There's no such thing as racial equality... Fact.

"

torturo wrote:

"

Bars wrote:

a Caucasian woman on Quora once tried to argue with me that men and women are basically the same, they're just raised in different ways and that's all there is to it

You had a talk with an educated feminist, it's what this ideology revolves around.

The majority of people think it's about social gender equality, while it's mostly about the biological gender equality. The social part is secondary but widely promoted, as it's easier to digest.

Well, I would call her uneducated or mislead. Could use many other more colourful qualifications. Educated, not so much.

im statistically less likely to commit violent crime than other races

but at the same time statistically more likely to be addicted to meth

"

Bars wrote:

Well, I would call her uneducated or mislead. Could use many other more colourful qualifications. Educated, not so much.

I thought about enrolling in a Liberal college just for the lols. Like, I wouldn't even try to argue with these people, I would just mock them. Most probably wouldn't be smart enough to know I was mocking them, which is why it would be hilarious.

For example, I might just decide to dress up as a female one day and wear a wig. And call anyone who gives me weird looks "homophobe". Some might say "I didn't know you were LGBTQ"? - I'm not, I'm just a straight guy who decided to be a female today. I'm kinda an offshoot of cisgender, but if you're asking for specifics, it's a classification I just invented. And I'd be mad salty if they didn't let me in the women's restroom. I'd even demand they install urinals in the women's restrooms for transgirls like me to use. That's within the realm of stuff I'd do to troll them.

The most challenging part of this entire plan would be keeping a straight face, not bursting out in laughter as SJWs stepped up to the plate to defend me. I'd have to find a recording studio that's well sound proofed, and ask to rent it for 30 minutes just to step in there and laugh to my heart's content.

Smiley: Don't forget to proclaim you're Muslim! This alone will provide you with ample opportunity to be offended at anything and act with impunity.

"

Bars wrote:

If you read a bit further in the thread, you'll see I and Mr. Smiley agree and support the hundreds of races option. They can nevertheless be grouped in some larger categories based on common patterns. Anyway, what I'm objecting to is the delusional attempts to explain everything with nurture.

Nurture is important, nature is important too. That's all.

About athletic ability and nurture being more important: depends how you look at it. Bad childhood conditions can certainly be restrictive and damaging to athletic ability, but you can't create a gifted athlete simply by good upbringing. The environment is supremely important mostly as a damaging and restrictive factor.

Ask any coach from any sports field about it. They can gather a bunch of kids, put them through a few tests, and they always know which kids have it and which don't. No amount of nurture can change that.

I dunno. It's like... Jamaica has a ton of world-class sprinters. They are arguably the best in the world at sprinting. Specifically sprinting - not long-distance running, or even mid-distance running; they're fairly average in those categories. Why is that? Is it because of a specific haplotype present in Jamaican racial groups which benefits extremely fast, short-distance running? Or is it more likely because Jamaica has a history of good runners, and when Jamaican kids think, "I want to be an athelete", their primary role models are people like Usain Bolt, and their training goes in that direction? There's a similar issue with quarterbacking in the NFL, from what I've heard - African-Americans in youth leagues often get shunted away from the quarterback position, which leads to there being a lot more white quarterbacks.

From what I read from your posts, I got the impression you were talking about "white" "black" "asian" as though they were physical realities. My mistake. But that's what I took from this:

"Since the brain is also an organ and a part of the organism, is it unreasonable to expect there might be other differences between the races apart from the physical ones? Isn't it naive to know for a fact whites and blacks are taller than Asians, and blacks have more melanin and are better adapted to sun exposure than everyone else, but to assume there couldn't possibly be a difference in mental traits too?"

To be honest, given the extremely dark history ideas like these have had throughout the world, and given how much we know about the negative effects of racism and poverty, and given the prevalence of both among African and African-American communities that continue to this day, I'd say it'd be naive to assert any such racial difference in mental traits without very conclusive evidence. It's not enough to say, "Look, African-Americans have a lower IQ on average". There are a lot of possible or partial reasons for that, and most of them are not based on genetics.

"

MrSmiley21 wrote:

I thought about enrolling in a Liberal college just for the lols. Like, I wouldn't even try to argue with these people, I would just mock them. Most probably wouldn't be smart enough to know I was mocking them, which is why it would be hilarious.

