The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Interracial and Intersexual Homicide, US 2019
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The FBI breaks offenders and victims down into three racial categories–White, Black, and Other. Most Hispanics are consequently included in the White figures while Asians, American Indians, and people of mixed race are amalgamated into the Other category. All figures exclude homicides in which the race or sex of the offender is unknown:

While whites (including many Hispanics) constitute 76% of the country’s population, they perpetrate just 31% of the interracial homicide that takes place within its borders. Peculiar characteristic of a putatively white supremacist society, that.

Most murder, like most violent crime in general, is intraracial. Interracial murder represents 15.7% of all homicide. Some 84.3% of all murderers and murder victims are of the same race, broadly defined.

Maybe the idea of systemic racism against non-whites has a tough time withstanding the empirical realities of criminal activity in America, but The Patriarchy doesn’t get off the hook so easily:

Men are far more likely to kill other men than they are to kill women, though women are over twice as likely to kill men as they are to kill other women. Because men do the lion’s share (89.6%) of the murdering, this works out to 32.6% of homicides involving an offender and victim of opposite sex and 67.4% involving people of the same sex.

 
• Category: Culture/Society, Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Crime 
Hide 50 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Twinkie says:

    It’s really quite simple. Whatever the variations among Whites, Hispanics, and Asians in criminality (which appears to me to be approximately, 1, 1.25-1.5, and 0.25-0.5, respectively), it pales in comparison to that of blacks. Crime, particularly violent crime, skews very heavily toward male, young, and black.

    Some years back, I proposed a simple index, with which to compare (theoretical) crime suppression capacity in each city in America – it was basically calculating the ratio of the number of young black males in the population to that of uniformed police officers in the given jurisdiction.

    No one took that up, obviously.

    • Thanks: Blinky Bill
    • Replies: @res
  2. Simple arithmetic for those who have not already done it or read about it:

    24.9 % White kills Black, divided into the approximate White (plus Hispanic) percentage of the US population = 24.9 / 75 = 0.332

    57.3 % Black kills White, divided into the approximate Black percentage of the US population = 57.3 / 13 = 4.41

    So, the real difference, per capita or anyway you want to realistically view it, between White on Black murder vs. Black on White murder is roughly 0.332 vs. 4.41. That means, once again, that Blacks are more than 13 times more likely, per capita, to commit interracial murder against Whites who supposedly dominate them and keep them down.

    13 Times more likely. 13 Times more violent. 13 Times more hateful. 13 Times more “systemically racist.”

  3. nebulafox says:

    Black people are 12% of the American populace.

    Normally, women don’t engage in murder. So, we’re down to 6% already, maybe 7 if we’re being generous for exceptions.

    Normally, people over the age of 40 and under the age of 15 also don’t engage in murder, so reduce that percentage further. Bare minimum, we’re probably well under 5% now, and that’s with a rather… generous window for “young male”. You can push it further and just check everybody between 18 and 35.

    People who come from middle-class or above backgrounds also usually aren’t homicidal, so got to filter that percentage further.

    I don’t have the exact percentage that’s left, but it’s going to be damned small to be contributing to over half the murders in your country, you know? And this in a country where the local whites and Hispanics aren’t exactly Swiss or Japanese, either.

    • Replies: @anon
  4. nebulafox says:

    >The Patriarchy doesn’t get off the hook so easily:

    CancelFact of the day: men are the majority of murderers and retards for the same reason that men are the majority of leaders and geniuses.

    Testosterone and evolutionarily being expendable just makes it more likely that you’ll be at the extremes of human nature: it says nothing about whether it is a good or a bad extreme. I’d argue that the two are more intertwined than polite society likes to admit. We want good, clean, wholesome… and I’d argue sterile impulses to be behind the good stuff. The HR and MBA types don’t get it. You got to put up with some of the harsh craziness and abrasive intensity that might otherwise manifest in violence (and that can be positively channeled, say, in Special Forces or the USMC for other kinds of men) to get the really creative code or algorithms.

