T1B

PSUFAN wrote:Not at all, I'm merely noting that the decline of the African American family structure at least partially coincided with the advent of civil rights.

mvscal wrote:there are enough blacks succeeding in this country at all levels to put the lie to any genetic reason for their overall failure.

culture is defined as a shared system of values. Urban black culture has been destroyed by a poisonous, blame-shifting victimology which has exempted them from all responsibility for their own plight. These fools just sit there and marinate in their own shit while they wait for the gubmint to come along and "fix" their fucked up lives for them. Look at those fucking worthless Katrina nogs. Those dipshits are still living in FEMA trailers three fucking years later.

when you subsidize something... anything, you create a demand for more.

Violent crime? The legacy of 400 years of slavery and oppression.

Broken homes? The legacy of 400 years of slavery and oppression.

Poor academic performance? You guessed it. The legacy of 400 years of slavery and oppression.

Just listen to these assholes sometime. Nothing but excuse after excuse. Whitey this, Whitey that. Blah, motherfucking blah.

Fuck the lot of them. Welfare should consist of a bus ticket to the nearest lettuce patch and reparations should take the form of a one-way boat ride back to Africa.

Goobs wrote:Sometimes the positives are outweighed by the nogatives.

There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs - partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his greivances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.

mvscal wrote: Quite simply culture is defined as a shared system of values. Urban black culture has been destroyed by a poisonous, blame-shifting victimology which has exempted them from all responsibility for their own plight. These fools just sit there and marinate in their own shit while they wait for the gubmint to come along and "fix" their fucked up lives for them. Look at those fucking worthless Katrina nogs. Those dipshits are still living in FEMA trailers three fucking years later.


Violent crime? The legacy of 400 years of slavery and oppression.

Broken homes? The legacy of 400 years of slavery and oppression.

Poor academic performance? You guessed it. The legacy of 400 years of slavery and oppression.

Just listen to these assholes sometime. Nothing but excuse after excuse. Whitey this, Whitey that. Blah, motherfucking blah.

Fuck the lot of them. Welfare should consist of a bus ticket to the nearest lettuce patch and reparations should take the form of a one-way boat ride back to Africa.

White Cock wrote:

mvscal wrote: Quite simply culture is defined as a shared system of values. Urban black culture has been destroyed by a poisonous, blame-shifting victimology which has exempted them from all responsibility for their own plight. These fools just sit there and marinate in their own shit while they wait for the gubmint to come along and "fix" their fucked up lives for them. Look at those fucking worthless Katrina nogs. Those dipshits are still living in FEMA trailers three fucking years later.


Violent crime? The legacy of 400 years of slavery and oppression.

Broken homes? The legacy of 400 years of slavery and oppression.

Poor academic performance? You guessed it. The legacy of 400 years of slavery and oppression.

Just listen to these assholes sometime. Nothing but excuse after excuse. Whitey this, Whitey that. Blah, motherfucking blah.

Fuck the lot of them. Welfare should consist of a bus ticket to the nearest lettuce patch and reparations should take the form of a one-way boat ride back to Africa.

Preach brother, preach to us!!! Can I gets an amen.

Smackie Chan wrote: Can the disparity between the success of Asians in America and that of blacks be solely attributed to cultural differences?

Dr_Phibes wrote:First you should ask yourself what commonalities exist in European, Asian and American history in terms of economic systems and their effect on social relationships (as you are describing 'culture' and defining success, within their traditionally described parameters) - then look for the differences and disparities in African history.

Nice of you to admit that 'culture' is a nebulous term, but somehow you've managed to define the word intelligence - and you're also on the cusp of isolating it's gene. Nice work.

Smackie Chan wrote:If science could ascertain that there is a genetic component, blacks could simply say that they can't help the way they are because they were born that way.

IndyFrisco wrote:Why wait for science? Fags already use this excuse; why can't the nog?

Smackie Chan wrote:

IndyFrisco wrote:Why wait for science? Fags already use this excuse; why can't the nog?

