« Ike... worst case scenario happening | Main | Deadliest hurricane ever? »

September 12, 2008

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bf6ae53ef010534a4be7d970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference AIDS and race:

Comments

What's the source of "HIV skeptic"'s evidence for the "racial differences in sexual behavior"?

On the surface, this theory sounds plausible, but where's the evidence?

"Afrocentrics" and others of the "Mau Mau" persuasion could just as easily make similar silly claims that "whites have a biological propensity for racism". To them, it doesn't matter that they don't have the scientific data to back up their claims. They can just say, "We don't need data, we already know this shit for a fact. Why do we have to prove it with data? Scientific data is part of the white man's system of tricknology....blah blah blah......"

So, if my point isn't quite clear, you're using the same "logic" that these "Afrocentric" types use.

HS:

"and that blacks have higher sex drives"
You have a source for that?

"and that blacks have higher sex drives"
You have a source for that?

Go to the FBI's website and look at the stats for rape. You'll find other bits of interesting data on additional predilictions those of the "Mau Mau" presuasion as well.

I don't think blacks have higher sex drives so much as they don't understand the consequences of their own actions, such as not using condoms. The higher rape stats is just like the higher robbery or murder stats, that is because they have lower IQ's they commit more crimes.

Nkosi:

"Go to the FBI's website and look at the stats for rape"

The population of criminals cannot be generalized to the whole population. Rape is nothing like the normal pursuit of sexual partners.

"The population of criminals cannot be generalized to the whole population. Rape is nothing like the normal pursuit of sexual partners."

A poor reply. Certain populations have certain behavioral tendencies. Keep denying it if you want, it ain't gonna go away. But it is amusing when you try.

Does anyone know if blacks have higher level of testosterone, than let's say Chinese dudes?

"We see that 30% of black respondents had two or more partners, compared to 18% of whites."

Can you control for age, marital status and income level? Some of those numbers like "100 or more" sounds like we are getting sex workers. Also, I wanted to know how many males/females were in each category. Differences in sex ratios would affect the number of partners also. There is also the issue of where the respondents are living. If blacks are disporportionately in large cities then they would have different numbers of sex partners to rural folk.

Finally, I recall the NYT article saying that blacks and whites did not have a significant difference in risky sex practices.

Nkosi:

It's amusing when people don't have a real rebuttal and fall back on pretending to be amused. Everybody knows that prisoners are a different population from law abiding people. I suppose next you will say that since most serial killers are white then all whites must be sicker in the head that other races. I suppose that would explain the proclivity for genocide.

"Finally, I recall the NYT article saying that blacks and whites did not have a significant difference in risky sex practices."

The GSS, a source I trust more than the NYT, says that blacks are more likely to engage in the risky behavior of having multiple sex partners.

I've proven time and again that the NY Times does a lousy job of vetting the accuracy of these types of articles.

"I suppose next you will say that since most serial killers are white then all whites must be sicker in the head that other races."
I at least wouldn't be surprised if a higher IQ correlates with a higher prevalence of mental disease.

You think this might have anything to do with the HIV rates?

"Older white women join Kenya's sex tourists"

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2638979720071126

That HIV skeptic website is awesome. I hope it goes into a textbook somewhere as the perfect example of how not to think.

"The relative rankings apply in every report I’ve seen: black > Hispanic > Native American > white > Asian."

Hey, that looks quite like Rushton's rule for bad stuff.

From a skepticism supporter "It’s that the racial disparities remain constant even while other factors are changed."

That sounds like like lots of other things too: SAT performance, chance of being a violent criminal...

"Yet in the clinic, the majority were of African descent, and there were never any Asians. Step outside the clinic, and one is in a sea of Asian faces. How the staff could fail to notice that is beyond me."

Um, we all notice this. We are only allowed to discuss it under vary narrow parameters: How is this white peoples' fault?

I wonder what the HIV rates are for nonblack women who have sex with blacks? That might be a good way to tease out immune and biomechanical vulnerability from behavioral vulnerability.

"I suppose that would explain the proclivity for genocide."

You mean like in Rwanda? Like I said, hysterical.