    No, this does not excuse domestic abuse. But no society-ever-is going to have more peaceful men than women.

    • Agree: Kratoklastes, Pop Warner
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    , @Rosie
  5. @Buzz Mohawk

    Just a minor quibble with your arithmetic.

    It might pay to evaluate inter-racial murderyness overall by race, rather than just doing BkW vs WkB.

    Blacks do 61.3% of all inter-racial killings. Whites do 30.7%.

    So as a group, blacks are twice as inter-racially murdery as whites… and using your numbers for white and black population shares (75%; 13%), whites are 5.77× more numerous than blacks.

    That means that per capita, blacks are 11.5× more inter-racially murdery than whites – a bit less than 13×, because whites kill ‘others’ in about the same proportion as blacks do. (Fucking ‘others’ – they give everyone a reason to kill ’em, it seems).

    I would like to see these sort of stats adjusted for SES (socioeconomic status) of the perp – there are roughly 10× more poor blacks in the US than poor whites (and the poor whites are rural and live in relatively low-densities: dollars go further in rural areas, too – so a given income level translates to a slight improvement in poverty). Adjusting (comparing “blacks with shit lives” to “whites with shit lives”) is likely to be informative: people with shit lives, generally do bad shit more than their entire race.

    When I say “I would like to see…” I don’t mean “enough to get off my arse and hunt out the data“.

    Given that a very large amount of black-on-black action happens in benighted high-density shitholes (Detroit, Baltimore etc), my prior is that black-on-[whatever] action happens in similar shitholes.

    I also wonder whether the average victim of inter-racial murder is the sort of person you (or I) would give a shit about: they might be white, but they also might be total and utter shitbags that you (or I) would not piss on if they were on fire. Sad anecdotes like that little kid killed recently by a black neighbour are almost-certainly not representative.

    The risk of being killed by anybody – black, white or ‘other’ – is very very low, when you factor in that most murder victims know their killer. Getting killed opportunistically at random by a stranger must have roughly the same probability as getting hit by lightning.

    Just seems to me that caring about extremely low-probability avoidable risks, is a bit of a waste of time. Obviously it’s less avoidable for those who live in shitspots, but it’s still a very low-probability event.

  6. @nebulafox

    “Testosterone and evolutionarily being expendable just makes it more likely that you’ll be at the extremes of human nature: it says nothing about whether it is a good or a bad extreme.”

    Once again I turn to Prof Roy Beaumeister

    http://www.denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm

    Nature rolls the dice with men more than women. Men go to extremes more than women. It’s true not just with IQ but also with other things, even height: The male distribution of height is flatter, with more really tall and really short men.

    Again, there is a reason for this, to which I shall return.

    For now, the point is that it explains how we can have opposite stereotypes. Men go to extremes more than women. Stereotypes are sustained by confirmation bias. Want to think men are better than women? Then look at the top, the heroes, the inventors, the philanthropists, and so on. Want to think women are better than men? Then look at the bottom, the criminals, the junkies, the losers.

    In an important sense, men really are better AND worse than women.

    A pattern of more men at both extremes can create all sorts of misleading conclusions and other statistical mischief. To illustrate, let’s assume that men and women are on average exactly equal in every relevant respect, but more men at both extremes. If you then measure things that are bounded at one end, it screws up the data to make men and women seem significantly different.

    Consider grade point average in college. Thanks to grade inflation, most students now get A’s and B’s, but a few range all the way down to F. With that kind of low ceiling, the high-achieving males cannot pull up the male average, but the loser males will pull it down. The result will be that women will get higher average grades than men — again despite no difference in average quality of work.

    The opposite result comes with salaries. There is a minimum wage but no maximum. Hence the high-achieving men can pull the male average up while the low-achieving ones can’t pull it down. The result? Men will get higher average salaries than women, even if there is no average difference on any relevant input.

    Today, sure enough, women get higher college grades but lower salaries than men. There is much discussion about what all this means and what should be done about it. But as you see, both facts could be just a statistical quirk stemming from male extremity.

