African Americans, Police, and several other things tied into this.

We are in a strange place, yet oddly familiar place in American society. Dating back to slavery, racial tensions in the US have been rather severe. I feel as though many people take this very complicated issue, and think that there is one cure all solution. It is much too elaborate to sort out like that, as it is a systemic issue.

First, a discussion of the history. Black people lack historical culture. It is as if a pair of scissors sliced through the ribbon that was their ancestral timelines. This is quite obvious when you realize that so often art centered around black people tend to revolve around rediscovering roots. I also feel as though most white people take their roots for granted, they don't realize how much their ancestors history influences their own; how one's parents influenced them, how the grandparents influenced the parents... all the way back through the history of time. For blacks, there is scar tissue hiding away a very painful link, and the area is still quite tender.

Today MLK Jr is hailed as the man that freed black people from the racist social order that was holding it back. But what did he really do? Did he give them the history that was lost? Did he give them their broken culture?

IMO, MLK Jr and the civil rights act did more to hurt black people than he did help them. At a time when Black people should have been resistant to settling, resistant to fitting into the social framework... they did just that. Black people needed to hash out their own pathway, to say "fuck you whitey and we are going to do our own thing". Change can never really occur out of force, it can only happen out of necessity. No law can give a man his equality, he must take it. And yet the rule of law tried to force a square peg into a round hole. It tried to force people to mesh, and result of that has been very grave. A melting pot of shit and anger. Real change didn't occur, the real social structure remained the same, and the law is the tool to keep it all the same, to keep the black people happy with being pigeonholed by a broken system.

And now for a statistical break down. White people comprise 63% of the population. Blacks comprise 12.3% So far in 2016, 238 White people have been killed by police, 123 black people have been killed by police, therefore black people are more likely to be killed over twice that of whites. Black people commit over half of the violent crimes in the US, despite their low population numbers. Black children are far more likely to grow up in single families than any other race by a substantial margin. Blacks are far more likely to be poor. Black unemployment rate has been over twice that of whites for quite a long time. The unemployment rate spiked at 11 percent during the recession in the US. Based on that number Blacks in the US have been in a recession for their entire history in the US. There has been several studies that have shown that Blacks that have a 4 year degree earn very close to that of Whites.

Then there is the issue of unconscious racism. If a Black person and a White person are walking behind you down the street in a dark alley, are you more afraid of the White person or the Black person? Statistically we are more afraid of the black person, as we have an inherent unconscious 'racism'. But I have to ask, if blacks commit crimes at such a higher rate than that of whites, isn't the person just playing the odds? This is a hard thing to eradicate, and when it comes to police, dealing with blacks in very crime ridden territories, a cops develop instinctive reactions to certain events.


So how do you fix all of these interconnected trends? Well with what we've got so far, the answer would be to get more blacks in college to get degrees. But why do black people not instinctively go to college to get degrees? It goes back to my earlier point about blacks lacking cultural roots. Instead of building their own roots and building themselves up as a social group, they've been domesticated. Black people are society's version of the angry pet, forever expecting more treats from its master but forever faithful to the social sphere. Whites and Blacks locked into a dysfunctional sadistic/masochistic relationship.

Quote:

---

So how do you fix all of these interconnected trends? Well with what we've got so far, the answer would be to get more blacks in college to get degrees. But why do black people not instinctively go to college to get degrees? It goes back to my earlier point about blacks lacking cultural roots. Instead of building their own roots and building themselves up as a social group, they've been domesticated. Black people are society's version of the angry pet, forever expecting more treats from its master but forever faithful to the social sphere. Whites and Blacks locked into a dysfunctional sadistic/masochistic relationship.

---

A lot of us are just naturally slow, impulsive, and incapable of delaying gratification (it even manifests at a benign level, e.g.. my binge eating, nihilistic spending habits, and lackadaisical comportment in general) - exemplary African diasporan ethnic groups like Nigerian Americans, Ghanaians, etc. are typically members of the small, affluent intelligentsia back in their home countries.

i think part of the point of the civil right's movement though was to get white people off black people's backs and remove all of the very real infringements they faced at every turn, which is why the common examples about having to sit in the back of the bus, having to use separate bathrooms and drinking fountains, etc. are often given. it allows you to easily imagine not only how difficult your life would be with all of these extra obstacles (even using a public restroom is made complicated for you - and that's just one of the more benign things - try getting a job that will actually pay you something); to grasp at the fear you might feel out in public (there are places where people will become aggressive with you if you enter, authorities will generally treat you badly if not harass or maybe even beat or kill you, there are people who would like to see you hanged, you have to be careful around any white person you encounter because they can hurt you and the system will be sympathetic to them if they do*); and to imagine the feeling of oppression (you are a second class citizen, you're supposed to shine white people's shoes or do other demeaning jobs. you are not worth anything--your ideas, thoughts and feelings are all worthless, your future isn't worth considering, and your experiences meaningless in the eyes of society).

*sadly a lot of this stuff is *still* true, just to a lesser extent.

i don't think there's a way to fix a loss of one's roots if one can't find them again. nor do i think there's a magic fix for all the lost knowledge from previous generations of culture that you didn't receive. according to one documentary i watched (which i've mentioned before and always forget what it's called), some blacks were busy building new cultures especially on the east coast. i can't remember what factors were attributed to this but i think it was mainly that these people descended from northern blacks and were more educated. however, a lot of blacks who were particularly poor and ignorant (especially in the south), who descended from slaves denied access to knowledge and thus were not passed much knowledge from previous generations, fared differently. according to the program, a lot of descendents of these people today occupy some of the most poor and ignorant black neighborhoods. and actually, the documentary did show how systems like welfare kept these people in poverty (however it does *keep them alive* and i think that's really important not to overlook). the solution it suggested was that if the minority of people in these neighborhoods who actually make it out (usually through education) would return and aid the others, more people could be "liberated" from this sort of generational darkness. it's just that most of those who get out never want to return. they've had to do a lot of work to free themselves from the sort of bleak and ignorant worldview they were passed, and i could imagine one might fear being sucked back into it... not to mention the sheer despair around you if you live in one of these neighborhoods. it's probably enough to bring anyone down because all around you, all you can see is hopelessness.

i guess i think that schools in such neighborhoods should take on some of the burden. to do this, they need to be well funded and there needs to be a focus on how to basically overturn the worldview a lot of the kids live in. but someone who understands it still needs to lead it. like i don't think it's enough to show everyone inspiring stories or something. the problem is that every time they leave the classroom they are back in the bleak world they live in that has been the only world they know and all the adults in their community see it the same way...

i completely agree with you @Hitta about this:

Quote:

---

I also feel as though most white people take their roots for granted, they don't realize how much their ancestors history influences their own; how one's parents influenced them, how the grandparents influenced the parents... all the way back through the history of time.