Vim,
You had better get back to your studying! But I forget myself, school is like shackles...

the funny thing is that the "majority" community ends up subsidizing immoral minority breeding behaviors.

Vote for Obama!

"The h-bd community knows very well that the three major races behave differently, and that blacks have higher sex drives, lower future time orientation, and lower IQs. The AIDS infection rates seem to prove the truth of h-bd, and not that HIV/AIDS theory is wrong."

Ahhh, it's good to see Sigma has taken a pause in his crusade against Palin and has reverted to being the virulent white supremacist we've all come to know and love.

Welcome back Sigma.

:)

Does anyone know if blacks have higher level of testosterone, than let's say Chinese dudes?

Posted by: Gannon | September 12, 2008 at 03:12 PM

Ruston says blacks have the highest levels of testosterone, with East Asians having the lowest levels and whites intermediate.

Rushton has also written the level of testosterone influences penis size, with blacks having the biggest shlongs, whites second and Asian men come out on the, uh, shortest end of the stick.

Penis size may explain why Asian men can't get any action in Western countries.

"It's amusing when people don't have a real rebuttal and fall back on pretending to be amused. Everybody knows that prisoners are a different population from law abiding people. I suppose next you will say that since most serial killers are white then all whites must be sicker in the head that other races. I suppose that would explain the proclivity for genocide."

From the journal "Homicide Studies"
African Americans and Serial Killing in the Media
The Myth and the Reality
Anthony Walsh
Boise State University

There were many expressions of shock and surprise voiced in the media in 2002 when the "D.C. Sniper" turned out to be two Black males. Two of the stereotypes surrounding serial killers are that they are almost always White males and that African American males are barely represented in their ranks. In a sample of 413 serial killers operating in the United States from 1945 to mid-2004, it was found that 90 were African American. Relative to the African American proportion of the population across that time period, African Americans were overrepresented in the ranks of serial killers by a factor of about 2. Possible reasons why so few African American serial killers are known to the public are explored.


Key Words: serial killing • African American • media stereotypes • racism

Conclusion, blacks are twice as likely to be serial killers and no one wants to share this empowering message with the world. I remember how disappointed the talking heads were when the DC Snipers din't turn out to be Evil Nazis or KKK, it was like little kids that had dropped an icecream cone. Did they ever consider the plight of the publicity hungry black serial killer? "I kill and I kill, but them damn racists just hide my light under a bushel."

I am absolutely not a white supremecist, and in fact I wish that white supremacists would comment less on my blog.

I'm only a seeker of the truth. The truth is that there are genetically based behavior differences between the races. This unfortunately attracts white supremacists, who are the only people in the United State who aren't all offended when someone points out that blacks have lower IQ than whites.

"I suppose that would explain the proclivity for genocide."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Congo_War

The Second Congo War, also known as Africa's World War[3] and the Great War of Africa, began in August 1998 in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (formerly called Zaire), and officially ended in July 2003 when the Transitional Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo took power (though hostilities continue to this day). The largest war in modern African history, it directly involved eight African nations, as well as about 25 armed groups. By 2008 the war and its aftermath had killed 5.4 million people, mostly from disease and starvation,[4] making the Second Congo War the deadliest conflict worldwide since World War II.[5] Millions more were displaced from their homes or sought asylum in neighboring countries.[6]

Despite a formal end to the war in July 2003 and an agreement by the former belligerents to create a government of national unity, 1,000 people died daily in 2004 from easily preventable cases of malnutrition and disease.[7]

"I am absolutely not a white supremecist, and in fact I wish that white supremcists would comment less on my blog."

I KNOW that , I'm just teasing ya, you big baby.

:)

The Undiscovered Jew – “Ahhh, it's good to see Sigma has taken a pause in his crusade against Palin and has reverted to being the virulent white supremacist we've all come to know and love.”

After giving up on him for a time myself, it is nice to see that he has decided to get back on some topics worth discussing. Perhaps it has finally sunk in that no matter how much he dislikes Palin, the polls are bearing out that she has allowed McCain to get back in to the race. On the other hand, and just to be a bit snarky with HS, he did miss the obvious – Sarah Palin doesn’t have AIDS, making her a likely candidate to be that white (mad) scientist who created AIDS with which to infect black people.