Because there has been scientific research done that indicates (as opposed to proves) homosexuality is innate rather than a choice. Poofters use this "excuse" because there is evidence to back it up, although they probably used it before the evidence existed, too. But genetic intelligence differences among ethnic groups is apparently a far more sensitive issue.

just because you have a gene that predisposes you to certain things, that doesn't mean you have to GIVE IN to said fukken gene.

mvscal wrote:

Smackie Chan wrote:Because there has been scientific research done that indicates (as opposed to proves) homosexuality is innate rather than a choice.

And none of it even remotely credible.

Sniffing Out the Gay Gene
By STEVEN PINKER {Gotta love that last name, considering the subject}
Cambridge, Mass.

It sounds like something out of the satirical journal Annals of Improbable Research: a team of Swedish neuroscientists scanned people's brains as they smelled a testosterone derivative found in men's sweat and an estrogen-like compound found in women's urine. In heterosexual men, a part of the hypothalamus (the seat of physical drives) responded to the female compound but not the male one; in heterosexual women and homosexual men, it was the other way around. But the discovery is more than just a shoo-in for that journal's annual Ig Nobel Prize - it raises provocative questions about the science and ethics of human sexuality.

Scientists and perfume marketers who believe that humans, like other mammals, respond sexually to chemical signals called pheromones were cheered by the news. But we are a long way from dogs in heat. The role of pheromones in our sexuality must be small at best. When people want to be titillated or to check out a prospective partner, most seek words or pictures, not dirty laundry.

The difference in the brain responses of gay and straight men does not, by itself, prove that homosexuality is innate; after all, learned inclinations, like innate ones, must reside somewhere in the brain. But in this case nature probably does trump nurture. Gay men generally report that their homosexual attractions began as soon as they felt sexual stirrings before adolescence. And homosexuality is more concordant in identical than in fraternal twins, suggesting that their shared genes play a role. Homosexuality is a puzzle for biology, not because homosexuality itself is evolutionarily maladaptive (though no more so than any other sexual act that does not result in conception), but because any genetic tendency to avoid heterosexual opportunities should have been selected out long ago. Perhaps "gay genes" have some other compensating advantage, like enhancing fertility, when they are carried by women. Perhaps the environments that set off homosexuality today didn't exist while our genes were being selected. Or perhaps the main cause is biological yet not directly genetic, like differences in hormones or antibodies that affect the fetus while it is developing.

Just as puzzling is the existence of homophobia. Why didn't evolution shape straight men to react to their gay fellows by thinking: "Great! More women for me!" Probably the answer lies in a cross-wiring between our senses of morality and disgust. People often confuse their own revulsion with objective sinfulness, as when they dehumanize people living in squalor or, in the other direction, engage in religious rituals of cleanliness and purification. An impulse to avoid homosexual contact may blur into an impulse to condemn homosexuality.

Cultural conservatives like the talk-show host Dr. Laura Schlesinger ostensibly condemn homosexuality for another reason - that it is a "biological error." Actually, it is she who has made the biological error. What is evolutionarily adaptive and what is morally justifiable have little to do with each other. Many laudable activities - being faithful to one's spouse, turning the other cheek, treating every child as precious, loving thy neighbor as thyself - are "biological errors" and are rare or unknown in the natural world.

It's not just anti-gay commentators who see a moral coloring in the biology of homosexuality. Some gay groups condemn such research because it could stigmatize gay people as defective and lead to a day in which parents could selectively abort children with "gay genes." Others welcome the research because it shows that people don't "choose" to be gay and hence can't be criticized for it, nor could homosexuals convert the children in their classrooms or Scout troops even if they wanted to.

It may not be a coincidence that the new discovery came from researchers in Europe. In America, the biology of homosexuality is a politicized minefield that scares away scientists (and the universities and agencies that pay for their research). Which is a pity. Regardless of where homosexuality resides in the brain, the ethics of homosexuality is a no-brainer: what consenting adults do in private is nobody's business but their own. And the deterrents to research on homosexuality leave us in ignorance of one of the most fascinating sources of human diversity.

Steven Pinker, a professor of cognitive science at Harvard, is the author of "How the Mind Works" and "The Blank Slate."

PSUFAN wrote:
Locked in a struggle to the death much, GP? Hey, whatever floats your boat - I just don't want to have you melting down and begging for cock pics around here.

Mgo wrote:I'll bet GPete has thought about Pickling his anus here and there.

PSUFAN wrote:he hammers fudge packets like a goddamn Greek Hero.