---

only i also think that most people take it for granted how especially their parents (and the body of influences that influenced them), influence them. since i grew up in an environment where my dad liked to isolate us and tried to make sure our minds were only populated with what he thought (it was really creepy and fucked up) i had to work to shed a lot of my father's worldview and i still haven't finished the process of going through all of it. also my experiences growing up in a poor and dysfunctional family impacted how i see the world. mainly i've experienced a taste of what this is like and how when your foundation (the world your parents give you) is bad, it gives you a basis with a lot of unhelpful core beliefs which you then have to go digging for to overturn (which isn't a fast process often). fortunately, there were also enough helpful things passed to me from my parent's worldviews for this to not be completely debilitating as it ends up being for a lot of people in poverty.

when i was watching 'the documentary,' it resonated with me *because* of these worldview elements (i'm using this word to mean basically the body of core knowledge & underlying beliefs you are passed from your parents and immediate environment--these things help to form the world in your mind (your worldview), which is your replica of what the world is). the documentary demonstrated how a lot of the young men, for instance, would get into selling drugs. it was the most lucrative for making money in the short term. after making what to these people was an amazingly large sum of money ($1500 or something) they would just blow *all* of it. they'd also get arrested for involvement with drugs and then return later to the neighborhood bragging about their experiences in jail (going to jail for the first time was like rite of passage - it made you cool to your peers). it was observed that most of these guys had terrible social and communication skills. i'm fairly sure it would be difficult for most of them to even get a job in fast food (you'd have to be desperate to hire someone with such bad people skills). one way to interpret their behavior is that they are idiots--but then the entire neighborhood is idiots. they *all* display this sort of lost lack of long term thinking--why look for pay off for the future when it's hopeless? no one ever leaves this neighborhood, no one ever makes any lasting cash, you wouldn't even know what to do with money if you *did* have it (hence you just spend it all) as you have no examples from your immediate family or people you know. you probably get to watch shitty satellite TV full of talk shows about other impoverished people and their hopeless lives (maybe these people even seem glamorous to you--they at least often are wearing nicer looking clothes). mainly, all you have available to you is immediate enjoyment (that's the best your life will ever afford you). so you might as well have what fun you can.

anyway i tried to convey it, but i'm sure that description falls way short and doesn't get to the depth of how imprisoning these conditions are to a developing human being's mind. growing up in these conditions basically allows a person to create "a prison in their own mind." they *are* trapped by society. but the more damning thing is that they are trapped by themselves. they've been "programmed" with a self-defeating "culture," "worldview," "body of beliefs," however you want to say it...

i believe that you can definitely program a human being. as i may have mentioned before, i realized this most strikingly after watching documentaries on and reading about feral children. it's incredible how a human being can adapt from an early age to behave just like a chicken, repeating their calls and learning how to socially interact with chickens--the chicken man was unfortunately mentally deficient due to being trapped in an enclosure with nothing but chickens for company during some long period during his childhood--and the deficiency was in many ways permanent. the thing about young developing humans is that first they seek to bond, and they will bond with whatever living thing is there (the monkey boy was way more fortunate in his bonding companions than the chicken boy). they then become a master of the situation--their large human brain is able to learn basically everything they need to succeed and they are socially engaging usually to the extent that the animals around them will accommodate them (with the monkey boy, his account was that the monkeys took pity on him and would bring him food... he credited them for saving his life). i also read about a boy would grew up with wild dogs and basically became the master of the pack when he got older and could communicate with all the body language and calls of a dog. he was the best at leading the dogs to food and making good decisions for the pack, so naturally he rose to dominance. these kids, in other words, formed perfectly into what their early environments afforded them. this is why i think human beings are the most adaptable animals on earth (not counting insects). you can make a human being into just about anything.

there was a different study i read about testing chimps and human kids with some contraption/puzzle box. a researcher would demonstrate how to open the box. it was transparent so that you could see all the pieces. the researcher would use an unnecessarily complicated series of steps to open it, including steps that clearly had nothing to do with opening the contraption. the chimps saw this and eliminated the unnecessary steps. the human kids, however, followed every single step even though it was apparent to them that some of the steps were unnecessary. this kind of demonstrates a downside to being highly adaptable, highly social and highly dependent on learning from others, as humans are. humans rely so heavily on being taught and can learn with such thoroughness and complexity that you can definitely pass humans a destructive worldview or belief system and watch them hang themselves with it later in life. this can happen even with adults, but the things humans pick up as kids tend to be embedded more deeply and are more difficult to overturn. this sort of thing is why i think the conditions a person comes from matter a great deal.

ps. i'm not comparing the urban poor to feral children. most of the feral children were victims or war or abuse before being left to fend for themselves with only animals as possible social companions. some were actually confined (like the chicken boy) and thus severely deprived of stimuli. many missed the critical period when one is supposed to be developing language and learning how to interact with other human beings, which caused their brains to develop abnormally. these examples are obviously extreme and unusual (i'd imagine also for every surviving feral child there are far more who did not survive, so i don't mean to suggest that any human child would survive being dumped in the jungle at age 5 or whatever). but i used the examples to demonstrate just how malleable a human being is. some of the feral children when found again were unrecognizable as human. they behaved like animals. many had even grown tufts of hair on their bodies. their behavior would be wild and chaotic to a civilized person. in most cases they succeeded after being found because someone refused to give up on them and displayed incredible patience, and didn't let set backs deter them.

eta: but the reason i mentioned the feral children also was because they were *successful* in being shaped by their social environment. the wild dog boy becomes a great dog. his mind arranged itself into exactly what it needed to be. so if you have a large community of people who grow up to be unproductive and unable to escape their shitty neighborhood, i would say those people grew into perfectly adept shitty neighborhood dwellers. so really these people are actually all successful within their contexts. the few who escape are strange - maybe there was some rogue influence in stories from a parent, or maybe they share certain personality qualities... but the point is *they* are the anomalies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by suedehead

A lot of us are just naturally slow, impulsive, and incapable of delaying gratification (it even manifests at a benign level, e.g.. my binge eating, nihilistic spending habits, and lackadaisical comportment in general) - exemplary African diasporan ethnic groups like Nigerian Americans, Ghanaians, etc. are typically members of the small, affluent intelligentsia back in their home countries.

---

Type related! Many black Americans are SEE type and they don't like or can't be entertained by the slow and methodical nature of higher education but there are exceptions. My dad was SEE (he's not black American )and he was smart but didn't go to college. He thrived in Culinary arts education. I feel like if education was modeled differently it would be possible to graduate more SEE kids.

Racism exists because it's deeply engrained in us. We thrive in small social circles and we want to have social constructs that support our reality and validate us in some way.

And I agree with @Starfall race is a social learned trait it isn't natural

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starfall

If you want to get scientific about it, race doesn't actually exist. I'm tired of there being a division based on skin color.

