# SDMB Bigoted Asshole Omnibus Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 29, 2012, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489 "2012-05-29T22:59:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 52
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1021 "2012-06-07T14:54:42Z")
Look up “post hoc, ergo propter hoc”. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1022 "2012-06-07T14:56:12Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > It certainly does indicate genetic propensities toward inferior intelligence and crime. Says you, with no evidence. > [@](#): > > In 1900 the United States was full of impoverished immigrants from Europe. The murder rate was estimated at 1.2 percent per 100,000 inhabitants. > > [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_countries\_by\_intentional\_homicide\_rate\_to\_1999#1900s](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate_to_1999#1900s) > > Currently it is 4.8 percent, after rising to 10.2 percent in 1980. > > [United States Crime Rates 1960 t0 2019](http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm) > > Clearly other factors influence the crime rate in addition to poverty. An important factor is the likelihood and severity of punishment. Since 1980 the prison population has tripled. > > [Home | Bureau of Justice Statistics](http://bjs.gov/content/glance/corrtyp.cfm) > > In 1900 several hundred people were executed every year. Conditions in prisons were worse than now. Police frequently beat suspects under custody. This was an obvious violation of the Forth Amendment. It also seems to have been effective. You’re using “percent” wrong. There is zero genetic evidence in all these cites. And you haven’t addressed how your use of “race” contradicts genetic data. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1023 "2012-06-07T14:57:36Z")
> [@Ramira](#): > > It is difficult to know who NDD and Brazil84 think they are duping by this egalitarian hypothesis straw man. Yes, I really don’t understand this. **brazil84** is waging a one-man war on the fervent proponents of the Egalitarian Hypothesis, who number exactly zero in this thread. Who is he talking to? ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1024 "2012-06-07T14:59:43Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Yes, I really don’t understand this. **brazil84** is waging a one-man war on the fervent proponents of the Egalitarian Hypothesis, who number exactly zero in this thread. Who is he talking to? The imagined groans of all the wraiths he’s “banned,” presumably. ---
**Author:** ![Who\_me\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/958977/32.png) [@Who\_me\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Who_me_1)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1025 "2012-06-07T15:06:22Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Yes, I really don’t understand this. **brazil84** is waging a one-man war on the fervent proponents of the Egalitarian Hypothesis, who number exactly zero in this thread. Who is he talking to? I’d never heard of it before brazil84 posted about it and I haven’t any urge to find out what it is. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1026 "2012-06-07T15:09:04Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Yes, I really don’t understand this. **brazil84** is waging a one-man war on the fervent proponents of the Egalitarian Hypothesis, who number exactly zero in this thread. Who is he talking to? Those who explain away persistent racial differences in average aptitude and behavior certainly seem to believe in the Egalitarian Hypothesis, or at least an approximation of it. ---
**Author:** ![Ramira](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ramira/32/344_2.png) [@Ramira](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ramira)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1027 "2012-06-07T15:09:40Z")
It is clear it is a straw man because it is easier to make self congratulations, than to present any clear idea of what the races they are claiming are in a fashion that is scientific. I do not even understand the crime argument because it is entirely contradicted by the evidences internationally. ---
**Author:** ![Ramira](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ramira/32/344_2.png) [@Ramira](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ramira)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1028 "2012-06-07T15:13:46Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > Those who explain away persistent racial differences in average aptitude and behavior certainly seem to believe in the Egalitarian Hypothesis, or at least an approximation of it. What is that approximation? Is it another of the not defined things you use to hide from the incoherences of your arguments and to ignore that you have no data? The majority of the argument against you is simple science that says the races are not genetical and coherent. But you ignore the inconvenient refutations of your American based claims. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1029 "2012-06-07T15:19:20Z")
> [@Telemark](#): > > Perhaps they have an average IQ of 54? Nah, if NDD had an IQ of 54, he’d already be gone, having taken his laptop into the shower or crashed in mid-post while driving down the freeway or some such misadventure. It’s a specialized form of willful blindness, not generic stupidity, that enables someone to actually operate a computer while remaining oblivious to the obvious absurdity of the claim that a long-existing society is composed of people with an average IQ of 54. This phenomenon is why you see otherwise normal and functional people who believe in Moon-Hoaxism or Birtherism or 9-11-Truthism or any of a plethora of other flapdoodle. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1030 "2012-06-07T15:26:52Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > They should not be compared with whites with IQs of 54, Well, if you’re going to admit up front that all your statistics are irrelevant because they compare things that should not be compared, I guess we can wrap up this thread. > [@](#): > > because they almost certainly have mental abilities the whites would not have. > [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Like what? Telepathy? I’m trying to imagine a telepath with an IQ of 54. I guess if such a person encountered someone who ranted and raved “I will destroy you!”, the subsequent pronouncement “I sense anger” would, in fact, be an insightful revelation. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1031 "2012-06-07T15:32:04Z")
> [@pravnik](#): > > The idea that the average IQ among the San is 54 is _laughable_. Literally laugh out loud laughable. The really laughable thing is that **NDD** apparently _still_ doesn’t understand why we are roundly mocking his arguments. The reason, for those just tuning in at home, is that they resemble past discredited arguments in the same vein, differing only in that the new assertions (e.g. a long-functioning society of people whose average IQ is 54) are even less credible than the old ones. **NDD** is in the position of someone who is following a series of 200-MPG carburetor hucksters, all of whom have been hooted off the stage, and proceeds to make his pitch for his _2000_-MPG carburetor. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > The San IQ of 54 is laughable not only because it’s so low, but because _there is no IQ data on the San._ The author of the book NDD quotes did not go get data about the San, he _made it up._ He guessed. He called it an “estimate”, based on IQ tests of regional neighbors, but even these tests were deficient. That just makes it all the more laughable that the author could have made up any number at all, and chose a facially absurd one. It’s like a child asked to explain what happened to the cookies, and spinning a tale about a theft by space aliens instead of trying to blame his little brother or something. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1032 "2012-06-07T15:48:04Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > It certainly does indicate genetic propensities toward inferior intelligence and crime. > > In 1900 the United States was full of impoverished immigrants from Europe. The murder rate was estimated at 1.2 percent per 100,000 inhabitants. …and black people, then as now, made up about 12% of the population (8.8 million out of 76.1 million total). If your argument holds water, the crime rate should have been roughly comparable; after all, black people are genetically predisposed to murder and pillage, you say. Strangely, it wasn’t. How do you explain that? ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1033 "2012-06-07T15:50:05Z")
Man, this thread moves fast. > [@brazil84](#): > > So you are saying that he might be right about the genetic basis for the black/white iq gap, but that his conclusions do not follow from his analysis? You’re getting vaguely warmer but not yet close. I’m saying two things here: 1. “Black” and “white” as **NDD** appears to define them do not exist as genetic groupings. As such, I’m not saying what you say I’m saying any more than if we were discussing whether there was an IQ gap between “green” and “blue” people. 2. I am not automatically assuming that comparisons of any two group of people using any particular criteria will (or indeed will not) produce results showing statistically significant differences. > [@](#): > > I don’t know, since I’m not yet sure what you mean when you say that a group doesn’t exist. It means it doesn’t exist. “One whole race of black people who share commonalities of genotype that are not shared by non-blacks” is not a real group. > [@](#): > > Let me ask you this, do the following groups “exist”? > > (1) All persons born on the island of Ceylon between the years 1950 and 1970. Yes. The criteria are in the descriptor. > [@](#): > > (2) All persons who hold citizenship in a Scandinavian country. Yes, assuming that we’re not quibbling about which countries are in Scandanavia and what constitutes “citizenship”. > [@](#): > > (3) Ethnic Germans I am aware of people who identify as “ethnic Germans” as a cultural group. I believe this is a self-reported category, however - you’re an ethnic German if you say you are. > [@](#): > > (4) Ashkenazim A more tightly defined cultural group. Also (if the evidence cited in this thread is correct) it is a specific genetic grouping. Note that the two definitions of the group will heavily overlap but are not necessarily exactly the same. > [@](#): > > (5) Mongoloids As an arbitrary designation by Rushton/ **NDD**? Sure. On a genotypical basis? Not remotely. > [@](#): > > (6) Labrador Retrievers I know nothing about dog breeds and make no arguments about them so whatever the kennel club says constitutes a labrador retriever is fine by me. > [@](#): > > (7) All persons with type O blood. Again, the criteria for inclusion is in the category. So 1, 2, and 7 contain their own criteria. 