[SallyIsNice5]

But why did you put the list of beliefs in the racialist category and even told me that in parlance I would be called racist?

I thought things like different responses to medication or adaptations of races to climate where evidence-based?

Are you having some serious problems reading English?

a) I said that you would be a racialist if we were being careful about terminology. In COMMON PARLANCE you would be a racist, because the distinction between racism and racialism is rarely acknowledged.

b) I have no idea why you're complaining about some aspects of racial differences being strongly evidence based. I gave an example of this myself to demonstrate that there was a continuum of beliefs about the inherent properties of different races, ranging from the self-evident "I believe black people are better at not getting sunburn than white people" to the obviously controversial "I believe that white people tend to be less violent and more intelligent than black people as a result of genetic differences" and beyond. My point is that the line between racialism and simple knowledge is somewhat fuzzy, but can be defined at least broadly. You said that certain beliefs about biological differences that are based on evidence would be considered simply evidence based belief not racialism. Or to rephrase it almost everyone would be considered racialist to a degree if he acknowledges these facts. And you also said the distinction between racism and racialism is rarley made and that racialists are most often branded racist.

So is it not logical from this that simply stating a fact can cause someone to call you a racist? And is it not true that being percieved a racist often comes with unpleasant consequences?



Yes the distinction is fuzzy, but what if you get called a racist simply because many people are scientifically iliterate and don't know that what you are stating isn't contraversial among experts at all? (example: What would have people said if you went around saying even a decade or so ago that your race is relevant to your treatment?) Shouldn't we strive for a society where saying 2+2=4 (to borrow from Orwell) dosen't cause you to loose social status?

[UTHZzJ6f]

The guy does what he does because of past experience, if I understand correctly. If 9 interracial couples out of ten he has married end up divorcing, or their kids end up, er, troubled, is it surprising, if he feels they just don't work, and are generally a bad idea?

I have a unrelated question, do the statistics back up his "experience"?

[Cajlwdvx]

Hera, as to you question: In general? No, likely not. He probably distorted his own statistics to justify his stand. He may believe that they are correct, but he probably has no real evidence.

As to the kids having problems, that depends on the means and position of the parents. If they are raised in majority-black areas as blacks, the problems aren't reflected in the statistics related to "troubled" youth. If the parents or their families have money and or positions of influence, then they are raised as priveleged, not based on race, per se. The tricky area can be lower middle class neighborhoods in large cities. Statistics do indicate that children with parents who identify as two separate races do have difficulties in such areas.

I've only seen limited sets of data on this based on a friend's research, so I can't say how this works in middle class and upper middle class areas or among the poor (lower class), but the information is not hidden, just very dispersed.

[lrtoinbert]

I suspect it is subject to "whim" in Louisianna as long as some other JP will do it. This guy would never be that baldly assertive to a reporter if he could be forced to step down due to this view. This would be in line with KH's note about JP's not necessarily being judges.

[metrocartockasur]

Political considerations have skewed the research and ruined the reputations of legitimate researchers. Some aras of research represent political minefields. May not be worth doing such research except for medical and treatment purposes. Even ethnic research can stir great controversy. Even when the research is based on actual, seemingly non-political data. Former colonial powers (the US is one) get especially close scrutiny worldwide.

[Texdolley]

Are you from down that way, Solomwi? Forgive me for already not knowing.

[Lotyqnag]

Publishing medically relevant research that shows a difference between African-Americans and caucasians can be a career-ending political nightmare. As such, data that shows such differences often remains unpublished since no one wants to face a firestorm over innocuous unexpected results.

[BinasiDombrs]

When I went to an medical doctor from Africa, who mostly treated African Americans, he constantly had a looped informational tape in his waiting area. It did reference studies which showed that African Americans are more likely to have hypertension/etc. It was really quite direct. I have seen reference to similar stuff online.

JM

[mygalinasoo]

Is that really true? There seems to be more ethnicity specific medication indications/warnings around today than previously, or do you mean in specific touchstone issues like intelligence, criminality etc.

It was true for me and I doubt that I'm the only one. I unexpectedly came across variations in the ratios of immunoglobulin sub-types when I was studying gonorrhea that allowed me to segregate African-Americans from others. This was around the time that the Prof in Scotland was being piloried for merely suggesting that the differences in IQ might be determined genetically. Given the political climate we didnt publish it, so its fallen by the wayside (for now at least). It may, or may not, be relevant to higher incidences of some diseases in African-Americans but we may never know. Thats the problem. Sometimes it's the small unexpected findings that become important once published.

I've also seen in many medical journals, authors of good epidemiological studies of diseases that are more prevelant in African-Americans viciously attacked as racist.

OTOH if one flys 'beneath the radar' and minimizes the 'race' issue there is research money for studying diseases that are more prevelant in African-Americans.

[littlePen]

I doubt he could read the articles but nevertheless just the possibility has a chilling effect IMO. It doesnt take too much racial controversy for university boards of enquiry (ie witchunts) to start lighting their fires.

[uphokyhuP]

I doubt he could read the articles but nevertheless just the possibility has a chilling effect IMO. It doesnt take too much racial controversy for university boards of enquiry (ie witchunts) to start lighting their fires.

Well, this is what tenure was invented for. And why unis should be extending tenure instead of arranging it so that the only people with tenure are those no longer doing active research.

[Mappaindy]

That's the very definition, off course people of all races can be racist. But how you used this makes no sense. The issues in this case are not just how white people treat black people, but how black people treat white people. It's not enough to simply "blame whitey".

[SQiTmhuY]

A little from column A, a little from column B...

Yep, and there are probably a few more columns contributing (assuming you're talking about why the JP might be so baldly assertive).

[rbVmVlQ2]

I guess this justice of peace had opposed racial desegregation back in 60s because government-enforced desegregation would have exposed black kids to bullying and other negative experiences.

Apparently, he has arbitrarily decided that interracial kids will never be able to grow up to become healthy, productive, functioning adults in today's society even given the complexity of their ethnic/racial identity.

[feseEscaple]

In my experience, interracial couples are more prevalent in the South than the North, and attitudes towards us are much less racist than up North.

That said, my experience was atypical because I as living in a navy town, and the military, for all its faults, has integrated the races in such a way that interracial relationships are very common. (In South Florida, it's even more common, though there's little military presence.)

As a Black person, however, my wife experienced a lot of racism when she was by herself. The South is not worse than the North, but it isn't better. It's different. The racism in the North is more overt, more in your face. Southern racism, except for the knuckleheads, tends to be more smile in your face as you're sticking the knife in your guts type.