---

unfortunately, ethnicity does exist. i don't think it's easy to get rid of the division for the very cultural reasons that create it in the first place. people identify with their ethnicity often, for better or worse. it's hard to shake or just wipe the slate clean when culture or social group ends up tying into a person's sense of their own identity. that there are patterns in culture/ethnicity makes it even more difficult because people will misattribute them as fixed properties.

also the documentary i watched, everyone in that neighborhood was black for the most part. black doesn't simply mean a certain set of patterns in physical features. the people identify themselves as this. but what's more important is the ethnicity and the history of passing culture over the course of generations... which is rooted in the conception of race all the way back to slavery. thus you kind of have to consider it when considering the problem.

like if my great great great grandmother was denied access to knowledge, born a slave, and lived in poverty after the civil war ended (just expected to magically know how to integrate with society); and maybe her kids learned a little bit more than she did, but still were largely ignorant and living in poverty... imagining what is passed from generation to generation, landing with me living in the projects... it's these subtle things in the worldview that end up impacting people more... now you have more access to knowledge, you are literate... but you are still trapped by an disempowering worldview that gets passed on and elaborated upon per generation. one based on being a slave in origin.

i guess as an example, alcoholism gets passed generationally in both sides of my family. it's not simply people drinking, it's a sort of cluster of behavioral traits that can appear in children of alcoholics that they then unwittingly pass to their own children without trying to, even if they themselves are not alcoholics. the pattern of traits can then make it easier for someone down the line to develop alcoholism. (there's probably some genetic thing too though maybe in this case.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inumbra

unfortunately, ethnicity does exist. i don't think it's easy to get rid of the division for the very cultural reasons that create it in the first place. people identify with their ethnicity often, for better or worse. it's hard to shake or just wipe the slate clean when culture or social group ends up tying into a person's sense of their own identity. that there are patterns in culture/ethnicity makes it even more difficult because people will misattribute them as fixed properties.

---

Because we are taught to identify with it in direct or indirect ways. Direct is by asking where you were born and indirect by someone in the family bragging about how superior they are vrs how "low" others are creating division and differentiation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIpcxy9M1pw

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa

Because we are taught to identify with it in direct or indirect ways. Direct is by asking where you were born and indirect by someone in the family bragging about how superior they are vrs how "low" others are creating division and differentiation

---

but i think maybe people always did this... people ask where someone came from as part of trying to understand who they are. and people are kind of tribal in inclination and would naturally want to be all "my tribe or group is better than yours."

anyway i don't really know the answer... the construction of race needs to be phased out and untangled from ethnicity. but in trying to address the social problems the construction of race created for people, it keeps being put in the spotlight as actually important (as though you are a race as an independent property). it thus can re-create itself like a nasty cancer. and you can't just withdraw everything and be all "race doesn't matter" because some people are actually at a disadvantage because of the history of racism and how it has affected them and those before them. not to mention how they are experiencing racism in their current every day lives. and it invalidates them to just be all, "you aren't a race, you're an equal person" when they are painfully aware of how "race" affects them.

eta: lamely i kind of suspect it will largely work itself out. all of these discussions are like a massive trying to work out the poison often; and although there's a lot of new poison being created, i feel like the overall trend is trying to "fix it" in an organic way even if we don't know specifically how to.

eta2: i think it would help more to generalize less though. i mean i do agree that "black people" or "white people" are generalizations in all cases, and meaningless terms when you attempt to break them down. but there *are* problems related to "race" is the issue, and if one doesn't talk about them at all, they're not just going to go away because of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starfall

If you want to get scientific about it, race doesn't actually exist. I'm tired of there being a division based on skin color.

---

Modern Epigenetics would have something different to say about this. Back when we stated that race and genes were unrelated, we tended to view the genome in an incredibly simplistic manner. When black or white or whatever race coagulates with each other in a specific area and shares cultures, methylation and demethylation will cause many distinctions within the genome, not to mention that I think we are only at the tip of the iceberg when it comes to understanding this process. There was a study done that showed the fear to certain environmental reactions was handed down for several generations after the changes in the genome.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transg...ic_inheritance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_epigenetics

@Hitta i thought the main point in saying that race isn't "real" was mainly that there is more genetic diversity *within* a supposed racial group than between supposedly different racial groups... which is to say we're all pretty similar. and we have less genetic diversity as a species on the whole than do a lot of animals.

and that a lot of our big differences are morphological differences (e.g. skin color) or adaptations to various diseases in regions hit hard (e.g. malaria, bubonic plague). these differences don't extend to personality really (they are surface differences).

and also that 200,000 years (if that is indeed how old we are as a species--which we could be even "younger" than that) isn't usually long enough to get really significant differences anyway between groups evolving in isolation from one another.

this post brought to you by :Ti: HA and out-dated info. :biggrin:

also, found this page: http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/conte...s/inheritance/

*but* i don't think this means that *race* matters that much because if my highly stressful childhood causes certain changes and i pass on some tag, it's not my race that matters in this but my conditions. frankly i think this could maybe help explain really how humans did manage to evolve morphological diversity so quickly... it's always been a bit bizarre to me really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starfall

http://www.newsweek.com/there-no-such-thing-race-283123


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK3sguRWYK0


As a kid, I grew up on a military base in Hawaii where my friends and neighbors were of many different races. My parents (who loved everyone) never talked about race or racial issues while growing up. My best friends were black and I saw them as part of my family and as part of myself. We had a different complexion, but I saw that as no big a difference as people with blue eyes and brown eyes. I didn't actually fully acknowledge race until I moved to Virginia and lived in the Civilian world. At this point I saw a huge separation between people, culture and economic demographics.

---

As a result most scientists that believed in traditional Darwinian logic are wrong. It is very easy to see how "races" begin. A group of people think they are similar, so they hang in the same social circles. As a result the races have common methylation patterns for their genes and similarities converge. The idea that there aren't races is a preposterous notion, that can only be saved by how you define a race.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...rities/430749/

"Well with what we've got so far, the answer would be to get more blacks in college to get degrees."

From what I understand about this situation there are a few major factors at play:
People of differing cultures within the same social setting attempt to force the other out, whittling the other down: though there may be times of peace between the two cultures, usually from compromise on both sides, both want the other to conform to their way of life eventually. Tensions between the varying cultures will always intensify until one caves in to the other's desires. This is why those who, for example, immigrate to America from another nation--say, Japan--eventually adopt the American customs as their primary culture, though they may still respect and recall the former culture they left--or may forget about it entirely. If an individual is forceful in preserving their own culture within a social area where another culture is dominant, they wind up forming their own society within that society, which usually means hardship in integration with that nation's economy vs. their very local economy, thus the individuals who don't integrate wind up living in unbearable poverty and wind up leaving back to where they came--normally. But thanks to the welfare state, foreign individuals no longer have to integrate, they can just live off the tax payer's dime, and so the cultural wars intensify as more members of competing cultures attempt to overtake the other.

Also: variances in intelligence can be vast between two races--e.g. compare Caucasians or Asians to Blacks or Arabs--and, in combination with this fact, intelligence is mostly set from birth and cannot be improved significantly (usually one can only get a 5 point gain to their IQ IIRC, but anything more is rare.) Next, consider that the average IQ of the two latter groups mentioned are within the hot spot for criminal activity (~85).