For example, I might just decide to dress up as a female one day and wear a wig. And call anyone who gives me weird looks "homophobe". Some might say "I didn't know you were LGBTQ"? - I'm not, I'm just a straight guy who decided to be a female today. I'm kinda an offshoot of cisgender, but if you're asking for specifics, it's a classification I just invented. And I'd be mad salty if they didn't let me in the women's restroom. I'd even demand they install urinals in the women's restrooms for transgirls like me to use. That's within the realm of stuff I'd do to troll them.

The most challenging part of this entire plan would be keeping a straight face, not bursting out in laughter as SJWs stepped up to the plate to defend me. I'd have to find a recording studio that's well sound proofed, and ask to rent it for 30 minutes just to step in there and laugh to my heart's content.

But... why?

This is an incredibly shitty thing to do. Trans people have it hard enough without chucklefucks like you trying to poison the well for them. You are aware that the suicide attempt rate among trans people is around 40%, right? (General population is 1.6% - trans people are 25 times more likely to attempt suicide than the general population.) This increased suicide rate is directly associated to how society at large treats them. This shouldn't be a huge shocker - when around 70% of Transgender individuals face assault, harassment, or denial of service in public restrooms, 84% of them feel unsafe in school, 44% have been physically assaulted, and a great many face being literally thrown out of their homes if they come out - 40% of all homeless youth are LGBT, and the vast majority of those are homeless because their parents threw them out.

The honest fact is that when people pull shitty stunts like this, most liberals tend to figure out what's going on pretty darn quick. Because liberals actually know how gender dysphoria works. Has this sort of shit ever worked? Or even happened? Chances are good one of two things will happen: your ruse will be blatantly transparent, or you're going to have to face up to the massive amount of discrimination and hatred transgender folks face on a daily basis.

And you want to go out of your way to be as big of a dick as you possibly can to those people.

Why?

No, really, why?

It's not insightful. It's not thought-provoking. It's not even funny unless you're the kind of person who looks at a 40% suicide attempt rate and laughs. So what's the point?

@Budget_Player: you are right that many of these ideas are a slippery slope. They should have a "proceed with caution" sign. Nevertheless, I can't ignore a piece of information simply because it may be distasteful or abused. As I stressed a number of times, true fairness means to treat everyone with the same set of values and principles regardless of their differences. It also means to treat every individual well until they give you reason to do otherwise, regardless of their characteristics or history.

Also, speaking of slippery slopes, to refuse to discuss something simply because it has been abused in the past, even if it's just a set of data which has no inherent ethical plus or minus sign whatsoever, is a slippery slope by itself.

If you look at human history, a great many atrocities have been committed in the name of some mighty fine words. Truth, freedom, justice, peace - millions upon millions of people have been killed for these ideals. What did a bunch of bloodthirsty savages, who beheaded tens of thousand of people, shout? Liberty, equality, fraternity. It was the French revolution. What does the Jihadi shout before he blows up a square full of random people? God is great. What did the Christians fight for while they were pillaging and massacring throughout the Middle East? Once again, it was God. What were all authoritarian dictators talking about, day after day, while killing millions of their own people? Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot and all the others? Freedom, democracy, justice and so forth.

Observations of the real world can't be evil. Information can't be evil. It can be wrong, or correct, but not evil. Evil comes from people.

"

It's not insightful. It's not thought-provoking. It's not even funny unless you're the kind of person who looks at a 40% suicide attempt rate and laughs. So what's the point?

I'm pretty certain Mr. Smiley is exactly the kind of person who would laugh.

"

Bars wrote:

@Budget_Player: you are right that many of these ideas are a slippery slope. They should have a "proceed with caution" sign. Nevertheless, I can't ignore a piece of information simply because it may be distasteful or abused. As I stressed a number of times, true fairness means to treat everyone with the same set of values and principles regardless of their differences. It also means to treat every individual well until they give you reason to do otherwise, regardless of their characteristics or history.

Also, speaking of slippery slopes, to refuse to discuss something simply because it has been abused in the past, even if it's just a set of data which has no inherent ethical plus or minus sign whatsoever, is a slippery slope by itself.