3 is self-reported. 4 can be self-reported or by other cultural or genetic criteria (as long as you define the criteria you’re using). 6 has various professional bodies defining the criteria for inclusion. Which leaves 5, a term previously used in various contexts and now largely discarded as meaningless except by a few fringe researchers and followers. It exists as a group according to whatever **NDD** said upthread, but it does not share a exclusive commonality of genotypes. So now what? > [@me](#): > > This is a bad argument: “Population X share a phenotype and a geographic and cultural background. They do Y. They must therefore also share a genotype to which we can attribute Y.” Do you not understand why this is a bad argument? > [@](#): > > Sure. Has anyone in this thread made that argument? Or are you simply setting up a strawman? It is pretty much **NDD** ’s basic argument. Take a group linked by appearance (sub-Saharan Africans) or country (Chinese) or socio-economic groups (American blacks, Jews). Throw out various statistics about those groups. Assume that the statistics show something about genetics. Check out post #1020 for a recent example. > [@](#): > > It’s a perfectly reasonable question. You asserted that a group exists as a genetic grouping if it has “common or related genotypes.” > > Since all humans have common or related genotypes, it follows by your definition that any subset of the human species exists as a genetic grouping. Umm…I think you’ve misunderstood something. Or you’ve excluded a middle somewhere. > [@](#): > > For example, the following set of people {people born on Ceylon + people who reside in New York City} all have common or related genotypes since they are all human beings. Yep, excluded middle. You seem to be skipping the idea that one can group people by genetic characteristics at some level between “individual” and “everybody in the world”. No one is saying that there aren’t. We’re just saying that **NDD** ’s way of doing so is wrong. You can certainly talk about people born on Ceylon (Sri Lanka, surely?) who live in NYC as a subculture or as a sociological grouping. But if you want to talk about their genes, as distinct from people not in that group, you’d have to be able to demonstrate that there are in fact a coherent and distinct group genetically first. > [@](#): > > I assume that you meant something more with your definition which is why I am asking you the question. > > Again: > > And do people outside of the grouping have to lack such common or related genotypes in order for the group to “exist”? > > It’s a simple yes or no question. It depends on your criteria. But if you want to demonstrate Trait X as characteristic of Group Y AND not characteristic of Group Z, then you had better be able to demonstrate the difference between Group Y and Group Z. And if your claim is that the difference is genetic, you need to be able to establish the genetic difference. If you need that in monosyllabic terms, that’s closer to “yes” than “no”. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1034 "2012-06-07T15:56:10Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > Those who explain away persistent racial differences in average aptitude and behavior certainly seem to believe in the Egalitarian Hypothesis, or at least an approximation of it. So it seems to you that people who disagree with you vaguely agreed with something like this other thing that no one has actually cited? I don’t know whether you’re strawmanning or just really confused. Here, as they say, is the thing. The vast majority of the arguments made against you say nothing at all about differences in racial groups. What they do say is that your argument is poorly constructed, your data is questionable at best and manufactured at worst, your criteria are ill-defined and your citations are largely irrelevant. We’re not saying everyone is equal; we’re saying that all you’ve proved repeatedly is a fundamental failure to apply the scientific method correctly. And that would be true _even if_ the genetic differences between populations do exist. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1035 "2012-06-07T16:09:12Z")
I think that we can all agree that as mammals maintaining our temperature is important for brain function. As the human race entered Europe, the decreased surface area of attached earlobes helped reduce the surface area that was exposed to the cold northern air. This allowed those individuals with attached earlobes brain to function better, thus we need to round up all the danglers and force them onto plantations for their own good. Cuz them danglers are a cummin for our JORBS!! ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1036 "2012-06-07T16:10:19Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’ve always wondered what it would be like to have delusions of grandeur and persecution… Are there any politically controversial issues where your views go against those expressed by the majority of the people you hang out with? Just wondering. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1037 "2012-06-07T16:13:49Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > Eventually the walls of political correctness will be torn down as dramatically as the Berlin Wall was, and it will once again be safe to say in public what most people have always known to be true. On that glorious day, the Arizona studio where the moon landings were filmed will be opened to public tours, the Bush Administration apparatchiks who orchestrated the 9-11 attacks will be arrested for treason, and Barack Obama’s Kenyan birth certificate will be encased in the Smithsonian. Really, are you utterly oblivious to how much your excuses that people reject your arguments becuse of bias and conspiracy (rather than because they have been tried and found wanting) makes you sound like a crank? ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1038 "2012-06-07T16:38:24Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > 1. “Black” and “white” as **NDD** appears to define them do not exist as genetic groupings. Are there any consequences to this claim? Or is it simply an observation you are making? > [@](#): > > It means it doesn’t exist. Lol, that doesn’t shed any light on what you mean. > [@](#): > > Yes. The criteria are in the descriptor. So any group which is described by criteria “exists” in your view? > [@](#): > > I am aware of people who identify as “ethnic Germans” as a cultural group. I believe this is a self-reported category, however - you’re an ethnic German if you say you are. Umm, does “ethnic Germans” exist or not? It’s a simple yes or no question. > [@](#): > > A more tightly defined cultural group. Also (if the evidence cited in this thread is correct) it is a specific genetic grouping. Note that the two definitions of the group will heavily overlap but are not necessarily exactly the same. Umm, does “Ashkenazim” exist or not? > [@](#): > > As an arbitrary designation by Rushton/NDD? Sure. On a genotypical basis? Not remotely. Does “Mongoloids” exist or not? > [@](#): > > It is pretty much NDD’s basic argument. I see nothing in post 1020 which contains this argument. Can you quote him where he does so? > [@](#): > > Umm…I think you’ve misunderstood something. Or you’ve excluded a middle somewhere.Yep, excluded middle. You seem to be skipping the idea that one can group people by genetic characteristics at some level between “individual” and “everybody in the world”. I’m not skipping any ideas – I’m simply trying to apply the criteria you laid out. You asserted that a group exists as a genetic grouping if it has “common or related genotypes.” Agreed? And do you agree that all humans have “common or related genotypes” by virtue of being members of the same species? (Simple yes or no question) Therefore, it follows that any subset of humanity you care to choose will be a group of people with “common or related genotypes” Agreed? Therefore, by your criteria, such a group “exists as a genetic grouping.” Right? > [@](#): > > You can certainly talk about people born on Ceylon (Sri Lanka, surely?) who live in NYC as a subculture or as a sociological grouping. But if you want to talk about their genes, as distinct from people not in that group, you’d have to be able to demonstrate that there are in fact a coherent and distinct group genetically first. And what are the criteria for determining whether a group is “coherent and distinct”? Is it the same as for determining whether a group “exists”? If it’s something else, please tell me. > [@](#): > > It depends on your criteria. We’re talking about your criteria here – not mine. > [@](#): > > But if you want to demonstrate Trait X as characteristic of Group Y AND not characteristic of Group Z, then you had better be able to demonstrate the difference between Group Y and Group Z. All I am trying to do with my question is nail down your criteria for determining whether a group “exists” or not. You have asserted, in essence, that “blacks” does not “exist.” What is it about blacks as a group makes you conclude that the group does not “exist”? And does the same reasoning apply to other groups? ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1039 "2012-06-07T16:43:31Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > On this board I have spoken out against AA, gender quotas and the like several times. I haven’t needed to suggest “blacks are teh dumb” to do it. Turning back to the example of firemens’ examinations, if (1)society accepts that blacks are genetically less intelligent than whites; and (2) black scores on the examinations are completely in line with this gap, do you agree it would weaken the argument that there must have been racial discrimination? > [@](#): > > I maintain the central motivation in saying “this group has a lower average IQ than that group” is really to justify “Your group is inferior, and you are inferior to me because you belong to that group”. So you are pretty confident that NDD is either Oriental or Ashkenazi, correct? > [@](#): > > I was talking about people trying to interpret information in a way that justifies their bigotry. Not handling the truth implies something different to this. Call it whatever you want – the fact that some people might misuse the truth about racial differences does not make it any less true. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1040 "2012-06-07T16:45:18Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Yes, I really don’t understand this. **brazil84** is waging a one-man war on the fervent proponents of the Egalitarian Hypothesis, who number exactly zero in this thread. Who is he talking to? Apparently not you. So you accept that intelligence and other important psychological traits may not be equally distributed among the races in terms of genetic predisposition? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489.md?page=51) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489.md?page=53)