treated me indecently has shown discrimination. I understand if it is for security reason, but why did they not give me a second to read the law?’

Ms Adzkia alerted Facebook friends to the incident in a post that went viral, however it has since been taken down.

She wrote: ‘I wanted to prove to them that I have nothing to hide and that I am not a terrorist.

‘In the meantime, I saw two nuns wearing headscarves, but they weren’t asked to take them off.

‘Is this what you call fair treatment and respect? Where are my human rights?’

Another hijab-wearing woman, Aisyah Allamanda, said Ms Adzkia should have agreed to remove her headscarf.

The official at the Indonesian Embassy said: ‘The numerous times I’ve flown out of Rome’s airport, I also experienced the same kind of security check as I also happen to wear a hijab.

‘The same applies to others who wear the hijab at Rome KBRI, female Muslims believe that they can’t take off their headscarves in public so they are provided a private room for a female officer to carry out the check.

‘If we refuse, I can understand if the security officer acts aggressively towards us.’

DANGEROUS TERRORISTS. TAKE OFF THOSE NUN’S HABITS.

Leaked Twitter Shadowban List Shows Bias Against Truth, Conservatives

Richard Spencer, Mark Dice, Alex Jones, Brittany Pettibone, Lew Rockwell, and a host of other “racists,” truth tellers, and conservatives are on the list.

Jack Dorsey, the CEO of Twitter, is destroying his own creation with his insane leftist nonsense. Be aware that this is only a partial list. More shadowbanned users are yet to be revealed by the leak.

Breitbart explains how a Twitter shadowban works.

Just in case Twitter suspends Tennessee GOP, here’s another Tweet that has the list.

“Bias Motivated Packages” Send Police Looking for “White Supremacist”

WHO IS PACKAGE MAN? POLICE WANT TO KNOW.
packages bias uc santa cruz

Any white person who notices that the white race is being genocided and attempts to talk about it will be demonized as a White Supremacist.

Mercury News

SANTA CRUZ – A man in orange-framed sunglasses, a dark unbuttoned shirt and pants became a person of interest after someone delivered packages promoting white supremacy this week at UC Santa Cruz.

“Inside the packages are references to the ‘white power movement’ and a website known to be associated with white supremacists,” UC Santa Cruz Police Chief Nader Oweis said of deliveries at Merrill College Wednesday and early Thursday. “This is really a First Amendment issue.”

Police seek the public’s help to identify the man in connection with communication that “could be considered hate speech,” Oweis said.

Surveillance stills show a skinny man walking on campus sidewalks with hands in his pockets.

Oweis said it is the first case of such acts he recalls happening on campus. The packages were dropped off by someone, he said. They were not mailed.

He declined to repeat messages in the “bias-motivated” packages, which had CDs and notes.

The contents, he added, have broad impact.

“Obviously, speech like this violates our principles of community,” he said. “We strive to have a learning environment that’s conducive to free speech and ideas, but when speech like this occurs, it can have an impact on the community.”

Students and faculty have a variety of resources to report and cope with such communication, he said.

Anyone who receives such a package or has observed any “hate or bias-motivated crime” can call 831-459-2231 ext. 1, file a report at reporthate.ucsc.edu or pursue services at Cowell Student Health Center, Oweis said.

If this story doesn’t wake you up the fact that we’re living in a police state that is “biased” (to use the cops word) against whites, then what will.

The story is very unclear as to what was in the “bias-motivated packages,” but perhaps the Daily Stormer or Stormfront are named. The CD probably has some youtube videos on it–maybe some of the same ones posted here about white genocide.

The police and university are reluctant to say much, but the phrase “First Amendment” has been raised by the police. That has to mean that there were NO criminal threats against anyone in the package, just information about white genocide and White Nationalism.

Go track down some real criminals, you loons.

Hate is in the eye of the beholder when there’s no crime or threat involved.

WOULD THE PICTURE OF A MAN DEAD 72 YEARS BE HATE SPEECH?
adolf-hitler

COLIN KAEPERNICK SAYS THIS REPRESENTS HATE. WAS THERE AN AMERICAN FLAG IMAGE IN THE PACKAGE?
flag

HERE’S SOME REAL HATE!
pepe heart sign

“Implicit Bias:” Watch Hillary Claim That ALL Americans are Racists

She actually says it right at the beginning of her response to terrible Lester Holt’s question. Hillary’s statement marks her as a cultural Marxist.

Don’t worry though. We’ll all have to go through training to bleed the bias right out of us if Hillary takes over the Oval Office. Police go first, of course.

Racists are Not Bad People Says Poll

racism poll

Haha. The survey didn’t ask about Jews. Are you a bad person if you hold negative views toward Jews?

That would have been an easy question to ask.

Holding negative views about Muslims and blacks is realistic. Look at the bombings, the shootings, and the riots. It’s not the Quakers causing problems.

