Favorite activities of the modern left include:
1) Flogging a dead Negro
2) Milking a cremated Jew
3) Putting lipstick on a wrestler

If everyone else’s crimes are explained by “mental health” and “a difficult childhood”, while white hetero men are the only ones who bear full moral responsibility, this means that only white hetero men have agency, as in free will.

This means only white hetero men should have the right to vote.

"ferangi' is the Farsi word for foreigner. Since Farsi is an Indo-Aryan language, the etymological resemblance is expected. If Turks use the word, it was borrowed, as Turkish is not an Indo-Aryan language

Who is this Amanda Marcotte? A white who would talk like that about the Duke case and not even acknowledge her error when the facts became known, is of the mentally ill ilk that also comprised of Tim Wise and that Diversity Inc. man. I just don't get these people. It hasn't been 1930 Mississippi for a long time, anywhere.

"Sorta related, after watching Sound of Music a number of times, I realized that Julie Andrews was way too old to play Maria. Maria should have been about 16. I guess they got away with it, they way they get away with it on the stage, but that story would be sexy with a younger female lead.

Maria was 22 in real life when she went to tutor the von Trapp children in 1926. She married Herr von Trapp a year of so later and there was a 24 yr gap between them. Apparently she had thought it would be a plantonic marriage to get the kids raised and she required a number of conversations with the local priest in order to accept the situation. Poor Herr von Trapp found her a handful and told her the best way to make him happy was to be as good and kind as his first wife had been (which she had briefly thought meant knitting booties). "Other than that, please be yourself."
Usually I'm critical of movies made of real life, when I am aware of the "real life", but Julie Andrews, 27 at the time, was actually not a bad choice either in personality, age or looks.

"Mild curiosity: Does Robin who thinks she rocks also happen to write for Salon?
She's certainly got the feminist screech down pat."
"I could easily bet a thousand bucks that rockin' robin really is a chick and not a fat man in Scotland. No man could imitate bitchiness that well."

Really? You'all don't sound any better than she does, though she gets demerits for having started on the offense. I take it you'all are on the defense. How "bitchy" or how "truthful" one sounds depends on the number of people ready to high-five you.

I don't get r.r.'s particular criticisms (cancer patients get too much admiration!?) or her animus about Sailer — I'm still not sure what she's on his case about, as he seems to present his sometimes controversial ideas in a discussable and even-humored way, and maintains a professional demeanor; but r.r.'s no worse than a lot of other commenters here of any gender, age, class, weight, or race.

Where do live rockin' robin? I think only in a few of the large cities that have, or rather had, significant white ethnic enclaves, would "Catholics" tend to be anti-WASP. This isn't 1910. Are they Poles with names ending in "isky" pretending to be Jewish?

"Girl HBD bloggers exist? Awesome!

"Bloggers"?? I think she's the only one.

But yes, look at how diverse we are!!"

There are others. One good one is Matilda's anthropology blog,http://mathildasanthropologyblog.wordpress.com/
Like another non-pc woman, Dr. Mary Lefkowitz, Matilda has spent some controversial moments debunking Afro-centrists on the subject of ancient Egypt. She's had to be circumspect about her identity (she's British I think) because of threats from disgruntled Afro-centrists. She hasn't posted in a year.

'… A guy from South Central who did drugs and stabbed a guy is far sexier than a White Middle class kid who built his own robot for a robot competition.'

god what insane garbage. sometimes i think people like this commenter should be held accountable for throwing poop pies in readers' faces. I mean if you're scrolling, you can't avoid him.
why doesn't he get a job in a university admissions office and see if he knows what he's talking about.

Yan shen … "Steve, did you even understand the argument Fukuyama was making in The End of History? He meant that History with a capital H, in the sense of a coherent, directional sociocultural evolution had arrived upon liberal democracy as its highest ideal, one that could no longer be improved upon."

I think we all got the gist, genius. Every adolescent generation thinks this way. We just don't agree with him. He takes a word that has a very steady and easily understood meaning for almost everyone, even the dumbest, and then declares it no longer exists. Gasp! Let's buy the book and see why there will be no more history? 2000K perhaps?
He felt assured of fame and a place in — history — for his clever prediction and bold annihilation of a common concept.
I thought he was just a gimmick when he wrote it, and now that he's still at it, he's more tiresome than ever.
History, it seems, has passed him by.

"well my friend has a dog that he would take on the trails and run with. eventually after a year of this his luck ended. on a training run one day, bears attacked the dog and killed it only 30 or 40 feet from him off the trail."

Aside from human criminals, people don't take the threat of animal attack seriously enough. I've supported as many wildlife charities as any tree-hugger, but nevertheless, I am realistic. An outdoorsman actually wrote a book dedicated to warning people about this–that our Disney attitude towards animals can get us killed by them. Animals like bears, mountain lions, etc., are first and foremost, wild. Even dogs can be vicious. Just remember, they live in a different reality to us. I used to be critical of ranchers and farmers ready to shoot strange critters on sight, but now I sort of get it. Personally I'd prefer a stun gun–I don't want to kill the critter; I just don't want to kill me.
This reminds me of goofy liberals and their pet causes.

"Actually, you are wrong. Feynman's IQ score was obtained straight from his high school record."
I had 119 iq in high school, and four years later tested 138 on a proctored Stanford Binet I took for mensa.
iq needs to be tested more than once during youth. My IQ in grade school was always the highest or second highest. They didn't call it IQ but that's what the test was. When she received the scores, the nun called our names and had us line up along the blackboard, highest first, and then on down. Catholic schools did things like that–they didn't worry too much about students' egos. They were made to be bruised. There were two tests. On one I was the highest, on the other I was the second highest. Funny thing–I was not that great academically except for reading, in which I was always 5-6 years above grade level, whereas the highest IQ, another girl, was academically excellent. However, later she deliberately got bad math grades in high school because "boys didn't like girls who were good in math." That comment so repelled me I must confess it made a feminist of me for a while, but my kind of feminist. I started school at 5 and was always the second youngest in the class. I don't know what the grade school scores were. My parents did not care much about grades as long as we did practical, sensible things, and made money when we got out of school. So IQ can go up and down. I prefer to think of myself as IQ 138.
While high IQ does not ensure "success" in cognitively demanding areas, it is absolutely necessary for success to occur.

Kylie "Some men have never forgiven feminists for the false claim that men don't have real friendships as women do."

This comes as a surprise to me.

"With all the misdeeds committed by feminists that men have yet to forgive them for, I would have thought the false claim that men don't have real friendships would have been pretty far down the list/"

I have read it mentioned fairly often, but probably more as an aside with other complaints. I don't know how seriously most men who have ever paid attention to feminist assertions feel about this particular "accusation" but some have sounded bitter about it.
What is on your list of really major feminist "misdeeds?"

"Deep politics"!!! Yes, I agree, women have real friendships to exactly the same extent that they're interested in deep politics.

All 4 billion of them, too. Well, it's actually less than 3.5 billion. Which reminds me of something!! Women are ableexperience real friendships with each other to exactly the same extent that they're comfortable with numbers. And logic."

god–Anonymous thy name is Lame. Forget me — do YOU have any friends? Male? Female? Other? Squirrels?