For these reasons, I don't believe what you've suggested will help. College may or may not improve an individual's intelligence, but if it does, it won't do it by much. In this case, putting your average Joe of these groups into a college environment primarily worsens the college experience overall, which is another way of saying it makes things worse for everyone without helping the intended group. I can personally attest to this fact having gone to a college which accepted federal aid: it was basically the high school experience all over again, complete with mandatory classes which had nothing to do with my major (gotta make it fool proof...) and lots and lots of people who had no hope of making a greatly positive impact on the world, those who would contribute to the pool of individuals who worked at such places like McDonald's and Starbucks with their college degrees, a pool which increases all the time. Among the greatest benefits of college--meeting great minded people--was lost, and it became just an extension of governmental daycare, just another way for people to stay busy without actually doing something.

It doesn't really matter what race they are, the race is just a convenient categorization. What matters as far as social cohesion goes is their mental capabilities, individuals of higher intelligence coexist much easier because such individuals can adapt much easier to one another, at least to the point where adaptation doesn't feel impossible (which would lead an individual back to square one, to getting the other culture to conform to their own culture.) Individuals of lower intelligence find it difficult enough to just coexist with one another. Frankly, some people just don't have what it takes to live in the West. As I see it, there are a few realistic and immediate solutions to this issue:

1. Segregation based on mental capability, that is to abandon the unintelligent people, let them have a nation to themselves, or to remove them from the nation--there are various methods with various levels of peace or violence but the end goal would be to have the two disparate groups separate. Basically do the opposite of what's going on between Europe and the Middle East. Ideally this segregation occurs by the unintelligent people choosing to self-segregate: all that needs to happen is to stop supporting their presence in the nation (going back to the welfare thing, at the very least putting absolute restrictions on what sort of welfare an individual can get and for how long.)
2. Accept things as they are and stop worrying about it. This has issues down the road but in the meantime, you won't have to expend any energy; maybe you can kick the can down the road to a generation you'll never experience. This is the method the previous generations employed, so it seems. Though to be fair, in my city in Texas, racial tensions are virtually non-existent: for an anecdotal example, my current place of employment has ~2 blacks for every non-black (excepting the leadership which is almost exclusively white), but everyone gets along quite well. Though I see the tension in the news, I don't see it in person, and it makes me skeptical whether the media is making mountains out of molehills as it regularly does. As I'm sure you're aware, Dallas recently had an incident, which surely would've worsened racial tensions one would think...perhaps it's just so minute that it cannot be seen except over a long period of time. Perhaps the effects are yet to arise. But I'm not seeing it, in fact I've been noticing an improvement, a decrease in tension, if we're considering all of the past few decades. Whether this is good or bad depends on how far ahead you're thinking. One may think of a decrease in racial tension as a lowering of a society's standards, as an abandonment of one's own cultural values to compromise with another.

"But I have to ask, if blacks commit crimes at such a higher rate than that of whites, isn't the person just playing the odds?"
You can tell from the way a person presents themselves, their attire and their behavior, what they may do. Context is also key: some neighborhoods you just don't want to be in at night, but again it's due to the community of people with the attires and the behaviors you know to look out for. It's entirely possible someone will play the odds, but it is unnecessary. It's entirely possible the statistics closely represent a large portion of this group, as well.

There is so much racism in this thread, it makes my head spin. Damn people, seriously?

the intelligence & race thing is soooooo stupid.

problems:

- how do you determine/define race?
- how do you determine/define intelligence?
- how do you prove there is any link between the two? (correlation =/= causation)
- how do you know the things you're thinking mean "low intelligence" aren't arising out of cultural or environmental factors?
- is it possible what you're looking for to determine "intelligence" is in fact arising out of your own biases (traits you value)?
- how can you possibly be confident enough in any of this to think you know what you are talking about?
- how do you know that whatever "evidence" you gather should you be able to adequately define standards on race and intelligence represents something meaningful and lasting in time?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kim

There is so much racism in this thread, it makes my head spin. Damn people, seriously?

---

if you don't say what and where, we can't get anything useful from your remark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inumbra

the intelligence & race thing is soooooo stupid.

problems:

- how do you determine/define race?
- how do you determine/define intelligence?
- how do you prove there is any link between the two? (correlation =/= causation)
- how do you know the things you're thinking mean "low intelligence" aren't arising out of cultural or environmental factors?
- is it possible what you're looking for to determine "intelligence" is in fact arising out of your own biases (traits you value)?
- how can you possibly be confident enough in any of this to think you know what you are talking about?
- how do you know that whatever "evidence" you gather should you be able to adequately define standards on race and intelligence represents something meaningful and lasting in time?

if you don't say what and where, we can't get anything useful from your remark.

---

When I find the time I will, but in the meantime your last post gives me hope.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hitta

As a result most scientists that believed in traditional Darwinian logic are wrong. It is very easy to see how "races" begin. A group of people think they are similar, so they hang in the same social circles. As a result the races have common methylation patterns for their genes and similarities converge. The idea that there aren't races is a preposterous notion

---

yeah some similarities did converge, like different skin and hair per environmental factors (always on a gradient though) or adapting larger lungs if you are at higher elevations... but we already know that we look different. that's the whole problem, that we can't get over how we look different. unfortunately physical appearance tends to be rather important on the primate line. primates are very visual creatures.

i think you could *obviously* get different behavior traits through evolution for different groups of people... but humans haven't been that controlled or isolated in their groups. humans tend to wander and trade off with different groups. but i'll use the dog breeds argument... not only do dog breeds look very different but there are behavioral differences... for instance certain characteristics are associated with herding dogs vs. with retrievers. herding dogs need to keep track of an entire flock of grazing animals and follow complex commands involving various signals or words. is it possible that the average border collie can learn more words/signals, is more likely to herd small animals and children by instinct, and is more likely to always being vigilant of an entire group and making sure they're all together? sure, i think that's reasonable. because along breeding lines there are certain behavioral traits breeders were looking for (the dog needs to be good at performing a particular function), so they were probably more likely to breed the most exceptional seeming dogs (although of course training is a *huge* factor in if the dog was exceptional... ahem), hoping to keep getting the desired traits. of course there are numerous issues with this since it *is* so dependent on training and since it's hit or miss in breeding (it's way easier i bet to select for physical features than something abstract-ish like "behavioral tendencies" - with the latter you really are just guessing). some individual dogs of breeds not even supposed to have anything with herding could turn out to be better herding dogs than some individual dogs of a herding breed. and of course how do you even define "better" in a way that is scientifically valid? also, breed your herding dog with a mutt and boom, the offspring just looks like a bunch of dogs. how quickly you can unravel your "breed" sort of demonstrates how possibly insignificant the little changed you have made to 'dog' are.

i don't think anything in human evolution has been so controlled and fixed as dog breeding, save maybe some sick eugenics experiment forced on people. many scientists argue that you can't even find worthwhile differences in personality traits or cognitive abilities or whatever between dog breeds - and that's with actually *trying* to breed for very specific traits.

