Oh come now, I’m sure the sample’s size would be at least four or five inches.
…what?
These questions are relevant when assessing the sexual abilities and proclivities of different individuals and races.
Hm. Didn’t know there was one.
Right here is an abridgment of his book.
Professor Rushton’s assertions about racial differences in average intelligence and crime rates are easy to document. The only area where I disagree with him is his explanation of how the differences evolved. The 10,000 Year Explosion provides a better explanation.
I often read about how men like Philippe Rushton and Charles Murray have been “decisively refuted.” Those making the claims are unable to explain the persistence of racial differences in crime, average intelligence, and sexual behavior.
Is there any correlation between penis size and propensity to reproduce, anyway? And what could ejaculation-distance have to do with it? It’s not like the stuff needs to travel far to work.
Man of steel, woman of Kleenex.
Ok, then please answer them.
How large is your penis when erect?
How many sexual partners have you had in the past five years?
How far do you ejaculate?
Thanks
So then you think Rushton is right when he says that most whites have really tiny penises?
I could link quite a number of . . . cites . . . appearing to show the contrary, but that is, of course, in the nature of purely anecdotal evidence . . . selected from the general population by force of financial incentive, as it were . . .
An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy is a 1944 study of race relations authored by Swedish economist Gunnar Myrdal and funded by The Carnegie Foundation. The foundation chose Myrdal because it thought that as a non-American, he could offer a more unbiased opinion. Myrdal’s volume, at nearly 1,500 pages, painstakingly detailed what he saw as obstacles to full participation in American society that American negroes faced as of the 1940s. Ralph Bunche served as Gunnar Myrdal’s main researcher and writer at the start of the project in the Fall of 1938.[1]
It sold over 100,000 copies and went through 25 printings before going into its second edition in 1965. It was enormously influential in how racial issues were viewed in the United States, and it was cited in the landmark Brown v. Board of Education case “in general.” The book was generally positive in its outlook on the future of race relations in America, taking the view that democracy would triumph over racism. In many ways it laid the groundwork for future policies of racial integration and affirmative action.[1]
Myrdal believed he saw a vicious cycle in which whites oppressed negroes, and then pointed to negroes’ poor performance as reason for the oppression. The way out of this cycle, he argued, was to either cure whites of the prejudice he believed existed, or to improve the circumstances of negroes, which would then disprove whites’ preconceived notions.
Unfortunately, the civil rights legislation that was passed during the 1960s had not disproved whites’ preconceived notions. Blacks continue to have a rate of violent crime that is nearly eight times the white rate. They continue to lag behind academically despite expensive efforts to improve their academic performance, like No Child Left Behind.
Although many people had high hopes for sub Saharan countries after they achieved independence, these hopes have been disappointed. The example of Haiti should have lead to a more sober appraisal of what black self rule would likely lead to.
Eighteen years since the end of apartheid in South Africa that country has one of the highest murder rates in the world.
South Africa has some of the highest incidences of child and baby rape in the world with more than 67,000 cases of rape and sexual assaults against children reported in 2000, with welfare groups believing that unreported incidents could be up to 10 times higher…
One in three of the 4,000 women questioned by the Community of Information, Empowerment and Transparency said they had been raped in the past year.[76] More than 25% of South African men questioned in a survey admitted to raping someone; of those, nearly half said they had raped more than one person.
If it was genetic why would not the large amount of rape by slaveowners melted a lot of the difference?
Going by posts in this thread, it ain’t so bad otherwise.
Average penis size by race is one of Professor Rushton’s assertions that I am not able to independently verify.
In in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male Alfred Kinsey said the differences were minimal, but but he seems to have made mistakes, so I would prefer additional substantiation.
Obviously those old rich white men had small penises, didn’t rape enough, and didn’t ejaculate far enough. Shame on them.
I have been trying to find reliable data on how the end of apartheid has effected the murder rate and the per capita gross domestic product. I believe the murder rate has been declining, but I do not know what it was before 1994.
I’m sure you would.
Of course, what you conveniently leave out of this little display is that the “circumstance” of the “negro” in the inner cities has not been improved and has, in fact, often deteriorated. You wave your hand at the Civil Rights legislation as if that had actually made improvements and then claim that its “success” proved that blacks were intrinsically worse. The Civil Rights legislation never really addressed the issues of povery, hopelessness, and despair. The money that might have made a difference under LBJ’s plan was sucked up to be wasted in the Vietnamese jungles. Through the 1970s, the money that might have made a difference was siphoned off by infaltion and a general downturn in the economy. By the 1980s, Reagan was able to simply turn much of it off. I don’t really know whether The Great Society might have worked. It is quite possible that it would have failed, regardless. However, pretending that it was actually implemented and saying that it failed because blacks were dumb is a gross error, since it was never implemented as planned. Needy Children Left Behind is another example of the same sort of thing. Little of it addressed the actual issues that kids in the inner city face and funding for it was never brought to the level that was deemed necessary by the people who formulated the plan. (It might still have failed, of course. I was never impressed by its stated plans, to begin with. However, pretending that it failed because black kids is dumb requires that one willfully ignore the ways in which it has also failed for all the kids who are not black.)
What the Civil Rights legislation proved, was that Congress can pass all sorts of laws that are simply not enforced if the local populace is in opposition–the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was still not effectively implemented in many places ten years later. And the preconceived notions of those whites who choose to indulge them have never been proven. All that has been proven is that if one traps a population in a hopeless situation, that population will often fare worse than people not so constrained.
You like to wave around percentages of poverty and crime, but you carefully avoid noting that those numbers are pretty much inner city numbers. Blacks in suburbia are no more likely to rob or murder their neighbors than are the whites among whom they live, while whites who are trapped in the inner city are just as likely to commit crimes as their black neighbors. By hiding behind aggregate numbers, you are able to pretend that you have found some profound truth, when you are really just perpetuating the false stereotypes from which you began your rants.
Hush, you ! Roll with it. I’m waiting for the part where he brings up the extensive phrenological evidence !
So you assert, given the quote I was replying to, that Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc. parents all treat their kids the same way? And that this is genetic?
First of all, there are individual variations. There are probably national variations also. Nevertheless, Orientals are less prone to have illegitimate children than whites, and they are less prone to get divorces.