I'd originally put 3.5 billion but just decided to pre-empt the next increment with a round number because I've been reading so much about the rapidly spiralling pop. growth. Some are predicting 10 billion in the not too distant future. The important idea is half the world's population. 50% Get it? As the Brits say, easy as lemon squeezy.

This is not a conspiracy website, except as regards feminism and HBD (the latter is why I'm here.) On these subjects, the gentlemen constantly invoke the mysteries of conspiracy, and they may be right.

Surely you know "Deep Politics" was a book by Peter Dale Scott, inspired by the enigma of the JFK assassination; for me the term is short hand for a host of other books and media on the subject–the government within a government. The reasons behind the stated reasons. http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/

Most of my friends agree to some extent. Taking all this seriously is not a requirement for friendship, but most are at least open to getting more information. When we are among friends regardless of their biological characteristics, we wish to be understood and communicate openly.

If that seems "illogical" to you–well, I'm not surprised.

Just how did things go between "Arthur Miller and Marilyn Monroe? This is why Jewish men bang blonde bimbo callgirls but marry smart women they can have conversations with."

Marilyn Monroe was intelligent, according to many people who knew her, and fairly well read. Unfortunately she was mentally ill.

"There are no such things as 'female buddies.' "

Horsefeathers, sourpuss. I have several best friends all female and all of many years duration. We have in common a love and concern for each other (despite differences), for our families, for spiritual growth, for literature and good films; alternative health and deep politics; and animal welfare. We're not that exceptional. Most of the 4 billion females in the world have friendships.

Some men have never forgiven feminists for the false claim that men don't have real friendships as women do. They discuss their resentment on men's issues blogs. Of course they have friends, and to deny their capacity in that area was callous and arrogant; I feel your pain.

Boomers produced two: Clinton and Bush… and then it passed to Obama.

1961 was still "boomer." Boomer lasted until about 1964. I still remember plenty of families in the 60s with four or more kids, all or most stillin grade school. I didn't notice families much during the 70s, but by 1980, few young families seemed to have more than one or two kids. Three was a large family.

"Claudia Zhao said…
there will never be Asian male solidarity for the simple reason that Asian males don't even like each other."

There are billions of Asian men. The unhappy man who wrote this article is in a particular kind of environment. I don't think he has a complaint, because I dare say a white person born in Korea or China would have a much harder time gaining acceptance in those cultures. Asians in Asia and Asians in heavily Asian places like Washington state, can view themselves as individuals. Individuals may dislike other individuals.
I hate to sound preachy but sometimes commenters here are so damn childish…often I don't read the original article just the comments. This time I read every word of the orignial article and I am startled and amused at what commenters notice–how boiled down to adolescent concerns. For me, the drunk woman telling him that if you're not a winner, you have to love the world twice as hard is the wisest and hardest advice to take and the take-away tagline. Yet I don't think anybody discussess that.
Given the atrocious historic levels of internecine warfare, strife and contention among Europeans, we are in no position to cast aspersions on perceived self-loathing in non-Europeans.

"But among whites, I'll bet Obama voters are smarter than McCain voters."

Really? Are you in the WH basement?
There is, indeed, a sickening fetish for him among certain middle-aged white liberal-type females of my acquaintance, esp. Jewish, which I guess is still on, given the media ownership; but he does make a lot of people queasy, and they come to be repelled by him sooner or later. Unlike me (I conclude I can't vote for any of them anymore), they overcome it if some sort of political agenda is served. There's a lot nose-holding while casting the ballot, that goes in D.C. The current Creatures from the Black Lagoon, no pun intended–Chicago politics, fit in pretty well.

And most of my life I thought I was a "liberal."

lesley wrote but didn't finish completely…"Unidentified Flying Objects exist and have been duly noted by countless people, many of whom are what society considers "credible." Frankly, what is more delusion than believing in extraterrestrial visitation is believing that 100% of an earthling" ……

got lopped off in transmittal:
"Frankly, what is more delusion[al] than believing in extraterrestrial visitation, is believing that 100% of an earthling population will have the motivation and ability to go to college.

"The two of them might just as well become UFO hunters."

You mean like these guys: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqzoC3QPI_E

Hey don't encourage those do-gooder-dufuses to enter the UFO crowd. btw, weren't they into Planned Parenthood? They should stick with that program as long as it isn't aimed at the "population" that invented the modern world (and the one most declining.)

Unidentified Flying Objects exist and have been duly noted by countless people, many of whom are what society considers "credible." Frankly, what is more delusion than believing in extraterrestrial visitation is believing that 100% of an earthling

why would anyone think blue eyes could only come from Europe? There are a number of other populations that have been blue eyed for many centuries (I emphasize that because some seeing the pictures might think rampaging soldiers are responsible.) This video shows some "Aryans" (not my word) in Afghanistan, where live some of the whitest looking people outside of Europe. I sometimes wonder why people are surprised at this. Anyone reading about the British in India would have come across accounts of their dealings with the tall, light-eyed mountain men of the Northwest Frontier. Nowadays they make up a fairly large share of the Taliban.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0TQ1gj8GQo

"You mean like James Michener."

Say what you will about Michener, I learned a lot of history from him. He was not a great formuator of character, but his description of environment and situation was exact. He did his research. His fascination with family or "extended family", generational epics and the twists of fate that separated and connected as the years went on, could have something to do with his being an adopted child.

"Overall,[Sunset Boulevard] it's a cruel movie, almost autocannibalistic. It is worth watching for Stroheim's incredible performance, though, if nothing else."

Cruel and prescient. http://www.bricksandstonesgossip.com/2011/05/03/former-playboy-pinup-yvette-vickers-body-found-mummified

Yvette Vickers, a young actress with a small part in the movie, later became a pin-up, playmate and B movie starlet. Her body was found her a big old house not too unlike Gloria Swanson's in the movie. The former Bunny was in a "mummified" state. A neighbor, after not seeing her for months, finally wondered enough to go to her door, and found cobwebs around Ms. Vicker's mailbox. Not a good sign.

Mr. Anon said
" I responded to him because he sounded like a garden variety conspiracy nut. I did not respond to you because you just come across as a nut."

So they've been telling me for years. But so often what I say turns out to be true, that even other people in my life who scoffed have started to notice and even apologize occasionally.
Using the term "garden variety conspiracy nut" about the other commenter tells a lot more about you.

"When living in NYC, I heard WABC "talk show host Lynn Samuels praise to the skies Public Enemy's latest album "Fear of a Black Planet." She enthused sincerely: "Such a WONDERFUL title!"

Probably playing Shock Jock back then. Don't know much about her, but lately she has been vocal in demanding BO's birth certificate, and questioning his elegibility, so she's not a pc-bot. Wonders never cease.

Her type (they come in jew and gentile) always seem to think they live in metaphorical gated communities and are immune from repercussions.

"The story about Oswald being on the FBI's payroll was made up by two reporters who thought that they were being monitored. They discussed informant numbers and Oswald to try to confirm their suspicions.

This, according to Alonzo Hudkins."

I can check that out; I'm in touch with researchers who would know better than I. But considering the countless lies and deliberate oversights of the Warren Commission and its "supporters" (who are still around and still on the offense), it would not matter to the overall assertion of a massive conspiracy. LHO was first and foremost, a CIA operative who found out too late he couldn't back out. They have you once, they have you for life.

