This woman is an assistant dean at a university! [490x680 - 73KB]

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.

Click here to see all the comments (79).

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

I'm an atheist who doesn't hate any race or ethnicity, or religion.

I recognize the differences in the prevalence of traits between groups of people, they aren't all going to be the same, but that doesn't mean one group won't have more individuals with certain traits to them than other groups.

Racism and Sexism can be explained with a deck of cards: - Take out the jokers and assign each of the faces within each suit a different value from 1 to 13 (ace is one, deuce is 2, numbers are their values,jack is 11, queen is 12, king is 13). - Shuffle the whole deck and sort them out into four hands. - Choose one of the hands and count the total value of each suit.

Are the total values of each suit going to be equal? of course not, each suit is entirely equal, but due to a somewhat randomized distribution in the shuffling, some suits are going to come out above others.

This is why even in a society where every group of people are equal, there would be inequality, all it takes is distinct groups of people, and variation within those groups, to lead to an unequitable society.

Now, imagine that some suits are not equal, there's about as much variation within these suits as in the previous example, but each suit has a different distribution of values within them, such that values that fall within a certain range are more prevalent in some suits than in others, each suit can have any value within them, but depending on the suit, they will have more values within different ranges compared to other suits.

This is how different groups can have different rates of different characteristics, despite there being members within each of these groups that could not possess the most common characteristics of their group.

I don't take offense against entire groups of people, because I acknowledge the existence of individuals within those groups that fall all over the spectrum of different characteristics, however, I will also be fully aware of the rates of characteristics that are more commonly found among the individuals in those groups compared with other groups, especially when people talk about inequalities.

Black people are a group with more individuals who are predisposed to committing crimes, not all Blacks bear this predisposition, most of them do not, but that does not change the fact that there is a larger share of Blacks that do among their group when compared to another group, Whites.

Furthermore, I can look at it another way, I can say that it's not the groups that I hate, but the specific behaviors, and that certain groups are more likely to have individuals who engage in these behaviors than others, thus it becomes a convenient shortcut to refer to these behaviors as being more expected from the groups with a larger share of individuals who engage in them, these are what sterotypes truly are.

It's not the claim "all asians drive like this" but the claim "I'm more likely to anticipate driving like this from an asian, because they have a larger share of individuals who drive that way", an asian who does not drive in such a manner does nothing to break the stereotype, because the stereotype is merely a tentative prediction based in statistical analysis, not some prophecy that Trait A must always mean Trait B, but that Trait A merely increases the probability of Trait B.

I have no issue with a jew who doesn't hate White people, and does not oppose pro-White advocacy, I have no issue with a black guy who isn't criminal and doesn't blame Whites for the hardship he or his people face (bonus points if he is a race realist), no problemo with an arab who isn't trying to convert every country to islam, or running a ring of rapists.

I have no cause to hate a member of a group which has a lot of individuals who engage in evil acts, if they themselves do not engage in them or support those who do, it's only those who commit the offenses, or those who protect those who commit them, that deserve my ire, I have no desire to punish people who merely belong to family of criminals and accomplices, it's only the criminals and accomplices that I take offense to, and even then, if they were to change their ways and work to make up for their past misdeeds, I would still be willing to set side my wrath.

I may be a monster, but I'm reasonable, and I have standards, without restraint or a sense of moral standards, we would not have civilization, I'm a pretty big fan of civilization.

The left

The left lives in denying reality, they are obsessed with the unlikely, to the point where they try to delude themselves and others into pretending that the least likely possibility is the most likely one, and that we should act like we cannot predict anything from the information we have, even in probabilistic terms.

Their whole thing is the denial of statistical realities, they claim it's out of wanting equality, but I think a lot of it is just the satisfaction of getting others to pretend that statistics don't matter, lots of them are pathological liars, who take pleasure in deceiving others just for it's own sake, and it's no surprise to me that they tend to be the kind of mentally disturbed kinds of individuals who need this form of stimulation, tricking others satisfies their inferiority complexes because they feel smart when they do it, on the inside, they know these statistical realities and feel smug when they deny recognition of them to others.

