[quote]JR249 wrote:
When you compare cultures as being inherently superior or inferior, it’s classified as ethnocentrism,
[/quote]
Okay, fine.
Do you disagree that cultures aren’t inherently better or worse than each other? (Feel free to differentiate based on size, because I would have to in my answer as well.)
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
I responded to the unsolicited post directed at and quoting me. I’m not interested in your endless arguing. And in relation to your comment, that definition(of which I am familiar), is completely inadequate. It contributes to the problem.[/quote]
Well, you asked, I answered, and obviously you took huge offense at a tad bit of humor peppered in there as an apparent personal attack and had to resort to profanity. I think the definition is adequate for a basic level of understanding, so we can agree to disagree there, but I’ll leave it alone now.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Do you disagree that cultures aren’t inherently better or worse than each other? (Feel free to differentiate based on size, because I would have to in my answer as well.)[/quote]
I personally think there’s a lot of objectivity in comparing better vs. worse, but even that aside, if we are going to begin with some sort of fairly universal standards for how a culture operates in terms of equality, freedom, and basic human rights, then yes, I think you could make a fair argument that some cultures can be “better” or “worse” than others. The same arguments can be made on an economic scale, etc.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]JR249 wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Lol! Are you fucking serious? It was a single response to you because you came into the thread and joined the discussion. And if you’d read the thread you’d see I’m fucking bored of it and not interested in the endless going around in circles from the kooks who don’t believe in race. I’m done with this. /out[/quote]
I answered your question, then you deflected with another about value judgments, which I personally see as irrelevant to what you asked. It was an observation.
[/quote]
I responded to the unsolicited post directed at and quoting me. I’m not interested in your endless arguing. And in relation to your comment, that definition(of which I am familiar), is completely inadequate. It contributes to the problem.[/quote]
Why don’t you just add radical,or militant like you do to other words? Racism and ethnocentrism have defined meaning already. You don’t like people calling jews racists,so you put up this thread to come up with a new definition amd in the process,make racist statements about sub sahran blacks. Nice
[quote] JR249 wrote:
With that having been said, you won’t find an unassailable definition in the social sciences, because even anthropological or social science experts might disagree on a working definition, much the same as history is often an interpretation of one’s own ‘scientific’ findings or research.
[/quote]
This broad, all encompassing, multi-meaning, mystical word “racism” needs to be defined because our law books are full of references to “race” and most of these laws are tyrannical. What’s more, in the US you have an Attorney General who has used his position to wage a war of malicious prosecution against white police officers. Yes, I know the law has a legal definition of “race” but “racism” is a far more vague term that is used to maliciously prosecute white people.
oh,and supposedly a Christian. See ya
[quote]confusion wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]JR249 wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Lol! Are you fucking serious? It was a single response to you because you came into the thread and joined the discussion. And if you’d read the thread you’d see I’m fucking bored of it and not interested in the endless going around in circles from the kooks who don’t believe in race. I’m done with this. /out[/quote]
I answered your question, then you deflected with another about value judgments, which I personally see as irrelevant to what you asked. It was an observation.
[/quote]
I responded to the unsolicited post directed at and quoting me. I’m not interested in your endless arguing. And in relation to your comment, that definition(of which I am familiar), is completely inadequate. It contributes to the problem.[/quote]
Why don’t you just add radical,or militant like you do to other words? Racism and ethnocentrism have defined meaning already. You don’t like people calling jews racists,so you put up this thread to come up with a new definition amd in the process,make racist statements about sub sahran blacks. Nice
[/quote]
Read the first sentence of my OP. I’ve been intending to start a thread on racism for a long time. You think I started it in response to the anti-Semitism thread? That thread has been going for months and it’s full of Jew baiting from the start.
Now as to my “racism” about blacks I get what you are saying. The average IQ of a Japanese person, Korean or Han Chinese is significantly higher than the average white IQ. Now I’m not sure if I’ve got this right but, I’ll guess. It is racist to communicate the truth about the average Asian IQ compared to the average white IQ. It’s taboo to say so and we have to pretend otherwise right? And if someone breaks the taboo as I have done here it means under the surface there is some kind of seething hatred of white people of else some feeling of “superiority” or “inferiority” as a value judgement as to the worth of a human being. And that’s what it’s all about isn’t it? Asians are more valuable human beings. They’re superior and their lives are more valuable.