"You can find refutations of the nutcase's "facts" by searching Posner's and Bugliosi's books at Amazon."

"I just hate people who read some book, take it as the gospel, and then assume they know everything."

Nutcase? That's a funny epithet to be using here, blog of so many heretical notions. But then this site is well-monitored, I'm sure, by people with varying interests.

I did not just read "one book." I have read many of various povs. As I said, I've studied this for YEARS.

So should I take the first commenter's advice and rely on two books rather than one? I believe he also said, "Who cares anymore?" another line detractors throw out to squash any protesting squeeks about lies and cover-ups. A lot of people care, many of them young. The executors of the 1963 coup d'etat were hoping people would not care after even 5 years, but here it is nearly fifty on and people still care. Because we are still living with the repercussions and many of the players are still around and in action, dude. Or their immediate descendants, political and/or biological are.

Douglass' is one of the best studies and extolled by reviewers of every stripe. He does view the whole thing with a spiritual slant, as he believed Kennedy, for all his foibles, had a real conscience was going through shock at what he was finding out–how politics really worked at his level and higher. But that does not take the place of cold, hard evidence and documentation.

Who wonders why a Warren Commission packed with JFK's enemies and people he fired (Dulles) would be, perhaps, suspect even if they had done their job?

Bugliosi and Posner? Posner admitted he wrote the "Oswald did it" book because that's what the pubishers wanted. And Bugliosi?
Don't make me laugh.

I don't know if you'd want to call it "right" or "left" but
Robert Morrow, JFK researcher has this to say, "The Far Left, the Far Right and the libertarians (Lew Rockwell) have figured out the JFK assassination. It is the Depraved Middle that murdered John Kennedy and is still covering it up. That is why so much radioactive horse manure has come out of the Council on Foreign Relations; the CFR for decades was and personified "the Establishment." Lyndon Johnson, Nelson Rockefeller, George Herbert Walker Bush, Gerald Ford, Richard Nixon … that is your Depraved Middle that murdered and/or covered up the JFK Assassination. Call them the "murdering moderates" if you will."

Here is the email address of D.L. Adams: [email protected] . I suggest shooting him some emails and giving him your best information on the 1963 Coup d'Etat."

Here is his bio:
http://www.familysec…thor_detail.asp "

All I have to say is read "Crossfire" by Jim Marrs. You may not agree totally, but you'll never think the same again. Maybe not about anything.

Mr. Anon posted:
"Templar said…

""This does not mean America did not land men on the moon. It did, and more times than are on record.""
Even though by NASA's own admission, they can't undertake manned space missions beyond Earth's Van Allen Belts because they have no adequate means of shielding astronauts from lethal solar radiation?"

Mr. Anon opines, "That is utter horseshit – NASA has never said any such thing."
Well nobody said they did, did they? But don't pay too much attention to NASA, as in Never A Straight Answer, unless you have your Flash Gordon decoder on hand. I think, Mr. Anon, you have mixed two commenters up.

I am the one who asserts that NASA has landed people on the moon, "more often than on record." You rail against the BSers who claim the Van ALlen Belt makes that impossible and that it was done.
OK. You don't have any argument from me about that Van Allen Belt. I know they have gone through it. My point was that the initial moon landing FOOTAGE THAT WAS SHOWN the first time, appears to have been staged. A film maker named Jay Weidner is currently working on a film about it which should be released soon. They DID GO TO THE MOON; only the film is faked, IMHO, and only for that first landing. "How Stanley Kubrick
Faked the Apollo Moon Landings:
Or How I learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Lies." Alchemical Kubrick II, Jay Weidner, 2009.
Yeah, he's out of the box, but that's considered a good thing IF we agree with the outtaboxer.

Lesley, first off, this lady wasn't a senator – she is in the House of Reps. Secondly, I think you missed Albertosauress's point, which was that the media reaction to single out a whole State is analogous to back then, not the shooting itself."

Sorry, I knew she was a representative, not a senator. I should have said "Congress." And I did get his point about the media singling out a state. But frankly, Lee H. Oswald and all that name conjures up, just grabs me more. It's something I've been studying for years.
As far as Arizona goes, somehow it doesn't surprise me too much that the "left" has found a means to play the grand victim to the "right." The poor woman and the other people who were shot were the victims, not the "left." Both terms are just conjurers tricks.
So, yes, I missed pont du jour. But that other point was, for me, the point of the century.

You see an analogy to "demonizing" Arizona, to demonizing Texas after 1963?
This analogy does not fit. Kennedy was a president, not a senate member, and there were oodles of people out to get him, not one schizophrenic. Also, his enemies were bipartisan. Many Texans did like him, obviously, but in the days before he went, ominous leaflets bearing his photo as "Wanted" were circulated; JFK and Jackie looked at them with sinking hearts the night before they left for Texas. I have heard people in the deep south as being glad over JFK's demise. Heck, I even knew a Catholic kid from Cleveland who who said he and his buddies were glad — they were Italians, but that's not why.
Had to do with 'civil rights.'
The evidence is overwhelming that Oswald was not a "commie."
Re Oswald: "During this time up until the assassination Oswald was on the FBI payroll, receiving $200 per month. This startling fact was covered up by the Warren Commission even though it was stated by the Commission’s own general counsel J. Lee Rankin at a closed-door meeting on January 27, 1964. The meeting had been declared “top secret” and its content only uncovered ten years later after a lengthy legal battle by researcher Harold Weisberg. Douglass claims Oswald “seems to have been working with both the CIA and FBI,” as a provocateur for the former and an informant for the latter. Jim and Elsie Wilcott, who worked at the CIA Tokyo Station from 1960 to 1964, in a 1978 interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, said, “It was common knowledge in the Tokyo CIA hstation that Oswald worked for te agency.” JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters. Douglass, James. (Orbis Books, 2008).
He went defected to Russia and returned with little fanfare during the depths of the cold war? A commie? Who are we kidding.
I am very sorry that you felt bias as a result of being Texan after 1963; however, that does not make it ok to swallow the government-approved conspiracy theory over any number that make infinitely more sense. In fact, like HBD, the evidence has been hiding in plain sight.

My nephew wanted to burn his sister's Barney doll. But then he was only six at the time.

"Vito Corleone was strong for the family. God bless him."

…that's the example of fatherly fortitude that first sprang to mind?
oh dear.

"97% of us AREN'T Jewish. Most Americans don't have Jewish neighbors, friends, or even co-workers. The Jews had nothing to do with the founding of this country and had minimal impact on our public life until 1900 or so. "

I once had a conversation with a very intelligent black lady (she'd worked in the film industry for a while) and opined that slaves had only made their owners wealthy, not society as a whole. She pointed out that slavery had made products like rum, sugar, cotton, etc., cheaper on whole, allowing a more fluid common market. So maybe the wealth of America did owe something to slavery.
As far as Jews not influencing all this, think again. First of all they were involved with European banking, and that was very involved with American finance by the Civil War. Lincoln had some real issue with all this, but that's a complex subject that has been written about by finance historians.
Jews were heavily involved in the slave trade going back to the 16th century. Lists of Jewish owned ships, crews, and the countries that sponsored them, are well known and Jews themselves spoke freely of it until it became taboo in the later 20th century. The first synagogue in the United States went up in Providence, Rhode Island, which puzzled me until someone pointed out that was a major slave-trade port. This is not to accuse them of greater perfidy than that committed by non-Jews, but I am really tired of how some act as though they (as a group) are totally innocent, historically, of slavery and racism in America. They are as guilty (even if they were sometimes victims of racism) as the non-Jews who were slavers. Nevertheless, the Jewish slavers could not have flourished unless the "Christian" countries sponsoring them, went for it in a big way. Queen Elizabeth I had her scruples, but they were overcome.
What I'm saying is, this aura of innocent victim who has never done any great degree of moral wrong (compared with gentiles) has just got to stop. It's dishonest, dissimulating, and leads to psycho anti-Jewishness which is just as disturbing as irrational philo-Jewishness. The Jews are no better and no worse morally than any other ethnic group, but the history is there to read. They say winners write history–I think they write the textbooks and the taglines on monuments. The original sources and references are left in the file cabinets for those who really want to know.

"She [Palin] is dumb, that's a fact."

"Dumb?" Do you mean she is lacking that ineffable quality that we are told B.O. possesses in such abundance, i.e., intelligence?
Or do you mean "dumb" as in "mute?" Because she does talk.

And that's a fact.

"Member of the right wing element in Texas" who carried out the assasination. That was until Lee Harvey Oswald was named as a suspect."

uh, probably because it really was a partly right-wing conspiracy involving a number of Texas oilmen and their rumblings had been in the grapevine for sometime and they had powerful contacts at the White House. Oswald, as he insisted to his very and sudden end, a "patsy." But there were leftys as well. Whenever something like this happens, hold on to the very first reports, such as 9/11. They are likely to contain some of the choicest morsels of truth, but the media has not yet decided exactly how to control it. Lougher's mom belong to the same synagogue as Gifford. I don't think they can hide that forever.

Concerning the Miss Steinfeld. Actors don't bother to Anglify their names or conceal mixed ancestry anymore–they used to. Weren't quite a few of the old Hollywood personnel of "exotic" lineages? Merle Oberon for example. There were others. Also, many purely European-descended actors played non-Europeans, even non-whites, the most awkward and stupid example being the lead characters in the Good Earth. Some Euros can play Arabs and mestizos with some look of reality, but they don't work as Chinese. And I don't think a white man would work playing Papa Doc. The PC crowd is becoming blind, deaf and dumber. The next time some pc lunatic wants to star an obviously black actor in a Jane Austin flick, let's suggest Tom Cruise play Malcolm X and Morgan Fairchild play Hitler. That should shut them up forever.
Actors "work" in a part as long as they are good and can be made to look the part. Steinfeld works in the role. I've seen northern Euros with bluntish features and no "mixture" to explain them. Just how the genes fell. That is what acting is. It is among the last professions where authenticity matters as long as artifice suffices. Just the ACTORS, not the actual story where authenticity and honesty really does matter.

"On a related note I've read that the Chinese never practiced surgery, while Westerners have been doing it since prehistoric times. The "let it be", "resign yourself to fate" attitude seems to be deeply rooted in the East."

I'm no great apologist for the Chinese, but really…
They just didn't believe in carving up the body, unless it was execution by a thousand cuts.
They used herbs and potients instead of surgery. Acupunture shows profound understanding of the body processes and the ability to manipulate them.
In the future, most medicine (except when urgent and necessary) will be closer to this method. In some ways, all this cutting and carving is pretty barbaric IF it is possible to treat the dis-ease systemically by balancing the system. IF a cancer can be stopped with a herb concoction that puts the body chemistry back in balance, that is obviously preferable to chopping it out and not curing the cause of the affliction.
And btw, Arab medicince used preparations for anesthetic long before ether and chloroform. To this day some medical historians wonder why European doctors did not use these pain killers when they actually were aware of their existence and had even used them at different periods of European history. Perhaps a fear of killing the patient; but personally, after reading Fanny Burney's account of having her breast removed (1812) without anesthetic, I'd have preferred to die of too much anesthetic.

"In an effeminate educational system, designed to educate women, the "

Oh I don't know. One Kafka biographer wrote with some horror of the entirely male schools of 19th century Prague. Always remember they influenced the author of the "Castle."

The "system", I suppose, means students sitting in a room and keeping movement to a minimum for a number of hours while acquiring information, often by rote, sometimes by experimentation.
This "system" has been in place for thousands of years. School rooms in Sumeria and ancient Egypt were not a million miles away from a school room (san computers) in small-town Anywhere. Females were rarely students in schools until the 1700s, and rarely teachers until the mid-1800s. Even after that, most teachers were men in the European school system until later in the 20th century. Women did not "design" the system, but certainly in some ways they are more adaptable to it and have been the major influence in America since the early 1900s.
There was no Golden Age of male schools, at least not for children. St. Augustine, cica 450 A.D., speaking of school, observed that any man would rather die than repeat his childhood in school. I don't think anyone would describe that fifth century school as "effeminate" and it involved a 'sitting-still' of biblical proportions.

"Most people whose IQ's are below 120 don't form their own opinions. They just parrot the opinions of those they are trying to suck up to. So you get a lot of lemming-like follow-on rejection of HBD from that >>large, dim group.<<"

I understand that commenters on this blog like to talk about those of high intellect, especially those whose IQ surpasses 130 (I also believe a great many assume their IQs are above 130). "

Thank you Height Privilege, you are so right. I first noticed this IQ inflation (in the minds of those who pay explicit attention to it) many years ago when I was only a kid. There was an article in Reader's Digest (ok, I was only 11; I lost interest in that rag by 12) discussing IQ and parents worrying about how one of their kids had an IQ of 135 and the other only 133. This was a sort of random example they chose. 133 is already in the upper 2% (Mensa territory), and the percentage points go down incrementally after that number. Even the Ivy Leagues can't possibly average that high, except in some of the hard sciences.
A few geniuses are responsible for sudden leaps forward, but a host of merely "smart" people are absolutely necessary to assist in the invention processes, implementation, maintainance, improvement and continuance of whatever was invented. Why do you think societies deteriorate when a high iq group withdraws, leaving a predominantly low-iq group which nevertheless, probably has a genius or two. Even invention is usually not the work of a single person, but the combined efforts of many. John Lennon said all great artists steal. Well all great scientists steal too. That's why I'm amused at the emphasis on Nobel Prize winners as indicators of singular genius. Maybe, maybe not. Western civilization emphasizes the individual and this does give drive to the invidual, but it doesn't always reflect reality.
Back to IQ. An IQ of 115 is well above the average and all that is needed to do very well in college and even in most of the professions. Unless the commenters here are all Mensa-eligible, they should be careful about framing every IQ argument around a desirable hypotethical population consisting of the upper 2% of Europeans. Most of the arguments are better served by using more realistic evaluations of what we are–on the average.

"Dr. Tan had indeed earned a medical degree (don't remember where) in the 1960s and worked among Indian tribes in Kansas."

Correction
I meant 1860s.

"You know, recently some old footage of San Francisco's Market trolley, circa 1906 (pre-Earthquake) was being linked all over the internet. Of the identifiable people, there are probably about 1-2% non-whites. There just weren't a lot of non-whites, even Chinese, in the West in the late 1800s."