I'm sure there will be some new tabloid-trailer-trash revelations about the Palins worth blogging about between now and the election.

The Undiscovered Jew:

I wasn't being completely serious about the genocide but seriously, there is no doubt whites have commited the most genocides and are responsible for the worst wars: Holocaust, genocide of American Indians, genocide of Caribbean Indians, genocide of some south American tribes, the Holocaust, the Armenian genocide, World War I, World War II, Stalin, etc etc ... then there are the Asian genocides like the killing fields, the great leap forward, the rape of Nanking ... Blacks have barely started catching up.

Thanks Undicovered Jew. That also probably explains why blacks have more muscle mass than whites, and why east asians have rather little muscle mass or facial hair.

HS:

"I'm only a seeker of the truth. The truth is that there are genetically based behavior differences between the races."

They are attracted because you are clearly so bitter about the whole thing and at least in the past have indulged in schadenfraude and name calling concerning the groups that about whom you have discovered 'truths'.

My reaction to the idea that a kid is retarded through no fault of his own is not to insult the kid ... but everybody's maturity level is different I suppose.

Then you say something that hits too close to home about white trash and the like and they freak out and remember you're a Jew.

slwerner,

I think HS admitted he is following the Palin "prole" scandals because he wants to increase page hits.

In other words, he's whoring his integrity out for money (again...)

"In other words, he's whoring his integrity out for money (again...)"

Welcome to the club!

Blacks have larger penises than whites. So finding a condom that fits is more challenging. Whites and Asians can use any off-the-shelf condom. Blacks can only use Magnums and Magnum XL, which aren't readily available; and which most women do not carry.

"They are attracted because you are clearly so bitter about the whole thing and at least in the past have indulged in schadenfraude and name calling concerning the groups that about whom you have discovered 'truths'.

My reaction to the idea that a kid is retarded through no fault of his own is not to insult the kid ... but everybody's maturity level is different I suppose.

Then you say something that hits too close to home about white trash and the like and they freak out and remember you're a Jew."

This had me laughing so hard I almost spilled my beer. You've covered it all, the bitterness, the schadenfraude, the truths, and maturity levels. The best part is the "freaking and remembering Half Sigma's a Jew" bit. You need to go out and have a few drinks yourself.

Can we go back to Palin trashing, please? "Prole Watch" is what this blog should be called.
Sort of the White equivalent of "niggermania.com".

"I wasn't being completely serious about the genocide but seriously, there is no doubt whites have commited the most genocides and are responsible for the worst wars: ... then there are the Asian genocides like ... Blacks have barely started catching up."

It's not because blacks are better morally on average (it's clear from looking at violent crime rates that they're actually worse on that dimension) but that they are simply not organized enough to commit a genocide with a few notable exceptions.

When the Germans decided to kill members of a market dominant minority, they did it in a systematic, organized, bureaucratic manner. In other words, like a group with an IQ of 100. When Malays get pissed off at their local market dominant minority group, the Chinese, they riot and burn stuff. When black people get pissed off and strike at the market dominant minorities in their community (Jewish shopkeepers in the 1960s, Korean shopkeepers in the 1990s) they riot and burn stuff. There's no real moral difference there, IMO, just a difference in competence.

IQ is a really good measure of how good a group is going to be at organized killing. If they face another group's organization it's a war; if they face a group without an army, it's a genocide.

Actually, Vim, there is a very important point to be made.

Most Serial Killers are indeed, White. White men are second only to Asian Men in having the median behavior being very law-abiding, but the "tails" of the distribution being wider, i.e. more variance, which means more serial killers on the one side and more total no-parking-ticket-ever guys on the other.

Blacks, on the other hand, have a narrower distribution, less variance, but the median behavior is more criminal (likely influenced by the 60% that live in the Urban Core, I suspect but have not seen studies comparing Whites, Urban Core Blacks, and Suburban-Middle Class Blacks, that Suburban Middle Class Blacks are fairly indistinguishable from Whites). Thus they are far less likely to be either super-law abiding or serial killers, but more prone to casual violence (again I think we are really measuring the Urban Core here). Blacks make up only 12% of the population, yet are over half the prison population.