I'm an atheist who doesn't hate any race or ethnicity, or religion. I recognize the differences in the prevalence of traits between groups of people, they aren't all going to be the same, but that doesn't mean one group won't have more individuals with certain traits to them than other groups. Racism and Sexism can be explained with a deck of cards: - Take out the jokers and assign each of the faces within each suit a different value from 1 to 13 (ace is one, deuce is 2, numbers are their values,jack is 11, queen is 12, king is 13). - Shuffle the whole deck and sort them out into four hands. - Choose one of the hands and count the total value of each suit. Are the total values of each suit going to be equal? of course not, each suit is entirely equal, but due to a somewhat randomized distribution in the shuffling, some suits are going to come out above others. This is why even in a society where every group of people are equal, there would be inequality, all it takes is distinct groups of people, and variation within those groups, to lead to an unequitable society. Now, imagine that some suits are not equal, there's about as much variation within these suits as in the previous example, but each suit has a different distribution of values within them, such that values that fall within a certain range are more prevalent in some suits than in others, each suit can have any value within them, but depending on the suit, they will have more values within different ranges compared to other suits. This is how different groups can have different rates of different characteristics, despite there being members within each of these groups that could not possess the most common characteristics of their group. I don't take offense against entire groups of people, because I acknowledge the existence of individuals within those groups that fall all over the spectrum of different characteristics, however, I will also be fully aware of the rates of characteristics that are more commonly found among the individuals in those groups compared with other groups, especially when people talk about inequalities. Black people are a group with more individuals who are predisposed to committing crimes, not all Blacks bear this predisposition, most of them do not, but that does not change the fact that there is a larger share of Blacks that do among their group when compared to another group, Whites. Furthermore, I can look at it another way, I can say that it's not the groups that I hate, but the specific behaviors, and that certain groups are more likely to have individuals who engage in these behaviors than others, thus it becomes a convenient shortcut to refer to these behaviors as being more expected from the groups with a larger share of individuals who engage in them, these are what sterotypes truly are. It's not the claim "all asians drive like this" but the claim "I'm more likely to anticipate driving like this from an asian, because they have a larger share of individuals who drive that way", an asian who does not drive in such a manner does nothing to break the stereotype, because the stereotype is merely a tentative prediction based in statistical analysis, not some prophecy that Trait A must always mean Trait B, but that Trait A merely increases the probability of Trait B. I have no issue with a jew who doesn't hate White people, and does not oppose pro-White advocacy, I have no issue with a black guy who isn't criminal and doesn't blame Whites for the hardship he or his people face (bonus points if he is a race realist), no problemo with an arab who isn't trying to convert every country to islam, or running a ring of rapists. I have no cause to hate a member of a group which has a lot of individuals who engage in evil acts, if they themselves do not engage in them or support those who do, it's only those who commit the offenses, or those who protect those who commit them, that deserve my ire, I have no desire to punish people who merely belong to family of criminals and accomplices, it's only the criminals and accomplices that I take offense to, and even then, if they were to change their ways and work to make up for their past misdeeds, I would still be willing to set side my wrath. I may be a monster, but I'm reasonable, and I have standards, without restraint or a sense of moral standards, we would not have civilization, I'm a pretty big fan of civilization. The left The left lives in denying reality, they are obsessed with the unlikely, to the point where they try to delude themselves and others into pretending that the least likely possibility is the most likely one, and that we should act like we cannot predict anything from the information we have, even in probabilistic terms. Their whole thing is the denial of statistical realities, they claim it's out of wanting equality, but I think a lot of it is just the satisfaction of getting others to pretend that statistics don't matter, lots of them are pathological liars, who take pleasure in deceiving others just for it's own sake, and it's no surprise to me that they tend to be the kind of mentally disturbed kinds of individuals who need this form of stimulation, tricking others satisfies their inferiority complexes because they feel smart when they do it, on the inside, they know these statistical realities and feel smug when they deny recognition of them to others.

parent
link

[–] • 1 pt

(edited )

"Hate" is a linguistic shortcut. I do not hate niggers for being black. They can't help it, after all. Literally. They can't.

What I hate is being forced to contend with niggers and spics and other brown people. If I want to set up a neighborhood that is spook free, that should be my right. Access to white people is not a legitimate human right. I have a burning hatred for people, white or brown, that insist I owe something to the barbarians just on account of it isn't fair that white people make nicer places to live.

Of course there are shining examples of people of all races. Thomas Sowell is a good example. I still would not want Mr. Sowell to live next door. Why? Surely he would be an asset to any neighborhood. The problem is someone like that will have sons and daughters and in-laws. Those relatives will have friends and husbands and wives and kids. Even if only 10% of them act like niggers, which is being extremely generous, they will shit up the neighborhood.

The same goes for schools and places of work. There's no legitimate reason for the government to take away the freedom of association. None.

parent
link

[–] • 0 pt

(edited )

Good points, I wanted to address this framing:

>Black people are a group with more individuals who are predisposed to committing crimes, not all Blacks bear this predisposition, most of them do not, but that does not change the fact that there is a larger share of Blacks that do among their group when compared to another group, Whites.

I think this is wrong because you are so close to the subject matter you are seeing details that exist but are not really important.

For example, you can do the same genetic feature distribution analysis in other animals. So for example, you can apply this to wolves, lions and hippos. The same distribution variability will be seein in each species (within the normal distribution range expected for the species) but that doesn't change the fact that all three will kill you, just under different environmental and behavioural circumstances.