    PS – it looks as if US stats and UK stats are in tandem on racial killing. In the UK for 2018-9, four times as many whites are killed by blacks than blacks are killed by whites. See comment below

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/peak-projection/#comment-4204324

  7. @Buzz Mohawk

    If we really wanted to streamline this, just pare it down to absolute basics, the question is: Who always moves away from whom? And, WHY DO THEY DO THAT?!?

    “Hey, this inner-city school is 80/15 per cent black/Hispanic! I can’t wait to send my blonde daughters there!” said no sane White father ever.

  8. Anon[194] • Disclaimer says:

    As usual, these threads only talk about the percentages of offense rates, murder rate ratios.

    Only 16,000 people a year get murdered in America. 85-90% of them are black, or Hispanic. That leaves us with what, 900 white people murdered annually by blacks?

    Violent crime doesn’t exist in this country.

    The irony is that a lot of you people try to downplay the Coronavirus (which will have killed more than a quarter of a million Americans by January) and call it a “nothingburger.” Yet you spend 90% of your online time complaining about the 900 white Americans who get killed by blacks yearly.

    Such dishonorable conduct would result in public flogging or socially imposed suicide (seppuku) 200 years ago.

    • Troll: Mr. Rational
    • Replies: @res
  9. @Kratoklastes

    seems to me that caring about extremely low-probability avoidable risks, is a bit of a waste of time. Obviously it’s less avoidable for those who live in shitspots, but it’s still a very low-probability event.

    Spots that are growing in the era of permanent pandemic, defund-tha-police, and import DIEversity: shitspots.

    You may not care about shitspots, but shitspots care about you, just not in a good way.

    In other words, you may be fortunate enough to live out the rest your days outside of any shitspots, but your children … not so much. Strangely, this does not stop a lot of parents I know from voting for more shitspots.

  10. bro3886 says:

    25% of interracial killings are whites killing blacks? Bullshit, I don’t believe it, even if the crooked, white-hating government folds Hispanics into that number. Unless they count overwhelmingly justified police shootings.

    • Agree: usNthem
  11. @Kratoklastes

    Just seems to me that caring about extremely low-probability avoidable risks, is a bit of a waste of time. Obviously it’s less avoidable for those who live in shitspots, but it’s still a very low-probability event.

    Well a few things about that:

    1) You may not have to deal with it, but somebody does, and society has a duty to look after the welfare of everyone as best it can (even those who you can rationalize as probably being “scumbags” anyway). This is especially true since alleviating the problem would be fairly simple and straight forward (step one is just acknowledging that it exists).

    2) Things like grand larceny, large scale business or financial fraud, or other white-collar crimes are probably even rarer per capita than murder, they must not be worth concern either right? Of course that’s nonsense because of the broad negative effects those crimes cause. Of course murder also has hugely corrosive social and economic effects, how do you think having roughly 13X as many murders affects community cohesiveness and quality of life?

    3) Murder is a correlate to all kinds of other violent crime from theft to assault, high rates of which destroy public order. These crimes are a genuine risk to random people just living their lives, being a “scumbag” not necessary. You said it yourself, these rates are the difference between “shitspots” and non “shitspots”, they actually do matter.

  12. Okay but if I post this data in my employer’s Conversation About Race slack channel I’m likely getting fired so…

    Like what is the point of objective truth

    Can this empirical evidence be used to secure power?

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  13. anon[317] • Disclaimer says:
    @nebulafox

    I don’t have the exact percentage that’s left, but it’s going to be damned small to be contributing to over half the murders in your country, you know?

    Perhaps 3% or fewer. So 3 does 55, and all the rest of us have to believe ever more counter-factual things in lieu of facing this fact.

    Thanks for this quick estimate, it confirms arithmetic operations I did a few years ago. Always good to have third party confirmation. Because the first reaction to this simple set of calculations is disbelief.

    Yet the facts are there regardless of who doesn’t like them: deporting or locking up a rather small percentage of the population would cut the US murder rate in half, in one year. I’m not advocating that, but averting our eyes from it doesn’t make it go away.

