Studies going back over 50 years have repeatedly arrived at the same conclusion -- racists have lower IQs than non-racists. The average intelligence quotient (IQ) of all members of the human race is 100 on the Stanford-Binet scale, as illustrated in the bell curves in the figure below. The average IQ of racists is up to 4 IQ points less than this (Montagu 1952 & 1988, Allport 1946, Frenkel-Brunswick and Sanford 1945). The reasons this is true are not entirely clear. Does racism attract the unintelligent or do the unintelligent default into racist mentalities? An exploration of this phenomenon can be most informative.
Yup! Most of them are thoroughly retarded, and need to be dragged out back and shot for great justice! So do us all a favor. Those who disagree with me, you are obviously retarded. Please take yourself out of the gene pool for the betterment of the human race! Kthx!
Recent studies show that researchers who study shit that everyone already knows are 40% more likely to be worthless sacks of crap than those who don't recieve grant money.
Let's think the unthinkable, let's do the undoable, let's prepare to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if we may not eff it after all. - Douglas Adams
Cracc wrote:Seriously tho. How, in a scientific study/poll. How do you define who is racist?
Someone who hates another merely for their race, religion, sexual orientation. This is usually because the hater thinks they are better than whoever they hate or doesn't understand them and therefore hates them, and wants to prevent their advancement and acceptance into society.
...and most of the posters on this board from libertarian to liberal to conservative.
Thinking you're better than someone else is key yes. I think we talked about that somewhere recently =p
Yup! Most of them are thoroughly retarded, and need to be dragged out back and shot for great justice! So do us all a favor. Those who disagree with me, you are obviously retarded. Please take yourself out of the gene pool for the betterment of the human race! Kthx!
classic
Seriously though, what a stupid study. Every person on earth is "prejudiced" about any multitude of issues. The study is a biased failure of science even though it proves out what everyone already knew - ignorance makes it easy to not see the other side.
Time makes more converts than reason. - Thomas Paine
So you're saying we should get to know the other side to better understand what? Are you really defending bigots and racists?
If we got to see the other side of say a KKK member, we'd find out they have a loving family, but a strange night life that involves burning crosses and harassing "the nigras", and we should accept them for that?
Rivera Bladestrike wrote:So you're saying we should get to know the other side to better understand what? Are you really defending bigots and racists?
If we got to see the other side of say a KKK member, we'd find out they have a loving family, but a strange night life that involves burning crosses and harassing "the nigras", and we should accept them for that?
You see, it's totally unintelligent interpretations like this that cast doubt on your more valid ideas.
Intolerance is a function of misunderstanding (ignorance). It seems that is common for you
Time makes more converts than reason. - Thomas Paine
Rivera Bladestrike wrote:So you're saying we should get to know the other side to better understand what? Are you really defending bigots and racists?
If we got to see the other side of say a KKK member, we'd find out they have a loving family, but a strange night life that involves burning crosses and harassing "the nigras", and we should accept them for that?
You see, it's totally unintelligent interpretations like this that cast doubt on your more valid ideas.
Intolerance is a function of misunderstanding (ignorance). It seems that is common for you
I prefer to move an argument in the area I want it to be, its called framing.
Who knows that Brotha posted may in fact be true... why? Because the SB IQ test truly tests how well you can succeed in school. While their have been updates the original test was normalized on white middle class males as were almost all other psychological exams. If it is true it just shows that we haven't done enough to make the test more appropriate for all Americans.
I was just trolling really, was hoping to get a lot more indignant liberal responses...kind of disappointing.
But yes, it is accurate from what I've read. That's not to say Africans are "dumber," they just don't do as well on IQ tests for a variety of reasons (social conditions a major one).
Freedom of speech makes it much easier to spot the idiots.
IQ tests have been proven to favor the American white male in score. This is because of cultural reasons, which is why IQ isn't as widely used. The original creator of the IQ test even wrote in a book that he designed the test to score blacks and women lower.
Brotha wrote:I was just trolling really, was hoping to get a lot more indignant liberal responses...kind of disappointing.
But yes, it is accurate from what I've read. That's not to say Africans are "dumber," they just don't do as well on IQ tests for a variety of reasons (social conditions a major one).
Heh, its not a real graph anyways. Only one axis? C'mon!
Brotha wrote:I was just trolling really, was hoping to get a lot more indignant liberal responses...kind of disappointing.
But yes, it is accurate from what I've read. That's not to say Africans are "dumber," they just don't do as well on IQ tests for a variety of reasons (social conditions a major one).
Actually this whole thread was a troll. Thanks for playing folks. =D
Cracc wrote:Seriously tho. How, in a scientific study/poll. How do you define who is racist?
Someone who hates another merely for their race, religion, sexual orientation. This is usually because the hater thinks they are better than whoever they hate or doesn't understand them and therefore hates them, and wants to prevent their advancement and acceptance into society.
i.e. Nazis, KKK, most of the south
Thats a pretty black and white way of looking at it, if racism is prejudicism(sp) on any level, then most of the worlds population qualifies as racist.
And im pretty sure that the racist that hates someone purely on the premise of said persons race/religion/sexual preference is rare.. usually there is a whole world of politics/ideologies/oppinions and such things underlying the hate.
For instance.. is a Bosnian that hates all Serbs for killing his people racist?
This is usually because the hater thinks they are better than whoever they hate or doesn't understand them and therefore hates them
Meaning the hate is unjustified to begin with and is merely hating another because they're different. Obviously a bosnian would hate serbs that have wronged them.
