Do you have a problem with interracial couples having kids? - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

Do you have a problem with interracial couples having kids?

Yes
10
11%
No
73
80%
Other
8
9%
By Syd
#13134069
Dr House wrote:Should I base my judgement of Northern European aesthetics on Margaret Thatcher?


Most definitely you can; an individuals view won't change a large groups view.
User avatar
By dudekebm
#13134140
Dr. House wrote:Sonia Sotomayor is an ugly old hag and unrepresentative of the apprearance of the average Puerto Rican woman. Should I base my judgement of Northern European aesthetics on Margaret Thatcher?

Puerto Rican women are very attractive.


Actually I second Dr. House on this one. I work with a woman of Puerto Rican descent and she's pretty hot (don't tell my fiance :) ). Also, unless you've been living under a rock for the past 20 years, Jennifer Lopez anyone ?

But you have the aesthetically very ugly and very beautiful no matter what the ethnic background. And there is also the statement that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

As far as Sonia Sotomayor and her genes being kept out of the gene pool: if they can isolate the genetic marker for 'self-serving politician with an agenda', I'd agree with this. Of course, this would not only exclude not only her but pretty much every politician, even those with Dave's Northern European genetic ideal.

Dave, normally I respect your views and agree with a lot of them but I can't abide by racial purity thing. Letting America go down the tubes as far as losing our European cultural heritage I can agree with; I frankly hate the bullshit revisionist history being taught to our young people today all in the name of being politically correct.

But from a scientific standpoint all attempts at racial purity only ends up eventually with inbreeding after a few generations. Look at the British Royal Family and their whole history; they should be thankful they had some Germans come into that family in the beginning of the last century and that Princess Diana actually got married in and produced a couple of heirs to let the gene pool breathe a bit or else the next generation or so would have been freakish pinheads you'd normally see in the backwoods of East Texas where people marry their first cousins.

My views on this are probably affected by my own background and my fiance's: I'm pretty much a mutt with Western European mixed with Slavic and possibly Ashkenazi genes, and my fiance is as well, Irish-German combined with Hispanic (Mexican) and Lord knows what else.
User avatar
By Dr House
#13134146
dudekebm wrote:Actually I second Dr. House on this one. I work with a woman of Puerto Rican descent and she's pretty hot (don't tell my fiance ). Also, unless you've been living under a rock for the past 20 years, Jennifer Lopez anyone ?

But you have the aesthetically very ugly and very beautiful no matter what the ethnic background.

Puerto Rican women tend to be very attractive on average, which is what I was referring to. Isolated examples do not speak to the general trend.

dudekebm wrote:And there is also the statement that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

There are traits which are more or less universally considered beautiful.

dudekebm wrote:My views on this are probably affected by my own background and my fiance's: I'm pretty much a mutt with Western European mixed with Slavic and possibly Ashkenazi genes, and my fiance is as well, Irish-German combined with Hispanic (Mexican) and Lord knows what else.

Hispanic is not a race or an ethnicity, just FYI.
User avatar
By dudekebm
#13134150
Dr. House wrote:There are traits which are more or less universally considered beautiful.

Agreed. Two arms, two legs, and no freakish features, along with a nice smile, good hygeine and not grotesquely obese or skinny is pretty much the universal here.

However, there are differences in people's perception of beauty. For example, as far as female beauty, some folks like the current model aesthetic (i.e. tall, svelte, subtle curves) whereas there are others who prefer the more shapely woman (i.e. any height, very curvy, "baby got back"). Some may even focus on the aspects of certain body parts (i.e. female breasts). As far as male 'beauty', (to probably give a bit of TMI here) I'm actually glad I landed a fiance who didn't like the current metrosexual norm as far as male hirsuteness as for one thing I grew a beard mainly because shaving became such a pain to do twice a day and for another I didn't feel like getting waxed all over my body every few months (can put the $$$ to better use).

Dr. House wrote:Hispanic is not a race or an ethnicity, just FYI.


