Community > Posts By > Dragoness

 
Dragoness's photo
Fri 01/27/12 08:31 PM





There's no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.

The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle, according to lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice, Hodson wrote in an email to LiveScience.

"Prejudice is extremely complex and multifaceted, making it critical that any factors contributing to bias are uncovered and understood," he said.

Controversy ahead

The findings combine three hot-button topics.

"They've pulled off the trifecta of controversial topics," said Brian Nosek, a social and cognitive psychologist at the University of Virginia who was not involved in the study. "When one selects intelligence, political ideology and racism and looks at any of the relationships between those three variables, it's bound to upset somebody."

Polling data and social and political science research do show that prejudice is more common in those who hold right-wing ideals that those of other political persuasions, Nosek told LiveScience. [7 Thoughts That Are Bad For You]

"The unique contribution here is trying to make some progress on the most challenging aspect of this," Nosek said, referring to the new study. "It's not that a relationship like that exists, but why it exists."

Brains and bias

Earlier studies have found links between low levels of education and higher levels of prejudice, Hodson said, so studying intelligence seemed a logical next step. The researchers turned to two studies of citizens in the United Kingdom, one that has followed babies since their births in March 1958, and another that did the same for babies born in April 1970. The children in the studies had their intelligence assessed at age 10 or 11; as adults ages 30 or 33, their levels of social conservatism and racism were measured. [Life's Extremes: Democrat vs. Republican]

In the first study, verbal and nonverbal intelligence was measured using tests that asked people to find similarities and differences between words, shapes and symbols. The second study measured cognitive abilities in four ways, including number recall, shape-drawing tasks, defining words and identifying patterns and similarities among words. Average IQ is set at 100.

Social conservatives were defined as people who agreed with a laundry list of statements such as "Family life suffers if mum is working full-time," and "Schools should teach children to obey authority." Attitudes toward other races were captured by measuring agreement with statements such as "I wouldn't mind working with people from other races." (These questions measured overt prejudiced attitudes, but most people, no matter how egalitarian, do hold unconscious racial biases; Hodson's work can't speak to this "underground" racism.)

As suspected, low intelligence in childhood corresponded with racism in adulthood. But the factor that explained the relationship between these two variables was political: When researchers included social conservatism in the analysis, those ideologies accounted for much of the link between brains and bias.

People with lower cognitive abilities also had less contact with people of other races.

"This finding is consistent with recent research demonstrating that intergroup contact is mentally challenging and cognitively draining, and consistent with findings that contact reduces prejudice," said Hodson, who along with his colleagues published these results online Jan. 5 in the journal Psychological Science.

A study of averages

Hodson was quick to note that the despite the link found between low intelligence and social conservatism, the researchers aren't implying that all liberals are brilliant and all conservatives stupid. The research is a study of averages over large groups, he said.

"There are multiple examples of very bright conservatives and not-so-bright liberals, and many examples of very principled conservatives and very intolerant liberals," Hodson said.

Nosek gave another example to illustrate the dangers of taking the findings too literally.

"We can say definitively men are taller than women on average," he said. "But you can't say if you take a random man and you take a random woman that the man is going to be taller. There's plenty of overlap."

Nonetheless, there is reason to believe that strict right-wing ideology might appeal to those who have trouble grasping the complexity of the world.

"Socially conservative ideologies tend to offer structure and order," Hodson said, explaining why these beliefs might draw those with low intelligence. "Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice."

In another study, this one in the United States, Hodson and Busseri compared 254 people with the same amount of education but different levels of ability in abstract reasoning. They found that what applies to racism may also apply to homophobia. People who were poorer at abstract reasoning were more likely to exhibit prejudice against gays. As in the U.K. citizens, a lack of contact with gays and more acceptance of right-wing authoritarianism explained the link. [5 Myths About Gay People Debunked]

Simple viewpoints

Hodson and Busseri's explanation of their findings is reasonable, Nosek said, but it is correlational. That means the researchers didn't conclusively prove that the low intelligence caused the later prejudice. To do that, you'd have to somehow randomly assign otherwise identical people to be smart or dumb, liberal or conservative. Those sorts of studies obviously aren't possible.

The researchers controlled for factors such as education and socioeconomic status, making their case stronger, Nosek said. But there are other possible explanations that fit the data. For example, Nosek said, a study of left-wing liberals with stereotypically naïve views like "every kid is a genius in his or her own way," might find that people who hold these attitudes are also less bright. In other words, it might not be a particular ideology that is linked to stupidity, but extremist views in general.

"My speculation is that it's not as simple as their model presents it," Nosek said. "I think that lower cognitive capacity can lead to multiple simple ways to represent the world, and one of those can be embodied in a right-wing ideology where 'People I don't know are threats' and 'The world is a dangerous place'. ... Another simple way would be to just assume everybody is wonderful."

Prejudice is of particular interest because understanding the roots of racism and bias could help eliminate them, Hodson said. For example, he said, many anti-prejudice programs encourage participants to see things from another group's point of view. That mental exercise may be too taxing for people of low IQ.

"There may be cognitive limits in the ability to take the perspective of others, particularly foreigners," Hodson said. "Much of the present research literature suggests that our prejudices are primarily emotional in origin rather than cognitive. These two pieces of information suggest that it might be particularly fruitful for researchers to consider strategies to change feelings toward outgroups," rather than thoughts.

http://news.yahoo.com/low-iq-conservative-beliefs-linked-prejudice-180403506.html


Having fought against it for so long, this is nothing new to me.

I made the connection to conservative or right wing politics years ago.

Racism and discrimination go hand in hand with right wing politics.

Also misogyny goes well with right wing politics.