If you look into racism of today, a lot of people hate people of the islamic faith because they do not understand them and they associate with a small crowd. The KKK believes whites are superior to blacks because the blacks were once enslaved, why were they enslaved? Because they were different and they were not as techonoligically advanced to repel the attacks of Europoeans.
The bulk of the hate relies on differences being the cause of attacks, which then in effect enforced people's hatred.
Actually I don't take that article too seriously. Sorry to you people who I called retards. I was in fact merely trolling. Come on, look at the design, and the other articles on that guy's page. While he probably has some valid points, to say that he's biased would be an understatement.
While there probably is some correlation between ignorance and racism, I am not sure about IQ.
In fact, IQ tests are kind of pointless anyways. If I took an IQ test every week for a year I could probably score a 200.
There are somewhat smart people who are racist for whatever reason. You usually can't unteach racism, but a society of tolerance and understanding can be achieved.
I grew up an air force brat, at least up until 4th grade... but living in the microcosm that is military life, it was absent of racism. I grew up friends with people from all over, and I value that.
Lynks wrote:Midnyte, do you often wish people dead, or feel good about it, when they don't agree with your lifestyle?
Hmmm, where did I hear this before?
I never wish death upon anyone, unless they are murders, hurt children, etc.
I just find it laughable the outpouring this loser gets. If our President was shot and killed the same assholes would be screaming with joy. I just think posts like these show the true value of many of the idiots who post here on a daily basis. It also makes me feel like shit because I waste my time even talking to such vile disgusting pigs.
I would but only if it meant a stop to the current crap. The reason being that he has caused thousands of needless deaths, and has endangered our country. Not because he is racist. I consider him and his administration traitors to our country.
Rivera Bladestrike wrote:
Someone who hates another merely for their race, religion, sexual orientation. This is usually because the hater thinks they are better than whoever they hate or doesn't understand them and therefore hates them, and wants to prevent their advancement and acceptance into society.
i.e. Nazis, KKK, most of the south
Racism has nothing to do with your sexual orientation. Unless you (for whatever reason) think of homosexuals as a race.
I am not racist by any means, but I do have some reservations when it comes to the gay community.
I could probably be labelled as mildy homophobic, not fervently so.
Aruman wrote:
Racism has nothing to do with your sexual orientation. Unless you (for whatever reason) think of homosexuals as a race.
This is true...the correct term is prejudice.
-=Lohrno
Well, I assume that there are homosexuals that hate hetero's too to some degree or another, but unfortunately, because we are not what you would call a minority, it isn't considered to be prejudice.
your assumption is as baseless as your homophobia.
Lalanae Burundi High Chancellor for Tourism, Sodomy and Pie
Unofficial Canadian, Forbidden Lover of Pie, Jesus-Hatin'' Sodomite, President of KFC (Kyoukan Fan Club), hawt, perververted, intellectual submissive with E.S.P (Extra Sexual Persuasion)
This from one of the most prejudiced people on these boards. I like you, but you're definitely guilty of not thinking before you make statements.
Isn't it reasonable to assume that some gay people have contempt for non gay people, as a defense mechanism against perceived persecution? Seems based pretty solidly to me. Not necessarily reflective of a population, but a reasonable assumption.
Time makes more converts than reason. - Thomas Paine
Yeah, fuck jews and their race hatred for Germans. Ignorant kike bastards.
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
Rekaar. wrote:
Isn't it reasonable to assume that some gay people have contempt for non gay people, as a defense mechanism against perceived persecution? Seems based pretty solidly to me. Not necessarily reflective of a population, but a reasonable assumption.
It's not only reasonable, it is so.
Racism and prejudice stem from a lack of understanding and/or a bad experience. If you are homosexual, and you get nothing but "Hey fag! Go home and play with your dolls and playgirl magazines!" or "We don't serve homos here." I think you may have a bad idea of straight people no? =D
Sueven wrote:Do you honestly expect any liberals here to defend the contention that homosexuals are incapable of prejudice toward straight white males?
If anyone is willing to defend that, I'd be the in line to call them a fucking idiot.
Well.
Aruman wrote:Well, I assume that there are homosexuals that hate hetero's too to some degree or another, but unfortunately, because we are not what you would call a minority, it isn't considered to be prejudice.
Lalanae wrote:your assumption is as baseless as your homophobia.
It's far from baseless, as has been clearly stated.
Personally I interpreted Lalanae's statement to be criticizing Aruman's assumption that the prejudice of homosexual's would not be considered prejudice. As in "you are correct that some homosexual's may be prejudiced against heterosexuals, but your assumption that this is not referred to as prejudice is baseless." If my reading was incorrect, then I'll be happy to disagree with her.
I don't think one can really be prejudice of a striking majority. Usually prejudice is only in the case that the majority doesn't like a minority to thwart their power with numbers and influence. Even if they minority has no presense in their daily life.
Sueven wrote:Personally I interpreted Lalanae's statement to be criticizing Aruman's assumption that the prejudice of homosexual's would not be considered prejudice. As in "you are correct that some homosexual's may be prejudiced against heterosexuals, but your assumption that this is not referred to as prejudice is baseless." If my reading was incorrect, then I'll be happy to disagree with her.
I could see it being interpreted that way I suppose. The way I saw it:
Aruman wrote:Well, I assume that there are homosexuals that hate hetero's too to some degree or another, but unfortunately, because we are not what you would call a minority, it isn't considered to be prejudice.
Lalanae wrote:your assumption is as baseless as your homophobia.