i could buy that humans have different races if the world consisted of 4 continents all separated from one another by ocean with 4 separate human populations on them, isolated from one another for at least 1 million years with very different environmental conditions on each. if you bring the 4 groups back together after 1 million years, you might find they are still the same species but that there are considerable differences... maybe you could measure some of them. because you know how long they were isolated from one another; and because it is "controlled," you can probably be somewhat safe in assuming that a lot of the observed differences are actually significant. however, you would *still* have to account for culture and conditions and not confuse that with actual biological differences. and you might actually even still not be able to find distinct differences in personality or cognitive abilities of statistical significance--like consider horses and donkeys, two separate species that imo are largely the same lol (despite who know how many years of evolution apart they really don't seem to have diverged much from one another). or consider a species that lives on multiple continents like the grey wolf... are there significant differences (they've been separated in different environmental conditions) to write home about? (you might automatically think there aren't because they all look the same :D)

anyway, the point is though that human evolution has not been nice and clear cut like this. there has been a lot of overlap between groups of people, we're at most 200,000 years old as a species... we don't have the proper controlled isolation or time or controlled vector (i.e. relentlessly breading in or out *specific* traits each generation) for there to be anything significant. that is to say you cannot find a way to break down humanity into meaningful categories based on any set of characteristics (subtracting out cultural factors) that tie to their genetic heritage. so you can't actually have a "race."

i think the other plausible seeming thing is that you can get morphological differences out of evolution pretty quickly and easily. it makes sense. i mean if a species can't get a needed morphological adaptation for its environment fast enough, it'll go extinct. the things on the surface of us (the literal physical surface) are kind of our first line of defense from the environment. the muscles and interior physical shapes like that of a blood cell may be our second line of defense. these things really seem much simpler than "behavior."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starfall

If you want to get scientific about it, race doesn't actually exist.

---

Races evidently exist as a genetically close groups with visual difference in the look and other. Assertions against is political idiocy, but not science.
Or you also need to say there are no races of dogs, breeds of fruits, etc.

The question may only to be how to group people in races with better practical use. Today categories of blacks, asian and whites are still useful, despite existence of a lot people with mixed race.

Also you may do nothing with racism - it was and will be forever. Especially where it has social and historical base like in USA.
At best people will not show rough discrimination in normal social conditions. To relate better and to have closer relations with people genetically close to you is instinct and it works want you this or not. Often there are other factors smoothing this effect, but racism just stays hiden.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sol

The question may only to be how to group people in races with better practical use. Today categories of blacks, asian and whites are still useful, despite existence of a lot people with mixed race.

---

Useful for what?

Quote:

---

Also you may do nothing with racism - it was and will be forever. Especially where it has social and historical base like in USA.

---

http://www.census.gov/newsroom/relea...s/cb12-68.html
I can't speak for the entire world, but the number of bi-racial couples in the United States is increasing, especially among the younger generations. Contrary to what you predict, I envision that humans will grow in physical uniformity as various groups exchange genetic material. As this occurs people won't be able to discriminate based on physical appearance.

Quote:

---

To relate better and to have closer relations with people genetically close to you is instinct and it works want you this or not.

---

I can't say I relate to this instinct. It appears that you're trying to rationalize discrimination by calling it natural. I also see no biological advantage -- ignoring mutation, if you want to change the genes you pass on, you have to exchange genetic material with someone with different traits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starfall

Argue that with modern science.

Also, the only reason we have variation in breeds of dogs and plants is because humans breed them, but a dog is still a dog. Stuff like that only really occurs in nature through isolation. If all humans somehow disappeared, dogs would eventually all mix to become mutts and a lot of plants that were genetically modified for human consumption would die out without having the aid of humans to grow them (they've been genetically modified that much).



Not necessarily. There are actually estimations that in the future the mixing of people of different ethnic backgrounds will become increasingly more common, especially now that immigration and travel is a lot easier than it was hundreds of years ago. Mixed race couples in America are everywhere, and they are only becoming increasingly more common. Racism is still around, but as we grow and lose old basis, this will eventually fade as well (America has actually come a long way already).

http://www.trueactivist.com/this-is-...-its-stunning/

Not to mention, the more mixed and diverse someones background is, the healthier genetics they tend to have in general. People who keep too strictly to their own gene pool will develop a lot of health issues.



Not really. This again, is influenced through social conditioning. When I was growing up most of my friends were (and still are) mixed or Asian. When I worked in cosmetics and skin care my closest and most loyal clients that I built relationships with were African American and Hispanic. I've had very few close and lasting friendships with people who were 100% Caucasian. My parents never raised me to "stick to my own". I don't relate to people just because they have a similar complexion. I actually tend to relate better to people who have either one or two foreign parents, tbh.

---

Starfall the race thing you are quoting is from a study that was done in 2000, and people keep quoting it over and over and over again as if nothing in our understanding of science has changed. People used to think the earth was flat, it doesn't make it true. Epigenetics makes a pretty significant argument for races, and most modern studies on race have concluded much differently than the 2000 study.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inumbra

yeah some similarities did converge, like different skin and hair per environmental factors (always on a gradient though) or adapting larger lungs if you are at higher elevations... but we already know that we look different. that's the whole problem, that we can't get over how we look different. unfortunately physical appearance tends to be rather important on the primate line. primates are very visual creatures.

i think you could *obviously* get different behavior traits through evolution for different groups of people... but humans haven't been that controlled or isolated in their groups. humans tend to wander and trade off with different groups. but i'll use the dog breeds argument... not only do dog breeds look very different but there are behavioral differences... for instance certain characteristics are associated with herding dogs vs. with retrievers. herding dogs need to keep track of an entire flock of grazing animals and follow complex commands involving various signals or words. is it possible that the average border collie can learn more words/signals, is more likely to herd small animals and children by instinct, and is more likely to always being vigilant of an entire group and making sure they're all together? sure, i think that's reasonable. because along breeding lines there are certain behavioral traits breeders were looking for (the dog needs to be good at performing a particular function), so they were probably more likely to breed the most exceptional seeming dogs (although of course training is a *huge* factor in if the dog was exceptional... ahem), hoping to keep getting the desired traits. of course there are numerous issues with this since it *is* so dependent on training and since it's hit or miss in breeding (it's way easier i bet to select for physical features than something abstract-ish like "behavioral tendencies" - with the latter you really are just guessing). some individual dogs of breeds not even supposed to have anything with herding could turn out to be better herding dogs than some individual dogs of a herding breed. and of course how do you even define "better" in a way that is scientifically valid? also, breed your herding dog with a mutt and boom, the offspring just looks like a bunch of dogs. how quickly you can unravel your "breed" sort of demonstrates how possibly insignificant the little changed you have made to 'dog' are.

i don't think anything in human evolution has been so controlled and fixed as dog breeding, save maybe some sick eugenics experiment forced on people. many scientists argue that you can't even find worthwhile differences in personality traits or cognitive abilities or whatever between dog breeds - and that's with actually *trying* to breed for very specific traits.

