Thread: science is helping racist

Originally Posted by wendylove

Their a long history of scientific racism. I hope it ends soon.

The scientific data does not support rascism. Look who funds the studies and meta-analyses "proving" an intelligence gap (for example, Pioneer Fund), and read the rebuttals against anyone claiming so. Anyway, "science" cannot be rascist, only people can be in their actions.

And even if the studies eventually did prove there was a miniscule IQ difference (which they haven't, and it would have to be miniscule or else we wouldn't have so much trouble proving it), so what? I don't think the studies are useful and I do think they are a waste of time and effort, with no good to come from them, but I don't think we have anything to be afraid of as long as people are judged as individuals. Which I realize is often not the case, but that usually isn't due to the rascist's interpretation of the scientific data.

Originally Posted by wasup

I mean, say at a job that is working out in the winter in the snow all day and they pick a white person specifically because of what you mentioned. Is this racist? I mean, isn't it BASICALLY the same thing as only hiring women as bra models due to men not having boobs?

That is not a good analogy at all. They pick the white person to work in snow because their skin is better at making vitamin D? I don't get it.

I'm still asking myself if I can trust my eyes and if wendylove DID create such a thread. I even reality-checked.

There are differences between teh sexes for sure. But the differences there are between races are slight and subtle and mostly related to personality. All other differences exist because of the different cultures there are.

That's all I need to reply to the original poster.

Every person is an individual. No matter what this or that study does to try to get around the huge forest of confounding variables and says about average differences among races and between genders, none of it gets around the fact that you cannot judge or make assumptions about an individual based on his or her race or gender. There are many, many major exceptions to every racial and gender stereotype and extreme deviations from the stated averages. Even if every word of The Bell Curve were true, it would not prove that Condoleeza Rice is not a supergenius or that Joey Buttafuoco is one. People should be judged on their own merits, not on groups they can be classified into because of biological characteristics. Every race and both genders have a tremendous amount of diversity within them. There is no way around that.

Originally Posted by Merck

There seems to be an awful lot of discrimination against racists here.

Originally Posted by O'nus

What are you? Non-racist? You anti-anti-racist bastard.

~

Awesome.

BTW - This thread has been a huge waste of the last 3 minutes of my life.

Originally Posted by wendylove

First of all I didn't have to think about it, all I had to do is look at the scientific research. Seriously, I'm not racist. The point is if your not a idiot you can think of stereotypes. I believe everyone is equal. It funny, because most of my friends are black.

That seems to be a re-occuring statement amongst closet racists...like they can say whatever they want regarding other races in a racist format as long as they have enough "colored" friends of the race they're talking about..that perfectly justifies the very reason why they aren't racist. Anyway, onto my 2 cents...

Originally Posted by wendylove

Well, Onus wrote this, however thinking about this more this is sexist. To highlight this I will change it to black people and white people.

Black people, have more skills in
-Running and long distance running
-Sprinting and jumping
-They are stronger
-Lower IQ, they are stupider
-More violent

White people, have more skills in
-Science and mathematics
-Logic and reasoning
-They are masters not slaves
-Developing cultures and technology

Math: Black people only make up 1% of the mathematical research community in university.

Aggresion: Black people make up half the population in jail, however most mass murderers where white.

I think this highlights a point. You can't jugde people on basic sterotypes and the gender sterotype of woman is not good. It like the sterotype that woman chat more then men, this is generally true, however if you look at it in more detail their is lots of differences. Some people speak a little, however some people speak alot. In newscientist they pointed out that in the study on speaking they found females generally spoke more, however the three people who spoke the most where all male.

Again, even then how can you show that it is genetic or upbringing. Onus mention males have better visualization, however as shown if woman play action games then that gender difference is no longer their.

Race is abit more complicated, however you can say black people are stupid and give them IQ test and then match it with whites. However, how can you be sure this is genetic. Again, the IQ test has been used by racist to justify their belife that they our superior.

When someone like James Watson comes out and say black people are stupid and that we assume their equal but their not. This is basically giving a thumbs up to racist. Gender research and narrow sterotype is giving a thumbs up to sexist.

Their a long history of scientific racism. I hope it ends soon.