    3% do 50% is ugly but also true.

    This piece of reality exists whether anyone believes in it or not.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
    , @Mr. Rational
  14. neutral says:

    The SJW ideology is simply preaching the inverse of what reality is. The worse the race (the blacks are the worst) the more they are elevated (so blacks are the best to them). The more degenerate the better (transgender). The more correct the facts are, the more they say those facts are false (IQ and wealth of nations).

  15. songbird says:

    I wonder what it would look like if one looked at other factors: married vs. unmarried, murder by number of sexual partners, by sexual orientation, <30 vs. 30+. Drug user vs. teetotaler.

    The existing categorizations are rather silly. Let's give them simple DNA tests, I say. Probably a pretty cheap way to find ethnicity. With the amount of money we spend on policing, they ought to be able to buy a ten year old PC and download LibreOffice's version of Excel.

  16. unit472 says:

    The big hole in murder data is the phrase “Where the killer is known” and, as I recall over 4,000 murders go unsolved every year and most of those involve a dead negro in a negro neighborhood so it is reasonable to assume it isn’t a white man from Georgetown heading into Anacostia on Saturday night to shoot a negro drug dealer though it is very likely a negro from Anacostia might have shot a white man in Georgetown.

    There are also ‘outlier’ events such as Stephen Paddock shooting to death 59 people in Las Vegas or the lunatic who killed 26 people in a Texas church last year. Sadly these kind of events are almost always committed by a white male madman but they do inflate the white murder ‘rate’.

    • Replies: @Talha
  17. @bro3886

    Not just Hispanics. As I posted on another thread before, the government piles Asians into the white category as well. Like this guy.

    He’s “white” according to the NYS prison system.

  18. Black rampant criminality is highly disproportional to their percentage of the US population in the same way that JEW media and JEW finance and JEW political power is highly disproportional to the percentage of JEWS in the USA.

    There is a whole lotta GASLIGHTING GOING ON by the disproportionally JEW-controlled corporate propaganda apparatus in terms of misdirecting and deflecting away attention from the horribly awful and shocking amount of Black murder and Black rape and Black attacks and Black thievery and Black mayhem and Black crime and one way the JEW-controlled mass media does this is to go full bore saturation coverage and focus on Black Lives Matter propaganda.

    The simple GASLIGHTING GAME of the disproportionally JEW-controlled mass corporate media is to refuse to acknowledge FBI crime statistics and other Black crime statistics and only focus on the interactions between the Blacks and law enforcement that go bad in a big way. There are terrible law enforcement mistakes and overreactions to be sure, but that is because there are so many Black interactions with law enforcement because of rampant Black criminality.

    You will find no Republican Party politician FOP talking about FBI crime statistics involving Blacks and the high crime rates of Blacks because the Republican Party is evil and corrupt and the Republican Party does what the JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire says.

    GASLIGHTING is Black Lives Matter

    GASLIGHTING is refusing to discuss high crime rates of Blacks in comparison with Whites and Asians.

    GASLIGHTING is the coward scum politicians in the Republican Party refusing to discuss FBI crime statistics that are plain as day in their revealing why Blacks have so many unpleasant interactions with law enforcement.

    Black Crime Statistics Matter

    Black Poor Performance On School Tests Matter

    Black Innate Intelligence Level Matters

  19. Talha says:
    @unit472

    There are also ‘outlier’ events

    It is interesting how one’s initial assumption on murderer is defined by context:

    – Some dude killed some other dude in a liquor store robbery – probably…black guy
    – Some dude was killed, execution-style, in the desert near the border – probably…Latino guy
    – A bunch of people were killed by being run over by a truck and then assailant shot as he tried to go stab-happy on police – probably…Muslim guy (of indeterminate race/ethnicity)
    – Some dude killed 15 people over a period of 10 years and saved body parts as jewelry (and pickled some for midnight snacks) – probably…white guy
    – Any murder involving nunchucks – probably…Asian guy (or possibly a teenage turtle in an unorthodox family situation)

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Elli
  20. res says:
    @Twinkie

    Some years back, I proposed a simple index, with which to compare (theoretical) crime suppression capacity in each city in America – it was basically calculating the ratio of the number of young black males in the population to that of uniformed police officers in the given jurisdiction.