And I am a person who really tries to believe each of us are individual like I am but it just never pans out in this environment. They feel inferior and their only way to boost themselves up is to believe there are those inferior to themselves be they gay, another race, a woman, of a different religion or non religious, poor, etc... and any combination of the above


wow... You needed a brush the size of Jupiter to paint a larger generalized picture than this..

I seriously doubt you know every conservative personally, so to make these wild and wholly ludicrous accusations is pretty laughable.




Haven't met one yet that makes it untrue. The only saving grace they have is there are those who really don't realize, they are ignorant of the fact they are bigoted or racist or discriminatory because they falsely justify what they believe usually with what they were taught by their family friends and the social environment they hang out in.

When I meet one that makes it untrue I will make sure to change my view on it. It will actually make me a happier person to not be let down by my fellow man so badly.


You only see what you want to see and when what you see doesn't fit into your agenda you come up with nonsense like this.

I am glad you support left wing ideology because this is a perfect example of why it needs to be defeated.






Actually it is the reason for it becoming more common as how intelligence needs to become more common.

Right wing ideology is the bane to this country and brings it down further every year it is allowed to influence anything here.

Dragoness's photo
Fri 01/27/12 05:43 PM

First why is this a news story. Second why are no white people interviewed. I have never seen racism before in the news, but this is too obvious.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pyW6w5B7Aw


First off Youtube is not a news outlet. People can stage anything they want on there, alter regular news to fit whatever quack job they want so it isn't news.

That said, I guess racist news this is not.

Now if it is a racist private film you have the choice to not look at it because white racists do the same and that is what everyone has the choice to with their garbage too.

Dragoness's photo
Fri 01/27/12 05:33 PM




I dont believe in taking away guns from law abiding citizens, I do believe in determining how law abiding (and mentally sane) someone is before ISSUING them a gun though,,,,,


So the Government would be allowed to decide who could own a gun? This is a violation of our second Amendment rights and it would allow the Government to deny guns to anyone on a whim.


Not true. It would allow non gun toting citizens to be safer from gun toting crazies.

No, it wouldn't you can get a gun from non-licensed dealers on the street, or buy one from an individual, yard sale, etc. without being background checked.


Yea I was speaking of true gun control.

Also that fearmongering ploy, same as the OP, won't make anyone who has guts run out in fear and buy a gun. Only the weaklings will fall for that rhetoric anyway.

Dragoness's photo
Fri 01/27/12 05:28 PM

The parent company of an electric car battery maker that received a $118 million grant from the Obama administration filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Thursday.

New York-based Ener1 said it has been affected by competition from China and other countries.

Ener1 subsidiary EnerDel received a $118 million stimulus grant from the Energy Department in 2009, and Vice President Joe Biden visited the company's new battery plant in Indiana last year.
Investigates first reported in October 2011 that Ener1 was facing financial troubles, after NASDAQ pulled the company from its listings, leaving the stock valued at $0.00.

Ener1 is just the latest company to seek bankruptcy protection after receiving assistance from the Energy Department under the economic stimulus law. California solar panel maker Solyndra Inc. and Beacon Power, a Massachusetts energy-storage firm, declared bankruptcy last year. Solyndra received a $528 million federal loan, while Beacon Power got a $43 million loan guarantee.

A CBS News investigation found earlier this month that a dozen green-energy companies - which in total received at least $6.5 billion in stimulus money from the federal government - have filed for bankruptcy protection. ( Click on the player at left for a full report on the CBS News investigation )

Solyndra, of Fremont, Calif., was the first renewable-energy company to receive a loan guarantee under the 2009 stimulus law, and the Obama administration frequently touted it as a model for its clean energy program.

Since then, the company's implosion and revelations that the administration hurried a review of the loan in time for a 2009 groundbreaking has become an embarrassment for President Obama and a rallying cry for GOP critics of the administration's green energy program.

Tax dollars backing some "risky" energy projects
Video: Romney calls Obama a venture capitalist with Solyndra
The chairman of a House subcommittee that is investigating Solyndra said the latest bankruptcy showed that the administration's clean energy program has failed.

"Unfortunately, you can now add Ener1 to the growing list of failed companies that went belly up after hundreds of millions of dollars in administration backing," said Rep. Cliff Stearns, R-Fla.

"One bankruptcy may be a fluke, two could be coincidence, but three is a trend," Stearns said. "Our investigation continues, and we are working to ensure taxpayers are never again stuck paying hundreds of millions of dollars because of the administration's risky bets."

An Energy Department spokeswoman said EnerDel had received $55 million so far under a program in which EnerDel matches federal investment dollar-for-dollar. Ener1 said in a statement that the restructuring would not affect EnerDel's operations. The company makes lithium-ion batteries for electric cars such as the Chevrolet Volt.

"While it's unfortunate that Ener1, the parent company, has entered a restructuring process," a recent infusion of $80 million in private investment "demonstrates that the technology has merit," said Jen Stutsman, a spokeswoman for the Energy Department.

"The restructuring is not expected to impact EnerDel's operations and they do not expect to reduce employment at the site" near Indianapolis, Stutsman said.


First off bankruptcy can be all kinds of different things in businesses. Many businesses use bandruptcy to reorganize and they stay in business.

Second, there is no way to know when you invest in a company whether bankruptcy is in their future or not. Making it impossible to predict.

Thirdly, in this economy many businesses are struggling so that isn't a shine on the president at all.

Dragoness's photo
Fri 01/27/12 05:23 PM


I dont believe in taking away guns from law abiding citizens, I do believe in determining how law abiding (and mentally sane) someone is before ISSUING them a gun though,,,,,


So the Government would be allowed to decide who could own a gun? This is a violation of our second Amendment rights and it would allow the Government to deny guns to anyone on a whim.