In Laura Ingalls Wilder's "Little House on the Prairie" the Ingalls family members are all down with the "ague" (probably malaria.) One Dr. Tan shows up with medicine (probably quinine) and they recover. If that scene were to play today, we'd say it was PC to include a humanitarian black doctor, but in fact that was in her book, and was true, and he really was black as Laura recalled, not "tan." Dr. Tan had indeed earned a medical degree (don't remember where) in the 1960s and worked among Indian tribes in Kansas.
So, the moral of that is, never say never.

I never equated light color with high-caste. I have seen too many pictures over the years, and have met too many Indians personally, to make such a simple conjecture. The photos (if labeled correctly) showed light colored peasants with chiseled features, identified by castes I can't recall except that they were not Brahmin, and Brahmins who look "Dravidian." Indira Ghandi's family apparently included a natural red-head, or so I read. They were high-caste, but of a particular type descending more recently from people from the north. There are v. dark South Indian Tamils who have been known for their mathematical ability. But if the west had never barged in on India, what would they have done with those skills that would have caused change and progress? Was India showing any signs of that? I don't see how, with Hinduism. Too fatalistic. Worse than Catholicism in southern Europe after the Renaissance. Almost as bad as Islam. I am no hater of religion, but after the initial burst of creativity, religions seems to petrify a society's progress. High level mathematical achievements by the native inhabitants of the Indian sub-continent were in the extremely distant past. When there have been no innovations, and only stagnancy or regression, you do have to wonder if it has something to do with the population itself, and not just cruel fate. We may be wondering that about ourselves in the not too distant future.

"For instance, the mind-blowing "illogic in the claim that "expensive cities that are filled with high IQ asians and brahmins seem to have no trouble recruiting high IQ whites" suggests that your IQ is rather low."

well, either that or English is just not his first language. Most of us sound stupid writing in a second language.
Expensive cities indeed. "Filled" with Indians." Silicon Valley aside, would that be Edison, New Jersey? You know, that city named for the famous American genius Thomas Edison.

"As a high IQ white who enjoys associating with East Asians, I find your comments (Tilman's) to be presumptuous."
My sister works in a computer company, in an east coast city, owned by Indians. Even now, during the depression, their HR is importing yet MORE Indians. My sister (white) and her friend, (black with an ex-military husband), are the minorities, in their own country. Both are competent programmers with years of experience. While they like their employers and most of their co-workers, they are not getting the work the Indians do, though they have the experience and know-how. This is what happens. But we tell anyone not white that they are protected minorities when many are well-heeled professionals, choosing to come here, from a country to which the American taxpayers owe nothing. While they have the right to legally immigrate, there is exactly 0 reason to allow any sort of affirmative action (though I don't know if that's what's happening.) How the hell could the country that invented the computer industry need to import anybody? If the school system would stop holding back the bright kids so no child is left behind, they'd have more than enough brains to take ET home. And if you are really set on a multi-racial, high iq environment, then everybody has to let go of the race-politics and race-id, not just whites, because sooner or later, people realize they are suckers.
Asians come because they can and because there's a freakin' two billion of them where they came from. But whites do not move to Silicon valley just for their company. They end up there because they've been going there since post-WWII, long-before any Asians; and continue to go despite Asians. As in any group, amicable relations form in varying degrees, but inevitably demographics become political. The whites are not allowed to look out for their own interests in their own country, yet we are expected to look out for the interests of non-whites, who are already looking out very well for their own interests with all the power that U.S. Constitutional law and pc sentiment, provides for them.
Something's got to give in that scenario.
I think Ben and some others were just responding to the presumption that whites seek out cities with high iq Asians so they can be with other like-minded individuals, when in fact, whites started it all (why, after all, are the Indians and Chinese coming here?), and it was the Asians who sought out the U.S.
As far as high-g elites favoring Asian company, I don't think most care and do not want to be overwhelmed demographically. Non-whites think the socially clueless, Aspergized whites who can't wait to be a minority in their own country are insane. Or at least naive.

The "live in the open" style – though you may see extreme examples of it filling every issue of Architectural Digest still – may turn out to be a blip, historically speaking: from 1910 to 2020, say.

One can only hope. Worse than houses though, whole office buildings made of glass make me exceedingly nervous. I don't think we were meant to live in glass houses. Not on this planet anyway.
You'd think they'd be more insecure in D.C.

"Do you deny that red-haired Scots, blonde nords, and dark skinned, haired and eyed iberians are all "authentically white"?"

If I saw an Irishman or Basque looking like, oh, B. Obama, I'd say "there's an example of admixture." Surprisingly, I don't know any Irish or Basques who look like Mr. O unless they have known black Africna ancestry.
If I recall, the forum discussion was about black Africans in central, west and southern Africa, most of whom are not "mixed" as far as one can tell. They were focusing on physical features.

"Is anyone willing to go for umimpressive AND Arab?"

I'll second you on that.
Probably Arab and pretty unimpressive. It's the element of surprise that magnifies it. The wall was mostly put up by a transient (or absorbed into the locals) Arab colony or trade-station that needed protection and whose Arabness didn't last too long. The Arabs were all over that part of Africa, and in Arabia there were tribes dating back a couple centuries who hailed from Ethiopia.
The wall is pretty anomalous in the area, and anyway, if local blacks built it, why did they ever repeat the task anywhere?

I think the Persians, more than the Arabs, were the ones to do the amazing mosaics and designed the "Moorish" architecture that went up in Andalucia, Spain. Or at least so a Persian said.
Still, the Arab Semites have been building walls for a long time. The Walls of Jericho. They build them around their houses, around their courtyards, around their gardens and around their cities. The walled mind is a metaphor for Arab culture.

btw, there is a group of blacks in the south-central Zimbabwe area who are very Arab looking, even more so than the Ethiopian types. Someone from this group was on a discussion forum and insisting that her phenotype, which included straight hair and light skin — or so she said — was just as authentically black and African as any other sub-Saharan black. When someone suggested they were mixed with Arab she vociferously denied it.

"Ahem…I believe that the British got trounced by the Zulus at Indalwana. At least the Ethiopians had guns! "

"Zulu", 1964 with Irish actor Peter O'Toole in another one of his British sahib roles. He was still sunburnt from being Lawrence of Arabia.

If you are going to talk about pain and the Chinese relationship with it, you absolutely cannot leave out the 1,000 year old custom of foot-binding. Mother-love, at least of the mother-daughter variety, was synonomous with causing pain. There was an actual term for it–something like she who gives pain give love. There is no other explanation for the fact that millions of parents were willing to torture their small children in a prolonged and intimate way in oder to have esthetically acceptable feet. Bound feet oozed pus and blood for months during the "breaking process." It was unbelievabley dredful. It is even more insane than circumcision (male or female) for at least circumcision had some connection with (often misunderstood)religious laws, poorly understood biological processes, and hygiene; whereas footbinding just tortured the feet and left them smelly and deformed, unfit to be seen unless covered and eroticized with elaborate, tight shoes.
This was a custom not confined to a few rich. By the time it stopped (mainly due to Japanese in Taiwan and "foreign devil" influence in other areas), 80% of all Chinese females had bound feet, including peasants in non-rice farming areas, and the impoverished. A common expression was "a barrel of tears for each little foot." They didn't really enjoy torturing their children (well, some mother-in-laws did), and there was no imperative religious requirement such as some cultures feel about circumcision. It was all for esthetics and showing that one was willing to suffer in order to please or one-up others, for smaller feet meant you were superior and beautiful. A pretty face you were born with but bound feet were made. They were molded into the desired form. In Chinese fables, a woman might be insulted if you praised her pretty face, for that she had no control over, it being a gift of nature. But the feet were woman-made.