By all means, let's discuss it. But all I'm saying is that the data needed to make any reasonable assertion about genetics and "racial intelligence" is just not present. AFAIK, there's not really strong evidence to believe that there's a substantial genetic component to intelligence (barring certain known genetic disorders) that would even be a blip on the radar compared to environment, and even less reason to believe that that genetic component would align in any meaningful way with "race". By all means, let's discuss the data. Let's just be very careful before we adopt that particular conclusion - the consequences of accepting any given position are drastically different.

"

Observations of the real world can't be evil. Information can't be evil. It can be wrong, or correct, but not evil. Evil comes from people.

No real disagreement there.

"

"

It's not insightful. It's not thought-provoking. It's not even funny unless you're the kind of person who looks at a 40% suicide attempt rate and laughs. So what's the point?

I'm pretty certain Mr. Smiley is exactly the kind of person who would laugh.

Speaking of evil coming from people...

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

By all means, let's discuss it. But all I'm saying is that the data needed to make any reasonable assertion about genetics and "racial intelligence" is just not present. AFAIK, there's not really strong evidence to believe that there's a substantial genetic component to intelligence (barring certain known genetic disorders) that would even be a blip on the radar compared to environment, and even less reason to believe that that genetic component would align in any meaningful way with "race". By all means, let's discuss the data. Let's just be very careful before we adopt that particular conclusion - the consequences of accepting any given position are drastically different.

Well, not much to discuss, really. There seem to be indications black people have a slightly lower IQ on average. It's the same as the criminality issue: it's simply a piece of information. We can't know what part of it is due to the environment. Even if it's strictly a racial, genetic property, so what? First off, IQ is overrated as fuck. Second, judge every person on their own merit. Jews have a higher average IQ and an unnaturally high number of geniuses compared to a relatively small population, doesn't mean they're a magically superior race. In fact, many people seem to hate on Jews, which makes no fucking sense to me, but never mind. Inferiority complex?

I don't really know what else is there to say about it. I acknowledge it might be true, and I don't really care.

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

"

Bars wrote:

I'm pretty certain Mr. Smiley is exactly the kind of person who would laugh.

Speaking of evil coming from people...

Speaking of evil, every single person has their own worth and merit, even the ones many would categorize as evil. For example, I've had much more interesting and even funny discussions with him than with most other forum users, even if they are decidedly nicer. The only effect Mr. Smiley has on my life is through his forum presence, and that effect has been beneficial for me. Do I care that he might very well be a right bastard in certain real-life situations?

No, not really.

Then again, I'm not exactly a paragon of virtue either. Perhaps it has something to do with it.

Also, come on - how evil is he? Look at his goddamn nickname! Mr. Smiley! And he laughs and jokes around a lot - is this really so evil? Oh no, he has a sense of humor.

Ask James Watson about it, he has studies on this topic. Yes, races and ethnic groups differ, mentally and physically, and from evolutionary PoV the combinations of genes matter - at the end it defines the winners and the losers. In nature equality doesn't exist.

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

Jamaica has a ton of world-class sprinters. They are arguably the best in the world at sprinting. Specifically sprinting - not long-distance running, or even mid-distance running; they're fairly average in those categories. Why is that?

If I remember correctly, it has to do with (muscle) fiber types (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myocyte)-scroll down a little. Apparently humans have differences in eye color, hair color, skin color, blood groups + dominant muscle fiber types + (everything else ?). It´s all fluent(not the expression of the phenotype, but the distribution), but you won´t find many blondes of (to be precise at least ancient) African origin e.g.. (I mean there haven´t been so many dark haired North Europeans before the Roman Empire, I guess).

"[...]Sprint athletes, on the other hand, require large numbers of type IIX fibers. Middle distance event athletes show approximately equal distribution of the two types.[...]"

It´s very likely many have "fast" fibres. When I think of long distance running, I associate Ethiopia or Kenia...

Might also have to do with nutrition and training as well as wealth of the country, social structures and the weather (seriously...)


Biological definition of race would be: "Races may be genetically distinct phenotypic populations" that means it depends at how many characteristics you´re looking at afais, so the more you´re looking at - the less distinct it´s going to be...

Actually there´s no "equality" between two individuals, except the genetic equality of twins, but there is supposed to be an equality of human rights for every individual.