I suspect this is a culture thing, strongly correlated with Blacks in the Urban Core. During Segregation, the Black prison rate and absolute numbers were much smaller, under a racist system. Obama's memoir mentions how Blacks in the projects he "organized" recalling Segregation missed the security and safety of their youth, even though other aspects were miserable -- they had ironically greater personal security and did not live in fear of their own youth as now. This is a giant causal arrow pointing to culture not genetics.

Conclusion? Culture matters, Urban Core Blacks have a totally dysfunctional one, and reform is URGENT. Blacks are the canary in the coal mine for US Whites, who generally follow negative things Blacks in the Urban Core do (as wider cultural/demographic/technological trends hit Urban Blacks first and hardest).

Both Blacks and Whites need a good dose of moral discipline and reform, IMHO.

Steve Johnson:

"It's not because blacks are better morally on average"

Okay but you admit my point that whites have done plenty of really horrific killing yes? I forgot to discuss who invented the atomic bombs and started us on the path that might end with the destruction of all mankind? Please ask Palin/McCain to threaten Russia some more. The threat of nuclear Holocaust isn't high enough.

"There's no real moral difference there, IMO, just a difference in competence."

Who said there was? That's your bag. I'm the guy that is skeptical about most group differences, remember?

whiskey:

"Both Blacks and Whites need a good dose of moral discipline and reform, IMHO."

I agree.

"Blacks are the canary in the coal mine for US Whites, who generally follow negative things Blacks in the Urban Core do (as wider cultural/demographic/technological trends hit Urban Blacks first and hardest)."

Good insight, methinks.

" I forgot to discuss who invented the atomic bombs and started us on the path that might end with the destruction of all mankind"

Yeah, when you invent basically everything that's ever been invented there are going to be some destructive things in there.

And way to go in the "missing the point" sweepstakes. Black people are more likely to murder someone, more likely to be inclined to commit murder and more likely to be better at murdering someone in a face to face situation (being bigger and stronger). Whites and Asians are better at getting together in large organizations that are then much much more effective at murdering people. They're also better at creating large organizations to do things like, enforce property rights and create goods and services.

You use the term "genocide" as if it were an unequivocally bad thing. Evolution operates on selection of genetic types, meaning that unfit frequencies are gene-ocided.

Genocide: killing or culling of unfit gene frequencies.

Evolution is, by definition, genocide. heh, I love word games.

On a more serious note, I would point out that recent evidence suggests that the the human genome has been rapidly changing under significant selective pressures. Evolution is speeding up, and how do you think that's happening? Well, large-scale population replacement has got to be one major factor.

Human beings, as they exist today, are probably significantly products of genocide. Yes, your every existence is predicated on huge moral outrage. Now, go on, you humanists, and justify the past or even better: take revenge on it by abolishing existence itself. That'll teach the universe to perpetrate such moral outrage.

Asher:

Genocide is an organized attempt to destroy a people, their institutions, culture and language. Evolution is not organized. The Universe has no intent so there is certainly no intent to destroy peoples. This is the difference between being killed by a heart attack and MURDERED by a human being.

I have heard people talk about things like the extinction of blondes. It's very stupid. Blondes are not a distinct people and do not have independent instititons, culture or language. Moreover, even if this were so, the genetics of the people 'replacing' blondes will be a superset containing all the genes that blondes have. Many will be the direct descendents of these blondes. Secondly, the language and instutions are being passed on. Thirdly, none of this is particularly organized, it's the product of individual choices whose emergent effect is the demographic change we notice. (This goes to intention).

"Well, large-scale population replacement has got to be one major factor."

Perhaps you should flesh out this term, 'replacement'. If two people of two different races has a child, who is replacing whom? I do not believe 'replacement' is the equivalent of genocide.

"Now, go on, you humanists, and justify the past or even better: take revenge on it by abolishing existence itself."

This argument is weak. The fact that we got here by murder does not mean we should continue in murder.

"Yes, your every existence is predicated on huge moral outrage."

Have you ever heard of 'original sin'? You are not introducing anything new to the discourse. This has been part of Western thinking for thousands of years.