Not true. It would allow non gun toting citizens to be safer from gun toting crazies.

Dragoness's photo
Fri 01/27/12 05:22 PM

It just keeps getting better and better.


http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/11/michelle-obamas-warning-to-gun-owners/


The following will give you examples of "WHY GUN CONTROLL SHOULD NEVER BE CONCIDERED"

"INNOCENTS BETRAYED". Cut and paste the Following URL.

http://www.veoh.com/iphone/#_Watch/v19384745tgeTy96g




170,000,000. That's the number of civilians that have been murdered by their own governments in the 20th century alone. 170,000,000 men, women, and children who were defenseless to protect themselves. 170,000,000 victims of gun control. You have never seen anything like Innocents Betrayed. This story has never been told in a documentary film. In this powerful documentary produced by Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, you will learn how governments have historically deprived people of firearms ... and then wiped them from the face of the earth. 58 minutes that will open eyes. Destroy myths. Change minds. Save lives./n"Only the police and military should have guns; private citizens don't need them." Innocents Betrayed shows what happens when the government alone has all power. It's sensible to license guns and register their owners." Innocents Betrayed shows how licensing and registration were key elements to disarming populations, leaving them vulnerable to methodical slaughter. "America should follow the lead of the rest of the world— strict 'gun control.'" Innocents Betrayed shows how the "rest of the world" lost 170,000,000 innocent, non-combatant men, women and children. "It can't happen here." It already has. Innocents Betrayed documents mass murders and vicious brutality in the US as a result of gun control. The victims left disarmed and powerless, by law. See with your own eyes the facts that the mainstream media has ignored and concealed for decades




Except that the amount of human life lost by a gun that went off without someone's hand on the trigger or a child's finger on the trigger or the amount of family members who have killed other family members intentionally or the amount of legal gun owners who have shot their fellow employees or boss or the amount of legal gun owners who have brandished their weapons in a threat to others illegally or etc.... outweighs the times the guns have actually helped someone in a good way.

So the stats actually show fearful people who arm themselves with guns are more of a nuisance and danger to themselves and others than they are a help.

And I am not anti gun, just logical.

Dragoness's photo
Fri 01/27/12 11:51 AM
Intelligence does play a major role in bigotry and discrimination. It takes a bigger brain to not pick on others like a child would and try to get your friends to hate her/him/them too.slaphead huh

Dragoness's photo
Fri 01/27/12 11:48 AM



There's no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.

The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle, according to lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice, Hodson wrote in an email to LiveScience.

"Prejudice is extremely complex and multifaceted, making it critical that any factors contributing to bias are uncovered and understood," he said.

Controversy ahead

The findings combine three hot-button topics.

"They've pulled off the trifecta of controversial topics," said Brian Nosek, a social and cognitive psychologist at the University of Virginia who was not involved in the study. "When one selects intelligence, political ideology and racism and looks at any of the relationships between those three variables, it's bound to upset somebody."

Polling data and social and political science research do show that prejudice is more common in those who hold right-wing ideals that those of other political persuasions, Nosek told LiveScience. [7 Thoughts That Are Bad For You]

"The unique contribution here is trying to make some progress on the most challenging aspect of this," Nosek said, referring to the new study. "It's not that a relationship like that exists, but why it exists."

Brains and bias

Earlier studies have found links between low levels of education and higher levels of prejudice, Hodson said, so studying intelligence seemed a logical next step. The researchers turned to two studies of citizens in the United Kingdom, one that has followed babies since their births in March 1958, and another that did the same for babies born in April 1970. The children in the studies had their intelligence assessed at age 10 or 11; as adults ages 30 or 33, their levels of social conservatism and racism were measured. [Life's Extremes: Democrat vs. Republican]

In the first study, verbal and nonverbal intelligence was measured using tests that asked people to find similarities and differences between words, shapes and symbols. The second study measured cognitive abilities in four ways, including number recall, shape-drawing tasks, defining words and identifying patterns and similarities among words. Average IQ is set at 100.

Social conservatives were defined as people who agreed with a laundry list of statements such as "Family life suffers if mum is working full-time," and "Schools should teach children to obey authority." Attitudes toward other races were captured by measuring agreement with statements such as "I wouldn't mind working with people from other races." (These questions measured overt prejudiced attitudes, but most people, no matter how egalitarian, do hold unconscious racial biases; Hodson's work can't speak to this "underground" racism.)

As suspected, low intelligence in childhood corresponded with racism in adulthood. But the factor that explained the relationship between these two variables was political: When researchers included social conservatism in the analysis, those ideologies accounted for much of the link between brains and bias.

People with lower cognitive abilities also had less contact with people of other races.

"This finding is consistent with recent research demonstrating that intergroup contact is mentally challenging and cognitively draining, and consistent with findings that contact reduces prejudice," said Hodson, who along with his colleagues published these results online Jan. 5 in the journal Psychological Science.

A study of averages

Hodson was quick to note that the despite the link found between low intelligence and social conservatism, the researchers aren't implying that all liberals are brilliant and all conservatives stupid. The research is a study of averages over large groups, he said.

"There are multiple examples of very bright conservatives and not-so-bright liberals, and many examples of very principled conservatives and very intolerant liberals," Hodson said.

Nosek gave another example to illustrate the dangers of taking the findings too literally.

"We can say definitively men are taller than women on average," he said. "But you can't say if you take a random man and you take a random woman that the man is going to be taller. There's plenty of overlap."

Nonetheless, there is reason to believe that strict right-wing ideology might appeal to those who have trouble grasping the complexity of the world.

"Socially conservative ideologies tend to offer structure and order," Hodson said, explaining why these beliefs might draw those with low intelligence. "Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice."