Sorry...my bad...I should have just said Mexican Mestizo on her mother's side instead. She does consider herself pretty much a 1/2 Latina though. Frankly, I couldn't care less either way - I love her and we're getting married end of October. ;)
Last edited by dudekebm on 19 Aug 2009 19:03, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Nets
#13134154
No.
User avatar
By Dave
#13134166
dudekebm wrote:And there is also the statement that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Sort of. The phi mask is a human universal for beautiful facial geometry, clear unblemished skin is too, as is waist-hip ratio near theta. Light hair and eye color are also preferred by most cultures that are aware of them, though this one is subject to more personal preference than some other things.

dudekebm wrote:But from a scientific standpoint all attempts at racial purity only ends up eventually with inbreeding after a few generations. Look at the British Royal Family and their whole history; they should be thankful they had some Germans come into that family in the beginning of the last century and that Princess Diana actually got married in and produced a couple of heirs to let the gene pool breathe a bit or else the next generation or so would have been freakish pinheads you'd normally see in the backwoods of East Texas where people marry their first cousins.

No group accepted as a race is anywhere close to being sufficiently inbred to result in the kind of proliferation of genetic diseases you're alluding to, and most hunter-gatherers had breeding groups under 150 people in the first place. As for the British Royal Family, the Germans in question came in three centuries ago with the Hanoverians, and there was an additional German infusion when Victoria married Albert Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. Queen Elizabeth II, by the way, married a Greek.

From a scientific standpoint, on the other hand, racial hybridization can result in the loss of co-evolved adaptations to particular local conditions (esp. certain diseases), and and the low genetic similarity of the offspring compared to his parents means a weaker parent-child bond, hence the higher rate of child abandonment and abuse with miscegenated children. This is completely aside from my aversion to the introduction of alleles that would change the physical appearance of my people.
User avatar
By ThereBeDragons
#13134188
Wouldn't mixing of gene pools introduce beneficial alleles as well as detrimental ones?
User avatar
By Dave
#13134199
ThereBeDragons wrote:Wouldn't mixing of gene pools introduce beneficial alleles as well as detrimental ones?

Of course.
User avatar
By Figlio di Moros
#13134453
Dr House wrote:Puerto Rican women are very attractive.


As are plenty of caribean and latina women; brazilians are particularly well known for their beauty.

Dave wrote:The phi mask is a human universal for beautiful facial geometry, clear unblemished skin is too, as is waist-hip ratio near theta. Light hair and eye color are also preferred by most cultures that are aware of them, though this one is subject to more personal preference than some other things.


To reiterate the previious, Latina's, and especially brazilians, are considered the most beautiful women, and that's followed closely by most people with Mediterranean and semetic women. I think most people would agree a women with a tan, brown or black hair, and darker eyes is more beautiful than the same women of pale skin, blue eyes and blonde hair.

Dave wrote:From a scientific standpoint, on the other hand, racial hybridization can result in the loss of co-evolved adaptations to particular local conditions (esp. certain diseases), and and the low genetic similarity of the offspring compared to his parents means a weaker parent-child bond, hence the higher rate of child abandonment and abuse with miscegenated children. This is completely aside from my aversion to the introduction of alleles that would change the physical appearance of my people.


And, as you admit, miscegenation can incorporate beneficial alleles across phenotypical racial constructs. With a positive eugenics program to limit the risk of damages, there's no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
User avatar
By Dave
#13134463
Figlio de gli moros wrote:To reiterate the previious, Latina's, and especially brazilians, are considered the most beautiful women, and that's followed closely by most people with Mediterranean and semetic women.

Really? By whom? You, I presume. Hell, most of Brazil's models come from the southernmost provinces which were populated by...Germans. Where Brazil wins is that the higher African admixture down there definitely means better T&A.

Figlio de gli moros wrote: I think most people would agree a women with a tan, brown or black hair, and darker eyes is more beautiful than the same women of pale skin, blue eyes and blonde hair.