Did I get it right? I’m trying to learn here what’s taboo and what’s not and what people are secretly thinking about how superior they are. Anyway, I’m with you guys. You’ve opened my mind and now I realise how wicked I’ve been with all my white privilege and hate.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]confusion wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]JR249 wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Lol! Are you fucking serious? It was a single response to you because you came into the thread and joined the discussion. And if you’d read the thread you’d see I’m fucking bored of it and not interested in the endless going around in circles from the kooks who don’t believe in race. I’m done with this. /out[/quote]
I answered your question, then you deflected with another about value judgments, which I personally see as irrelevant to what you asked. It was an observation.
[/quote]
I responded to the unsolicited post directed at and quoting me. I’m not interested in your endless arguing. And in relation to your comment, that definition(of which I am familiar), is completely inadequate. It contributes to the problem.[/quote]
Why don’t you just add radical,or militant like you do to other words? Racism and ethnocentrism have defined meaning already. You don’t like people calling jews racists,so you put up this thread to come up with a new definition amd in the process,make racist statements about sub sahran blacks. Nice
[/quote]
Read the first sentence of my OP. I’ve been intending to start a thread on racism for a long time. You think I started it in response to the anti-Semitism thread? That thread has been going for months and it’s full of Jew baiting from the start.
Now as to my “racism” about blacks I get what you are saying. The average IQ of a Japanese person, Korean or Han Chinese is significantly higher than the average white IQ. Now I’m not sure if I’ve got this right but, I’ll guess. It is racist to communicate the truth about the average Asian IQ compared to the average white IQ. It’s taboo to say so and we have to pretend otherwise right? And if someone breaks the taboo as I have done here it means under the surface there is some kind of seething hatred of white people of else some feeling of “superiority” or “inferiority” as a value judgement as to the worth of a human being. And that’s what it’s all about isn’t it? Asians are more valuable human beings. They’re superior and their lives are more valuable.
Did I get it right? I’m trying to learn here what’s taboo and what’s not and what people are secretly thinking about how superior they are. Anyway, I’m with you guys. You’ve opened my mind and now I realise how wicked I’ve been with all my white privilege and hate.[/quote]
If you are using IQ in this context, you don’t understand what it’s for. IQ scores are not comparable between cultures or timeframes.
confusion mentioned the anti-Semitism thread and accused me of hypocrisy(and racism). I thought if was interesting to note that I didn’t accuse a single poster of being an anti-Semite. Not the holocaust denial guy, not the Zionist conspiracy guy - no one. And yet here I am, having to defend myself again from personal attack; I’m a racist, I’m a homophobe, I’m a this, I’m a that…really silly. This is exactly what I’m talking about when I say a disservice is being done to victims of real racism. But the perpetrators of real racism are largely ignored at best or excused.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
So how is it that I’m both sane and stupid, clear-headed yet ignorant?
[/quote]
You’re not. It was a bullshit response and more telling of his own biases than anything.
[/quote]
Dude, what’s your beef with me? This is not the first time you’ve attacked my “biases”, then proceeded to basically agree with me, then for some reason make it clear that you don’t like feminism.
It’s a weird M.O., is all I’m saying.
Ha ha ha! Yeah good one! I’ve heard it before many times and it just keeps getting funnier. I suppose you’ll mention Guns, Germs and Steel next.
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]confusion wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]JR249 wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Lol! Are you fucking serious? It was a single response to you because you came into the thread and joined the discussion. And if you’d read the thread you’d see I’m fucking bored of it and not interested in the endless going around in circles from the kooks who don’t believe in race. I’m done with this. /out[/quote]
I answered your question, then you deflected with another about value judgments, which I personally see as irrelevant to what you asked. It was an observation.
[/quote]
I responded to the unsolicited post directed at and quoting me. I’m not interested in your endless arguing. And in relation to your comment, that definition(of which I am familiar), is completely inadequate. It contributes to the problem.[/quote]
Why don’t you just add radical,or militant like you do to other words? Racism and ethnocentrism have defined meaning already. You don’t like people calling jews racists,so you put up this thread to come up with a new definition amd in the process,make racist statements about sub sahran blacks. Nice
[/quote]
Read the first sentence of my OP. I’ve been intending to start a thread on racism for a long time. You think I started it in response to the anti-Semitism thread? That thread has been going for months and it’s full of Jew baiting from the start.
Now as to my “racism” about blacks I get what you are saying. The average IQ of a Japanese person, Korean or Han Chinese is significantly higher than the average white IQ. Now I’m not sure if I’ve got this right but, I’ll guess. It is racist to communicate the truth about the average Asian IQ compared to the average white IQ. It’s taboo to say so and we have to pretend otherwise right? And if someone breaks the taboo as I have done here it means under the surface there is some kind of seething hatred of white people of else some feeling of “superiority” or “inferiority” as a value judgement as to the worth of a human being. And that’s what it’s all about isn’t it? Asians are more valuable human beings. They’re superior and their lives are more valuable.