In another study, this one in the United States, Hodson and Busseri compared 254 people with the same amount of education but different levels of ability in abstract reasoning. They found that what applies to racism may also apply to homophobia. People who were poorer at abstract reasoning were more likely to exhibit prejudice against gays. As in the U.K. citizens, a lack of contact with gays and more acceptance of right-wing authoritarianism explained the link. [5 Myths About Gay People Debunked]

Simple viewpoints

Hodson and Busseri's explanation of their findings is reasonable, Nosek said, but it is correlational. That means the researchers didn't conclusively prove that the low intelligence caused the later prejudice. To do that, you'd have to somehow randomly assign otherwise identical people to be smart or dumb, liberal or conservative. Those sorts of studies obviously aren't possible.

The researchers controlled for factors such as education and socioeconomic status, making their case stronger, Nosek said. But there are other possible explanations that fit the data. For example, Nosek said, a study of left-wing liberals with stereotypically naïve views like "every kid is a genius in his or her own way," might find that people who hold these attitudes are also less bright. In other words, it might not be a particular ideology that is linked to stupidity, but extremist views in general.

"My speculation is that it's not as simple as their model presents it," Nosek said. "I think that lower cognitive capacity can lead to multiple simple ways to represent the world, and one of those can be embodied in a right-wing ideology where 'People I don't know are threats' and 'The world is a dangerous place'. ... Another simple way would be to just assume everybody is wonderful."

Prejudice is of particular interest because understanding the roots of racism and bias could help eliminate them, Hodson said. For example, he said, many anti-prejudice programs encourage participants to see things from another group's point of view. That mental exercise may be too taxing for people of low IQ.

"There may be cognitive limits in the ability to take the perspective of others, particularly foreigners," Hodson said. "Much of the present research literature suggests that our prejudices are primarily emotional in origin rather than cognitive. These two pieces of information suggest that it might be particularly fruitful for researchers to consider strategies to change feelings toward outgroups," rather than thoughts.

http://news.yahoo.com/low-iq-conservative-beliefs-linked-prejudice-180403506.html


Having fought against it for so long, this is nothing new to me.

I made the connection to conservative or right wing politics years ago.

Racism and discrimination go hand in hand with right wing politics.

Also misogyny goes well with right wing politics.

And I am a person who really tries to believe each of us are individual like I am but it just never pans out in this environment. They feel inferior and their only way to boost themselves up is to believe there are those inferior to themselves be they gay, another race, a woman, of a different religion or non religious, poor, etc... and any combination of the above

That's just ridiculous.......That's prejudiced right there....there are just as many prejudiced left as right.....prejudice is just now hidden beneath political correctness.....and both sides pander to that


Actually it's more factual.

An ugly fact, I agree, but factual just the same.

Again I will say the only saving grace is that they do not realize they are bigoted and discriminatory due to their false justification fed to them by their environment.

Dragoness's photo
Fri 01/27/12 11:42 AM
Edited by Dragoness on Fri 01/27/12 11:43 AM



There's no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.

The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle, according to lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice, Hodson wrote in an email to LiveScience.

"Prejudice is extremely complex and multifaceted, making it critical that any factors contributing to bias are uncovered and understood," he said.

Controversy ahead

The findings combine three hot-button topics.

"They've pulled off the trifecta of controversial topics," said Brian Nosek, a social and cognitive psychologist at the University of Virginia who was not involved in the study. "When one selects intelligence, political ideology and racism and looks at any of the relationships between those three variables, it's bound to upset somebody."

Polling data and social and political science research do show that prejudice is more common in those who hold right-wing ideals that those of other political persuasions, Nosek told LiveScience. [7 Thoughts That Are Bad For You]

"The unique contribution here is trying to make some progress on the most challenging aspect of this," Nosek said, referring to the new study. "It's not that a relationship like that exists, but why it exists."

Brains and bias

Earlier studies have found links between low levels of education and higher levels of prejudice, Hodson said, so studying intelligence seemed a logical next step. The researchers turned to two studies of citizens in the United Kingdom, one that has followed babies since their births in March 1958, and another that did the same for babies born in April 1970. The children in the studies had their intelligence assessed at age 10 or 11; as adults ages 30 or 33, their levels of social conservatism and racism were measured. [Life's Extremes: Democrat vs. Republican]

In the first study, verbal and nonverbal intelligence was measured using tests that asked people to find similarities and differences between words, shapes and symbols. The second study measured cognitive abilities in four ways, including number recall, shape-drawing tasks, defining words and identifying patterns and similarities among words. Average IQ is set at 100.

Social conservatives were defined as people who agreed with a laundry list of statements such as "Family life suffers if mum is working full-time," and "Schools should teach children to obey authority." Attitudes toward other races were captured by measuring agreement with statements such as "I wouldn't mind working with people from other races." (These questions measured overt prejudiced attitudes, but most people, no matter how egalitarian, do hold unconscious racial biases; Hodson's work can't speak to this "underground" racism.)

As suspected, low intelligence in childhood corresponded with racism in adulthood. But the factor that explained the relationship between these two variables was political: When researchers included social conservatism in the analysis, those ideologies accounted for much of the link between brains and bias.

People with lower cognitive abilities also had less contact with people of other races.

"This finding is consistent with recent research demonstrating that intergroup contact is mentally challenging and cognitively draining, and consistent with findings that contact reduces prejudice," said Hodson, who along with his colleagues published these results online Jan. 5 in the journal Psychological Science.

A study of averages

Hodson was quick to note that the despite the link found between low intelligence and social conservatism, the researchers aren't implying that all liberals are brilliant and all conservatives stupid. The research is a study of averages over large groups, he said.

"There are multiple examples of very bright conservatives and not-so-bright liberals, and many examples of very principled conservatives and very intolerant liberals," Hodson said.

