Some unfortunate happenings at the Rippetoe forum

[JasonLB]

A. There is no reason to put the adjective "scientific" in front of evidence. Evidence is evidence. Just a pet peeve of mine that people do all the time.

Fair enough. Any cursory look at history reveals more than enough evidence to prove, conclusively, that "race" has absolutely no bearing, whatsoever, on intellectual or technical ability. Western Europe was an intellectual backwater for much of the common era while Middle Eastern, North African, and Chinese civilizations flourished.

D. If you concede the fact that there are visible differences between the average bodies of people of different races; then, the burden of proof is on those who believe that those differences are confined only to the physical and not to the mental.

Apples and oranges. Physical characteristics are entirely the product of genetics; intelligence (a broad term) is very much reliant on environment. The achievement gap observed in American schools between blacks and whites is a product of a number of things (socio-economic, cultural and structural issues) that have nothing to do with genetics.

[RobCosimo]

When people say that, they generally don't want it to include white culture. As if white culture is something bad or dangerous. I want you to see this video, it's an eyeopener.
( http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... ace&hl=en# ).
It shows how normal middleclass people are very tolerant towards other cultures, but cringe and become uncomfortable when talking about "white" culture. It's a cultural taboo at the moment.

It's hilarious when white middle class people of Britain or USA whine about not being able to celebrate their culture, because it's EVERYWHERE - culture isn't just about flags and exclusion, it's also power, laws, education, media etc, which is based predominantly around white middle/upper class ideals.

[itsbruce]

+1, Rob, +1

[steelcutoats]

some interesting things here, and I'll offer my thoughts on some related things

First thing is that I am all for censure, which is not the same thing as censorship. It drives me nuts when I call people on being racist and they say that I censoring them or making them feel uncomfortable. They should freaking stand up for their beliefs. If somebody really thinks that "I don't like black people" or "the Klan isn't all bad" are defensible opinions, they should try to make a case for it. My guess is that they back off and whine because they can't. They know Klan is a bunch of violent thugs and criminals, and they know when they are unfairly hassling people for some crap they have in their own heads.

Next thing is "the race card". While there are certainly cases when people call "racism" when there is none, racism is still pretty real in all parts of the world. As a white guy in America, I have walked down the street with friends and had people yell "nigger" at us , had people confide their racism to me, heard the N-word at least a half-dozen times a week when I was kid, and observed similar cat-calls to minorities in the streets when I visited Europe. (This was more shocking since I have spent no more then a few months total time in Europe during my entire life versus a liftime in the states. ) Yet, some people swear that racism is long dead and that if a minority ever complains about racism or discrimination, it is "just playing the race card".

As far as Rip is concerned, I think that he might be at risk of "jeopardizing his brand" for not calling out something that was xenophobic, but I suspect that he was mostly concerned with the gun-rights stuff and that his approval was more for that part of the post. If I earned my money as a famous coach/educator, I would not get involved with flame wars like that, but that is his style.

[rossi]

Because Mehdi does not follow the news, I just wanted to bring to his attention that some days ago some agitated youths set fire to a police station, municipal office and several cars in Brussels.

As an added bonus, a gang of youths of the same ethnicity as the beforementioned have today sexually mollested my niece, and then beaten here until she was unconscious, with a fractured skull and many bruices as their gift to her.

But hey, my post is "fear based", so some will dismiss it right away.

[Mehdi]

Because Mehdi does not follow the news, I just wanted to bring to his attention that some days ago some agitated youths set fire to a police station, municipal office and several cars in Brussels.

As an added bonus, a gang of youths of the same ethnicity as the beforementioned have today sexually mollested my niece, and then beaten here until she was unconscious, with a fractured skull and many bruices as their gift to her.

But hey, my post is "fear based", so some will dismiss it right away.

Sorry about your niece but why are you posting that?

[lawdog]

i noticed that several posters on the rippetoe site (and at the beginning of the thread over here) mentioned "free speech", implying that we should somehow keep our mouths shut when someone says something we find distasteful.

couple of points regarding the U.S. first amendment:

- first, the "freedom of speech" guaranteed by our first amendment is not an absolute freedom: there are ALWAYS limits to what we can say. for example, you can't yell "fire" in a crowded movie theater and cause a panic UNLESS there's an actual fire happening. in fact, i cant' think of ANY constitutionally-guaranteed freedom which is absolute: you can have an abortion, just not in the last trimester; you can call G.W. Bush an asshat, but you can't encourage people to kill him. all of our "freedoms" have strings attached, but for some reason, certain sectors of our society (and the well-funded lobbies which stand to profit) think that some amendments grant ABSOLUTE rights.

- second, this "freedom of speech" only protects our speech from the state and federal governments (and in a few instances, from private entities which are acting on behalf of these governments). so to imply that the original poster on this site shouldn't have posted about the comments made on rippetoe's site because of "free speech" is incorrect.

in sum: our government can't stop you from saying stupid racist shit, but that won't stop me (or anyone else) from calling you out on it.

[wrenchhands]

Free Speech is a legal principle, but it's also a moral principle.

[SUseb]

Because Mehdi does not follow the news, I just wanted to bring to his attention that some days ago some agitated youths set fire to a police station, municipal office and several cars in Brussels.

As an added bonus, a gang of youths of the same ethnicity as the beforementioned have today sexually mollested my niece, and then beaten here until she was unconscious, with a fractured skull and many bruices as their gift to her.

But hey, my post is "fear based", so some will dismiss it right away.

That's an inheritance of the stupid leftist and PC-people in this country. It's thankfully beginning to change, but for too long there's been a sentiment that aknowledging that there's a problem with minority youths was the same as being racist. Which is just frustrating and has fucked so much up: it made many people flock to the extreme-right (which I absolutely don't like, even without the racist aspect) made it impossible for a constructive approach for the problem and resulted in a worse integration in general. I blame that PC-attitude more then the extreme-right for deteriorating relations between natives and immigrants as the extreme-right doesn't really have to do alot to spread fear and hatred.

And yes I know that saying "I'm not racist but there's a problem with minority youths in this country" actually sounds racist, but everytime somebody says something along the lines of "Those Turks/Muslims/Marrocans" I roll my eyes so there, I'm not

And I'm sorry about your niece, it's so infuriating when something like that happens. I hope she recovers quickly

[lawdog]

for too long there's been a sentiment that aknowledging that there's a problem with minority youths was the same as being racist.

SUseb, as a minority (though no longer a youth) i'm not going to bother calling you a racist. people get too caught up in arguing over whether or not a given term applies to them, which prevents any real dialogue.

however, i do want to point something out to you and others:

i've read several studies (i am too busy studying for finals to find links to them, but i would be happy to in a few weeks if anyone asks) showing that people tend to do two things:

- anytime we see someone of a different background (racial, gender, religious, etc) does something BAD, rather than blaming that singular person's bad behavior on the person him/herself, we instead blame their bad behavior on their GROUP background. so a non-muslim says "that man blew up the building b/c he's muslim." a non-black person says "that boy robbed the liquor store because that's how black people are." a non-white person says "that white guy said that racist stuff b/c all white people are racist."

- anytime we see someone of our OWN background (racial, gender, religious, etc) do something BAD, we blame it on that INDIVIDUAL rather than say that the group as a whole is bad. so the white person says "timothy mcveigh blew up that building b/c he was crazy" rather than say "timothy mcveigh blew up that building b/c he's white."

- whenever WE do/receive something POSITIVE, we don't say that the only reason we achieved that good thing is because of our race/religion/gender. so, the white person who gets promoted says "i got promoted because i'm a hard worker" instead of saying "i got promoted because i'm white." the minority who gets into a college which practices affirmative action says "i got in because i'm smart" rather than saying "i got in because i'm a minority."

- finally, when something good happens to someone of a different group, we say that they didn't deserve it. they only got it b/c of the advantages which their group unfairly receives. the white person looks at the latina congresswoman, and says "she only got elected because everyone wants to be PC." the latina looks at the white congressman and says "he only got elected because he's a white male and doesn't have to deal with the discrimination that i have to overcome."

so, in sum:
- bad people from other groups are bad b/c that GROUP is bad.

- bad people from our OWN groups are bad b/c that PARTICULAR person is bad, but the group as a whole is ok.

- the good things we achieve are because WE deserve it.

- people from other groups don't deserve the things they achieve.

SUseb, there is a minority youth problem in this country, right? but white youths in this country are ok, aside from the bad apples (who are bad for personal/family reasons, not b/c they're white) which the liberal-controlled media sensationalizes, right?

[itsbruce]

+1, lawdog, +1.

[SUseb]

Lawldog:

I've taken a social psychology class so I know what you are talking about. There's even a name for it I think but I can't remember it Though you've explained it very well and I do agree with you.

Now, the fact that I agree with what you say doesn't mean that I'm abbandoning my previous statement: I still believe that there's a problem with minority youths in this country, BUT I do not think this is because they're form Turkish or Morrocan or Eastern-european descent, but because generally the immigrants from those countries living here are poor. Now, it's a well-known fact that poverty breeds crime, contempt for the society and police (aka 'The police are out for us, they're racist" etc.) this is not just with minorities living in this country but for white people in this country as well. If variables such as income and social standing were to be included, immigrants and natives would both be equally represented in crime statistics, but because immigrants, due to historical and social structural reasons, are poorer than natives, they are overrepresented in crime statistics (percentage-wise).

I do want to point out, for clarification, that I don't think the majority or immigrants are bad, but I do think there are more than a few bad apples

Ofcourse, the problem is more complicated than that, with cultural reasons and ghettofication also playing a part, but I believe poverty, not cultural and religious reasons is the main problem. Saying that someone is more likely to be a criminal or aggressive because they're muslim or Turkish, that is just stupid.

Oh and I think the media sensationalizes everything. Oh and heh, liberal controlled media,I'm not from the USA Where are you from lawdog?

[kali]

Lawdogi've read several studies (i am too busy studying for finals to find links to them, but i would be happy to in a few weeks if anyone asks) showing that people tend to do two things:

Lawdog: i totally learned something here. i always figured other people might think that way, but never me. and yet, in reading your post, i suddenly realized that yes, that is me, insofar as how i actually see things without my conscious awareness!
i mean, sure, you already know of my islamophobia (working on it...) but i always assumed i am not racist at least, but here i am, sub-consciously engaging in those very thought patterns with anybody and everybody who is not white american!

damn, learn new things every day. who knew.
muchas gracias mi amigo!

[RobCosimo]

Lawdogi've read several studies (i am too busy studying for finals to find links to them, but i would be happy to in a few weeks if anyone asks) showing that people tend to do two things:

Lawdog: i totally learned something here. i always figured other people might think that way, but never me. and yet, in reading your post, i suddenly realized that yes, that is me, insofar as how i actually see things without my conscious awareness!
i mean, sure, you already know of my islamophobia (working on it...) but i always assumed i am not racist at least, but here i am, sub-consciously engaging in those very thought patterns with anybody and everybody who is not white american!

damn, learn new things every day. who knew.
muchas gracias mi amigo!

you've got a good attitude Kali

[kali]

thanks