I find it more useful to think of other races of humans as other species of humans becaus that categorizes them as "not us" and gives us the opportunity to look at traits from a bit more distance.

Blacks are ALWAYS dangerous, no exceptions.

parent
link

[–] [deleted] • 0 pt

I have a lot of blacks in my extended family, none of them have criminal records, none of them have been anything but polite to me, we even like the same kinds of music.

The only thing we don't align on (when I'm hiding my power level) is religion and politics, they are very old school orthodox catholics (worse than the pope, but considering how cucked the pope is, that's not saying much, but they also outdo the previous one as well, they pretty much shun my brother in law for being found out as a faggot in hiding, a black gay pretending to be straight, who is still ortho cath, think of a black milo yianopolous, but less effeminate and open, kinda liked hanging out with him at the wedding, I could see that he was a fag, so when it came out, I was like "called it" in my head), but the issues there are resolved by simply not discussing religion.

Politics is that they are a mix between conservative and liberal, they supported Obama and Trump (the American ones voted for both), but in both cases it was reluctant support for different reasons (they were better than all the known alternatives, but short of the ideal), they have a different take on the whole politics thing than most people, I once brought up blm, and they moved the conversation to employment rates and labor concerns, not so interested in police related matters, since this family has a lot of soldiers and police officers in it.

The grandmother matriarch doesn't think Biden won legitimately, she thinks from the black vote alone that Trump was cheated. She once told me in private on the phone that she agrees that Harris is a wanton slut who belongs on the streets.

parent
link

[–] • 0 pt

(edited )

I appreciate you sharing your experience. I accept all of that at face value.

I've been suckered in with the brown sugar thing as well. Black women can become particularly submissive if they suspect a white man is even vaguely interested in them.

I would never of course. But I can add the following, although it will be in caricature form the way a lion tamer would talk about lions. Yes, they all have their own personalities and if you raise them or are raised by them there can be a socializing capacity between the species (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IChRNbuHHWE).

Blacks have:

Low impulse control.
Low long term strategic thinking, in particular they comprehend time from other human species.
Are always engaged in dominance behaviour especially when young (seems to almost dissapear in the very oldest of them).
Fronting is present as part of a need to protect their ego.
We know black and white men have the sam elevels of testosterone but black men have twice as much estrogen than white men.
Blacks have a HIGH HIGH HIGH respect for competence. If you ever see a white kid being accepted into a group of blacks, it is because he has demonstrated a high level of competence in a PHYSICAL skill. This is at the core of the dominance behaviour, but is worth listing as a separate point.
They are a type of trickster species, always looking to play games and trick people to do things, but at a very low level. Where the jew is a mid level trickster in sophistication, blacks are low level tricksters namely their tricks are mostly just common lies and attempts to make other people believe something that isn't true or get away with a quick pointless hustle.

Basicaly, if I am speaking to black men that have not accepted me into their tribe, I cannot have a conversation with them. All conversations between white men and black men of different tribes are dominance and fronting conversations. I have to pay particular attention to not make a black man look stupid (especially in a group but outside a group as well) because he will usually take it as a challenge to his dominance instead of an intellectual game. The moment a black man feels, by being shown to be wrong, that his dominance has been challenged fronting behaviour is engaged at which point you have to make a decision whether or not you want to complete the fronting / dominance challenge and possibly end up in a physical confrontantion. Now, winning a fight with a black man isn't difficult, you just need to pay attention to them just going all out or feigning them backing out and swinging at you in surprise (they never square up and fight fair). Mostly though they will attempt to verbally assert dominance by what I call linguistic mangling ... a kind of a way to insult you by verbal jabbing at your masculinity and the perceive supporting structures and supporting the jabs by undeserved laughter and higher energy phsyical behaviour. Very rarely will it be a co-equal or netral party level exchange of ideas and collaborative conversation.

Black women are always involved in dominance behaviour as well, because they have to engage with black men and get the to submit to a commited situation, something that is not in a black mans nature to my expeirence. They are ALWAYS looking for opportunity outside of the relationships. White men as well, but this is at a much deeper level than in white men. However, it's harder for me to evaluate black women because I have less experience with them and they tend to hide in their submissive behaviour because I am a white male. I have had a few runins with black women in a workplace environment and they were far more aggressive than white women, but that is as far as I can go.

The reason that I am posting this is that I appreciate your humanized view of the black members of your extended family. When I was younger I used to view them with nuance as well. As I have gotten older, what I used to think of as racism or just a kind of mean sprited oversimplification of black behaviour, I now really think of them the way that lion whisperer thinks of lions. Yeah, you can sort of get accepted into the lion pride under specific circumstances, share a meal, even feel like you are friends. But, never forget that a black man always behaves differently than a white man because he is of a different species.