Nosek gave another example to illustrate the dangers of taking the findings too literally.

"We can say definitively men are taller than women on average," he said. "But you can't say if you take a random man and you take a random woman that the man is going to be taller. There's plenty of overlap."

Nonetheless, there is reason to believe that strict right-wing ideology might appeal to those who have trouble grasping the complexity of the world.

"Socially conservative ideologies tend to offer structure and order," Hodson said, explaining why these beliefs might draw those with low intelligence. "Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice."

In another study, this one in the United States, Hodson and Busseri compared 254 people with the same amount of education but different levels of ability in abstract reasoning. They found that what applies to racism may also apply to homophobia. People who were poorer at abstract reasoning were more likely to exhibit prejudice against gays. As in the U.K. citizens, a lack of contact with gays and more acceptance of right-wing authoritarianism explained the link. [5 Myths About Gay People Debunked]

Simple viewpoints

Hodson and Busseri's explanation of their findings is reasonable, Nosek said, but it is correlational. That means the researchers didn't conclusively prove that the low intelligence caused the later prejudice. To do that, you'd have to somehow randomly assign otherwise identical people to be smart or dumb, liberal or conservative. Those sorts of studies obviously aren't possible.

The researchers controlled for factors such as education and socioeconomic status, making their case stronger, Nosek said. But there are other possible explanations that fit the data. For example, Nosek said, a study of left-wing liberals with stereotypically naïve views like "every kid is a genius in his or her own way," might find that people who hold these attitudes are also less bright. In other words, it might not be a particular ideology that is linked to stupidity, but extremist views in general.

"My speculation is that it's not as simple as their model presents it," Nosek said. "I think that lower cognitive capacity can lead to multiple simple ways to represent the world, and one of those can be embodied in a right-wing ideology where 'People I don't know are threats' and 'The world is a dangerous place'. ... Another simple way would be to just assume everybody is wonderful."

Prejudice is of particular interest because understanding the roots of racism and bias could help eliminate them, Hodson said. For example, he said, many anti-prejudice programs encourage participants to see things from another group's point of view. That mental exercise may be too taxing for people of low IQ.

"There may be cognitive limits in the ability to take the perspective of others, particularly foreigners," Hodson said. "Much of the present research literature suggests that our prejudices are primarily emotional in origin rather than cognitive. These two pieces of information suggest that it might be particularly fruitful for researchers to consider strategies to change feelings toward outgroups," rather than thoughts.

http://news.yahoo.com/low-iq-conservative-beliefs-linked-prejudice-180403506.html


Having fought against it for so long, this is nothing new to me.

I made the connection to conservative or right wing politics years ago.

Racism and discrimination go hand in hand with right wing politics.

Also misogyny goes well with right wing politics.

And I am a person who really tries to believe each of us are individual like I am but it just never pans out in this environment. They feel inferior and their only way to boost themselves up is to believe there are those inferior to themselves be they gay, another race, a woman, of a different religion or non religious, poor, etc... and any combination of the above


wow... You needed a brush the size of Jupiter to paint a larger generalized picture than this..

I seriously doubt you know every conservative personally, so to make these wild and wholly ludicrous accusations is pretty laughable.




Haven't met one yet that makes it untrue. The only saving grace they have is there are those who really don't realize, they are ignorant of the fact they are bigoted or racist or discriminatory because they falsely justify what they believe usually with what they were taught by their family friends and the social environment they hang out in.

When I meet one that makes it untrue I will make sure to change my view on it. It will actually make me a happier person to not be let down by my fellow man so badly.

Dragoness's photo
Fri 01/27/12 11:37 AM



Let's see.
Was Johnson a democrat?
July 2, 2004

Forty years ago today, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a bill that changed the face of America. It opened all public accommodations — hotels, restaurants, swimming pools — to all Americans regardless of race, color, religion or national origin.

Just after he signed, he was heard stating;

"I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years."

-- Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One according Ronald Kessler's Book, "Inside The White House"

Democrats fought to keep an entire race in slavery during The Civil War. Now today 150 years later the same Democrat Party fights to enslave EVERY American to government and in the process destroy the traditions, values and principles that have made out country great. They seek to spend us into oblivion to accomplish this slavery and blame Republicans, the Tea Party and anyone else they can find for their truly unamerican obsession with enslaving the masses through government.

So, tell me, what is the party of racists and bigots?


neither, actually, at the time of the civil war our politics wasnt quite as two sided, it was also regional

most who opposed civil rights were southerners, both democrat and republican,,,
actually it was the Republicans who pushed the Civilrights Act!


Yea but the parties have switched sides since then by a long shot. It was a completely different party in Lincoln's day.

Dragoness's photo
Fri 01/27/12 11:34 AM

In this Psychology Today article, Conspiracy Theories are explained
as the brains natural response to excessive and faulty repeated
stimulation due to an overabundance of irrelevant or extraneous
data which is viewed as threatening. In other words a mental disorder.

Interesting reading.

drinker

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200501/conspiracy-theories-explained


Paranoia will destroy you ♪

Dragoness's photo
Fri 01/27/12 10:22 AM

There's no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.

The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle, according to lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice, Hodson wrote in an email to LiveScience.

"Prejudice is extremely complex and multifaceted, making it critical that any factors contributing to bias are uncovered and understood," he said.

Controversy ahead

The findings combine three hot-button topics.

"They've pulled off the trifecta of controversial topics," said Brian Nosek, a social and cognitive psychologist at the University of Virginia who was not involved in the study. "When one selects intelligence, political ideology and racism and looks at any of the relationships between those three variables, it's bound to upset somebody."