If most people would agree with this, then why do blondes attract so much more male attention? Light-colored eyes also merit more sexual attention. Bottle blondes are incredibly common, and many Mediterranean women dye their hair blonde. And when women put in colored contacts, it isn't the brown lenses they go for. This isn't new either, the Greeks and Romans often put blonde hair and blue eyes on statues of Aphrodite/Venus, and Roman women paid small fortune to get blonde wigs from Rhine maidens. I'll grant you the tan (though not too tan), but fair women are also a universal sexual preference and among duskier races it's common for women to actually harm themselves in pursuit of fairer skin. Northern Europeans also come closer to matching the phi mask in facial geometry and have higher levels of facial symmetry.

Figlio de gli moros wrote:And, as you admit, miscegenation can incorporate beneficial alleles across phenotypical racial constructs. With a positive eugenics program to limit the risk of damages, there's no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Of course.
By Einherjar
#13134482
Roman women did indeed buy blonde hair from German women and used ceruse to lighten their skin. I don't know whether this is a universal trend or a result of the exoticness caused by the Roman encounter with those exceedingly white women in the same way that modern Northern European women like to get their skin darkened by standing in the sun (and risking skin cancer). I suspect it is the former though.
User avatar
By Dave
#13134499
For the record, skin cancers are not a major risk in Northern Europeans provided we don't use sun block or, especially, consume large amounts of polyunsaturated fats. Everyone in my family tans quite nicely and there is no history of skin cancer.
User avatar
By Figlio di Moros
#13134529
Dave wrote:Really? By whom? You, I presume. Hell, most of Brazil's models come from the southernmost provinces which were populated by...Germans. Where Brazil wins is that the higher African admixture down there definitely means better T&A.


We certainly agree on T&A, but most often the Brazilian models are a bit darker than most german women; even if there's more german in them, they miscegenist history of Brazil grants their women better alleles from other racial groups.

Dave wrote:If most people would agree with this, then why do blondes attract so much more male attention? Light-colored eyes also merit more sexual attention. Bottle blondes are incredibly common, and many Mediterranean women dye their hair blonde. And when women put in colored contacts, it isn't the brown lenses they go for. This isn't new either, the Greeks and Romans often put blonde hair and blue eyes on statues of Aphrodite/Venus, and Roman women paid small fortune to get blonde wigs from Rhine maidens. I'll grant you the tan (though not too tan), but fair women are also a universal sexual preference and among duskier races it's common for women to actually harm themselves in pursuit of fairer skin. Northern Europeans also come closer to matching the phi mask in facial geometry and have higher levels of facial symmetry.


What are you basing this on, a cosmo article? :lol:

Try flipping through a male magizine; blondes are increasingly rare and embody more and more non-nordic features, such as darker skin, larger asses, fuller lips, etc. Yeah, black women may not be particularly prevelent, but latinesque women are quite popular, and to be quite frank, those men I know who specifically find interest in blonde women also think they should look like 12 y/o boys with long hair.

Dave wrote:Of course.


So, then we agree black women ought to be included in any positive eugenics programs for their particular contributes to female beauty?
User avatar
By Dave
#13134536
Figlio de gli moros wrote:We certainly agree on T&A, but most often the Brazilian models are a bit darker than most german women; even if there's more german in them, they miscegenist history of Brazil grants their women better alleles from other racial groups.

Or, they live in Brazil and spend more time in the sun...

Figlio de gli moros wrote:What are you basing this on, a cosmo article? :lol:

Do you dispute any of it?

Figlio de gli moros wrote:Try flipping through a male magizine; blondes are increasingly rare and embody more and more non-nordic features, such as darker skin, larger asses, fuller lips, etc. Yeah, black women may not be particularly prevelent, but latinesque women are quite popular.

It's media, and therefore full of anti-white propaganda. In the 1995 video re-release of Cinderella Disney for whatever reason chose to invest money in darkening many of the characters. If you look at the media images in countries not affected by multicultist propaganda, it's a different story. The actresses on telenovelas look like they were casted by David Duke, and in India the first thing asked about a woman is if she's fair. In the real world blondes still rule.

Figlio de gli moros wrote:So, then we agree black women ought to be included in any positive eugenics programs for their particular contributes to female beauty?