The way I have squared the "see people as individuals / boy aren't they nice to me" and "we are different species" is to take the position of an ambassador sent by my people to speak to a completely new people just discovered around the world. Treat them with the same respect, care and SKILL that an ambassador needs in order to not get ambushed and beheaded while giving them their space for the true nature of their species to complete its behaviour displays. Get in, get business done, get the fuck out, always have backup.

So, I appreciate your post tremendously. Thoughts on how I have ended up categorizing them vs us?

// EDIT: As a side point, I have similar categorizations now for asians, shitskins and jews as well. All at the caricature level, but, I feel highly useful when dealing with them.

// EDIT: Also, I don't want the post to read like I am telling you something you don't know or otherwise. Now that I have read it again, it reads that way, not my intention. Apologies.

I appreciate you sharing your experience. I accept all of that at face value. I've been suckered in with the brown sugar thing as well. Black women can become particularly submissive if they suspect a white man is even vaguely interested in them. I would never of course. But I can add the following, although it will be in caricature form the way a lion tamer would talk about lions. Yes, they all have their own personalities and if you raise them or are raised by them there can be a socializing capacity between the species (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IChRNbuHHWE). Blacks have: * Low impulse control. * Low long term strategic thinking, in particular they comprehend time from other human species. * Are always engaged in dominance behaviour especially when young (seems to almost dissapear in the very oldest of them). * Fronting is present as part of a need to protect their ego. * We know black and white men have the sam elevels of testosterone but black men have twice as much estrogen than white men. * Blacks have a HIGH HIGH HIGH respect for competence. If you ever see a white kid being accepted into a group of blacks, it is because he has demonstrated a high level of competence in a PHYSICAL skill. This is at the core of the dominance behaviour, but is worth listing as a separate point. * They are a type of trickster species, always looking to play games and trick people to do things, but at a very low level. Where the jew is a mid level trickster in sophistication, blacks are low level tricksters namely their tricks are mostly just common lies and attempts to make other people believe something that isn't true or get away with a quick pointless hustle. Basicaly, if I am speaking to black men that have not accepted me into their tribe, I cannot have a conversation with them. All conversations between white men and black men of different tribes are dominance and fronting conversations. I have to pay particular attention to not make a black man look stupid (especially in a group but outside a group as well) because he will usually take it as a challenge to his dominance instead of an intellectual game. The moment a black man feels, by being shown to be wrong, that his dominance has been challenged fronting behaviour is engaged at which point you have to make a decision whether or not you want to complete the fronting / dominance challenge and possibly end up in a physical confrontantion. Now, winning a fight with a black man isn't difficult, you just need to pay attention to them just going all out or feigning them backing out and swinging at you in surprise (they never square up and fight fair). Mostly though they will attempt to verbally assert dominance by what I call linguistic mangling ... a kind of a way to insult you by verbal jabbing at your masculinity and the perceive supporting structures and supporting the jabs by undeserved laughter and higher energy phsyical behaviour. Very rarely will it be a co-equal or netral party level exchange of ideas and collaborative conversation. Black women are always involved in dominance behaviour as well, because they have to engage with black men and get the to submit to a commited situation, something that is not in a black mans nature to my expeirence. They are ALWAYS looking for opportunity outside of the relationships. White men as well, but this is at a much deeper level than in white men. However, it's harder for me to evaluate black women because I have less experience with them and they tend to hide in their submissive behaviour because I am a white male. I have had a few runins with black women in a workplace environment and they were far more aggressive than white women, but that is as far as I can go. The reason that I am posting this is that I appreciate your humanized view of the black members of your extended family. When I was younger I used to view them with nuance as well. As I have gotten older, what I used to think of as racism or just a kind of mean sprited oversimplification of black behaviour, I now really think of them the way that lion whisperer thinks of lions. Yeah, you can sort of get accepted into the lion pride under specific circumstances, share a meal, even feel like you are friends. But, never forget that a black man always behaves differently than a white man because he is of a different species. The way I have squared the "see people as individuals / boy aren't they nice to me" and "we are different species" is to take the position of an ambassador sent by my people to speak to a completely new people just discovered around the world. Treat them with the same respect, care and SKILL that an ambassador needs in order to not get ambushed and beheaded while giving them their space for the true nature of their species to complete its behaviour displays. Get in, get business done, get the fuck out, always have backup. So, I appreciate your post tremendously. Thoughts on how I have ended up categorizing them vs us? // EDIT: As a side point, I have similar categorizations now for asians, shitskins and jews as well. All at the caricature level, but, I feel highly useful when dealing with them. // EDIT: Also, I don't want the post to read like I am telling you something you don't know or otherwise. Now that I have read it again, it reads that way, not my intention. Apologies.

parent
link

Load more (1 reply)