Women interview late in the 20th century would say that people in their mothers' day could not imagine a natural footed woman. Such a creature would have seemed grotesque them.

Baker is his book "Race" mentions artistic achievements by west African black peoples who had learned goldsmithing from the Portuguese in the 1400s. In fact, Encyclopedia Britannica, circa 1911, had an article on the highly complex art works that were done. But as the whites withdrew from that part of Africa, the blacks did not keep up the art form.
Doing skilled handwork and crafts — which is what building is — is not confined to high iq populations. What does take high iq is the foresight, planning, conceptualization, distribution, maintenance, improvements and innovations on already invented procedures. That sort of thing. And that's the sort of thing they can't keep up in Africa. Or Detroit. Or anyplace where the population is majority black. The average percentage of individuals with high enough intelligence for that — it would take a substantial percentage — is just not present in a sub-Saharan African population. The Haiti example of "Emperor Jones" does show the blacks can do it, physically. But the French had only just recently left, and many of the people who planned the building had been educated by the French. The whole "meme" of building such a fortification was still fresh in their experience. I'll wager it would not have been built 100 years after the departure of the French, were Haiti to have been invade. Haiti, like Africa, has jungles where the people can retreat. And like Africa, did not have much of an urban "civilization" to protect. In 1810, the French colony was still a sort of "civilization" that at least the mulattos wanted to maintain.

"Actually, depression is rather rare in individuals of African ancestry.Schizophrenia is a more common mental illness amongst persons of African descent, depression is mostly a 'white man's' disease."

' "So maybe he is half depressed." '

..and the other half is schizophrenic.
finally it makes sense.

There are also on-line the reminiscences of a well-known Australian misionary traveling through China in the 1880s. Mostly he likes and respects the inhabitants, notes their lawfulness, and social order that generally prevailed, and thinks the women are much better looking than the Japanese, whose admirers he doesn't understand. He thinks the incidence of female infanticide is overstated by missionaries (though how would he know for sure?), but notices the strong favortism towards male children. All in all though, he admires the country.
When he talked to an American missionary in a large city, she said the local ladies liked to dress in their best and visit her western style house, which apparently was well appointed though not extraordinary.
Certainly they similar desires to ours concerning a way of life, just no way of implementing it, given the limitations of material culture at that time. The Chinese ladies commented on the house's cleanliness, order and light, and called it "heaven."
It wasn't just the opium wars that made China want to beat the West at its own game.

"but as for the idea that we are more disease-ridden than the Chinese, I don't buy for a minute."

Nor do I. There is a memoire I read on-line, (memoires and testifying were a popular artform during the cultural changes of the early 20th century. Women unbinding their feet told their stories in well-publicized newspaper articles during the 20s and 30s) of older Chinese who lived through most of the 20th century. A woman described the life of her mother who had born about 11 children of whom most died in childhood. This was prior to WWII, but still, 20th century. The interesting observation was that that was "common" in those days. There was nothing unusual for a mother to lose 11 children in childhood. Almost made infanticide (also practiced mostly by the urban poor) not worth the effort.
The Chinese premature mortality rate was extremely high. As in the opening pages of the Good Earth: only Wang Lung had survived which is why a woman must "bear children continually" in order to have any survive.
By the 20th century most of the West had left such a high child mortality rate behind. By 1900 it was about 10% for upper class families, although still about 25% for society as a whole. By WWII it was way lower, though I don't have the stat for it.
So while I am a great believer in some of the Chinese medicines, etc., they owe their enormous increase in population and vast decrease in child mortality, to the adoption of western ways, and — it's hard for me to admit — some forms of western medical practice. Just having flush toilets and running water makes a huge difference. Otherwise you are surrounded by filth. Imagine being sick from "both ends" in a small, crowded room with only pots of water. One Chinese friend (ex-Party member, no less), said that among peasants it was not unusual for little boys to get bitten on genital area while doing their business because latrines were built over pig styes and the pigs had no respect. And this was late 20th century.
We just have no idea how most of the world lives.

I don't care about any "depression" he may be experiencing. Of course he's depressed. He mentally ill but he's not totally insane. Not totally.
What concerns me, and what should concern the public, is whether he's a liar or not. Now I know all pols lie, just as everyone in the Oval Office gets depressed, and should get depressed. But what lies? No, frankly I don't give a damn about his weepy blues condition. If he feels that way, it may be one of the few honest and appropriate responses he's had to reality in his life.

"Turkish," I can think of only four word-association completions: "bath," "whorehouse," "march," and "prison."

what? How about Turkish Taffy (very popular candy when I was growing up, and still available); Turkish Delight, another kind of candy of very ancient provenance; Turkish towels, and Turkey dinner.

"Unlike the delinquents in Washington DC, who have decided to:
a.) Invite the whole world to live here
b.) Let our manufacturing base go overseas
c.) Allow foreignization of the IT workforce
d.) Borrow lots of money to pay for wars and overseas troop deployement that doesn't even benefit us."

You make a compelling case. Those running this country have little invested in it — quite literally. Any American businessman or politician who wants to move operations and jobs overseas, should move himself overseas and give up American citizenship. We are funding traitors.

"Gore Vidal said a narcissist was someone better looking than you are."

Yes, an gay man would tend think that.

"As for his IQ, I find the 115-125 range plausible. Much below that a man wouldn't be able to form complicated grammatically-correct sentences as easily as he does. Much above that he wouldn't be so boring. You'd occasionally see signs of an unusual, eccentric take on the world beneath the platitudes."

Coming from his background, eccentric comes naturally. It doesn't represent any orignal thought.

Perhaps because it's scary to think how dumb most of the world is, people have a really inflated idea of what IQ it takes to seem intelligent. Prince Charles supposedly has an IQ of 103 (sorry, I can't remember where I read that, but it's plausible); he's not known for brilliance, and yet I have heard him talk extemporaneously about architecture (a passion of his) with an articulateness and precision I haven't heard from many college professors. He knows his history too. I guess he has been so surrounded by well-spoken people he is performing at maximum capacity in this particular way. But he's just one example. IQ 100 is average, 110 is already exceptional. Anybody of at least average intellect can be trained to seem of managerial capacity if they get a lot of support. We have people with IQs of 100 graduating as medical doctors, thanks to AA.
POTUS doesn't do or say anything that requires much more than that. The constant use of the teleprompter and his fumbling extemporaneous attempts should tell you that much. I think they are trying to keep him out of Washington right now. Whoever's is running this mess, he doesn't really help their cause much right now.
As for he being smart because he graduated from Harvard–oh come on.

"It's not about Obama.

Obama – any president – is merely a figurehead, not a "decider" (laughable Bush). But particularly Mr. Teleprompter, the ultimate empty suit.

It's the powers behind the scenes that determines what "The President" does. And they don't want an end to racial quotas, or to mass illegal immigration. Their puppet will not rebel against his masters."