Did I get it right? I’m trying to learn here what’s taboo and what’s not and what people are secretly thinking about how superior they are. Anyway, I’m with you guys. You’ve opened my mind and now I realise how wicked I’ve been with all my white privilege and hate.[/quote]
Are you trying to learn anything? Just asking. I get what you’re saying about talking about these things. Intellectual honesty requires it I suppose. SM,you can’t change the definition of racism. Some of the things you say are by definition racist. Maybe the question should be,“is it ok to be racist?”,or some such…
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
confusion mentioned the anti-Semitism thread and accused me of hypocrisy(and racism). I thought if was interesting to note that I didn’t accuse a single poster of being an anti-Semite. Not the holocaust denial guy, not the Zionist conspiracy guy - no one. And yet here I am, having to defend myself again from personal attack; I’m a racist, I’m a homophobe, I’m a this, I’m a that…really silly. This is exactly what I’m talking about when I say a disservice is being done to victims of real racism. But the perpetrators of real racism are largely ignored at best or excused.[/quote]
I’m all about being real SM,you not calling someone else an anti semite has nothing to do with you making statements about racial superiority,which by oxford definition are racist.also,when you talk about immigration and don’t want black africans,yes I think that indicates that their life is worth less. However,I think I get your point now. You think the definition of racism has been watered down to include every white person. How about this? It seems that every time there is an incident that occurs with black americans and white americans,blacks pull the race card. Hows that? How about this one? I’ve met very few black people who weren’t racist? Does that make me a racist,etc?
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Ha ha ha! Yeah good one! I’ve heard it before many times and it just keeps getting funnier. I suppose you’ll mention Guns, Germs and Steel next.[/quote]
They are used to detect mental problems, that’s it. It can be used somewhat to compare people of fairly uniform background. Comparing across cultures is inaccurate because the tests are based on the supposed culture of the person being tested. A person in Japan and a person in the US would by need take entirely different tests. IQ is not really a measure of intelligence and even then what is measured is a relative measurement. Test design is such a huge part of the results the average score on the test between vastly different parts of the world is more or less, meaningless.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Ha ha ha! Yeah good one! I’ve heard it before many times and it just keeps getting funnier. I suppose you’ll mention Guns, Germs and Steel next.[/quote]
They are used to detect mental problems, that’s it. It can be used somewhat to compare people of fairly uniform background. Comparing across cultures is inaccurate because the tests are based on the supposed culture of the person being tested. A person in Japan and a person in the US would by need take entirely different tests. IQ is not really a measure of intelligence and even then what is measured is a relative measurement. Test design is such a huge part of the results the average score on the test between vastly different parts of the world is more or less, meaningless. [/quote]
Are you saying asians are not smarter than whites who are not smarter than blacks? Throw away the iq test and use the word smart instead. Ok?
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
So how is it that I’m both sane and stupid, clear-headed yet ignorant?
[/quote]
Because it’s entirely possible for decent people to make bad decisions based on incomplete information and prejudice.
In this situation, the consequences of you being wrong and crossing the street for no reason -that the young men might have their feelings hurt- aren’t as dire as the consequences of not crossing the street if they do turn out to follow stereotype.
So, maybe “irrational” isn’t the word I was looking for, since we’ve kind of established that it’s coming from the caveman part of your brain and that it would have to be irrational. I should have said it’s understandable, because sometimes a gut feeling is all we have to go on, even if it’s wrong. Still, it’s based off of one single premise: that black men are more inherently prone to unprovoked violence against strangers, and that it’s in your best interest to get away. Is that fair to say? Based on your hypothetical question, I’m assuming -and correct me if I’m wrong, please, I’m not trying to insinuate anything- that the only thing we know about these men is that they’re black, and that you wouldn’t cross the street if a similarly-dressed and mannered group of young white men was approaching you.
So is that true? Do you, in the light of day and free to think on the subject as you wish, think that black men are inherently more violent and prone to assaulting unarmed strangers than white men? Is this a rational belief that you should hold onto?
Does this way of thinking do more good than harm?
Can’t we all just get along? Isn’t love the answer? Mush mush, mushity-mush?