i could buy that humans have different races if the world consisted of 4 continents all separated from one another by ocean with 4 separate human populations on them, isolated from one another for at least 1 million years with very different environmental conditions on each. if you bring the 4 groups back together after 1 million years, you might find they are still the same species but that there are considerable differences... maybe you could measure some of them. because you know how long they were isolated from one another; and because it is "controlled," you can probably be somewhat safe in assuming that a lot of the observed differences are actually significant. however, you would *still* have to account for culture and conditions and not confuse that with actual biological differences. and you might actually even still not be able to find distinct differences in personality or cognitive abilities of statistical significance--like consider horses and donkeys, two separate species that imo are largely the same lol (despite who know how many years of evolution apart they really don't seem to have diverged much from one another). or consider a species that lives on multiple continents like the grey wolf... are there significant differences (they've been separated in different environmental conditions) to write home about? (you might automatically think there aren't because they all look the same :D)

anyway, the point is though that human evolution has not been nice and clear cut like this. there has been a lot of overlap between groups of people, we're at most 200,000 years old as a species... we don't have the proper controlled isolation or time or controlled vector (i.e. relentlessly breading in or out *specific* traits each generation) for there to be anything significant. that is to say you cannot find a way to break down humanity into meaningful categories based on any set of characteristics (subtracting out cultural factors) that tie to their genetic heritage. so you can't actually have a "race."

i think the other plausible seeming thing is that you can get morphological differences out of evolution pretty quickly and easily. it makes sense. i mean if a species can't get a needed morphological adaptation for its environment fast enough, it'll go extinct. the things on the surface of us (the literal physical surface) are kind of our first line of defense from the environment. the muscles and interior physical shapes like that of a blood cell may be our second line of defense. these things really seem much simpler than "behavior."

---

I do think there are behavioral differences between white people and black people though that have been passed from generation to generation based on environmental influences. It makes perfect sense to me how and why this happened, similar looking people feel more comfortable around those they share physical traits with... and soon the behavioral traits start to overlap as well. Now what I don't understand is why is it a problem for white people and black people to be different? Being different does not mean being inferior. We spend so much time trying to make everything the same that I think we kind of isolate certain cultures from the rest of the world unintendedly in the name of equality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hitta

I do think there are behavioral differences between white people and black people though that have been passed from generation to generation based on environmental influences.

---

which white people and which black people, where and when?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inumbra

which white people and which black people, where and when?

---

Well thats the bizarre thing... groups can be assigned based on proximity. A group of the same color in one area will be different than those in another area. I do think there is probably a shared behavioral linkage between all within a race though, as I think there is a commonality between how they are treated and interact in response to the world environment. It may be very subtle but I do think it exists. I mean, look at China, Japan, and Korea. They have similar linguistic relativity, have similar foods, similar all kinds of things. You can say that they all came from the same area, therefore they have similar culture....... but that'd just be playing into my argument. Culture causes changes in epigenetics, which just perpetuates culture. Even if deviations occur, there probably still are very residual similarities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hitta

Well thats the bizarre thing... groups can be assigned based on proximity. A group of the same color in one area will be different than those in another area. I do think there is probably a shared behavioral linkage between all within a race though, as I think there is a commonality between how they are treated and interact in response to the world environment. It may be very subtle but I do think it exists. I mean, look at China, Japan, and Korea. They have similar linguistic relativity, have similar foods, similar all kinds of things. You can say that they all came from the same area, therefore they have similar culture....... but that'd just be playing into my argument. Culture causes changes in epigenetics, which just perpetuates culture. Even if deviations occur, there probably still are very residual similarities.

---

ugh. well considering the entire continent of africa (it's huge) and just how many "groups" we would be talking about in that continent alone coupled with minimal time (200,000 years is so little time for a species), i seriously do not see how we'd be able to find any meaningful and measurable very subtle behaviors... and if they are so subtle to begin with, why does it even matter. aren't there like less subtle, more easily measurable things we could focus on? if it's so subtle it's like a breath of smoke, hard to notice and quick to fade, who cares about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inumbra

ugh. well considering the entire continent of africa (it's huge) and just how many "groups" we would be talking about in that continent alone coupled with minimal time (200,000 years is so little time for a species), i seriously do not see how we'd be able to find any meaningful and measurable very subtle behaviors... and if they are so subtle to begin with, why does it even matter. aren't there like less subtle, more easily measurable things we could focus on? if it's so subtle it's like a breath of smoke, hard to notice and quick to fade, who cares about it.

---

You're missing my point. People see themselves as being different. I live in the most fucked up area of the world... the deep south. Down here white people and black people literally live on different sides of towns. People legit see themselves as being apart of a cultural group, and being apart of those cultural groups causes convergence. Throughout the entirety of animal history, those that think they are similar to each other tend to coagulate closely with those that are relate-able. It makes perfect sense that people that look similar, would converge together behaviorally..,. and genetically. People in the United States probably have uniform behavioral traits in comparison to the behavioral traits of those in the United Kingdom, but probably have similarities as well. Subtle does not mean unnoticeable. Differences cause changes in the genetic code. Methyl groups assemble and deassemble based on your environmental experiences. If people have similar experiences, then they will develop similar patterns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa

Type related! Many black Americans are SEE type and they don't like or can't be entertained by the slow and methodical nature of higher education but there are exceptions. My dad was SEE (he's not black American )and he was smart but didn't go to college. He thrived in Culinary arts education. I feel like if education was modeled differently it would be possible to graduate more SEE kids.

Racism exists because it's deeply engrained in us. We thrive in small social circles and we want to have social constructs that support our reality and validate us in some way.

And I agree with @Starfall race is a social learned trait it isn't natural

---

Interesting thought. These are traits on growth. I wouldn't call them SEE types as much as I'd call them raised in a subculture that is strongly inclined towards SEE behaviour, and that culture is forced, based on wealth, and harsh environments squeezed out from a time that preceded the current.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hitta

You're missing my point. People see themselves as being different. I live in the most fucked up area of the world... the deep south. Down here white people and black people literally live on different sides of towns. People legit see themselves as being apart of a cultural group, and being apart of those cultural groups causes convergence. Throughout the entirety of animal history, those that think they are similar to each other tend to coagulate closely with those that are relate-able. It makes perfect sense that people that look similar, would converge together behaviorally..,. and genetically. People in the United States probably have uniform behavioral traits in comparison to the behavioral traits of those in the United Kingdom, but probably have similarities as well. Subtle does not mean unnoticeable. Differences cause changes in the genetic code. Methyl groups assemble and deassemble based on your environmental experiences. If people have similar experiences, then they will develop similar patterns.

---

well, you're missing my point. i mean people in the deep south: ooh 20 generations or something. that's hardly any. is it going to make for some significant personality trait or cognitive feature shared by no other humans anywhere? can the deep southerners be their own race now? i mean it's ridiculous. it's also ridiculous to call all "white people" or all "black people" distinct races.

i'm not arguing that we are not adapting to our environment subtly, but that we are and we still don't actually have any races. i'm not saying it's impossible to find a distinct pocket of people that have a higher tendency to be adapted to a single thing--like a virus... but that is not a race. it's really hard to see how like if some of my ancestors lived in the alps for 25,000 years before climbing down to live in the valleys and spread apart in separate groups for the next 10,000 years until finally a small pocket of the original group settled in a northern forest... how that gives me a particular racially identifiable set of personality or cognitive traits that anyone should actually care about because of their amazing significance. like i can't genetically shake the laziness of those damn mountain dwellers and their 25,000 years of sitting on their asses => it's a racial distinction.

