Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-18-2015, 07:44 PM
 
67 posts, read 88,728 times
Reputation: 193

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aunt Maude View Post
Well now you ruined it for those who love to say that all serial killers are white. The link you provided states that blacks represent the largest share of them at 20%. LOL

 
Old 04-18-2015, 08:18 PM
 
428 posts, read 344,320 times
Reputation: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNA1 View Post
Well now you ruined it for those who love to say that all serial killers are white. The link you provided states that blacks represent the largest share of them at 20%. LOL
I think what most people actually know about science or sociology just comes from a giant game of 'telephone'.

The stupid thing is that whoever that guy/gal is will continue stating the serial killer = white even after reading that. It seems to me that memes actually making physical dents in peoples' brains.
 
Old 04-18-2015, 10:25 PM
 
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,297 posts, read 14,164,711 times
Reputation: 8105
Quote:
Originally Posted by DNA1 View Post
I have noticed over the last couple of years in California and in my travels throughout this country an interesting phenomena. Black males have been getting thousands of non-black women pregnant and leaving them as single mothers. We all know the statistics about black males and black females regarding their illegitimacy rate but now it is crossing racial lines when black males date non-blacks. I live in L.A. County where black males are like 4-5% of the population but they are spreading their seeds all over the place and you see so many unmarried white, hispanic and even some Asians women with their black babies. I know people are going to say things like how do you know the father is not part of their lives. For one thing whenever I see these women it is in public places like the beach, the park and the zoo where most fathers tend to go with their families but these women are rarely accompanied by black males. I can never remember seeing anything like this or at least to this extent before Obama was elected or before the Kardashians were in the public eye. So my question is. Is this some kind of trend where women think it is cool to have an illegitimate black mixed kid?
Immature women (most of them in this country in modern times) are strongly attracted to bad boys. Ghetto thugs are the ultimate bad boys, and by far most of them are black.

Add to that the fact that pop culture glorifies the thug lifestyle ....... and the curious fact that black men seem to be attracted to neglected fat women as much as thin ..... and stuff happens.
 
Old 04-18-2015, 10:51 PM
 
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,297 posts, read 14,164,711 times
Reputation: 8105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aunt Maude View Post
Here's a question....

Is there some innate difference between hood rats and decent Black people?

That would be a great study.

A lot of really interesting stuff is going to come out of modern DNA testing. Those 23andMe people aren't in this business to provide people with a bit ancestry information...people are paying them to collect data that they'll use in other ways.
Research into physical, mental, and DNA differences between races is discouraged in academia, to say the least. There have actually been at least two such researchers that have been dismissed from tenured positions that I can recall. However, genetic differences between agressive criminals and normals of any race have been studied ....... I haven't looked into it recently, but there used to be only a few genes that had a slight correlation with aggression or sociopathy, but the evidence was really inconclusive for the most part except maybe for some extreme examples.
 
Old 04-19-2015, 12:34 AM
 
10,829 posts, read 5,436,622 times
Reputation: 4710
I know of a local white woman journalist who is single but talks a lot in her columns about her precious black child.

She is a self-described feminist, extremely racist against whites (she fairly seethes with anti-white vitriol even though she is white herself) and sexist against men, who she ridicules constantly.

It wouldn't surprise if she kicked the black father to the curb simply because he was a man.

Once she got the non-white baby she wanted, she had no more use for Daddy.

Of course, she is the sort who doesn't understand her own motivations, so she doesn't recognize her own paternalism and racism against blacks. Her message to them is basically, "I -- a white woman -- will prove that a black child can turn out right by raising him or her myself." In other words, "I can do the job blacks can't do."

In some of her columns she rants about the horrible inner-city public school her child is attending. Of course, as an alternative paper journalist, she can't afford private school. And anyway, that would be "elitist."

Boy, I feel sorry for that kid!

That kid is nothing more to her than a fashion statement when you get right down to it. "Look at how hip I am, how enlightened and superior."

Last edited by dechatelet; 04-19-2015 at 01:18 AM..
 
Old 04-19-2015, 12:42 AM
 
897 posts, read 1,180,446 times
Reputation: 1296
Why hasn't this been closed yet?
 
Old 04-19-2015, 01:38 AM
 
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,297 posts, read 14,164,711 times
Reputation: 8105
It depends on the mod, Jjury. There are a lot of them, and they're all very different in their styles. Some are total free speech types, some of them will shut an active thread just because they're not interested anymore, or disagree with the direction it's taking.

I suppose this should be over in politics/controversy, Great Debates is supposed to be more for ...... well ..... important topics from learned points of view, though it sure shouldn't doesn't seem like it recently. I've been censored once or twice here, since I have a terse and unusual point of view, rather than an intellectual or pedantic attention to detail. It used to be you couldn't even discuss psi evidence here, because it was considered to be too disreputable a subject!
 
Old 04-19-2015, 04:52 AM
 
Location: Tucson for awhile longer
8,869 posts, read 16,319,598 times
Reputation: 29240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aganusn View Post
People do realize one of the objectives in our evolution is to become a more unified race, right? In hundreds of years when we're all dead there will be waaaay more interracial humans to the point where it'll be normal. People after us are going to laugh that we cared so much about race, it's disgusting.
Ah, no. It's not going to take "hundreds of years." In the U.S.A. it's going to take about 30 years. The U.S. Census Bureau takes count of this stuff and they have announced that by 2045, the white population will make up less than 50 percent of the American population. It's likely to be that way forever going forward. So, yes, you're right about one thing. The American public of the future, in ever shade from off-white to almost black, will indeed be laughing at us.

I'd recommend that the OP watch this video so he can get ready for the future he might live to see:
So You're About To Become A Minority...
 
Old 04-19-2015, 06:16 AM
 
Location: Kansas
25,961 posts, read 22,120,062 times
Reputation: 26697
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
I have no idea what this means "most would find an abortion much worse than ending the life of their baby" Isn't ending the babies life what an abortion does? You claim people have babies for an increased welfare check? Did you know that in many States having an additional child does not give you a penny more in your cash grant and for those that do give you extra money it's usually around $80 a month[/b].

According to you, another reason the poor have more kids is to get more food stamps? The average size of a welfare family is 3.7 people, about the same as for a non-welfare family. Spending patterns of families receiving means-tested government assistance : Beyond the Numbers: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics[/b]

We have been sold on a whole lot of myths about the poor. It started with Reagan's "welfare queen" and it hasn't stopped since, what a shame.
Sorry, my intention was to say that they would consider abortion, which most would consider killing their babies, to be worst than giving a child up or raising it. Many of these poorer people, especially the working poor do value their children from conception. The $80 is the food stamp amount per person, more or less. They also get a WIC coupon and additional cash.

The reason the average amount of children plays out is because of the number of single, especially those with disabilities and seniors, who don't have children. Do the math? Average. An interesting comparison about welfare income: http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.or...ff_2013_wp.pdf I live among the poor, the welfare poor, lazy trash that care about booze and drugs, not birth control and the working poor. I did a comparison and the only difference between what a low wage worker and a welfare recipient was the pride that the low wage worker had that kept them working when they could have been laying in bed all day and partying all night. And, we are talking about white people. Socio-economic class.

We live in KS. There are almost NO blacks here. I didn't grow up here, thank God, and I won't be staying here but I see this prejudice like this quite often. They only need to know of one black person doing something and that means ALL. That is what happens when you are ignorant about what you are talking about. And, we have LOTS of illegitimate births, white girls/woman having 100% white babies usually up to 3 with different white fathers. I think 3 is the cut off for additional benefits. And, we are raising them with our tax dollars also a lot of "anchor" babies, 100% pure illegal and although the parents may be married I have many issues with that!

Someone that obviously didn't give it much thought said they knew the father wasn't in the picture because they saw the mother with the children at the swimming pool and the zoo with the kids, things a father usually joins in. Well, maybe dad was working. I guess that thought never crossed the person's mind. Her husband could also be deployed by the military and she has come back to stay in the area of her family while he is away. You do see the mixed marriages more so with the military. It was on a Sunday? People work on Sunday. Work schedules today are insane and my husband works 3rd shift Wednesday night through Sunday night. I just never thought all the years he worked 3rd shift and I had the kids out without him that people would think my kids were illegitimate. Oh, they wouldn't have thought that would they? We are white.

I do think we need to qualify "working poor" and "welfare poor". I think most don't mind giving help to those doing everything they can and who still can't make it but the ones who refuse to help themselves are the issue.

It is my feeling that this threads started about blacks are meant to increase someone's points for the "contest" at C-D. I have heard people like this in the general public and I do let them know what I think about what they said. I grew up in MI near where the underground railroad ended and had many friends and classmates who were black and when I hear this racist nonsense, I see their faces in my head and tell myself that is who they are talking about and you don't talk that way about them because you don't know them yet feel comfortable slamming them. You can fix ignorance but you know what they say about "stupid", can't fix that!

Last edited by AnywhereElse; 04-19-2015 at 06:28 AM..
 
Old 04-19-2015, 08:38 AM
 
428 posts, read 344,320 times
Reputation: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jukesgrrl View Post
Ah, no. It's not going to take "hundreds of years." In the U.S.A. it's going to take about 30 years. The U.S. Census Bureau takes count of this stuff and they have announced that by 2045, the white population will make up less than 50 percent of the American population. It's likely to be that way forever going forward. So, yes, you're right about one thing. The American public of the future, in ever shade from off-white to almost black, will indeed be laughing at us.
Losing a white majority certainly doesn't imply admixture.

A simple experiment is simply to look at the famous (infamous?) NY Times census race map of the US. The result of this huge surge of people from Mexico and Central America has been highly segregated areas that have become mostly theirs. The rate of change has been pretty breathtaking.

What's the end result? Rather than a continuum of people (or some sort of new universally shared culture), my own bet is a metastasized version of Yugoslavia with an increasingly strengthened central government to keep the lid on.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top