Polling data and social and political science research do show that prejudice is more common in those who hold right-wing ideals that those of other political persuasions, Nosek told LiveScience. [7 Thoughts That Are Bad For You]

"The unique contribution here is trying to make some progress on the most challenging aspect of this," Nosek said, referring to the new study. "It's not that a relationship like that exists, but why it exists."

Brains and bias

Earlier studies have found links between low levels of education and higher levels of prejudice, Hodson said, so studying intelligence seemed a logical next step. The researchers turned to two studies of citizens in the United Kingdom, one that has followed babies since their births in March 1958, and another that did the same for babies born in April 1970. The children in the studies had their intelligence assessed at age 10 or 11; as adults ages 30 or 33, their levels of social conservatism and racism were measured. [Life's Extremes: Democrat vs. Republican]

In the first study, verbal and nonverbal intelligence was measured using tests that asked people to find similarities and differences between words, shapes and symbols. The second study measured cognitive abilities in four ways, including number recall, shape-drawing tasks, defining words and identifying patterns and similarities among words. Average IQ is set at 100.

Social conservatives were defined as people who agreed with a laundry list of statements such as "Family life suffers if mum is working full-time," and "Schools should teach children to obey authority." Attitudes toward other races were captured by measuring agreement with statements such as "I wouldn't mind working with people from other races." (These questions measured overt prejudiced attitudes, but most people, no matter how egalitarian, do hold unconscious racial biases; Hodson's work can't speak to this "underground" racism.)

As suspected, low intelligence in childhood corresponded with racism in adulthood. But the factor that explained the relationship between these two variables was political: When researchers included social conservatism in the analysis, those ideologies accounted for much of the link between brains and bias.

People with lower cognitive abilities also had less contact with people of other races.

"This finding is consistent with recent research demonstrating that intergroup contact is mentally challenging and cognitively draining, and consistent with findings that contact reduces prejudice," said Hodson, who along with his colleagues published these results online Jan. 5 in the journal Psychological Science.

A study of averages

Hodson was quick to note that the despite the link found between low intelligence and social conservatism, the researchers aren't implying that all liberals are brilliant and all conservatives stupid. The research is a study of averages over large groups, he said.

"There are multiple examples of very bright conservatives and not-so-bright liberals, and many examples of very principled conservatives and very intolerant liberals," Hodson said.

Nosek gave another example to illustrate the dangers of taking the findings too literally.

"We can say definitively men are taller than women on average," he said. "But you can't say if you take a random man and you take a random woman that the man is going to be taller. There's plenty of overlap."

Nonetheless, there is reason to believe that strict right-wing ideology might appeal to those who have trouble grasping the complexity of the world.

"Socially conservative ideologies tend to offer structure and order," Hodson said, explaining why these beliefs might draw those with low intelligence. "Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice."

In another study, this one in the United States, Hodson and Busseri compared 254 people with the same amount of education but different levels of ability in abstract reasoning. They found that what applies to racism may also apply to homophobia. People who were poorer at abstract reasoning were more likely to exhibit prejudice against gays. As in the U.K. citizens, a lack of contact with gays and more acceptance of right-wing authoritarianism explained the link. [5 Myths About Gay People Debunked]

Simple viewpoints

Hodson and Busseri's explanation of their findings is reasonable, Nosek said, but it is correlational. That means the researchers didn't conclusively prove that the low intelligence caused the later prejudice. To do that, you'd have to somehow randomly assign otherwise identical people to be smart or dumb, liberal or conservative. Those sorts of studies obviously aren't possible.

The researchers controlled for factors such as education and socioeconomic status, making their case stronger, Nosek said. But there are other possible explanations that fit the data. For example, Nosek said, a study of left-wing liberals with stereotypically naïve views like "every kid is a genius in his or her own way," might find that people who hold these attitudes are also less bright. In other words, it might not be a particular ideology that is linked to stupidity, but extremist views in general.

"My speculation is that it's not as simple as their model presents it," Nosek said. "I think that lower cognitive capacity can lead to multiple simple ways to represent the world, and one of those can be embodied in a right-wing ideology where 'People I don't know are threats' and 'The world is a dangerous place'. ... Another simple way would be to just assume everybody is wonderful."

Prejudice is of particular interest because understanding the roots of racism and bias could help eliminate them, Hodson said. For example, he said, many anti-prejudice programs encourage participants to see things from another group's point of view. That mental exercise may be too taxing for people of low IQ.

"There may be cognitive limits in the ability to take the perspective of others, particularly foreigners," Hodson said. "Much of the present research literature suggests that our prejudices are primarily emotional in origin rather than cognitive. These two pieces of information suggest that it might be particularly fruitful for researchers to consider strategies to change feelings toward outgroups," rather than thoughts.

http://news.yahoo.com/low-iq-conservative-beliefs-linked-prejudice-180403506.html


Having fought against it for so long, this is nothing new to me.

I made the connection to conservative or right wing politics years ago.

Racism and discrimination go hand in hand with right wing politics.

Also misogyny goes well with right wing politics.

And I am a person who really tries to believe each of us are individual like I am but it just never pans out in this environment. They feel inferior and their only way to boost themselves up is to believe there are those inferior to themselves be they gay, another race, a woman, of a different religion or non religious, poor, etc... and any combination of the above

Dragoness's photo
Wed 01/25/12 10:56 AM
I just draw into myself and listen to my breathing and feel.


Dragoness's photo
Wed 01/25/12 10:52 AM

Newt Gingrich will never become U.S. President because of 'something I know', Nancy Pelosi has claimed.

The former House of Representatives Speaker has left commentators scratching their heads after she issued the cryptic threat last night.

It came as the Democrat was asked by CNN's John King what would go through her mind if Republican Gingrich took the top job.

She replied: 'Let me just say this. That will never happen. He's not going to be President of the United States. That's not going to happen.
There is something I know.

'The Republicans, if they choose to nominate him that's their prerogative. I don't even think that's going to happen.'


By not detailing exactly what 'she knows' Pelosi, Gingrich's long-standing bitter rival, has sparked an intense debate as to what it could be.

Several possibilities are being touted by commentators.

Some believe it could relate to Gingrich's seedy private life.


His second ex-wife Marianne has revealed how Gingrich, also a former House Speaker, cheated on her with pretty young Washington worker Callista Bisek, who later became his third-wife.

It happened in the late nineties as he demanded President Bill Clinton be removed from office for lying on oath about his affair with Monica Lewinsky.

She also claimed he asked her for an 'open marriage', something which she declined.

Others think the 'something' Pelosi knows comes from her time investigating the GOP candidate as she served on a Washington committee.

Last month, she hinted she had 'major dirt' on Gingrich that could tarnish his White House hopes.

She suggested she would reveal 'thousands' of pages of an ethics committee investigation into the GOP frontrunner 'when the time's right.'

'I served on the investigative committee that investigated him, four of us locked in a room in an undisclosed location for a year. A thousand pages of his stuff,' Mrs Pelosi told Talking Points Memo.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2091578/Newt-Gingrich-President-Nancy-Pelosi-issues-cryptic-threat.html


LOL she is not the only one who knows it.

Newt is a calamity as are all the republican candidates this year.

Obama is a shoe in due to no competition.

Dragoness's photo
Wed 01/25/12 10:49 AM

Seriously everyone, just keep a clear and open mind that everyone is different. So who cares what others think of you. Everyone has different perspectives on other people, but that's what makes life interesting. I mean if everyone looked the same or like the same exact thing then the world would just be a total bore. It seems to me as if most of the people here are insecure but there's no need to be because its a big world filled with many people and at least one person out there will love and accept you for who you are.


I care about my appearance to please me.

So others opinion of it doesn't make no never mind.

Dragoness's photo
Wed 01/25/12 10:47 AM
This should be in the joke section as it is not real data.

I say what I mean, there is no code with me. I tell you if you are working on a fight straight up, why beat around the bush.

If you piss me off I tell you, you piss me off and then I tell you why and what you will get if it continues. Which is usually me out the door for good.

Dragoness's photo
Wed 01/25/12 10:39 AM
A 375-Year-Old French Bank Forgives Debts of Paris' Poorest
Previous ArticleNext Article

Isabelle RougholIsabelle Roughol
Journalist

Share this

507


January 23, 2012 • 5:30 am PST
781 responses

Just as France was being chastised for excessive national borrowing with a sovereign debt downgrade, thousands of lucky French people had their financial obligations forgiven after the country's oldest bank decided to simply wipe their slate clean.

Granted, it's a small slate. The 3,500 clients who benefitted from the bank’s largesse had debts of 150 euros or less (about $190) with the Crédit Municipal de Paris, also known as the "Mont-de-piété," the bank of the poor, which has for centuries allowed the needy to get loans against their valuables—a kind of ethical pawnshop, or the original microlender. The small kindness was welcome for many.

"I'm very happy, it's the first time I get something for nothing," said Geneviève, an elegant woman in her fifties who was at the bank to get back a gold coin and a small wedding band she had pawned three years ago. "There came a point when I needed money. They're not worth much but they're important to me."

The unexpected gift is a way for the bank to celebrate its 375th anniversary. The Crédit Municipal de Paris was created in 1637 by Théophraste Renaudot, a doctor, journalist and philanthropist who wanted to combat poverty by giving the needy access to fair banking.

"The goal was to combat usury," explains Thierry Halay, who authored a history of the Mont-de-piété. "Interest rates at the time could go up to 130 percent," which quickly turned small loans into unmanageable debt.

The good doctor's idea was to give the poor people of Paris loans they could reasonably hope to repay, at decent rates for the time (about 10 percent annually) against whatever collateral they could produce: pots and pans, linens, silverware, artisans' tools. Halay found evidence of a 19th-century woman so destitute her only possession was her mattress. Every morning, she would carry it to the bank and pawn it. With that money, she'd buy potatoes, sell them for a profit during the day and buy back her mattress at night.

Today, the bank stores more than a million objects, from the puny piece of jewelry to the grand masterpiece, in headquarters covering a city block in the historical center of Paris. With a capitalization of 60 million euros, the bank had 93 million euros in pawn-broking loans outstanding in 2010. Its 2010 profit of 1.3 million euros was partly assigned to improving shelters for the homeless.

"It was the country's first secular, welfare institution. It was a safety net," Halay says.

Similar city-owned, not-for-profit banks opened all over the country on the same principle: Pawn an object and you get a yearlong loan. Pay off the interest (4 to 8.9 percent annually) and you can extend the loan; pay off the principal and you get your property back. If your valuable is sold for more than you owe, the profit is yours. These banks were eventually granted a state monopoly on pawn-broking loans, which continues to this day; France is thus a country without pawnshops.

Celebrities of the day secretly used the bank: Victor Hugo, Claude Monet and Napoleon’s first wife, Joséphine de Beauharnais, among others. Prince François d'Orléans, third son of King Louis-Philippe, once pawned his watch to settle a gambling debt. Ashamed when asked what happened to his precious timepiece, he answered, "I left it at my aunt's (ma tante)." To this day, getting help from "ma tante" is a discrete way of saying one's been going to the "poor people's bank."

"People were never very proud to go to the Mont-de-piété," Halay says. It may be why people turned away from it: With the prosperity of the 20th century, people wanted to forget this symbol of poverty.