The word prejudiced here is loaded. Prejudice implies irrationality. If others think a white person who has negative views of blacks is irrational or a bad person, then those others are delusional.

Too many of those who participated in this survey are either delusional or they are saying what they thought the pollster wanted to hear or what would make them look reasonable.

Huffington Post via archive.is

When Hillary Clinton dismissed half of Donald Trump’s supporters as belonging to a “basket of deplorables,” much of the debate that followed focused on attempts to quantify what percentage of Trump’s supporters actually held bigoted views.

But the statement, which Clinton quickly walked back in scope, also raised a more fundamental, if uncomfortable question ― whether holding an abhorrent viewpoint makes someone an abhorrent person.

Clinton described the “deplorables” as being “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic ― you name it.” So, in a new HuffPost/YouGov poll, we asked Americans how they’d describe people who hold negative views of Muslims, black people, women, gay people and immigrants. Did that make them bad people, prejudiced but not necessarily bad, or neither of the above?

The results show Americans’ discomfort with outright condemning people who hold bigoted views.

Most of those polled fell into the middle category, saying that disliking an entire race, religion, gender or other class of people was prejudiced, but didn’t necessarily make someone a bad person.

That sentiment was generally consistent across demographic lines, varying only in intensity. Less than 30 percent of people any age group, racial group, gender or party were willing to say that any of the negative views tested made someone a bad person.

Black Americans were consistently more likely than white Americans to say that biases made someone a bad person, although a majority still rejected that characterization. Twenty-six percent of black Americans, compared to just 10 percent of white Americans, say that holding negative views of black people makes someone a bad person.

Black respondents were also notably more likely than whites to take a similar stance on discrimination against Muslims, women and gay people.

Age factored most prominently in attitudes toward anti-gay bias. Eighteen percent of those under age 30, compared to just 4 percent over age 65, said that negative views of gay people made someone a bad person. Americans in the youngest age group were also 12 points less likely than those in the oldest age group to see nothing wrong with holding negative views toward gay people.

Democrats and Republicans expressed largely similar views about people who disliked blacks. But most Democrats say that negative views about Muslims made some prejudiced, but not necessarily a bad person, while the majority of Republicans don’t even consider such views to be prejudiced. A majority of Democrats and independents say that negative views of women, immigrants and gay people count as prejudice, while Republicans are closely divided between describing people holding those views as prejudiced and saying that they’re not.

The HuffPost/YouGov poll consisted of 1,000 completed interviews conducted Sept. 14-Sept. 15 among U.S. adults, using a sample selected from YouGov’s opt-in online panel to match the demographics and other characteristics of the adult U.S. population.

Interestingly, on the Huffington Post the writers and commenters are often quite willing to condemn race realists as bad people. And blacks believe race realists are bad people. They want to silence us.

black shut ur ass up gif

Muslims Demand Hate Crime Investigation Over Beatings of Two NYC Muzzie Teens

muslims islam poster

Muslim teens started something, but an unidentified man finished it. Now the Muslims are calling it a hate crime.

Huffington Post

Two Muslim teenagers were beaten outside a New York City mosque by an attacker who shouted slurs at them, a rights group said on Monday, calling for police to investigate the incident as a bias crime.

The attack early on Sunday was at least the third involving Muslims in the United States over the weekend. A law enforcement source said investigators had ruled out the incident as a bias crime.

The New York chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, said in a statement that a 16-year-old boy was attacked outside Brooklyn’s Muslim Community Center as he took a break from prayers.

A surveillance video released by CAIR showed a man punching, kicking and stomping the youth as he lay in the street. Another teenager on a bicycle was chased and attacked when he rode past the boy.

CAIR said the man was reportedly heard shouting: “You Muslims are the cause of all the problems of the world” and calling the youths “terrorists.”

The 16-year-old suffered a concussion, cuts, bruises and a badly swollen eye, and was taken to a hospital. The second teenager had a black eye, CAIR said.

Afaf Nasher, the executive director of CAIR in New York, said the slurs warranted an investigation into a possible bias motive.

A spokesman for the New York Police Department said the 16-year-old suffered bruises to the head and was treated at a hospital. The second teenager refused medical attention. The spokesman gave his age as 17.

The law enforcement source said the police hate crimes unit had rejected the incident as a bias crime. He said the two youths were harassing a 40-year-old woman in a car and her 37-year-old boyfriend assaulted them.

The man has been identified and a search for him is under way, the source said.

Is the man the police are looking for of European descent, a Latino, or a black? By omitting any description of him, one might guess he’s black. That will present an interesting problem for liberals. Do they side with a black man defending himself or side with the Muslim teen attackers who got beat up?

The life of a liberal must be hard. How do they reconcile all those conflicts spinning around in their brains?

you don't say gif