Absolutely. Sometimes I am surprised at how much even thinking people think politicians' parties matter, or even the pols themselves. They matter little, and the higher you go, the less they matter. Local politicians can actually affect change in a personal way–you can influence on that level; but at the presidential level, it's entirely controlled from behind the scenes. I don't know how long this has been true–probably most of our history, but Woodrow Wilson whispered that to a confidant in 1919 or so.
It's almost never that I would use the arrogant, extreme accusation, "you don't know what you're talking about," but you REALLY don't know what you're talking about if you believe Pearl Harbor had anything to do with "political correctness" way back then. Roosevelt knew it was coming and he did nothing. This was admitted in mainstream news a few years ago, as was another appallingly callous almost-did-it plan hatched by generals about 1961, called Northwoods. It's one of those things that is just too hard to believe, like that your parents abuse you and want to kill you. Fortunately the President vetoed it so we shall never know whether it would have worked out they way they wanted.
In the words of General Smedley Butler, "War is a racket." He admitted he'd been a gangster for corporate interests, whose crumbs we the people also eat.
America needs no lessons in ruthlessness. Or whoever the hell is running this country needs no such lessons.

"Why single out the arts as the one field where you don't get to qualify unless you've attained Greatness?"

Ray, I hear your frustration with asefoetida, who occasionally makes insightful points, gets complimented and then thinks he can judge the vegetables every year in every state fair. You get some of these cases.

Of course there's a distinction between Leonardo Da Vinci and Andy Warhole, but there's a whole lot between. In any case "great" whatevers don't rise out of nowhere or exist in isolated greatness. All owe their specialness to talent, work, achievement, discoveries, that preceded them.

"Ever since the rise of Pagalia-ism, a neo-feminism has encouraged women to act wild, sexually out of control, skanky, and spanky."

in the words of Kramer (Seinfeld)
"oooo baby!"

thanx. I don't get a lot laughs on this blog.

"Austen's principal characters are mostly middle class by the standards of their times. Furthermore, Emma, for example, has well-rounded characters among the genuinely non-well-to-do."

Fanny of Mansfield Park was a poor relation. When Fanny has to return home, the description of her homelife is startling. It could be a New Jeresy rowhouse when I was growing up–Dad sitting with the newspaper (candle instead of lamp), kids back from school running all over the place ignoring their newly home sister, mom preoccupied with getting older brother's duds ready for his leave taking to seamanship school, the slovely maid who delays with the tea forcing Fanny to order out for scones.
Jane could describe the "lower orders" when she had to. As far as her living conditions, she was one of them most of her life.

Somebody mentioned there'd been no women on the order of Lovecraft–Shirley Jackson gave him a run for the money. Remember "The Lottery?" I'll never forget the first time I read that. Horror writing is one genre where I've read some fantastic female writing. Also crime writing.
How about Agatha Christie? P.D. James? I guess you could say Christie took off on Conan Doyle, but the way she told stories and the quantity she produced, was pretty unique and still lives on.
The genres of literature in which women have pioneered and excel are sort of odd-ball genres imo. If you want mideaval France, the Crusades, the reality of life in the castle circa 1100, read Zoe Oldenburg, The World Is Not Enough. Incredible. Never read anything like it. You can smell the dead leaves after a village burning.
Laura Ingalls Wilder. Kids books, esp. girls', so naturally most the commenters here would be unfamiliar with her writing if not her name, but genius shimmers through her story telling. I have read memoires galore and never read any as starkly real as they are haunting and dreamlike. There are a number of childrens' writers of the female persuasion who could be called geniuses of a sort–Beatrix Potter perhaps– and that does make sense–women have been telling kids stories forever. Also illustrators. And I haven't even gotten to some of the pioneering women of the alternative medical field, or the "crazy" and wildly controversial physicist, Dr. Judy Wood. At least she give reasons for what she believes and only accepts what she sees.
I'll leave that for a women-can't-be-real-scientists post. They're always fun.

There is certainly something to be said for the greater agressiveness and concentration with which men are likely to embrace their chosen avocations, and in some cases their achievements are dependent on stratospherically high IQ (it is only above 140 that a male/female iq divide becomes persuasive), but I think people who claim there are no creative women geniuses are rather ignorant of the creative output in the last 180 years, are not interested in the fields most women of achievement have worked in, only look in certain quarters for certain opinions, and perhaps they choose to be that way.

"But when it comes to asians, whites love to deny HBD and throw out every theory they can to account for any differences."

Could be; but to me, fawning over Asians as being so much more intelligent when said Asians are basically flourishing in a modern world almost entirely invented by several centuries of European diligence, creativity, gradual improvement and technological invention, is just, well, nutty.
Yeah, many among them are just as smart as many among whites. Maybe the generality are just a little smarter, as well as more disciplined, than the generality of whites. But the thought of them as of "superior" intelligence, when I look at all that whites have done is just, well, crazy. It doesn't make any sense and yet whites on hbd blogs keep parroting that "whites will never be as smart as asians." Like saying the British will never speak English as well New Jerseyites.

I don't think women are expecting to live anymore on men's earnings for the rest of their lives. You are living in the Philip Wylie generation? As a matter of fact, my mother died 11 years before my father; my best friend's mother died 20 years before her widower; my other friend' father outlived his wife by 35 years and yet another's friend's mother died 12 years before her husband. Indeed, I count so many friends and relatives of a certain generation (mine) whose fathers outlived their mothers, that I wonder if it's a trend that is showing up in the stats.
In any case, I don't why men here diss feminism so much. There have been the absurd PC excesses, but a lot of "feminism" needed to happen for mens' own good.
It has actually forced a very large percentge of women to fend for themselves, and sometimes for their husbands. Those female PhDs who now apparently outnumber male PhDs will at least be less likely to bother the male for a lifetime free lunch.
And btw. Prior to the 20th century, men outlived women on the average. Reading 17th and 18th biographies is an education in that regard. Until the 20th century when it wasn't really necessary in developed countries any more, I don't recall reading of any females whining over it. It was just life.

"It is BS that Sicilians are part black or mostly Arab- and I get tired of hearing it. But being of Sicilian descent, I also find it annoying when Internet warriors try to "defend" us by making us out to be Nordic.
In spite of all the different invaders on the island, the majority of Sicilians (with the possible exception of people from a few towns) look distinctly Southern European, and Sicilians have more Greek ancestry than Norman or anything else."

Thanks for some sanity in the Euro-ethnic discussion. What you say makes sense from common-sense observation and history. I have seen perhaps more than few Sicilians who could be from anywhere in Europe, north, south, east or west, but there is a general "Sicilian" or southern Italian look, just like there is an "Irish" or "Czech" look (yes, there is.)
I recall that in Coon's book, one of the chief race-indicators in phenotype, and one that most people cannot put their finger on and don't consider–is that of "striations" in the musculature of the face. In other words, the number and "striations" of the muscle fibers that make up facial expressions. He uses an Italian, an Asian and a "Negro" (African Black) as examples. The Italian is quite the drama king/queen because the face makes so many expressions. Asians are more impassive not just because of facial flatness or their culture, but because their facial musculature is just smoother under the epidermis. African blacks have the smoothest facial musculature of all.

IQ degrades mildly in middle age only for those near the middle of the Bell Curve, but for the plus-3 sigma crowd, the decline is a lot steeper. Trust me. As one of these folks, working among these folks for two decades, I know.

