What's new
By:

Is Hayward a victim of reverse racism on this board?

reason said:
With all the logic you guys think you're spouting, you continue to make one disgusting fallacy. EVEN IF African Americans are a standard deviation more athletic, there is still NO WAY you can look at an individual and make even the slightest guess at their athleticism using their skin color. That's just not how it works, and every time you try to make that connection with regards to individual you come off as ignorant. Smart people shy away from this topic when analyzing a player not because it's politically incorrect but because it's fallacious and downright dangerous.

This discussion is embarrassing on so many levels, but I'll pick one more: the irony of talking about the evils of slavery while simultaneously employing the mindset of a slave owner as you pick apart prospects based on wingspan, vertical leap, hand size, and even skin color. Just by bringing it up you've turned the NBA draft into something that carries the echoes of a slave auction. Really takes the fun out of the whole thing.

I wish we could just welcome our new player and look forward to cheering for him.
Click to expand...

You sound as if you've been abstinent for years.
 
Last edited:
reason said:
With all the logic you guys think you're spouting, you continue to make one disgusting fallacy. EVEN IF African Americans are a standard deviation more athletic, there is still NO WAY you can look at an individual and make even the slightest guess at their athleticism using their skin color. That's just not how it works, and every time you try to make that connection with regards to individual you come off as ignorant. Smart people shy away from this topic when analyzing a player not because it's politically incorrect but because it's fallacious and downright dangerous.

This discussion is embarrassing on so many levels, but I'll pick one more: the irony of talking about the evils of slavery while simultaneously employing the mindset of a slave owner as you pick apart prospects based on wingspan, vertical leap, hand size, and even skin color. Just by bringing it up you've turned the NBA draft into something that carries the echoes of a slave auction. Really takes the fun out of the whole thing.

I wish we could just welcome our new player and look forward to cheering for him.
Click to expand...



Damn, sit down and have some cheetos bro.
 
What I will say is that we've gone off slightly tangentially to what earlier posts were claiming. The earlier posts were about selective breeding somehow strengthening the gene pool of African-Americans during the slavery period.
Click to expand...


Wow, you're really mischaracterizing my argument. My bad though. I'm honestly not very good at communicating my thoughts to others so I'm not even gonna try anymore- in this context at least.
 
Hayward did not grade out well in the combine and the only thought your rambling crap post illicited from me is, "what the **** is REVERSE racism?"

Go suck down some management slop and let those of us with brains be pissed off.
 
Sirkickyass said:
I think the same thing every time I hear the term. Near as I can tell it's code for "twice as bad as regular racism because it's against white people."
Click to expand...

Interesting.

While I don't think racism needs any sort of qualifier, my sister and her nutjob hippie Berkeley friends all preached to me that only Whitey® could be racist since the other minorities didn't possess any sort of power in the racist institution that is the United States of America. So maybe it needs a qualifier to show that anyone can be a racist? Hell if I know.
 
Sirkickyass said:
I think the same thing every time I hear the term. Near as I can tell it's code for "twice as bad as regular racism because it's against white people."
Click to expand...

I've never thought of it that way...

From now on, I will not use the term -- however, I still despise it.
 
Darkwing Duck said:
You've done well with your links, Thriller. Credit is due. What I will say is that we've gone off slightly tangentially to what earlier posts were claiming. The earlier posts were about selective breeding somehow strengthening the gene pool of African-Americans during the slavery period. We're now on the individual populations of ancestry and genetic "fitness" for certain activities.

I need to clarify something I mentioned earlier. I said the only main difference of Northern Europeans and Africans were build and melanin percentage. This is mostly true to the phenotype. Bringing in muscle fibers goes more into the genotype.

As it applies to Hayward, though, all the links that you provided would suggest that Hayward is incapable of being in the top 1% or so of quickness and speed, and thus how those two are used in the playing of basketball.





To fix a couple things:

First, heavy melanin content is believed to be the root of all human ancestry, meaning that lighter toned skin was the mutation, not the other way around. This was to better absorb the sun rays in climates that had less of it, namely the higher latitude areas.

Second, even European ancestor society was at one point at the tribal level. Chiefdom and State level societies are a more complex structure that is necessary because of higher populations and things like job specialization.

Third, and this will actually help your argument, is that hunting was different in tribal Europe and tribal Africa. I've read some suggestions, hypotheses, and even up to theories, that humans are genetically designed to be one of the best distance runners on Earth. Africans would hunt by chasing prey until the prey fatigued. In Europe, it's more about patience and quick strikes.

Fourth, both Europeans and Africans ran the gamut as far as people being nomadic, shepherds, or farmers. Animal and plant domestication just happened later in the Earth's timeline in Africa.

Fifth, both Africans and Europeans developed various immunities to diseases. Kind of obvious that those with immunities would be selected in.

Sixth, what a lot of people don't seem to realize is that it's not just the outside environment that affects the evolutionary process. Many traits that have no business existing in the environment that trait exists in. I believe sexual attractiveness is much more important to the passing of a trait overall than environmental affinity. Who cares if that trait survives if you can't pass that gene off because no one wants to do the dirty with you. Now these two thoughts often work together and coexist, but they're not mutually inclusive of each other.
Click to expand...

Well the first point is debatable because God is white (only kidding)... it makes sense white people are worse at everything than black people, especially at getting scholarships.

Second-- the genetic mutations would not have furthered and maybe even digressed once they established a society essentially based on eating cow **** and trying not to get sick... their survival of the fittest had nothing to do with being fit, but being lucky to be naturally immune to disease or have the disease not affect them in a serious manner. They established granaries... because they could not harvest food in the winter, whereas in Africa it wasn't necesarry. and granaries lead to complex societies(who manages the food, how much food does each person get) and all along Cow's were taking dumps in the food, and thats why it was basically survival was contingent on chance. Rather than ability and skill in Africa.

THird--- thank you for strengthening my argument.

Fourth-- It was granaries man... that was the basis of government. Africans have no use for granaries and conserving food, because its always there to be caught, and saving it does not provide much of an advantage. They weren't inept, just making the best of circumstance. They became herders when they realized they could provide a good and get paid by the people who had "by chance" obtained a government which emphasized getting paid.

Fifth-- Ya, but disease was only a badluck facet of African life (I don't know... I'm just guessing from context)... getting a European plague and dieing. It was good luck if you survived the plague in europe.

Sixth-- Pheromones... we are innately attracted most to those who are most genetically different from us, genetic diversity causes mutation, mutation causes advantage (and disadvantage, but thats not a huge issue).
 
Black people are darker and more athletic because their ancestors lived in a sunnier and warmer climate. That way they had more time to run and play. Their skin is darker because it was an adaptation to spending a lot of time in the sun.


Did I get that right?
 
HeavenHarris said:
this was an interesting discussion. does it still apply? let's discuss the racialism.
Click to expand...

Hayward has been underestimated and insulted flat out because he is white. He's supposedly nonathletic based on nothing more than the color of his skin. That's racist and or racialism (HH's silly term) without question. Hayward is extraordinarily athletic. He's proven that without question he has the athletic ability to compete in the NBA. Anyone who wants to diminish that based on his skin color is a racist.
 
In case it hasn't been said already, there is no such thing as "reverse racism." Racism is racism no matter what race it is ism-ing toward.
 
Gameface said:
Hayward has been underestimated and insulted flat out because he is white. He's supposedly nonathletic based on nothing more than the color of his skin. That's racist and or racialism (HH's silly term) without question. Hayward is extraordinarily athletic. He's proven that without question he has the athletic ability to compete in the NBA. Anyone who wants to diminish that based on his skin color is a racist.
Click to expand...

Great job. I love watching Hayward block someone because it is not just the media, but other players that doubt him as well.
 
All I want to say is that "reverse racism" is a false term. There is nothing reverse about it. It is a term used by the media in an attempt to sound educated and informed. Racism is racism. Period.
 
I love it when gameface has the opportunity to just GO OFF like that... it's a nice salve for his otherwise broken-hearted, lukewarm, and intractable libertarian angst. Thank you jazzfanz, Hayward, and Mr. Castleton.
 
Hack said:
Black people are darker and more athletic because their ancestors lived in a sunnier and warmer climate. That way they had more time to run and play. Their skin is darker because it was an adaptation to spending a lot of time in the sun.

Did I get that right?
Click to expand...

The last sentence is correct. The others, not so much.
 
LifeOnaPlate said:
In case it hasn't been said already, there is no such thing as "reverse racism." Racism is racism no matter what race it is ism-ing toward.
Click to expand...

Since racism is a power imbalance based on punching down, there is no reverse racism, because that would be punching up.
 
One Brow said:
Since racism is a power imbalance based on punching down, there is no reverse racism, because that would be punching up.
Click to expand...

no its wrong because racism is racism. regardless of skin tone, economic or political power or any other ******** metric used to "measure" it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top