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Ha ha ha! Yeah good one! I’ve heard it before many times and it just keeps getting funnier. I suppose you’ll mention Guns, Germs and Steel next.[/quote]
They are used to detect mental problems, that’s it. It can be used somewhat to compare people of fairly uniform background. Comparing across cultures is inaccurate because the tests are based on the supposed culture of the person being tested. A person in Japan and a person in the US would by need take entirely different tests. IQ is not really a measure of intelligence and even then what is measured is a relative measurement. Test design is such a huge part of the results the average score on the test between vastly different parts of the world is more or less, meaningless. [/quote]
When I said “I’ve heard it all” I was being serious. I have heard everything you are saying here many times before. What I’m interested in, is have you heard people with an opposing opinion? I’m pretty sure you haven’t because for one thing it’s an esoteric science that’s highly politically charged. You’ll have trouble finding the opposing sources even though the work I’m referring to is from leading scholars. Amren is a great site for academics and people interested in serious study on the subject because for years they have collected all the science from both sides.
But to be honest, as I said before I’m not interested in treading water here for pages on end. You don’t accept what I’m saying. You are proffering the standard pseudoscientific garbage and explaining it to me as if I’ve never heard it before. Believe me, I’ve heard it all before. Everything you have to say. Guns, Germs and Steel? Heard it all. Let’s agree to disagree.
[quote]Ironskape wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
So how is it that I’m both sane and stupid, clear-headed yet ignorant?
[/quote]
You’re not. It was a bullshit response and more telling of his own biases than anything.
[/quote]
Dude, what’s your beef with me? [/quote]
I have no idea who you are. You’re not regular enough for me to remember. (That isn’t intended as an insult, just being honest.)
And as a response to your question, none. I don’t take any of this personal, nor hold anything said against anyone. I don’t think there are very many people on this board I haven’t verbally spared with, at one point or another… It’s the point of the internet. And I don’t care enough to remember or even hold a grudge about any of them, except for particularly egregious situations.
You’ll have to refresh my memory here.
I didn’t agree with you. Well, rather, I don’t agree with your perspective in the thread. I think your general, overall conclusions about race and people’s interactions in terms of it are generally correct, but you tend to leap directly to the tired “we’re all racist” and “racism is super alive and well” rhetoric that really detracts from an ability to have an actual conversation about race in modern society.
So I agree with your general tone of “racism is bad and we should be working on making sure to fix it as a society”. I just am very weary of the roads you’re taking to get to that destination. If that makes sense. The ends don’t always justify the means, and your means can (and have) lead to some drastically fucked up shit.
I have no problem with actual feminism, in fact my wife tells me often how much she enjoys that my perspective has changed after having a daughter, and I’ve become such a wonderful feminist.
I have a problem with radical delusional people who only have a voice because the internet gave every cuckoo bird with an opinion a microphone, that have taken ridiculous hyperbole and (somewhat successfully) made it “main stream” and “valid” for consideration.
Is cat calling bad, annoying and in ultra poor taste? Sure. But lets not pretend every fucking man on earth does it and is someone responsible for the few that do. I read an article how women’s bathrooms are now patriarchal oppression… Are we fuckign serious right now?
[quote]It’s a weird M.O., is all I’m saying.
[/quote]
I think it’s more weird you think you’re that important to me.
[quote]confusion wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
Ha ha ha! Yeah good one! I’ve heard it before many times and it just keeps getting funnier. I suppose you’ll mention Guns, Germs and Steel next.[/quote]
They are used to detect mental problems, that’s it. It can be used somewhat to compare people of fairly uniform background. Comparing across cultures is inaccurate because the tests are based on the supposed culture of the person being tested. A person in Japan and a person in the US would by need take entirely different tests. IQ is not really a measure of intelligence and even then what is measured is a relative measurement. Test design is such a huge part of the results the average score on the test between vastly different parts of the world is more or less, meaningless. [/quote]
Are you saying asians are not smarter than whites who are not smarter than blacks? Throw away the iq test and use the word smart instead. Ok?[/quote]
I’m saying that IQ scores aren’t good evidence to support the notion.
[quote]Ironskape wrote:
that the only thing we know about these men is that they’re black, and that you wouldn’t cross the street if a similarly-dressed and mannered group of young white men was approaching you.
[/quote]
You are wrong, and why I made the point about your bias that I did.
No other race was brought into question, and factors outside of race left out on purpose. You took those omissions of detail to make the assumption/conclusion that he was in fact racist. I think you’re projecting a little here, maybe not.
This right here is where you start to fly off the track. The Good Doctor was making a point about his area, and the use of statistics (right or wrong) and whether an action was justified. You… Took it to racism town.