Re: omosessuali e neri sono razze inferiori? elementare Watson!

Inviato da  Paxtibi il 24/12/2007 12:42:46

Ora dovremmo credere che gli occhi a mandorla sono una "concezione sociale," e questo perché l'85% dei geni sono comuni a tutti gli uomini.

In realtà la genetica dice semplicemente che i geni che differenziano le razze sono pochi, non che non esistono.

* The genetic differences that divide races appear to be new, geologically speaking, and tend to result from harmless mutations (differences in blood type) and adaptations to recent environments (skin color).
* Traits that people consider important, like certain forms of intelligence and self-control, are most likely going to be important in mate selection, so alleles that enhance these traits will spread to spread throughout the human gene pool in all habitats and increase in frequency to a greater degree than alleles that don't. Consequently, alleles that favor useful traits will be overwhelmingly common in all populations.
* Mutations within populations have produced genetic differences among individuals that are greater than those among populations.
* The idea of a recent African origin is still under investigation, as is the idea of a recent common ancestry for all living people.
(A New Perspective on Race)


Da notare tra l'altro:

According to an editorial in the British paper The Independent, a fear of offending members of historically stigmatized racial groups has prevented us from confronting the evidence that tiny genetic variations do actually account for real physical and behavioral differences. "We have gone from one kind of ignorance and prejudice to another without walking the road of good sense," wrote the anonymous commentator. "There are important biological differences that distinguish groups and individuals within groups. Vastly more African American men have prostate cancer than do white men. British Asians have significantly higher rates of heart disease...If gene research is only allowed among white groups, important breakthroughs will only be available to them, too."

Not to explore genetic differences and genes responsible for certain diseases that afflict different ethnic grips, is, as London Times journalist Anjana Ahuja writes, "to leave ethnic groups in the grip of disease for the sake of political correctness."

Entine, author of Taboo: Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We Are Afraid to Talk About It, makes a similar point. "Although we share a common humanity, we are different in critical ways such as our genetic susceptibility to diseases," he says. "For instance, blacks are genetically predisposed to contracting colo-rectal cancer; Eurasian whites are genetically prone to multiple sclerosis -- and Asians are by and large victims of neither. The problem with Clinton's pandering to political correctness is that it threatens confidence in the life-saving aspects of the genetic revolution."

Insomma, dietro tanta sicurezza nel definire le razze un "concetto sociale" sembrano esserci i nostri soliti amici, quelli che "meno siamo meglio è"...

"Why do we readily accept that evolution has turned out blacks with a genetic proclivity to contract sickle cell, Jews of European heritage who are one hundred times more likely than other groups to fall victim to the degenerative mental disease Tay-Sachs, and whites who are most vulnerable to cystic fibrosis, yet find it racist to acknowledge that blacks of West African ancestry have evolved into the world's best sprinters and jumpers and East Asians the best divers?" Entine asks rhetorically.

Along similar lines, Professor Clive Harper of the University of Sydney, Australia claims to have found that among Aborigines, the area of the brain responsible for visual processing is 25 percent larger than average. Harper's as yet unpublished studies indicate that Aboriginal children have photographic memories, an evolutionary gift from their ancestors, who "had to master the vast landscape to survive."