I am going to have to give your comment a D(grade inflation).

Vim's arguments can be described as byzantine. Complicated and well written but ultimately lacking substance, just writing around the corners.

I know this isn't really on-topic for this thread, but it's too good to pass up. It turns out that having the most stereotypically Alpha job possible is no guarantee that your wife won't cheat on you with a thug:

http://gothamist.com/2008/09/13/prison_shrink_gets_off_easy_for_mak.php

"I have heard people talk about things like the extinction of blondes. It's very stupid. Blondes are not a distinct people and do not have independent instititons, culture or language. Moreover, even if this were so, the genetics of the people 'replacing' blondes will be a superset containing all the genes that blondes have. Many will be the direct descendents of these blondes."

i would agree that the argument framed in those terms is stupid. i think a better one is that the frequency of certain phenotypes might significantly decrease in certain situations. as you imply, the hardy-weinberg principle dictates that neither the genes nor the concomitant phenotypes will actually become 'extinct.'

Vim, the problem you are operating from is the assumption of an abstract, "out-there" universalist morality. Morality is the product of the process of human civilizing, it is not a precondition for it. "Original sin" is no sin at all, as there is no existing moral authority, to twist a phrase from the great social philosopher Al Gore.

Brazilian Yanomamo tribes today are at a stage of development that was more prevalent probably 10,000 years ago. They frequently war with each other over fertile females, and researchers have found that a man's ability to have multiple wives is related to how many men he kills. But this is not murder, because there is no controlling moral authority. Moral authority arises from people developing and sssuming mutual obligations to each other over the course of time, therefore no developed mutual obligations means no moral authority. The concept of "murder" is a product of a civilization and develops within a civilization by the members of that civilization developing obligations to each other and to the civilization that gives them birth.

Human beings kill. It's in our DNA, part of who we are and what we do to advance our genetic interests. Morality developed to serve life; life does not serve morality. A morality that stands in opposition to life is no morality at all.

Thus, genocide has and can advance the cause of our species.

Interesting no one mentions infidelity, evolutionary reproductive success and sperm competition when all of these clearly offer insight into the spread of AIDs.

It is fascinating that black Americans and black Africans have such high HIV rates. I'm curious if the approach used in this blog to explain this issue would be accepted in a peer-reviewed journal, or has it been?

"blacks have higher sex drives, lower future time orientation, and lower IQs"

So if this isn't the reason for the AIDS rate in the black community what is? Is the KKK conspiring to send defective rubbers to black communities and/or convincing blacks not to use them through some diabolical propaganda ploy? Is this like the Tropical Fantasy soda thing?

This is the most disturbing racist bullshit I have ever seen in my life.

Has it occured to anyone that the "number of sexual partners" in the last year might have to do with something other than sex drive and genetics?

The number of sexual partners I've had this year is different from the number of sexual partners I had when I was 15 - but that doesn't mean I have different genetics now than I did then.

African-Americans are on average younger than white Americans - has it occured to anyone that people in their 20s might have had more sexual partners in the last year than older Americans? Or that cultural differences account for differences in behavior, or that diet and quality of education have an influence on IQ, or that white people filling out questionnaires are more likely to downplay sexual activity because multiple sex partners are less acceptable to them?

You could find much more disparity in sexual behavior if you broke down the population by age or income, rather than race.

The problem with any hypothesis arguing people of African ancestry to be genetically different from anyone else is that there is more genetic diversity among Blacks than in the rest of humanity combined. The earliest humans were dark-skinned, and diversified through time and populated Africa with increasingly genetically-unique populations over millions of years. One small group of humans left Africa and became the ancestors of all other human populations. This has been soundly studied and documented using mitochondrial DNA.

Matt, the progenitors of the human race began splitting apart into groups possibly as far back as 200k years. Additionally, we're just not exactly sure how quickly speciation occurred and how long we kept interbreeding with other archaics. I think it's a pretty conservative estimate that as of the year 1000 no human being in what are now Nigeria and Sweden had a common ancestor any later than 50k years BP (Before Present). It's probably longer but I'm playing it safe. That's probably somewhere between 2000 and 3000 generations of evolutionary divergence in significantly different physical AND social environments.