Nonsense. I have always read that senility is more common among lower IQ persons. Not exclusively of course, but statistically significantly more common. It has something to do with the brain being of more complex design, more "backup" as deterioration occurs. Also, just more activity.
Among scientists the number who continue to work actively in their fields as they into their 80s and even 90s is amazing. They are not doing their greatest anymore, but they are still functioning and interested.
This is pretty general knowledge.

I would infinitely prefer to live in Argentina, Brazil, heck even Thailand, than Sweden, and even Japan is just plain boring and vanilla at the end of the day."

To complete you education, please plan on spending extra time among Somalis in Sweden, Jamaicans and Nigerians in London, and please don't forget neighborhoods full of blacks and browns surrounding Paris. Close the door on your way out, and don't forget an extended stop-over in Johannesburg.

"I was smart enough to read Finnegans Wake" Bob!"

I'm impressed. I could only get through "Ulysses" going backwards, but there were unforgettable moments nevertheless. "Finnegan's Wake" I read by reading crtiques of it and bios of Joyce.
I don't know what it is about "English" (meaning literature in general of any language) and "History" that rankles so many who consider themselves pragmatists (for lack of a better word.) These are subjects that actually can raise the mentality a bit, from the dross of everyday existence, if there is any mentality to raise. Unlike the hard sciences, they are not dependent on a specialized type of talent–at least I don't think so–or doing well in algebra. Of course the terms "literature" and "history" are broad, but I have never been in gross disagreement about what the experts think is high quality in these areas, except that "history" is much too limited and controlled by whoever is running the show. Still…
These are called "humanities" for a reason and often it's not until after high school that you can appreciate them. Perhaps nobody should be paid four year tax money to study them, but maybe one or two years is worth it. While I may risk sounding like Jon Voigt (spelling anyone? you know, Angelina's estranged Dad?) in that movie where he's teaching apparently hopeless cases in a black rural school, I have seen changes in unpromising young people exposed to the worlds that literature and other humanities can open to them. Of course there is a risk of the teaching being too absurdly "leftist." That's why pragmatists and race realists have to be involved in the process. Too many of them scorn anything that is not of material value to them in an immediate way. Literature is a vast world and any "ideology" can be found in it if you look.

We will never have such a president again because women vote."

Women have been voting in America since 1920. Please do drag yourself, hbd and all, into the 21st century. Now. Let's see what woman the mass of men would be most likely to cast their votes? hmmmm.

Both genders of actors in Hollywood are botoxed up and look more like androids than flesh and blood these days. Some actreses even without "work" look sexy later on, like Helen Mirren, but they are not to everyone's taste and must have exceptional talent to command the screen.
A few male actors (Cary Grant for one) did age very well and didn't look too weird with much younger co-stars, but Cary was an exception. Robert Young, dashingly handsome in his 20s, was considered over-the-hill and not leading man material by the time he was only 40. He ended up playing Father Knows Best, in his 40s. Most leading-man actors at 40 are still at their peak, but not at 50 for the most part. Jimmy Stewart decided not to play opposite any more much younger actresses after he was in Bell, Book and Candle with Kim Novak. Thought he looked too old for them, and re-watching the movie, I concurred. Stewart did grow up to be a bit fatherly looking towards the end of his major career. I always thought he was unusually realistic and admirably honest and considerate — almost noble. To have gone on pretending would have been so expected, so unevolved, so blah. But he knew it was time to move on. Time to move over. Warren Beatty was a pup by then.

While the iconic image of lovers has always been of a couple at least of the same generation, there has always been a predictable percentage of May-September (at least not too many January) couples, and I suspect the percentage in societies where the women choose their own mates, has been consistant over the centuries. Just like there's always a certain percentage (about 3%) who are particularly attracted to other races. There are always some people attracted to great differences in age. How did they handle their social life and friends and those "remember when" conversations?
Anyway, both genders have plenty of examples of vapid, soul-destroying icons of behavior, esp. the young, poor things. Surprise of my life: some of us actually find being "older" — and healthy — to be a freakin' relief.

What we'll get is changes to divorce law that saves high earning women the ignominy of paying their loser husbands alimony (man-imony)."

I wonder where some of you live. Or when.
Unmarried women are pretty much expected to earn their own way these days. Married too, for that matter, most of the time.

In Maryland, if the woman made more money, she is indeed liable to pay the ex-husband alimony, though I don't know the exact rules. I personally know of a woman who had her own business and had to pay so much to her ex-husband she lost the business and is living with her psychiatrist parents. Maybe more to the story, but she did have to pay her husband.

Some of you really must enter the 21st century. You'd be surprised at how things have changed so much at least they don't SEEM the same.

"Obama's mother was a US citizen which pretty much gives him US citizenship whether born in the US or abroad (like McCain in Panama)."

No, it doesn't for a number of reasons. But I'd prefer that lawyer Phil Berg, enlighten you on that topic. As for McCain's situation, it was at least publicized and discussed in the MSM. He was the son of two adult American citizens for one thing.
Also, something about a law passed in the early 30s. But at least it was discussed and he didn't pay a major law firm a million dollars to shut up the accusers, as has someone else we all know.
That topic as never been debated here, and just as well isteve keeps on topics that do not get the Obots too acitvated/

One of the most striking pieces of evidence regarding this matter is the list of high scoring people in the Putnam Mathematical Competition. This competition is written every year by the best undergraduate mathematics students in USA and Canada, and the people who do well are the best of the best, and truely must in the extreme upper fringes of mathemaatical ability.  
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lowell_Putnam_Mathematical_Competition 
 
The top 5 students every year (or top 6 in the case of a tie) are given the distinction “Putnam Fellow”. The names of Putnam Fellows are published every year.  
 
http://www.maa.org/awards/putnam.html 
 
Since 1992 there has been a special award for the top scoring female in the competition. From 1992-2007 a woman acheived the Putnam Fellow distinction only 4 times, while men have been awarded this distinction about (5*16)-4 = 76 times. So the M:F ratio is 76:4, or 19:1. (I am basing the gender count on the assumption that in a year when a woman is a Putnam Fellow, she will also be the winner of the Elizabeth Lowell Putnam Prize for the highest scoring women. Because many of the names are not Anglo-Saxon, I can’t tell from the names alone). 
 
More data could be obtained, because a list of the top 500 contestants is published every year, and likely the gender of most could be determined using the first name (if a team of people familiar with names in different cultures looked at them).  
 
I wrote the contest in 1993 and scored in the top 500, which is how I know about the list. I’m also a female.  
 
Before you men get too smug, keep in mind that a lot of men in the upper fringes of mathematical ability seem to have strange, antisocial personalities–they might have Asperger’s or something like that (which is more common in men). And a lot of them are just bat-sh*t crazy.

Why, indigenous peoples were living in a harmonious, peaceful state with nature before the arrival of those bad Europeans. 
 
Of course. According to my daughter (a sociology major) all the badness in the world comes from evil European colonialism. Before that, the world was a paradise with no fighting or war or violence or disease.

I’m just a little perplexed as to why Central Asians, Mongols, and some of the other northern ethnicities seem to be really far apart from the Koreans and Japanese.  
—————————- 
I’ve read that alcoholism is very widespread in Mongolia–this could certainly have a devastating effect on a civilization.  
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/55/507.html 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3138806.stm