(this is also funny because kids often have unique behavioral and cognitive traits anyway, unique from their parents. sometimes you just get the alien child who seems utterly unidentifiable in the family.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inumbra

well, you're missing my point. i mean people in the deep south: ooh 20 generations or something. that's hardly any. is it going to make for some significant personality trait or cognitive feature shared by no other humans anywhere? can the deep southerners be their own race now? i mean it's ridiculous. it's also ridiculous to call all "white people" or all "black people" distinct races.

i'm not arguing that we are not adapting to our environment subtly, but that we are and we still don't actually have any races. i'm not saying it's impossible to find a distinct pocket of people that have a higher tendency to be adapted to a single thing--like a virus... but that is not a race. it's really hard to see how like if some of my ancestors lived in the alps for 25,000 years before climbing down to live in the valleys and spread apart in separate groups for the next 10,000 years until finally a small pocket of the original group settled in a northern forest... how that gives me a particular racially identifiable set of personality or cognitive traits that anyone should actually care about because of their amazing significance. like i can't genetically shake the laziness of those damn mountain dwellers and their 25,000 years of sitting on their asses => it's a racial distinction.

(this is also funny because kids often have unique behavioral and cognitive traits anyway, unique from their parents. sometimes you just get the alien child who seems utterly unidentifiable in the family.)

---

You can call them anything you want to call. I mean you denoted them as "southerners",why did you do that? You noticed an obvious pattern that is shared among-st those in proximity. The reason "southerner" this is so hard to isolate is there is no overt physical characteristics to match, yet people do it anyway... it is just hard to push at a global scale. What exactly is a race? Wikipedia definition of race "Race is a group of people who share similar and distinct physical characteristics, as well as shared cultural practices and affectations." You can create boundaries based on any criteria, that doesn't mean the boundaries don't exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inumbra

well, you're missing my point. i mean people in the deep south: ooh 20 generations or something. that's hardly any. is it going to make for some significant personality trait or cognitive feature shared by no other humans anywhere? can the deep southerners be their own race now? i mean it's ridiculous. it's also ridiculous to call all "white people" or all "black people" distinct races.

i'm not arguing that we are not adapting to our environment subtly, but that we are and we still don't actually have any races. i'm not saying it's impossible to find a distinct pocket of people that have a higher tendency to be adapted to a single thing--like a virus... but that is not a race. it's really hard to see how like if some of my ancestors lived in the alps for 25,000 years before climbing down to live in the valleys and spread apart in separate groups for the next 10,000 years until finally a small pocket of the original group settled in a northern forest... how that gives me a particular racially identifiable set of personality or cognitive traits that anyone should actually care about because of their amazing significance. like i can't genetically shake the laziness of those damn mountain dwellers and their 25,000 years of sitting on their asses => it's a racial distinction.

(this is also funny because kids often have unique behavioral and cognitive traits anyway, unique from their parents. sometimes you just get the alien child who seems utterly unidentifiable in the family.)

---

You act as though there has to be some switch that gets thrown for classification to occur. TBH there isn't even perfectly clear boundaries as to what is a human v.s. what is not. You go back to the period of time where we were undergoing a lot of changes, and our physical and mental composition is a lot different. Species, race, population.. these are social constructs by choosing certain specifics to focus on.

I'm living proof that most wouldn't profit from higher education. I'm probably on the better side of average IQ-wise for my race and I have no business attending even a lower-tier public college since I can't wrap my tiny head around the simplest of assignments.

IMO, blacks (in the US at least) often seem to have a culture that promotes higher crime, victimization (racism), and poverty. Not saying there isn't a history of white people oppressing and putting black's down, because there is, but once you get past that, culture plays a huge role in how people behave and think.

Not committing crimes is the first step in not being negatively involved with the police. As a practical issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hitta

We are in a strange place, yet oddly familiar place in American society. Dating back to slavery, racial tensions in the US have been rather severe. I feel as though many people take this very complicated issue, and think that there is one cure all solution. It is much too elaborate to sort out like that, as it is a systemic issue.

First, a discussion of the history. Black people lack historical culture. It is as if a pair of scissors sliced through the ribbon that was their ancestral timelines. This is quite obvious when you realize that so often art centered around black people tend to revolve around rediscovering roots. I also feel as though most white people take their roots for granted, they don't realize how much their ancestors history influences their own; how one's parents influenced them, how the grandparents influenced the parents... all the way back through the history of time. For blacks, there is scar tissue hiding away a very painful link, and the area is still quite tender.

Today MLK Jr is hailed as the man that freed black people from the racist social order that was holding it back. But what did he really do? Did he give them the history that was lost? Did he give them their broken culture?

IMO, MLK Jr and the civil rights act did more to hurt black people than he did help them. At a time when Black people should have been resistant to settling, resistant to fitting into the social framework... they did just that. Black people needed to hash out their own pathway, to say "fuck you whitey and we are going to do our own thing". Change can never really occur out of force, it can only happen out of necessity. No law can give a man his equality, he must take it. And yet the rule of law tried to force a square peg into a round hole. It tried to force people to mesh, and result of that has been very grave. A melting pot of shit and anger. Real change didn't occur, the real social structure remained the same, and the law is the tool to keep it all the same, to keep the black people happy with being pigeonholed by a broken system.

And now for a statistical break down. White people comprise 63% of the population. Blacks comprise 12.3% So far in 2016, 238 White people have been killed by police, 123 black people have been killed by police, therefore black people are more likely to be killed over twice that of whites. Black people commit over half of the violent crimes in the US, despite their low population numbers. Black children are far more likely to grow up in single families than any other race by a substantial margin. Blacks are far more likely to be poor. Black unemployment rate has been over twice that of whites for quite a long time. The unemployment rate spiked at 11 percent during the recession in the US. Based on that number Blacks in the US have been in a recession for their entire history in the US. There has been several studies that have shown that Blacks that have a 4 year degree earn very close to that of Whites.

Then there is the issue of unconscious racism. If a Black person and a White person are walking behind you down the street in a dark alley, are you more afraid of the White person or the Black person? Statistically we are more afraid of the black person, as we have an inherent unconscious 'racism'. But I have to ask, if blacks commit crimes at such a higher rate than that of whites, isn't the person just playing the odds? This is a hard thing to eradicate, and when it comes to police, dealing with blacks in very crime ridden territories, a cops develop instinctive reactions to certain events.


So how do you fix all of these interconnected trends? Well with what we've got so far, the answer would be to get more blacks in college to get degrees. But why do black people not instinctively go to college to get degrees? It goes back to my earlier point about blacks lacking cultural roots. Instead of building their own roots and building themselves up as a social group, they've been domesticated. Black people are society's version of the angry pet, forever expecting more treats from its master but forever faithful to the social sphere. Whites and Blacks locked into a dysfunctional sadistic/masochistic relationship.