But it is no longer forgotten. As the economic crisis rippled through Europe, the Crédit Municipal de Paris saw a 29-percent jump in attendance in December 2011, compared with the same month in 2010. France’s economy grew about 1.75 percent in 2011, but economists expect less than one percent in 2012, maybe even a recession. Unemployment is at 9.8 percent, reaching 10-year highs and still climbing.

"We get more and more young people, students and retirees, too," says Florence Marambat, a spokeswoman for the bank. "People used to get their property back after 11 to 13 months; now it's closer to 24 months. But nine out of 10 still get it back."

"Our director likes to say our waiting room is like that of a hospital emergency room," she adds "Everyone comes to it at some point."

Nearly 700 people come through here every day, on awkward hallways and too-small waiting rooms. Some are clutching a jewelry pouch, others have a letter, which the bank started sending out last week, notifying them to come claim their valuables for free. The operation will continue in waves through the end of February.

http://www.good.is/post/a-375-year-old-french-bank-forgives-debts-of-paris-poorest?utm_campaign=daily_good2&utm_medium=email_daily_good2&utm_source=popular_post_link&utm_content=Use+Up%2C+Wear+Out%2C+Make+Do%3A+Buy+Less+in+2012

Excellent.

Dragoness's photo
Tue 01/24/12 08:45 PM

"A recession is when your neighbor loses his job, a depression is when you lose your job, and a recovery will be when Obama loses his job."





First off who said it?

Second......NOT!

Dragoness's photo
Tue 01/24/12 08:42 PM

A 15-year-old Wisconsin boy who wrote an op-ed opposing gay adoptions was censored, threatened with suspension and called ignorant by the superintendent of the Shawano School District, according to an attorney representing the child.

Mathew Staver, the founder of the Liberty Counsel, sent a letter to Superintendent Todd Carlson demanding an apology for “Its unconstitutional and irrational censorship and humiliation” of Brandon Wegner.

Wegner, a student at Shawano High School, was asked to write an op-ed for the school newspaper about whether gays should be allowed to adopt. Wegner, who is a Christian, wrote in opposition. Another student wrote in favor of allowing gays to adopt.

Wegner used Bible passages to defend his argument, including Scripture that called homosexuality a sin.

You can read Wegner’s editorial by clicking here.

After the op-ed was published, a gay couple whose child attend s the high school, complained.

The school immediately issued an apology – stating Wegner’s opinion was a “form of bullying and disrespect.”

“Offensive articles cultivating a negative environment of disrespect are not appropriate or condoned by the Shawano School District,” the statement read. “We sincerely apologize to anyone we may have offended and are taking steps to prevent items of this nature from happening in the future.”

But Staver said what the school system did next was absolutely outrageous. He said the 15-year-old was ordered to the superintendent’s office where he was subjected to hours of meetings and was accused of violating the school’s bullying policy.

“The superintendent called him ignorant and said he had the power to suspend him,” Staver said. “He’s using his position to bully this student. This is absolutely the epitome of intolerance.”

Staver said the boy’s parents were never notified.

At one point, Staver said the superintendent gave him a chance to say he regretted writing the column.

“When Mr. Wegner stated that he did not regret writing it, and that he stood behind his beliefs, Superintendent Carlson told him that he ‘had got to be one of the most ignorant kids to try to argue with him about this topic,’” Staver said.

At that point, Staver said the superintendent told the boy that “we have the power to suspend you if we want to.”

The superintendent allegedly told Wegner that he was personally offended by Wegner’s column.

FOX News & Commentary offered Carlson a chance to address the allegations. He refused to submit to questions, but did say he would send a statement. That statement never arrived.

Staver said Wegner was not trying to cause problems or pick a fight.

“He was asked to write an article in the newspaper overseen by a faculty adviser,” he said, suspecting the superintendent was specifically outraged over the Bible verses Wegner had used.

“The superintendent wants everyone to accept homosexuality as normative and homosexual adoption as something that should be standard practices,” Staver said. “In doing so, he’s belittling the views and the biblical views of many people across this country. He is playing a zero-sum game. He’s not interested in dialogue. He wants to cram his view down the throat of everyone else and will not tolerate an opposing viewpoint.”

Staver said an apology from the superintendent may not suffice – and they may consider taking legal action.

“It was a very intimidating situation for this 15-year-old boy,” he said.”It was uncalled for. He crossed the line. It’s absolutely outrageous and he needs to apologize for his actions.”

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/atty-says-school-threatened-punished-boy-who-opposed-gay-adoption.html

Why would they even publish a hot button political subject in a school newspaper anyways. What does gay people adopting have to do with education or the school or school system. It doesn't. Who cares if gay people want to adopt, who cares if people are against it.

This whole situation has gone to far. Personally I support gay marriage and for them to be able to adopt, but I dont believe in is for their beliefs to be rammed down everyones throat's and when someone who is against it speaks out they get blasted, sued, beat up, labeled a hatemonger, arrested, suspended and or expelled.

IMO if they want the rights that they are fighting for they need to accept the criticism. It's ok for them to force their beliefs down peoples throats but when someone does they same against them they are up in arms.

Stick and Stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me. I am sick of all this Politically Correct BS.


Even though the child is ignorant, I don't agree that he should have been told so. There are more constructive ways to get that point across. Also this would be a great time for a teaching moment. Have a child of adoption to a gay couple come and speak at the school so everyone can be less ignorant.

Dragoness's photo
Tue 01/24/12 08:36 PM
I like differences but I have to be able to respect him. Meaning his views and way of living have to be non prejudice, liberal leaning, sober for the most part, etc... or I can't respect him.

But for him to have different hobbies would be fun to do with him as long as they are not sport hunting, wilderness survival (due to my health issues), etc... unless he does them alone with the exception of sport hunting, I do not respect/approve of that so couldn't live with or be around someone who did it.