WHEN THE LEVEL PLAYING FIELD LOOKS LIKE CARTHAGE:

The difference between a lunatic and a liberal egalitarian sociologist is that the latter has tenure and visiting professorships at Harvard. As the frontier of social justice continually expands, like a balloon filled with stale toxic gases, it has become time to investigate the privilege enjoyed by children whose parents read to them at night, instead of smoking crack over their beds.

This story comes to us courtesy of Adam Swift, a political philosopher and liberal egalitarian sociologist with an interest in social justice and the family, and Australia's ABC.

"Is having a loving family an unfair advantage?" asks a story on the ABC's website.

"Should parents snuggling up for one last story before lights out be even a little concerned about the advantage they might be conferring?"

"Evidence shows that the difference between those who get bedtime stories and those who don't -- the difference in their life chances -- is bigger than the difference between those who get elite private schooling and those that don't," British academic Adam Swift told ABC presenter Joe Gelonesi.

Gelonesi responded online: "This devilish twist of evidence surely leads to a further conclusion that perhaps -- in the interests of levelling the playing field -- bedtime stories should also be restricted."

Swift said parents should be mindful of the advantage provided by bedtime reading.

"I don't think parents reading their children bedtime stories should constantly have in their minds the way that they are unfairly disadvantaging other people's children, but I think they should have that thought occasionally," he said.

They should feel guilty... for being good parents. This is the logic of the left. And if you're not illiterate, check your bedtime reading privilege. You enjoyed the advantage of parents who cared about you. You should feel guilty. Very guilty.

Follow @brothersjudd