Research "Woke" science: You shouldn't buy children teddy bears for Christmas (animal hobbies)

[C C]

But contrary to the DailyMail's injected adjective, this actually sounds like the opposite of Wokeness, which also has affiliation with political anti-naturalism. Woke not only encourages people to ignore the risks of various social engineering projects, but also the reality of nature's constraints and order. Pleading that we should retreat from its harsh reality into a kind of adult kindergarten world of figuratively cuddly do-gooderism that spurns critical evaluation of its policies and cynicism about its ultimate motives. Where the elite establishment is the Protector Nanny to be revered and followed (potential symbol of diverse children circling around Barney the Dinosaur, holding hands in nirvanic harmony, reminiscent of a collectivist hive-mind).
- - - - - - - - - - - - -

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/...-bear.html

EXCERPTS: If you were planning on buying your child a teddy bear this Christmas, woke scientists say you should think again. [...] Their concern is that children raised on soft, cuddly, but unscientific toys will grow up with a limited understanding of real wildlife.

[...] Teddy bears are designed to be adorably cute, with oversized heads, massive eyes, as well as muzzles and paws that are distinctly free of flesh-rending teeth and claws. According to the researchers, this Disney-esque view of the deadly predators risks jeopardising children's relationship with nature.

[...] In a new paper, published in the journal BioScience, Dr Mouquet and his co-authors argue that children's toys are an important gateway for learning more about nature.

The researchers surveyed 11,000 people to see if they had a cuddly toy growing up and, if so, what type of animal it was. Out of those surveyed, 43 per cent said that their childhood toy had been a bear, making it the most popular by far.

[...] The connection that children build with their first cuddly toy is incredibly powerful, offering physical comfort and a constant companion that stays with them for years. In this way, teddy bears can act as 'emotional ambassadors' for the real animals.

But if the bears we love as children look nothing like the animals we are being asked to protect in the wild, that connection doesn't help at all.

In a second study, the researchers compared the physical traits of bears to those of stuffed animals. While no stuffed toy looked anything like a real species, the bears that came closest to our cuddly ideal were pandas.

Dr Mouquet thinks it is no coincidence that the most toy-like of the bear species is also the bear which receives the most attention when it comes to conservation and is frequently used as a mascot for environmental projects.

He adds: 'My interest in teddy bears comes from a broader question: why do some species get a lot of attention and protection, while others are ignored? Teddy bears are a fun, almost universal way to explore this same bias, because they reveal which traits make us care about certain animals from a very young age.'

The researchers don't want us to chuck out our old beloved bears or turn beloved characters like Paddington or Winnie the Pooh into terrifying grizzlies. However, they would like to see toys with more realistic features being offered alongside these classic designs... (MORE - missing details)

[Syne]

No, that's pretty ridiculous and in the vein of woke nonsense. The idea that you can't teach children about actual animals with stuffed animals around would imply the sort of borderline neglect with which leftists approach child rearing. Instead of giving your child the necessary attention, they would rather the schools, TV, and toys teach their children. Zoo trips and nature documentaries can go a long way... if you engage with your kids.

[stryder]

I don't think a teddy bear did much else than act as comforter (unless specifically being collected as a collectable)

After all it's there to listen (even when what is said is unintelligible to grown up ears), it never gets mad or upset, and will likely be there through early life changing events (unless chewed on by a family pet)

To think their invention came from a satirical meme of Theodore Roosevelt not shooting a tied up bear out of seeing it was something not to be proud of. (It wasn't a capitalistic endeavor to populate the market with a a trade mark fad)

[confused2]

One of my teddy bears was killed by a washing machine. An early introduction to life being short and brutal. It took me years (about 65) to work out what actually happened.