I think a lot of people are trying to quantify a very complex issue into a nice, easy, linear format.
Fact: There are a lot of black athletes out there.
Fact (according to the original post): There aren’t a lot of black swimmers.
Fact: Just because someone’s black doesn’t mean they can’t swim.
Fact: Just because someone’s white doesn’t mean they can’t run/jump/whatever.
Okay, I can go on with facts all day long. But this isn’t about facts, it’s about conjecture. Could there be some sort of genetic trait in blacks that make their musculatur/skeleton/whatever different than whites? Why not, they have a genetic trait that makes their skin contain more pigment. Anyone who says that the entire human chromosome has been completely mapped is a flat-out liar. There ARE a lot of genes that have been traced… but not everything’s been discovered yet.
Why are some people completely hung up on the idea that everyone’s the same? I have no idea. But simple sight confirmation is needed to tell you that people are different, racially, socially, physiologically, whatever. And these differences tend to come in groups. If, STATISTICALLY SPEAKING, a large group of people have both Difference 1 (D1) and Difference 2 (D2), while another large group has neither difference, it’d be safe to say (STATISTICALLY SPEAKING, for any of you hot-heads waiting to accuse me of racism) that D1 and D2 are connected somehow, and if someone has D1, there’s a good chance they’ll have D2.
Maybe there aren’t a lot of black swimmers of note because not a lot of blacks WANT to be swimmers (but that doesn’t follow well, either, because there’s a lot of people of a lot of races wanting to be football players or basketball stars). But I only bring up that point as an example that there may be five reasons, ten reasons, or even a million reasons why we don’t hear about a lot of black swimmers.
-SPOOFE