    There is LEO data for 100 cities here.
    https://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-justice/law-enforcement-police-department-employee-totals-for-cities.html

    The US census provides county level demographics which I think are fine grained enough to extract young black males based on this document.
    https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/technical-documentation/file-layouts/2010-2019/cc-est2019-alldata.pdf

    This document has some interesting county maps based on that data and gives the total number of blacks for about 15 cities.
    https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-06.pdf
    But I don’t see any way of getting that data with age granularity or for more cities.

    This gives percentage black for the top 100 cities.
    https://www.indexmundi.com/facts/united-states/quick-facts/cities/rank/black-population-percentage

    Some more lists
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._metropolitan_areas_with_large_African-American_populations
    https://blackdemographics.com/population/black-city-population/

    Anyone know of any good data sources for the number of young black males in US cities?

    Twinkie, do you think total black population is a good enough proxy for young black males here?

    P.S. For anyone interested, here is the white counterpart of that census link.
    https://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-05.pdf
    Some interesting county maps here as well. Especially since they split out Hispanic and non-Hispanic whites.

  21. res says:
    @Anon

    Only 16,000 people a year get murdered in America. 85-90% of them are black, or Hispanic.

    No. 2018 victim statistics.
    https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-1.xls

    2018 was a quiet year so there were only 14,123 murders, but of those we see the following proportion were non-Hispanic white.
    (6,088 – 2,173) / 14,123 = 28%

    Such dishonorable conduct would result in public flogging or socially imposed suicide (seppuku) 200 years ago.

    Indeed. Ponder that before the next time you post a lie.

    P.S. BTW, my estimate is conservative because I counted all Hispanics as being white. Unlikely to be true, especially given that we are talking about murder statistics.

  22. Elli says:
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Suppose that 90% of the population is right-handed, and 10% left, and that handedness plays no role in murder, either in propensity, or choice of victims. Murderers don’t even know victim handedness before they shoot.

    By pure chance, 81% of murderers will be right on right, 9% right on left, 9% left on right, 1% left on left.

    You can’t divide 9% R on L by 90% right share of population and divide 9% L on R by 10% left share and make the claim that lefties are 9x more murderous to righties than vice versa.

    Your math needs refinement.

  23. Elli says:
    @Talha

    Blacks are now a majority of serial killers, no idea whether they are prone to trophy taking or cannibalism.

    • Replies: @Talha
  24. Most murder, like most violent crime in general, is intraracial.

    As a quick thought experiment, what would the numbers look like if all races were equally violent and chose their victims at random:

    It’s black-on-black murder that in reality occurs 21x as often. (Other-on-other is within margin of error, I also dropped ‘unknown’ from the table.)

    • Replies: @Mr. Rational
  25. @bro3886

    All murders are homicides. Not all homicides are murders. And no, most police shootings are not justified. The police are out of control just like the blacks. Both groups should be disarmed.

  26. Talha says:
    @Elli

    Blacks are now a majority of serial killers

    Really? Do you have any stats for this?

    Thanks in advance!

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Elli
    , @Mr. Rational
  27. Rosie says:
    @nebulafox

    CancelFact of the day: men are the majority of murderers and retards for the same reason that men are the majority of leaders and geniuses.

    When I hear things like this, it makes me wonder if I have done future generations of women a disservice by not being more ambitious. I would caution men who would like to see women choose traditional lifestyles against gloating about men’s superior accomplishments. On the other hand, if you want to see more women prioritize their careers, gloat and taunt to your heart’s content. Reverse psychology.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Talha
  28. anon[332] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    When I see one of your emotional responses to biological facts I marvel that you managed to snag a man at all. Because nothing nebulafox wrote is a gloat or a taunt, except inside your own fevered, perpetually indignant, contentious imagination. You might as well get all worked up over the fact that European men on average are taller than European women, or the fact that on average men have more upper body strength than women.