Sexism is ENTIRELY different from racism, wendylove...your ignorance has soared to an unfathomable level. It seems to me you took what O'nus said completely out of context and flipped it into a "black and white thing". And furthermore, from your statistics you imply that blacks are the "weaker" race. Which is not at all true. Your avatar sports Christopher Lloyd in character from the hit trilogy Back to the future, where the movie is themed around a time machine. Ironically enough you'll probably need that time machine, to go back in time to erase this horrific thread. You epitomize what it means to be a 21st century racist. Consider this thread your personal pandora's box.

p.s. It's estimated that 100 million blacks were slaughtered during slavery and yet blacks are "statistically more violent"? Perhaps you should re-calibrate your statistics, and while you're at it, factor in The Holocaust as well.

Originally Posted by kichu

Awesome.

BTW - This thread has been a huge waste of the last 3 minutes of my life.

So good to find peopel that agree with you!

Originally Posted by Kromoh

So good to find peopel that agree with you!

Are you being racist??

No, actually science says it so.

Originally Posted by Kromoh

No, actually science says it so.

Hmm....yes. Quite.

Science is helping you justify your racism Wendy?

When scientific research shows some kind of difference between men and women, how is that sexist? It doesn't say, "Men have better visualization skills... therefore they are better... haha women sux0rz" All it says is the following:

"From a sample of 1000 men and 1000 women, there is a CLEAR difference in visualization skills between the two". The doesn't mean "all men are better at it than all women"... it just means ON AVERAGE, it's the case. How is that sexist? Sexism begins where someone uses that data to only interview men for a position that requires visualization skills. But then, the sexist one is the recruiter.

Originally Posted by Replicon

When scientific research shows some kind of difference between men and women, how is that sexist? It doesn't say, "Men have better visualization skills... therefore they are better... haha women sux0rz" All it says is the following:

"From a sample of 1000 men and 1000 women, there is a CLEAR difference in visualization skills between the two". The doesn't mean "all men are better at it than all women"... it just means ON AVERAGE, it's the case. How is that sexist? Sexism begins where someone uses that data to only interview men for a position that requires visualization skills. But then, the sexist one is the recruiter.

I don't think it would be sexist to hire a man in preference to a woman in a job that required great physical endurance and emotional stability.


Men are better at these particular things; this doesn't make them in any way superior beings somehow.



This isn't sexism if someone did that; it's merely practicality.

Somebody would have to be pretty damn stupid to deny that there are physical differences between the races.
Nevertheless all the research in the world is only ever going to prove that most of these differences are pretty superficial.

The big problem is cultural and social issues which keep some members of the population from integrating effectively with others and perpetuate certain mindsets in communities that are impossible to break.

RACE IS NOT THE ISSUE!

CULTURE IS!!!

Nope, I'm pretty sure it's just race.

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

That is not a good analogy at all. They pick the white person to work in snow because their skin is better at making vitamin D? I don't get it.

If white people are scientifically proven to be better adapted to perform in colder conditions, is it racist to hire someone in a job in which cold conditions are experienced based on one's race? What don't you get about that?

It defenitely IS racism to say that black people are more violent than white people. That their IQs are lower. Etc etc.

It is the process of "de-humanisation" in order to justify racial cleansing and racial inequality. It is judging people based on their race. Which is an old mistake humanity can't seem to avoid. So I am Jewish.

Does that mean I am good with Money? That I am probably wealthy and inherited my father's jewelry or lawyer-business? That I'm wearing a suit and that I am good at decieving people?

Well FUCK no I'm a broke ass, dreadlocked, Marijuana loving dude trying all he can to get a carreer in Graphical Arts. I AM the destruction of "The Stereotype" cuz these stereotypes were made up by TRAGICALLY simple minded people to devide the people in sub-cathegories while people's characters aren't just black or white, but all colors of the rainbow and all middle-tones and cross-shades...etc. Methaphorically speaking.

Those who associate Character trates with Racial/Ethnic-traits are Lowly intelligent and socially disfunctional peope. They are retarded and scared of the diversity of this world.

Originally Posted by SKA

It defenitely IS racism to say that black people are more violent than white people. That their IQs are lower. Etc etc.

OK. I think I agree with you, but take this hypothetical situation:



If There are two types of people in the world; X and Y people


And out of 100,000 tests the IQ of X is say, 50% lower than Y.


Would it be racist to claim that X-types have generally lower IQ's?

Actually Carousoul, as Oneironaut said, you cannot really say that X-types are genetically presdisposed to have a lower IQ. Sure, you could say that the ones who took the test might. But there are other reasons for that result. As O said, say the X types who took the test had no education... it wouldn't be a very good measurement. You could only say that if the group X and Y were both raised in the same circumstances and then took the test. Sure, there would be a pattern in the results. But the conclusion you make might not always be right.

Originally Posted by wasup

Actually Carousoul, as Oneironaut said, you cannot really say that X-types are genetically presdisposed to have a lower IQ. Sure, you could say that the ones who took the test might. But there are other reasons for that result. As O said, say the X types who took the test had no education... it wouldn't be a very good measurement. You could only say that if the group X and Y were both raised in the same circumstances and then took the test. Sure, there would be a pattern in the results. But the conclusion you make might not always be right.

But it would probably apply to the X types in the world?


Thay would still on general have a lower IQ; regardless of why..

So it wouldn't be racist to assume that an X type would be less intelligent than a Y type in an interview because the majority are; for various reasons even if not their genotype?

I don't believe that to be true.

If you take a poll with a number of polsters that is less than the collective group of each side being polled, you are not getting an accurate account of that collective group. You are only accounting for the members of that group that actually took the poll.

If you went to a state that is primarily democratic, and took a poll about which demographic is more likely to vote democratic or republican, and the poll says X amount of blacks are most likely to vote democratic, then would it be accurate to expand that result to a national level and say that "in America, most blacks are likely to vote democratic," simply because the majority of people polled credited that conclusion? No.

When you do a sectional poll, you are not getting an accurate account of the nationwide (let alone global) statistic.

A poll with millions of polsters isn't accurate on a global scale. A poll with tens of thousands is even less accurate, on a global scale.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

I don't believe that to be true.

If you take a poll with a number of polsters that is less than the collective group of each side being polled, you are not getting an accurate account of that collective group. You are only accounting for the members of that group that actually took the poll.

If you went to a state that is primarily democratic, and took a poll about which demographic is more likely to vote democratic or republican, and the poll says X amount of blacks are most likely to vote democratic, then would it be accurate to expand that result to a national level and say that "in America, most blacks are likely to vote democratic," simply because the majority of people polled credited that conclusion? No.

When you do a sectional poll, you are not getting an accurate account of the nationwide (let alone global) statistic.

A poll with millions of polsters isn't accurate on a global scale. A poll with tens of thousands is even less accurate, on a global scale.

Truth.



Polls are unreliable.

It's science and nobody can deny it. I had a row with my parents over this because my stepdad was trying to tell me that even though they are statistics everyone is an individual so we can't judge people blah blah bloody dah. Then I said yes but I mean the average and he's like, "Yes, the AVERAGE population of black people" and I'm like "YES the average population of black people not every individual!". We ended up arguing about something we agreed on and he apparently "won". I hate parents

Sorry that was uncalled for... but I find it so hard to beleive that many of the population still beleive in this whole "everybody's equal" business when there's SO much evidence against that. Whether you call this racism or not is should be accepted because it's so obviously true. Same with the sexism thing. How can men and women be the same when we're different genders?

Originally Posted by Idolfan

It's science and nobody can deny it. I had a row with my parents over this because my stepdad was trying to tell me that even though they are statistics everyone is an individual so we can't judge people blah blah bloody dah. Then I said yes but I mean the average and he's like, "Yes, the AVERAGE population of black people" and I'm like "YES the average population of black people not every individual!". We ended up arguing about something we agreed on and he apparently "won". I hate parents

Sorry that was uncalled for... but I find it so hard to beleive that many of the population still beleive in this whole "everybody's equal" business when there's SO much evidence against that. Whether you call this racism or not is should be accepted because it's so obviously true. Same with the sexism thing. How can men and women be the same when we're different genders?

-puts a dunce cap on you- Go sit in the corner with Wendy Love, we'll let you know when you may come out.

Originally Posted by wasup

If white people are scientifically proven to be better adapted to perform in colder conditions, is it racist to hire someone in a job in which cold conditions are experienced based on one's race? What don't you get about that?

White people have light skin so they can absorb vitamin D in less light, they don't necessarily make better snow-shovelers. I was saying that men not having boobs is a lot different than not hiring black people to work in the snow.

Never mind. That paragraph is one of the more inane things I've ever said, but you drove me to it.