---

IMO this idea that black people needed to establish a new, separate identity from society which was antagonistic toward it would not have helped and is basically the thug culture in a nutshell. Instead our society needs to very much recognize the history of slavery and what was done to the black community. That 'scarred history' will then fill in the gaps in the lost cultural identity you are talking about. THen, having done this, society will reintegrate as a whole. Then we will have a unified society and black people will have a clear historical identity within that society. And I think this is what is happening naturally on its own, from the looks of it.
I also think you understate the problem of poverty and the corrupting influence of the thug culture, which really amplifies the problems.
Also, I see alot of what you describe as 'racism' as being a justified, conditioned response.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa

Many black Americans are SEE type....

---

I was already wondering why many of them have big dicks, but now I know...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by consentingadult

I was already wondering why many of them have big dicks, but now I know...

---

:doh: I think it's al a stereotype not that I've experienced personally

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa

:doh: I think it's al a stereotype not that I've experienced personally

---

Maybe you should try it once. It will have the benefit of you being silent for at least 5 minutes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by consentingadult

Maybe you should try it once. It will have the benefit of you being silent for at least 5 minutes.

---

I have a husband. Sure he won't like that hahaha and I run opposite direction of "big"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maritsa

I have a husband. Sure he won't like that hahaha and I run opposite direction of "big"

---

Have you asked him? I mean, he may like being cuckolded, and he already has to compete with this forum for your attention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ratrevisits

IMO this idea that black people needed to establish a new, separate identity from society which was antagonistic toward it would not have helped and is basically the thug culture in a nutshell. Instead our society needs to very much recognize the history of slavery and what was done to the black community. That 'scarred history' will then fill in the gaps in the lost cultural identity you are talking about. THen, having done this, society will reintegrate as a whole. Then we will have a unified society and black people will have a clear historical identity within that society. And I think this is what is happening naturally on its own, from the looks of it.
I also think you understate the problem of poverty and the corrupting influence of the thug culture, which really amplifies the problems.
Also, I see alot of what you describe as 'racism' as being a justified, conditioned response.

---

Actually I quite disagree. From the 1920s through the 1980s, black people were very consistent with generating their own culture. The thug culture(while there have always been things) probably begin more in the late 80s , early 90s. I think black people in general have an issue with roots, as they have no family history to fall back on(especially since they keep getting thrown back into poverty). While I do think the racism in police departments are nearly as bad as they try to make them out to be, one thing that really restricts them is systemic issues. Black guy smokes weed, black guy goes to jail, black guy can't get a job. And then on the other side of most of the redistribution ideas/welfare that are intended to help black people really only end up leeching or preventing any sort of savings from forming. Without savings you can't invest and raise your market status. They are pretty much in a horrible death spiral at this point, which makes the fact that Hillary Clinton says they are doing perfectly fine in order to get more votes even more vomit inducing.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health...cant_jump.html

It's cute how much white people love their perceived superiority while appearing so utterly stupid in their attempts at trying to prove it.

Quote:

---

Harvard psychologists took a look at how black children adopted by well off upper-middle class white families at a very young age perform on IQ tests once they grow up in white families with good socioeconomic conditions. Black children adopted by white parents average 89 on IQ tests at age 17 (slightly better than the 85 average for blacks nationally). White children who grew up in the same households and had white biological parents on average scored 109. Even with the same socioeconomic upbringing, the racial IQ gap remains.

---

..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Averroes

..

---

This study has been considered questionable for various reasons by various people. But more importantly, what point are you trying to make? You are white, therefore likely to be more intelligent? YAY YOU!! #whitefragility

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLOvdgXSy_Q

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kim

It's cute how much white people love their perceived superiority while appearing so utterly stupid in their attempts at trying to prove it.

---

.

I don't really know any white people like this. I guess I'd just shy away from such a person. I have been in situations of cultural diversity and then in others that were not at all. Sometimes people separate themselves on purpose into groups of people that are culturally familiar to them and you can feel unwelcome when you try to mix. At least at first. You have to let people have time to get used to you when you are different. You have to allow them that first natural reaction (like, a suspicious: "What is that person of this different race/culture doing here with us?") and sometimes just give people time to know you and then that first reaction fades. Sometimes people purposely mix outside their culture for various reasons, sometimes just a principled reason, like that's what people should do. I am not saying this to minimize the prejudice and unfairness that blacks and other people of difference have experienced, though. This should be acknowledged, remembered, realized - always, and never minimalized.

Only one example - I could think of many - is from the past. In my son's tiny Catholic school in 4th grade there was only one black student who did come in with different cultural habits and customs in this otherwise mostly one-culture school [In that one-culture there were several sub-cultures, and my son and I were not the top of that pile at all, as questionable newbies in a tightly formed group. Maybe that's why my son and this boy got along - when they weren't scrapping, that is, because that happened too). My son was invited to this boys birthday party at a bowling area in a different part of the city than I had ever been in; parents welcome to stay, so I did, since it was far. Well, we were the only white people there in this sea of dark faces. It was a very relaxed comfortable place but I stuck out like a stranger. I thought, well, now I know exactly what they experience so many times in their life when they go somewhere where they are the only black. So I felt a solidarity there. The large group of kids and adults for the party was very organized - when I asked someone if do something to help - I think it was get a pitcher of water from the bowling alley staff for those of our party with nothing to drink (they had cups). She looked alarmed and said I should ask this person over there (of the party) who was "in charge". I did, and this woman, too, looked sort of alarmed by my question (probably because I am this new element in their usual routine) and after clarification she said okay.. so I took over that job, filling peoples water cups and the pitcher, and when I sat I just got to know this one person from a conversation we got in because she also was a newly single mom, too, so we talked about that, and other people got in our conversation, and it soon seemed all-normal to everyone. So I enjoyed getting to know them because the normal "shock-response" faded and people were themselves. I liked their warmth and the realness; and it was a nice time. I had seen this boys mother at school before, but we had never conversed like we had now at the party. Later that year my son got involved in the CYO basketball team at the church down the block, and when I went to one of his games in yet another strange unfamiliar church's crowded gym, I saw this boy's mom there (for her son's game, just previous), and I will always remember how she surprised me by greeting me with such friendly, familiar warmth. It was a memorable unexpected blessing in a lonely time of my life...

The point is most people most of the time are just normal about racial differences. Just because they may be mistrustful before they know you doesn't mean they don't get over it in due time. They normally do, in everyday life, I think.

I think one of the horrible agendas of the media - don't ask me why, but I am convinced of this - is to divide people, to cause the masses to be at odds with each other. So exaggerating racial tensions, exaggerating political differences and religious differences, and telling people what they should believe and think and who is horribly bad and awful because they don't agree with the correct opinion on things -- all these tactics have the same end - related to a "divide and conquer" . Yes, its us they are trying to divide and set against each other, and they are trying to instill fear of all things in us, and we all ought to have nothing to do with the program. And I would not be like them and perpetuate their agenda in any way. There will always be freaks with freaky ways. I would rather ignore them.