    It’s called biology. Resenting biology is both futile and foolish.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  29. Talha says:
    @Rosie

    Definitely a big mistake society can make; to judge women as successful or not by men’s standards. Women should be judged as successful by different standards that naturally fit them and are beneficial to society – else you have the catch 22 you are talking about.

    I remember someone mentioning that he was at his grandmother’s 90th birthday and she had tears of joy in her eyes as she looked over the life she had helped bring into the world; nearly 60 kids, grandkids and great grandkids.

    He said no one was concerned about whatever occupation she ever held.

    Peace.

    • Thanks: Rosie
  30. Elli says:
    @Talha

    Look up Dr. Michael Aamodt and Radford Univ. Serial killer database.

    • Thanks: Talha
  31. nebulafox says:
    @anon

    I’d bet on fewer than 3%. I’m not just filtering out women, but anybody above 40 or under 15, and anybody with middle-class socioeconomic status. You could probably filter further while still keeping the amount of homicides above or near half: I’ll bet the occurrence of homicide decreases dramatically with over-30 guys who have stable blue-collar jobs. It’s not exactly a secret that violent crime is a young and typically poor male thing in every society across the world.

    Doing this filtration is doubly useful: not only are you highlighting the reality to such a blatant extent that liberals who try to dismiss it will look like idiots, you simultaneously are diluting race with the added factors of sex, age, and socioeconomic status. That’s not only the truth, but will allow you to keep race as a factor at all without being compulsively dismissed as a racist. And with every successive reduction in the percentage, the impact is stronger.

    Sometimes the best propaganda calmly tells the truth, nothing more, in as laconic a way as possible. And then lets the audience make their own conclusions about the people shrilly trying to denounce you.

  32. nebulafox says:
    @anon

    Honestly: I’m really bad at taunting people. The few times I’ve gotten angry at other commentators here, it’s not just ineffective, but blatantly transparent. You have to work hard to read gloating or taunting into all my other comments.

    I’m always willing to eat crow and update my beliefs when other commentators show me that I’m wrong: lot of people here who know more than I do, after all. But when I said a *a majority*, I meant just that: a majority. Of course you have very successful, brilliant female scientists and doctors and lawyers. You also have female psychopaths and murderers and homeless people. Life is probabalistic. But is anybody going to argue that there are as many of them as there are men at the bottom and the top? Of course not: that’s blatantly contradicted by observing daily life, and when you connect that to basic evolution, you find your logical, mundane answer. Men don’t deal with glass ceilings, but they also don’t have nets to catch them.

    And for what it is worth, I do wish that more women would go into hard science and learn more math… because I’d like to see more people go into hard science and learn more math, period. I’m actually that old school kind of guy who genuinely doesn’t really care about the race or the color or the whatever of the person he’s coding with or doing physics problems with: the main distinction to me is that they are another student, another programmer. We still exist in 2020, shocking as that might be. In previous times, that would have made me non-judgemental, I suppose. In less previous times, normal. In current times, the height of evil white patriarchalism.

    I think it’s perfectly valid to want to work toward that while not being under delusions that it’ll ever be a 50/50 balance, and not wanting to be dismissed as a rampaging misogynist for pointing out the average interests that the sexes tend to have.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @anon
  33. @Not my economy

    Like what is the point of objective truth

    The current paradigm rejects the very idea of objective truth.  And for that, anyone who cleaves to it must be rejected.

  34. Rosie says:
    @nebulafox

    I think it’s perfectly valid to want to work toward that while not being under delusions that it’ll ever be a 50/50 balance, and not wanting to be dismissed as a rampaging misogynist for pointing out the average interests that the sexes tend to have.

    You are not a “rampaging misogynist” by any stretch. I certainly didn’t intend to say you are any such thing. Also, I have come to understand that you have some sort of spectrum disorder, and as such, might lack certain diplomatic skills. On that account alone, I am inclined to give you a wide berth.