I would say genetic engineering program as I'm not aware of how you could introduce positive black appearance alleles without the horrible hair, facial geometry, excessive musculature, etc. You could also simply conduct a parallel program for blacks.
User avatar
By ThereBeDragons
#13134539
I would say genetic engineering program as I'm not aware of how you could introduce positive black appearance alleles without the horrible hair, facial geometry, excessive musculature, etc. You could also simply conduct a parallel program for blacks.

Sterilization, abortion, population control. You know, all that stuff that eugenics is good at.
User avatar
By Dave
#13134542
ThereBeDragons wrote:Sterilization, abortion, population control. You know, all that stuff that eugenics is good at.

Of course, but this kind of thing would take very many generations--just consider how long it took to create various breeds of dog. It would be much faster to simply isolate the genes in question and introduce them via other means, such as resequencing or retrovirus. The immediate strategy should be full-scale eugenics programs while conducting research into genetic engineering, and introducing various genetic engineering techniques as they are practicable and safe.
User avatar
By ThereBeDragons
#13134551
Dave wrote:Of course, but this kind of thing would take very many generations--just consider how long it took to create various breeds of dog. It would be much faster to simply isolate the genes in question and introduce them via other means, such as resequencing or retrovirus. The immediate strategy should be full-scale eugenics programs while conducting research into genetic engineering, and introducing various genetic engineering techniques as they are practicable and safe.

Most modern breeds of dog date only from Victorian times, and the Soviets basically bred foxes into dogs after about ten generations. That's still a long time in human terms, but wouldn't the proposed policy be fine with gradual change over time? It's not like anyone plans to make all babies born after 2040 genetically ideal.
User avatar
By Dave
#13134556
ThereBeDragons wrote:Most modern breeds of dog date only from Victorian times, and the Soviets basically bred foxes into dogs after about ten generations. That's still a long time in human terms, but wouldn't the proposed policy be fine with gradual change over time? It's not like anyone plans to make all babies born after 2040 genetically ideal.

That would indeed be fine, but 10 generations in human terms is in short-generation case 140 years. Genetic engineering techniques mean that planning for such "breeds" via normal methods is silly given how rapidly the science is advancing. Better to structure negative eugenics programs to eliminating "undesirable" people for now and positive eugenics programs increasing the numbers of "desirable" people rather than experimenting to see if you can get a white girl with african booty or what not.
User avatar
By MistyTiger
#13134564
Dave wrote:If most people would agree with this, then why do blondes attract so much more male attention? Light-colored eyes also merit more sexual attention. Bottle blondes are incredibly common, and many Mediterranean women dye their hair blonde. And when women put in colored contacts, it isn't the brown lenses they go for. This isn't new either, the Greeks and Romans often put blonde hair and blue eyes on statues of Aphrodite/Venus, and Roman women paid small fortune to get blonde wigs from Rhine maidens. I'll grant you the tan (though not too tan), but fair women are also a universal sexual preference and among duskier races it's common for women to actually harm themselves in pursuit of fairer skin. Northern Europeans also come closer to matching the phi mask in facial geometry and have higher levels of facial symmetry.


I agree. If you have ever watched Telenovelas, most of the Latinas have dyed their hair blonde or some lighter shade than their natural black or dark brown hair. Most female celebs have dyed their hair blonde, when their hair is not naturally that color...Jennifer Lopez, Lindsay Lohan, Britney Spears, Beyonce Knowles, etc. I have one Hispanic friend (do not know if he is Mexican or what), who has had at least 2 girlfriends who have had fair skin, blonde hair, and blue eyes. Coincidence, I think not. He is not representative of all Hispanics, but I just cited him as an example. I actually used to like the fair and blue-eyed look. And I do believe that most women like blue contacts. Blue eyes can be beautiful, but they can also look very empty and glassy and cold.

Also, there is this idea that blondes have more fun and that they are more wild. That probably has to do with the vikings and how rugged and independent they were.
US Supreme Court Watch

@Doug64 It's also anathema to the Left, as is a[…]

CRT

If the argument is that systemic discrimination i[…]

I absolutely agree with you @wat0n that efforts[…]

Okay, then say what you want to say here, using t[…]