Dating with Aspergers

A while ago I came across an article that really hit home with me: “Dating with Asperger’s.” Though my case is mild, it would be an understatement to say that this syndrome has hindered by relationships with the opposite sex.
But while walking up to people and bringing up random thoughts and facts relegates one to the realm of “odd” or “eccentric” in real life, this is not the case with blogging. In fact, it could be argued that this is what blogging is all about. I’d be willing to bet that a disproportionate number of bloggers have Asperger’s syndrome. I’ve been thinking about redefining Asperger’s to include blogging as one of its hallmark symptoms. That way, we can be more numerous and maybe even form our own special interest group.  We can even have our own “C.A.C.” – Congressional Asperger’s Caucus.
Full-blown autism is similar to Asperger’s in some ways. Of course, this varies with the individual. I do know that autistic men have challenges with the opposite sex; they tend to have challenges with other people in general. Do they make good bloggers? There are lots of blogs ABOUT autism, but who knows how many blogs, relating to other matters, are authored by autistic people?
I’ve always been capable of bringing up awkward facts, which fly in the face of social convention. Over time, I’ve even learned to enjoy it. It can be fun to watch people squirm, especially liberals. Is this one of my “Asperger’s traits” or is it just me? Is it even possible to separate the two? I doubt there’s any way of knowing; lots of non-Asperger’s people have natural personality traits that are often considered Asperger’s traits. This doesn’t mean they have the syndrome.
Autistic people, as well as asperger’s people, have trouble with convention. What tends to matter to us is if something is correct or incorrect, not whether it’s normal or not. Convention holds little sway over the autistic mind, until/unless that mind is trained to respect it. Learning to respect convention, in real life, is key to attracting females. In the blogosphere, however, there are few penalties for breaking with convention – but there can be rewards.
If you’re good at shocking people, you can gain a lot of attention – and attention is what bloggers thrive on. For people on the autistic spectrum, this can come naturally. But while those of us with Asperger’s can shock people with what we say, autistic people have fewer options; speaking is a challenge for them. Blogging does not present such a challenge – so some of them will unleash all their pent-up frustration (and desire to shock) through blogging.
On a related note, I’d like to comment on a blog called “Elderof Zyklon.”  The author of  ElderofZyklon’s (I’d originally thought he was autistic*) appears as if he’s compensating for what he cannot say in public. Despite his grotesquely anti-Semitic graphics (and the obviously-designed-to-shock name of his blog), I don’t consider him among the pathological anti-Semites. The pathological anti-Semites would get rid of, through murder or some other means, every single Jew on the face of the Earth if they could. For all their claims that the Holocaust is a hoax, they’d be the first to perpetrate it should the opportunity arise. They make no distinctions between individual Jews; as far as they’re concerned, there’s no difference between Noel Ignatiev and yours truly.
Does ElderofZyklon have a problem with Jews? Yes he does – just as I do. If anything, the fact that so many influential Jews are rabid, hateful, genocidal liberals bothers me more than it bothers him. But he’s made it clear that he bears no hatred toward all Jews; he reblogs a lot of my material and he comments on this blog sometimes. Do I find the name of his blog, and the accompanying graphics offensive? Absolutely. If he’d change those, he’d lose some of his shock value, but whoever he’s trying to convince would take him a lot more seriously. As for his anti-Semitic fans, their opinions are not going to change one way or the other; he’s been preaching to the choir.
In other words, though Elderof Zyklon wears a facade of Jew-hatred and venom, I don’t believe he’s all that. Underneath the facade is a human being, with legitimate concerns, who is frustrated and just wants to be heard. Hopefully, he’ll refine his blogging communication techniques and focus more on facts than on shock value.
Am I being too trusting and generous? Perhaps, but it’s something that I’ve been thinking about for a while now, and I wanted to put it out there.
*I’ve edited this post after my error was pointed out.

Posted in Aspergers and health, politics and attitudes of the pro-white movements | 34 Comments

How Denmark benefits from diversity

A group of Danish high school girls is being credited with a possible scientific breakthrough. According to The Daily Dot:

An experiment by a handful of high school students in Denmark has sparked some serious international interest in the scientific community.
Five ninth-grade girls at Hjallerup School in North Jutland, Denmark, noticed they had trouble concentrating after sleeping with their mobile phones at their bedsides. They tried to figure out why. The school obviously doesn’t have the equipment to test human brain waves, so the girls decided to do a more rudimentary experiment.
They placed six trays of garden cress seeds next to Wi-Fi routers that emitted roughly the same microwave radiation as a mobile phone. Then they placed six more trays of seeds in a separate room without routers. The girls controlled both environments for room temperature, sunlight and water.
After 12 days, they found the garden cress seeds in the routerless room had exploded into bushy greenery, while the seeds next to the Wi-Fi routers were brown, shriveled, and even mutated.