    That said, I think it is very easy to come up with a Darwinian story for just about anything, that being a major problem with that particular theory. Moreover, your OP was about abilities, whereas now you speak of interests, and therein lies the problem as far as I’m concerned. How do you determine what part of the “achievement gap” (for lack of a better term) is explained by differences in ability, what part is explained by differences in interests, and what part might be determined by other factors?

    Finally, I would urge you to consider that your good faith (which I believe to be sincere) is kind of beside the point. Frank public discussion about male superiority in regards to this or that is very likely to have certain psychological consequences that may or may not be desirable, depending on your point of view, and that remains the case regardless of whether such discussions are motivated by animus.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @nebulafox
  35. Rosie says:
    @Rosie

    If we assume that men are in fact overrepresented among the dregs of society, and further, that this is the result of biology rather than “toxic masculinity,” then AE is correct that the patriarchy doesn’t get off the hook so easily. There is something to the claim that feminism is a phenomenon of the privileged middle-class woman, but it is not the whole story. From the very beginning, the Temperance Movement was very concerned with the safety and welfare of the women living under the authority of precisely these dregs.

    • Agree: iffen
    • Replies: @iffen
    , @anon
  36. nebulafox says:
    @Rosie

    😛

    Well, chances are if anybody tells you a sociological question is single-factored, they are wrong or lying. So I’ll take “all of the above” for 200. And this is the Internet. We are anonymous commentators. We will not meet in real life. We are engaging in inane stress release, not the bizarre honor competition that some seem to act as it as. That’s why we get to be so frank.

    And yeah, my tone and mode of writing would be deeply strange if it was insincere. I get that you want to help, and I respect that, but I am OK. Truthfully, the kind of HR or MBA drone who would be mortally offended by what I discuss is the kind of person I try to have minimal contact with on other grounds anyway. Myself, I really want to be left alone to my interests. My issue with the Cultural Bolsheviks is that it is increasingly obvious that they will not grant me that courtesy, and also that they wish to do me and my kin harm.

  37. @anon

    3% do 50% is ugly but also true.

    QFT.

    This piece of reality exists whether anyone believes in it or not.

    QF meta-truth.

  38. iffen says:
    @Rosie

    Rivet, rivet, rivet it.

  39. Talha says:
    @Mr. Rational

    “…serial killers – defined as someone who has killed two or more people on separate occasions…”

    Ah OK. That makes sense. I guess I’m old school and was going with the whole you-can’t-have-a-serial-killer-without-some-fava-beans-and-a-nice-Chianti-being-involved.

    But maybe SNL was on to something :

    Peace.

  40. anon[391] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    From the very beginning, the Temperance Movement was very concerned with the safety and welfare of the women living under the authority of precisely these dregs.

    But not the men who were objectified as “dregs”, though. Their safety was of no importance. Even now the vast, vast majority of homeless are men, for the obvious Variance reason that nebulafox mentioned and – as usual – you misconstrued. As usual you focused on the plus side of the curve and ignored the minus side, the “man on the beach shouting at nothing” side.

    There are men existing – not living, existing – in cheap tents on public spaces from Seattle to San Diego. Hardly anyone really cares, least of all the self-righteous, misandrist, hypocrites – like you.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  41. anon[391] • Disclaimer says:
    @nebulafox

    And for what it is worth, I do wish that more women would go into hard science and learn more math…

    Equality of opportunity isn’t enough for you unless it leads to equality of result? I know Rosie’s emotions run that way, but didn’t expect it from you.

    smh

    You’re like Joe Biden wishing that cops would have some sensitivity training. Maybe you’ve been out of country too long? Every K – 12 school whether public or private in the US is all about encouraging girls and women into science and math. Every college from community colleges on up is all about summer “girls only” coding camps / math camps — there are no, none, not any “boys only” camps like that, of course, because reasons. This has been the case for years – 10, 20, maybe longer.