Now we have hard evidence that the selective pressures on the human genome have been consistently speeding up the evolution of the species. And if a species is undergoing significant selective pressure then different population clusters in different environments will tend to diverge rather quickly.

One of the most noted biologists of all time, E.O. Wilson (a Democrat, btw) has stated that speciation is possible in 50 generations. In fact, researchers produced a new canid species from foxes in 40 generations. If complete speciation can occur in 50 generations then it's no great stretch to conclude that distinct differences within a species can occur across vastly different environments in 3000 generations.

Matt, no one here is arguing that people who recently came from Africa are not human beings. That would be silly. But it's just as silly to assert that different population groups would have no divergence after 3000 generations in vastly different environments.

Couldn't this be attributable purely to lower rates of marriage in the black community? That is, a married person will usually have one sexual partner in any given year, whereas it's not terribly unusual for an unmarried person to have 2 or 3 (or none). Granted, this doesn't fully explain the higher rates of very large numbers of partners. Additionally, black men may be more likely to falsely claim very large numbers of partners.

Nobody wants to mention why condoms aren't being used by the black (and gay) communities. Simplest explanation: Low IQ/don't care.

Preference for sexual partners or low rates of marriage, which is prior? My intuition is that low rates of marriage among blacks exists because people whose ancestors spent the last 100,000 years in Africa evolved a preference for more sexual partners; the environment favored that mating strategy.

So wherever you look around the world and see communities of people of recent African ancestry you see similar patterns of behavior. Can blacks have marital monogamy? Sure, but it'll probably have to be in a social environment that whose mores originate from someplace other than AFrica and that are rigorously policed by non-blacks.

I find it funny, how people on this blog are talking about "divergent populations" and "speciation" to belay their racist points but have come with no proof whatsoever.

These same people ignore established science (no divergent modern human species) in favor of idealogisms and think people won't see past their racist drivel and check them on it when they state it matter-of-factly.

Maybe its time we did. Enough is enough. But this is a racist, agenda driven blog so like attracts like.

Divergence doesn't necessarily imply speciation. Cocker spaniels and pitbulls are both in the dog species. But they are genetically different in a significant manner that affects behavior.

Truth, you are confusing "evidence" and "proof". The first relates to theories that are limited by the ability to gather an assimilate information, the second to things that are logically and necessarily true or untrue. Proof applies to logical tings and evidence to empirical things. Secondly, the mountain of research regarding divergence within the ONE HUMAN SPECIES is positively vast, and there are entire libraries that contain nothing but evidence for this topic.

Different human population clusters from around the world are from the same species but they have diverging variations in behavior that are due to genetic drift and selection pressures. I would suggest beginning with www.gnxp.com, run by two rather dark Pakistanis (i.e. not exactly an agora for white nationalists), as a guide into the intersection of genetics and variations in human behavior.

Finally, I don't see why you feel the need to directly ignore the explicit claims that others are making. NO ONE here is talking speciation. What we are talking about are variations within a species. Blacks and whites are the same species but have some differences in behavioral patterns due to genetic divergence that is at least 50k years of different selective pressure.

Let me see if I have this right you’re not a white supremacist you just believe that whites are superior to blacks, that’s interesting....

There is no such thing as "racial supremacism", period. People do tend to prefer their culture, e.g. China's self-moniker of "Middle Kingdom" translated correctly really means center of the world, and there seems to be significant empirical evidence that people tend to prefer working with people who are more closely related to them. Yeah, that's probably genetic, too. "White supremacism", or any racial supremacism is a myth.

And no one said anything about "superior", either. "Superior" pre-supposes some absolute, abstract, ahistorical standard of value or worth; none exists. Different genetic lines developed and diverged over the course of the last several dozen millenia in vastly different social and physical environments. Those genetic lines developed to suit individuals for those specific environments.

As someone whose ancestors are from Europe for the last 50 or so thousand years I admit that my genes would be rather ill-suited for an environment where men engaged in continuous combat to be in the 10 percent of alpha males who get all the sex. You might even call me "inferior" in that specific situation.

Geesh, what's with all the straw man arguments around here.

The comments to this entry are closed.