It’s not every day that we see schoolgirls making international news through innovative experimentation. They couldn’t have done it without diversity. Here are the girls:
danish girls
As you can plainly see, some are blonde while others are brunette, and some are tall while others are short. Diversity at its finest!

Posted in parody/satire | 7 Comments

A real-life black Jesus

Looking over the comments on an recent American Renaissance article, I saw one that claimed something to the effect that “blacks always get into universities for free, and they never enroll except to rape white girls.” I noted that such comments are not helpful and that they won’t sway opinions. The comment has since been removed, thankfully, from that page.
Unfortunately, comments claiming that “all bantus are lazy” or “every she-boon is obese and obnoxious” or “Mexicans always want to dispossess the white man” are all too common on the internet. I’ve written about this matter previously. At one point, I suggested that a lot of the moronic comments made by so-called racists are actually the work of leftists in disguise. That it’s part of a campaign to discredit pro-white sentiments.
But now I’d like to focus on blanket statements. They’re rarely accurate in this context; I can’t say they’re never accurate, because then I’d be contradicting myself – and I never do that…
For those of y’all who were born yesterday, and haven’t yet had the chance to get out and meet real people, here’s a piece of information for y’all: There are decent people who are Mexican. There are smart, hard-working, blacks. There are good Asian drivers and there are poor Jews.
Should all “Asians” and blacks be removed from Britain? I can think of one who should stay. Her name is Maria de Jesus-Lucungo, and she was born in Angola. I found her on m.vice.com. From the article:

Say hello to Maria de Jesus-Lucungo. Not only does Maria share a name with the benevolent oracle of the Christian faith, she’s also inherited some of his selflessness and eternal goodwill. Although she’s originally from Angola and doesn’t have fair hair herself, Maria has made it her life goal to campaign for the protection of the UK’s blonde population. She believes that England’s flaxen-haired brothers and sisters are under threat of extinction and that, if they disappear, “the world will not be so attractive in beauty any more”…
Through extensive flyering, an online petition and multiple letters sent to the British Prime Minister, Maria says that she hopes to establish a National Blonde Day to celebrate all things blond. I caught up with her to find out what else she wants to achieve…
VICE: Hi, Maria. When did you first realise that blondes need protecting?
Maria Jesus-Lucungo: It came all of a sudden a few years ago. They’re not breeding with each other. It’s good to have some blond in the white community to mix with everyone else so we can have a variety of complexions. Variety is nice—variety is the spice of life! If you go to Africa, you expect to see a black African. If someone from Africa comes to Europe, the first thing they should see should be a blonde. Blonde is the pure white before it gets mixed with everyone else.
Do you think the purest forms of all races need to be protected? Like if black Africans were becoming extinct?
Yes, but Africans aren’t becoming extinct. Go to Africa—you’ll see they have lots. If blondes disappear, then you will have to explain to your grandchildren that, once upon a time, we used to have another type of white people and the child might not believe it. This is what I’m trying to avoid; we don’t have to let it get that far.
In England, we need somebody to stand up for blondes in the House of Commons. It’s like if you have a garden and one flower is dying out, then the gardener will do something to revive it. His concentration will be on that particular one. So my focus is on this particular one, but it doesn’t mean that I don’t like all the others. I like everyone all the same.

Maria may come across as somewhat simplistic in her views, and it’s unfortunate that they chose to bring Hitler into the conversation – but how many pro-white keyboard warriors can honestly claim to be as publicly active as Maria? My guess is that she gets more people thinking outside the box than 99.99% of racialist commenters on the internet. Of course, she’s exempt from accusations of racism by virtue of being black. This, in itself, adds another layer of credibility to her work; it makes the double-standard even more obvious.
So next time you’re seething with anger, over the latest black-on-white atrocity, think before you write. Think about Maria de Jesus-Lucungo and choose your words carefully.
blondes

Posted in activism, Africa and blacks, politics and attitudes of the pro-white movements | 27 Comments

Michael Griffin and Frank Borzellieri

The Left is up in arms because a New Jersey Catholic school, Holy Ghost, has terminated one of its teachers for being homosexual. According to MSNBC:

A high-school teacher at a suburban Philadelphia Catholic high school has been fired after applying for a marriage license in New Jersey with his partner of 12 years.
Michael Griffin, who taught Spanish and French at Holy Ghost Preparatory Schol in Bensalem, PA. and is also an alumnus of the high school, was told his marriage license “contradicts the terms of his teaching contract,” as stated in a statement from the school…
The school’s 87-page handbook includes the Teacher’s Code of Conduct which Griffin believes was the clause used for Griffin’s termination.
“Although the school welcomes teachers from other denominations and recognizes their rights to religious freedom, as employees of a Catholic institution, all teachers are expected to uphold lifestyles compatible with the moral teaching of the Roman Catholic Church,” the handbook states.

Reading the above article, it’s obvious that MSNBC’s sympathies are with Griffin, and not the school. But I think the school’s expectations are not unreasonable at all. It’s a Catholic school, and the Bible is very clearly anti-homosexual. Surely Griffin was aware of this. Even if we disregard the schools handbook, there are other reasons for one to sympathize with the school. Having homosexuals in such a school sets a bad example, from a religious perspective, for the students. Do we demand that Muslim schools allow teachers who eat pork in their cafeterias?  Should we force Jewish religious schools to hire Jews who publicly desecrate the sabbath?
It’s interesting that organizations such as change.org are so eager to defend Michael Griffin – yet they were completely silent when Frank Borzellieri was terminated from his position as principle at another Catholic school in New York. Unlike Griffin, Borzellieri did nothing to contradict the Catholic faith. There’s nothing in the Bible that refers to pro-white attitudes as an “abomination.” There was no indication that Borzellieri held any hatred toward his black students, nor did he pose any sort of danger to them. According to beliefnet.com:

… Frank Borzellieri was a principal of Catholic elementary school in the Bronx,New York.  Once word was released that Borzellieri was a “white supremacist,” however, he was swiftly terminated.
As it turns out, Borzellieri was, at one time, at any rate, a bit friendlier with a certain organization—American Renaissance (AR)—than the self-appointed guardians of our politically correct orthodoxy believes he had a right to be.  AR exists simply and solely for the unhindered promotion of the free exchange of ideas on matters pertaining to race.   For this, it has been branded a “hate group” and purveyor of “white supremacy.”…
Yet now Borzellieri is out of a job for no other reason but that he dared, at one time, to express politically incorrect beliefs concerning race while maintaining an affiliation of a sort with AR.
The more one learns of both AR and Borzellieri, the more this episode becomes at once interesting and disturbing, for you see, if Borzellieri is a “white supremacist” because of his association with AR, then there is a whole lot of other popular media personalities and organizations that are guilty of “white supremacy” because of their association with it.  Some of these have a relationship with Borzellieri as well.  This is interesting.  What is disturbing is that thus far, not one of these personalities or outlets has so much as mentioned the travesty that Borzellieri had visited upon him, much less defended him.

I met Mr. Borzellieri at an American Renaissance a few years ago. He came across as a man who had suffered much for his beliefs. According to Wikipedia, he spent 11 years on a New York school board, where he fought a lonely battle for conservative values. During those 11 years he…
… battled frequently with liberals over hot-button issues such as multiculturalism and bilingual education, both of which he opposed. He became a leading national spokesman for English as the official language. He also opposed what was termed the “Rainbow Curriculum,” which provided positive presentations of homosexuality and homosexuals in children’s books such as “Heather Has Two Mommies” and “Daddy’s Roommate.” It was one of very few issues on which Borzellieri had a majority support of the school board. The others on which he received majority support were his proposal to strengthen New York City’s Megan’s Law against child predators, and the prohibition of discussing with young students the topics of abortion, homosexuality, masturbation and contraception. He defended the Boy Scouts of America’s right to ban homosexual scoutmasters and he put forth a resolution, which passed by a vote of eight to one, supporting the Scouts at a time when other New York City school boards were voting to denounce them.
Borzellieri took a stand against sexual permissiveness and against what his faith considered to be sinful or deviant. He spoke the truth about Martin Luther King among people who considered King to be no less than a saint. Whether we agree with all of Borzellieri’s positions or not, he’s a man who has no fear of expressing unpopular views, and he’s worthy of our respect.
Borzelilieri doesn’t claim to be a hero, but he most certainly is. As for Griffin, he has every right to create a union with another man, but this does not make him a hero – and traditional Catholic institutions should not be expected to continue to employ him.
When we compare the corporate-owned media reaction to the two men, it becomes painfully clear that they value a man who has sex with another man far more than they value a man who stands up for his beliefs.
Posted in human sexuality and morality, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 1 Comment

To "move", the rape-denier

A while ago I wrote a post titled A black answer to black-on-white rape statistics. There are now 72 comments. Some of them are by a persistent character who calls himself “move.” Apparently he’s made it his life’s mission to find white-on-black rapes and then use them to disprove the FBI’s statistics, which show vastly more black-on-white rapes than the other way around. Despite the fact that the FBI is clearly biased AGAINST whites, as evidenced by their habit of including Hispanics as “whites” when they commit crimes, but as “Hispanics” when they’re victims, move insists that the FBI is actually biased in favor of whites. His evidence? He’s managed to find some white-on-black rapes and other crimes.
I know of nobody who denies that there are bad apples among whites. Out of the tens of millions of whites, who still inhabit the U.S., we’re bound to find some very unsavory individuals. In any event, I’ve listed his most recent points, as presented in his comments there, and provided my responses.
1) “White man confessed to sexual assault, kidnap of of 7 year old black girl”
http://www.fox8live.com/story/22525206/deputies-say-kenner-man-has-confessed-to-sexual-assault-and-kidnap-of-girl
You make it seem like your quote is from the article, that the article identifies the girl as black. In fact, it doesn’t. Not only that, but I could find no source on the web revealing the race of the victim. Obviously, it’s a heinous crime regardless of the victim’s race.
2) 16 year old Black Boy Raped And Beaten To Death By White Men Over Drug Money
http://www.fox19.com/story/24108789/dione-payne-dies-geldrich-watson-arrested
The article states that the boy was beaten to death. Nowhere does it mention that he was raped. He was, however, black. So this is a rare case of white-on-black murder – which is not the subject of this post.
3) “Sixty percent of the men exonerated by the Innocence Project are blacks wrongly convicted raping largely white women.”
http://www.hartfordinfo.org/issues/documents/Crime/htfd_courant_040707.asp
From the article:

The New York-based Innocence Project has identified the real criminal in 40 percent of its cases, Neufeld said. And in almost every one, that person has committed multiple crimes.

I’ll bet dollars to donuts that all those “real criminals” were also black – but the article conveniently leaves out the racial statistics here. Are you naive enough to believe that had those 40% been largely white men, the article would have somehow neglected to tell us? White women are being raped by black men, and sometimes they then point their fingers at the wrong black men. This shouldn’t surprise us.
4) According to the FBI, about 95,000 forcible rapes were reported in 2004. Based on the statements and studies cited above, some 47,000 American men are falsely accused of rape each year. These men are disproportionately African-American.
Of course they’re going to be disproportionately black men; if real rapists are disproportionately black men, then naturally the fake ones will be too. Let’s take your line of reasoning to its logical conclusion regarding another group: Men in general. Would you be surprised if I told you that most people who are falsely accused of rape are men? This being the case, would you then conclude that women are just as likely to be rapists as men? According to your reasoning, this would have to be the case – since men are so often wrongly accused.
5) “More than 86 percent of rapes against Native American women are carried out by non-native men, most of them white, according to the Justice Department.”
http://iowaindependent.com/39760/king-votes-against-bill-to-help-protect-native-americans-from-rape
Yes, but bear in mind that “white,” when it comes to perpetrators of crime, includes Hispanics. Either way, this is not surprising. Native American women are dispersed throughout the population – a population that is still largely white. If they hang out with white men, date white men, and live next to white men, when they’re raped, it’s probably going to be by a white man. In this case, it’s their dispersion that’s to blame – unless you’re insinuating that white men are sneaking into Indian reservations to rape Indian women. But I seriously doubt this is the case. Native women are raped mostly by white men for the same reason white women are mostly raped by white men: They live around white men.
It’s a big world out there, and you have a lot of free time, so you were able to find a handful of white-on-black rapes. It happens. I don’t deny it. But it’s still a statistical rarity. I’d scour the internet, as you did, to compose my own list – but I don’t have to; others have already done so. Here’s on website that lists white victims of black crime. It’s in chronological order and you can knock yourself out cataloging them as “rape” or “non-rape” crimes if you want:

White victims of black crime

I’m sure my readers will be happy to contribute many black-on-white rape cases, and lists, for your perusal.
 

Posted in Africa and blacks, crime and violence | 26 Comments

On gendered pronouns

According to technical writer Bryan Cantrill (thanks to Mangan for the link), an employee should be fired for ignoring directives to pull gendered pronouns from his work. He writes:

But while Isaac is a Joyent employee, Ben is not—and if he had been, he wouldn’t be as of this morning: to reject a pull request that eliminates a gendered pronoun on the principle that pronouns should in fact be gendered would constitute a fireable offense for me and for Joyent. On the one hand, it seems ridiculous (absurd, perhaps) to fire someone over a pronoun — but to characterize it that way would be a gross oversimplification: it’s not the use of the gendered pronoun that’s at issue (that’s just sloppy), but rather the insistence that pronouns should in fact be gendered. To me, that insistence can only come from one place: that gender—specifically, masculinity—is inextricably linked to software, and that’s not an attitude that Joyent tolerates.

I use so-called gendered pronouns all the time; it’s less awkward than “he or she”, “him or her” or “they.” Apparently, the use of the masculine form to denote either gender dates back to the 18th century. According to thediacrities.com:

Interestingly enough, the Times’ On Language credits a feminist grammar teacher by the name of Anne Fisher with popularizing the use of ‘he’ as the neutral pronoun.

 “If any single person is responsible for this male-centric usage, it’s Anne Fisher, an 18th-century British schoolmistress and the first woman to write an English grammar book, according to the sociohistorical linguist Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade. Fisher’s popular guide, “A New Grammar” (1745), ran to more than 30 editions, making it one of the most successful grammars of its time. More important, it’s believed to be the first to say that the pronoun he should apply to both sexes.”
On Language, Patricia O’Connor and Stewart Kellerman, July 21, 2009

Actually, that same article starts off by documenting much earlier uses of the plural pronoun “they” for this role. It claims Chaucer as the first documented user of the word “they” as a pronoun that can refer to both men and women.
Maybe I should start emulating Chaucer. If my aim, in using “he”/”him,” was to annoy feminists, perhaps I’m off the mark here; this convention was invented by a feminist, though not the sort of feminist who would be considered one nowadays.
Furthermore, why should we men share our pronouns with women?  If anything, the use of masculine pronouns to refer to both men and women is unfair to men. Don’t we deserve pronouns of our own?
But today’s feminists are at the forefront in championing gender-neutral pronouns. Sweden, striving for a genderless society, led the way last year by officially introducing the word “hen” into the Swedish language. According to Nathalie Rothschild of Slate:

Earlier this month, the movement for gender neutrality reached a milestone: Just days after International Women’s Day a new pronoun, hen (pronounced like the bird in English), was added to the online version of the country’s National Encyclopedia. The entry defines hen as a “proposed gender-neutral personal pronoun instead of he [han in Swedish] and she [hon].”The National Encyclopedia announcement came amid a heated debate about gender neutrality that has been raging in Swedish newspaper columns and TV studios and on parenting blogs and feminist websites…

Today’s hen champions, however, have a distinctly political agenda. For instance, Lundqvist’s book is published by a house named Olika, which means “different or diverse.” Olika only publishes books that “challenge stereotypes and obsolete norms and traditions in the world of literature.” Its titles include 100 möjligheter Istället för 2! (“100 possibilities instead of 2!”), a book for adults who “want to give children more opportunities in gender-stereotyped everyday life”; and Det var en gång … en ritbok! (“Once upon a time there was … a drawing book!”), the first “gender-scrutinizing” drawing book for children that “challenges traditional and diminishing conceptions of girls and boys, men and women.”

But not everyone is keen on this political meddling with the Swedish language. In a recent interview for Vice magazine, Jan Guillou, one of Sweden’s most well-known authors, referred to proponents of hen as “feminist activists who want to destroy our language.”…

At some point, the aspirations of Swedish feminists will reach an impasse. That impasse will be when the Muslim population of Sweden reaches critical mass. At that point, the feminists will be lucky if they get to pick the color of their hijabs.
Back in America, the fastest growing demographic couldn’t care less about gendered pronouns; Mexican Spanish is not about to accommodate itself to the whims of feminism. As a matter of fact, the American political establishment, and education system, encourages people to adapt to Hispanic values (including the emphasis on “machismo”). For example, the University of Southern Florida has a page, called (ironically) “His/Her Name is Today“. Here’s what it has to say:

UNDERSTANDING THE Hispanic/Latino CULTURE

It is important that educators of Hispanic/Latino children and adolescents understand and appreciate important concepts of the Hispanic/Latino culture.
corazon: heart
sensibilidad: sensitivity
afecto: warmth and demonstrativeness
dignidad: dignity
respeto: respect
machismo: biological superiority of the male (emphasis mine)

Hispanic/Latino AMERICAN CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS
There are 10.5 million Hispanic/Latino children under age 18. Hispanic/Latino children are the fastest-growing youth population, and by 2020 more than one in five children will be of Hispanic/Latino origin…

  • “Machismo” plays a significant role in the Puerto Rican and other Hispanic/Latino groups

    • used as a flattering term among Hispanic/Latino Americans

    • significantly influences behavior and attitudes of adolescent males during time of identity formation.

    • distinction between sexes; males enjoy rights/privileges denied to females (emphasis mine).

    • boys and girls learn that machismo refers to male’s manhood, courage to fight, honor and dignity, keeping one’s word, and protecting one’s name.

    • includes dignity in personal conduct, respect for others, love for the family, and affection for children…

    PARENTS, FAMILIES, AND THE COMMUNITY

    Educators’ recognition of the role of parents, the family, and the community in the multicultural education effort is an absolute prerequisite to the multicultural education program’s success. Actions with a significant role in determining the success of the multicultural education program:

    Including both immediate and extended families and community members

    • demonstrates that you are serious about accepting and promoting other cultures

    • adds credence to the multicultural education program’s efforts…

    Hispanic/Latino American children learn early the importance of (1) a deep sense of family responsibility, (2) rigid definitions of sex roles, (3) respectful and reverent treatment of the elderly, and (4) the male’s position of respect and authority in the family (emphasis mine). Although some of the male’s authority appears to be relaxing as the woman’s role is redefined, women in the Hispanic/Latino American culture continue to occupy a subordinate position. Fathers have prestige and authority, and sons have more and earlier independence than do daughters.

This sort of accepting attitude toward Hispanic culture is typical. The leftist American establishment will not be demanding gender-neutral pronouns in Spanish any time soon, because it’s perfectly acceptable, and natural, for men to have superior status over women – as long as those men are not white men. Any change within Hispanic (Mexican) culture must be the result of natural evolution from within. To interfere would be a violation of the “Prime Directive.”
For all their whining about racism and ethnocentrism, liberals once again reveal their hypocrisy. Having been in close contact with them all my life, I’m fairly certain that liberals observe the Prime Directive toward non-white peoples out of a sense of moral superiority and patronization. They feel secure and comfortable within Western (white) civilization. Therefore they feel entitled to attack it constantly.
Whatever its true motivation, the establishment Left is morally confused. If white women are being oppressed by gendered pronouns, then why is it okay for Mexican women to endure even worse “oppression?” If Swedish liberals feel so strongly about their precious “hen,” then let them impose it upon Arabic and Somali as well. Since they insist upon having a “multicultural society,” it behooves them to protect their foreign language speaking women as well. If they fail to do so, then they must be racists.

Posted in feminism and men's issues, immigration/ Hispanics, shenanigans of the Left and of non-white activists | 9 Comments

Are "marginalized" people at higher risk of AIDS?

According to of Slate Magazine, marginalized people are more likely to contract the AIDS virus than those who are not marginalized. In a recent screed, he tells us:

Because AIDS has from its very beginning been a disease of the marginalized, we have allowed it to spread like a weed through the cracks in our society. Inaction, more than transmission, is at issue here. HIV causes AIDS, yes, but the AIDScrisis is caused by stigma, oppression, discrimination, and apathy. The virus is not our biggest enemy—we are…
But what if we flipped the lens? What if we focused more on marginalization (and its real-world effects) and less on identities? What if we understood AIDS not as a disease affecting certain types of people, but rather, as a disease that affects those living at the intersection of a constellation of conditions, such as poverty, lack of access to education, inadequate health care, stigmatized sexual practices, drug and alcohol abuse (legal or illegal), and political disenfranchisement?
…the numbers of new infections among white and black MSMs were almost identical—despite the fact that non-Latino whites represent 63 percent of the U.S. population and blacks only 12 percent. Additionally, the greatest number of infections was seen in the youngest age group. Again and again, it is those who sit at the intersection of marginalized identities—those with the least social capital and political agency—who are most at risk.

Clearly Ryan believes that since blacks are “marginalized”, “disenfranchised” and “stigmatized” they are also more likely to contract AIDS.
Are blacks marginalized, disenfranchised and stigmatized in Washington DC? Is this their social status in Haiti? What about Detroit? Are blacks stigmatized in sub-Saharan Africa? All of these places are governed by blacks, and have been governed by blacks for a long time. Yet they all have unusually high prevalence of AIDS.  Ryan seems to believe that “marginalized people” have problems acquiring condoms. He writes:

…it’s like telling someone to use a condom every time they have sex—without considering where they will get the condom…

By all accounts, it’s very easy to get condoms in Africa and other impoverished places. The problem is getting people to actually USE them.
While there is little doubt that being marginalized will increase a person’s risk for certain health conditions, it’s a stretch to claim that AIDS is among them. Let’s consider some basic facts:
AIDS is transmitted primarily through sexual contact.
Marginalized people, such as those who are ugly or unpopular, have less sex (does one need evidence for this?).
Popular/attractive people have more sex – and are thus more at risk for contracting AIDS.
Obviously there are some exceptions to the above generalizations (among prostitutes, drug-users and some gays for example), but for society at large I think the burden of proof should fall on those who disagree.
While Ryan would have us believe that blacks have a higher incidence of AIDS due to their supposed low social status, the real culprit is their high social status combined with a low average I.Q. and a high time-preference. The Daily Beast reports:

The study that produced this statistic found that, on average, African-Americans reported having sex 65.8 times per year, while Caucasians reported having sex 60.8 times a year.

That same article claims that college-educated men have more sex than those who lack a college education. Normal-weight women have more sex than obese women. No surprises here. If somebody did a study, he’d probably discover that thinner women have a higher incidence of AIDS than obese women and that tall men are more at risk than short men. All else being equal, if you have more sexual partners, you’re at higher risk for AIDS – and if you’re considered more sexually desirable, you’re more likely to have more sexual partners.
I don’t doubt that there are some people whose low status makes them more vulnerable to AIDS. But it seems to me that there are many more whose high status, coupled with irresponsible behavior, makes them more vulnerable. Black men have high status – and a lot of black women only date black men. They must compete for those black men with white/Asian women. Does this motivate them to accommodate black men in ways their white/Asian competitors won’t? For example, by foregoing the condom? Online accounts of condom-use studies, that deal with racial differences, tend to be lacking in detail, plagued with double-speak and and beholden to political correctness; it’s hard to extract, with any confidence, reliable statistics from them.

Posted in Africa and blacks, racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science | 8 Comments

Social Bias Within The Academic and Political Establishment

Why do we refuse to recognize the obvious and how do popularity and gender fit into this? Robert Jinman does a great job tying it all together. Highly recommended:

 Social Bias Within The Academic and Political Establishment

Posted in feminism and men's issues, nurture vs. nature and I.Q., racial differences and how they manifest themselves/race science | 1 Comment

Afros and transport, today and yesterday

Today and tomorrow I’ll be reblogging a couple of recent articles that impressed me. Tonight’s reblog is from “Those Who Can See”. She never disappoints and her research is top-notch. I’m sure you’ll enjoy this post as much as I did:

Afros-and-transport-today-and-yesterday

Posted in Africa and blacks, crime and violence | 3 Comments

Happy "Thanksgivukkah"

For the first time in history, and likely the last, the first day of Hannukah falls on Thanksgiving. According to Livescience:

By Tia Ghose, Staff Writer
It’s a once in more than 70,000-year event: The first day of Hanukkah this year coincides with Thanksgiving.
As a result, Jews everywhere are gearing up for “Thanksgivukkah,” a mashup of Thanksgiving and the Jewish festival of lights. This lineup of the first day of Hanukkah with Thanksgiving is incredibly rare.
“That’s not going to happen again for thousands and thousands of years. No one knows exactly how long, because the calendars aren’t going up that high,” said Jason Miller, a rabbi in Michigan who blogs at rabbijason.com. “It’s something like 70,000 years,” assuming of course that America, the Jews and the human race are still around at that time.

If memory serves me right, the last time this happened, turkeys were still dinosaurs. Fire hadn’t even been discovered yet, so they couldn’t be cooked anyway; Jewish Neanderthals could only fantasize about latkes. We’ve come a long way since then.
The article goes on to explain:

Many calendars
The reason for this year’s rare alignment has to do with quirks of two calendars, the Gregorian and Jewish calendars. Much of the world follows the Gregorian calendar, which has a 365-day year based on the Earth’s orbit around the sun, with leap years every four years. The Gregorian calendar was implemented by Pope Gregory to keep Easter in line with the season it was originally celebrated in.

But the Jewish calendar, which was created more than 2,000 years ago, follows the waxing and waning of the moon. That calendar has 12 months of roughly 30 days each, which works out to a bit more than 354 days in a year. As a result, the Jewish year creeps earlier and earlier relative to the Gregorian calendar. But many Jewish holidays, such as Passover, are tied to seasons such as spring.
To keep holidays in line with their seasons, the Jewish calendar includes an entire extra month in seven of every 19 years. This year is a leap year, so Hanukkah and all of the other Jewish holidays came especially early in 2013. And Thanksgiving, which falls on the fourth Thursday in November, happened to come extra late this year, allowing for the convergence.
Because the extra month on the Jewish calendar will occur in 2014, Hanukkah will once again happen in December, Miller said.
“That also allows us to get Passover back in the spring,” Miller told LiveScience.

In reality, the Jewish calendar was implemented out of necessity. In days of yore, the Jewish court (Sandhedrin) would wait for witnesses to come forward, each month, to testify that they had seen the new moon. At that point, the court would declare a new month and word was sent out to all corners of Jewish habitation. As for the extra month required to keep the holidays in season, Jewfaq explains:

In ancient times, this month was added by observation: the Sanhedrin observed the conditions of the weather, the crops and the livestock, and if these were not sufficiently advanced to be considered “spring,” then the Sanhedrin inserted an additional month into the calendar to make sure that Pesach (Passover) would occur in the spring (it is, after all, referred to in the Torah as Chag he-Aviv, the Festival of Spring!).

Why did ancient Jews stop using witnesses to declare the new month? It was because of diversity. All was well as long as the Jewish population was homogenous and unified. But after the Babylonian Exile, when full-blooded Jews came into contact with the half-bloods (Samaritans) who had settled in the Land of Israel, tensions flared. From the Center for Online Jewish Studies:

The Samaritans were a mixed people, made up of Israelites who had not been exiled when the Northern Kingdom was destroyed in 722 B.C.E. and people of various foreign nationalities whom the Assyrians had resettled in the area in an attempt to ensure that Israel’s national aspirations could not again come to the fore. This mixed group had adopted a syncretistic form of Judaism that combined old northern traditions with those of the resettled nations. When work began on the Temple, the Samaritans approached the Jews to join in the project. The Judeans rejected the Samaritans because of their questionable descent.
In First Temple times it was possible for foreigners to join the Jewish people in an informal way by moving physically and socially into the land and adhering to its religion and laws. During the exile, Judaism had been transformed from a nationality which depended on a connection to the land and culture to a religious and ethnic community which depended upon descent. How else could Judaism have ensured its continuity when deprived of its homeland? The returning Jews from Babylonia could not accept the questionable genealogy of the Samaritans. On the other hand, there was not yet a system for religious conversion like that developed somewhat later on in the Second Temple period. Hence, there was no choice but to reject the Samaritans, even had they agreed to abandon their syncretistic practices. In response to their rejection, the Samaritans attempted, although with limited success, to influence the Persian authorities to halt the rebuilding of the Temple and to limit the powers of the priestly and temporal government of the Jews.

The Samaritans used various tricks in order to sabotage traditional Jewish life. One of them is described by My Jewish Learning:

Originally, there was not a set calendar for Jewish months. Instead, the Sanhedrin would declare a new month after receiving the testimony of two reliable witnesses reporting that they had seen the new moon. Then the message was spread throughout Israel and Babylonia via small fires on hilltops. When a new moon was announced, someone would go to the top of the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem with a long pole of wood. He would set the end of his pole on fire and wave it around until he could see someone on another hilltop waving his own pole. The second person waved his pole until he could see a third person waving, and so on until the message reached Babylonia.
Eventually the Samaritans began lighting fires on hilltops in order to mislead the Jews, and so instead of fires, messengers were sent out from Jerusalem. By the later Amoraic period, a fixed calendar was set, and there was no longer any need for witnesses or messengers.

Due to the increased area of Jewish settlement, it became impractical to continue sending messengers in this way. The system of fires, had it not been abandoned, might have continued to function, at least for a while.
At first glance, having a calendar is a great convenience. It takes away the guessing game, removes the potential for abuse and allows people to plan ahead. On the other hand, something important was lost: There was no longer an intimate connection between the rabbinical authorities (the Sanhendrin) and the people. The institution of a calendar was a major step downward into the abyss of rigid ritual. It helped transform the Jewish people from a people of trust to a people of codification. The calendar was one of the first stages in the ossification of warm flesh and blood. No longer did people have to meet face to face in order to set the pace of national life. Now, all one had to do was consult the calendar.
Hanukkah is the anti-diversity Holiday. Hellenized Syrians had defiled the Temple and were attempting to stamp out Judaism among the Jews. The traditional story of Hanukkah, as it appears in Wikipedia, reads:

When the Second Temple in Jerusalem was looted and services stopped, Judaism was outlawed. In 167 BCE Antiochus ordered an altar to Zeus erected in the Temple. He banned brit milah (circumcision) and ordered pigs to be sacrificed at the altar of the temple (the sacrifice of pigs to the Greek gods was standard ritual practice in the Ancient Greek religion).[17]
Antiochus’s actions provoked a large-scale revolt. Mattityahu, a Jewish priest, and his five sons Jochanan, Simeon, Eleazar, Jonathan, and Judah led a rebellion against Antiochus. Judah became known as Yehuda HaMakabi (“Judah the Hammer”). By 166 BCE Mattathias had died, and Judah took his place as leader. By 165 BCE the Jewish revolt against the Seleucid monarchy was successful. The Temple was liberated and rededicated. The festival of Hanukkah was instituted to celebrate this event.[18] Judah ordered the Temple to be cleansed, a new altar to be built in place of the polluted one and new holy vessels to be made. According to the Talmud, unadulterated and undefiled pure olive oil with the seal of the kohen gadol (high priest) was needed for the menorah in the Temple, which was required to burn throughout the night every night…

The oil needed to be pure, the Temple needed to be purified and the nation needed to be purged of the cultural imperialism that had tainted it. Of course, all this is relative; there is no such thing as a “pure culture” and, as a matter of fact, they even could have used olive oil that was less than pure. But the concept behind Hanukkah is to take back the culture that is ours, that our enemies would extinguish if given the chance.
Perhaps it’s time that America had it’s own Hanukkah.

Posted in Jewish stuff and Israel, pan-nationalism and multi-culturalism | 8 Comments