    So far the results are not what you and Rosie obviously expect, because the blank slate is bullshit. Encourage 17 year old girls with coding camp all you want, only a handful will even find it interesting and a lot of the rest will find it boring, or will concentrate on doing the PowerPoint slides. Totally predictable just by looking at mean (g) and Var(g) for girls and women, by the way.

    Because girls are not boys with boobs bolted on.

    Testosterone and estrogen are powerful compounds that have deep effects on the brain. It’s not Teh Sexism that tends to steer young women into life sciences and young men into physics, it’s often brain structure. It’s almost as though evolution or God or something actually molded male humans to be different but complimentary to female humans. But that can’t be true, can it? Because that would mean there is no blank slate, and horrors result if you follow that line of thinking. Horrors!

    I’m actually that old school kind of guy who genuinely doesn’t really care about the race or the color or the whatever of the person he’s coding with or doing physics problems with: the main distinction to me is that they are another student, another programmer.

    Do you expect them to be able to get their part of the job done, to pull their own weight? I bet you do. I assume you’ve had enough experience with group projects to know what it is like when your group of 3 or 4 coders/builders/hackers/lab workers has a “teachers pet” added to the group? The person who can’t actually do anything, but everyone has to pretend they are a contributor?

    You think more of that is a good idea?

    • Replies: @Rosie
  42. Rosie says:
    @anon

    There are men existing – not living, existing – in cheap tents on public spaces from Seattle to San Diego. Hardly anyone really cares, least of all the self-righteous, misandrist, hypocrites – like you.

    Hmmm. You must have missed all my posts defending the welfare state against libertarians worried about muh taxes. I assure you, I am not indifferent to the needy, as anyone around here will tell you, even people who dislike me as much as you do.

    • Replies: @anon
  43. Rosie says:
    @anon

    Equality of opportunity isn’t enough for you unless it leads to equality of result? I know Rosie’s emotions run that way, but didn’t expect it from you.

    It is always the hysterics who screech the loudest about how hysterical women are.

    Neither NF nor I are blank slaters who expect “equal outcomes.” Perhaps you should lurk more and get to know people before you fly off the handle and make a fool of yourself.

    Here I am at comment #203 noting women’s continuing lack of interest in mechanical engineering and computer science, though they may well come to dominate medicine.

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/2020-sat-scores-asian-supremacy-intensifies/#new_comments

  44. While women are of course far less likely to kill at all, when it comes to inter-sexual murder, they do better than I would have assumed.

    I wonder what proportion of the murderesses of men are black?

  45. Truth says:
    @bro3886

    Acording to Big Ron and Frijole Fred, Mess-Kins are much less violent than Honkees, so they are artificially depressing your crime numbers.

  46. @Kratoklastes

    ‘Adjusting (comparing “blacks with shit lives” to “whites with shit lives”) is likely to be informative: people with shit lives, generally do bad shit more than their entire race.’

    Indeed it would be informative. Around here, we have plenty of ‘whites with shit lives’ — oh boy, do we. I could tell you a story…

    But no blacks. So — to take last year — yes, lots of fights and lots of petty theft and lots of drug and alcohol offenses.

    But — in a population of a hundred thousand — no murders, and no rapes.

    No blacks, you see.

  47. anon[200] • Disclaimer says:
    @Rosie

    You must have missed all my posts defending the welfare state against libertarians worried about muh taxes.

    Have never seen such comments, but I tend to skip some entire threads. You would of course be in favor of resources provided to babymommas and their bastards.

    I assure you, I am not indifferent to the needy,

    Unless they are men. Then you do not care. That has been made very clear. You are a misandrist.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  48. Rosie says:
    @anon

    You would of course be in favor of resources provided to babymommas and their bastards.

    Note the double bind. It seems I can’t win with trolls like this.

    Unless they are men. Then you do not care. That has been made very clear. You are a misandrist.

    I have repeatedly expressed support for welfare programs that primarily benefit men, to wit: worker’s compensation, veterans benefits, tariffs, a humane prison system.

    You are making a fool of yourself.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS