Balotelli cartoon - is this racist ?

[nightgoat]

IMO it's as racist as the Scumball chant.

So not at all, then.

 

[KentuckyYid]

Racism is actually very black and white, but due to people misusing the term and calling everything 'racist' for political reasons (usually to gain something or play on sympathies) it has become warped and gray, when in reality the definition is very clear-cut and straightforward.

Racist: someone who believes a person of an ethnic background is superior to another inherently.

Racism: the practice of the above.

The end. But now every comment, every picture and every little nit-picking thing that someone doesn't like is 'racist'. It has become nothing but a buzz word and a get out of jail free card, which is really sad.

Do you mean like this guy?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Olympic legend Michael Johnson says a ‘superior athletic gene’ in the descendants of West African slaves means black American and Caribbean sprinters will command the sport at the London Games.
The Olympic gold medallist and BBC commentator said: ‘Over the last few years, athletes of Afro- Caribbean and Afro-American descent have dominated athletics finals.
‘It’s a fact that hasn’t been discussed openly before. It’s a taboo subject in the States but it is what it is. Why shouldn’t we discuss it?’


Somehow I don't think you'd hear white swimmers etc bragging on how their white gene will win them more medals than a black gene. If they did they'd be one almighty witch-hunt that's for sure.

 

[beats1]

Do you mean like this guy?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-descendants-slaves-medals-sprint-finals.html
Olympic legend Michael Johnson says a ‘superior athletic gene’ in the descendants of West African slaves means black American and Caribbean sprinters will command the sport at the London Games.
The Olympic gold medallist and BBC commentator said: ‘Over the last few years, athletes of Afro- Caribbean and Afro-American descent have dominated athletics finals.
‘It’s a fact that hasn’t been discussed openly before. It’s a taboo subject in the States but it is what it is. Why shouldn’t we discuss it?’


Somehow I don't think you'd hear white swimmers etc bragging on how their white gene will win them more medals than a black gene. If they did they'd be one almighty witch-hunt that's for sure.

I don't really understand your point, yes he is saying that he may have a genetic gene that has given him a advantage over other people but he is saying he has that gene not because he is black because his ancestors where slaves and because the strongest where able to survive it seems there genes may have carried on their characteristics down

 

[KentuckyYid]

He's saying he and other black athletes have a superior gene. However he disguises it, and how other gullibles interpret it, it amounts to the same quotation "Blacks are superior to whites". Bottom line, a white Olympian saying the same thing would get run out of the sport and have their lives ruined by it..

 

[nightgoat]

He's saying he and other black athletes have a superior gene. However he disguises it, and how other gullibles interpret it, it amounts to the same quotation "Blacks are superior to whites". Bottom line, a white Olympian saying the same thing would get run out of the sport and have their lives ruined by it..

Yes, it's almost as ridiculous as someone thinking there's a secret conspiracy by women to take over the world.

 

[KentuckyYid]

Yes, it's almost as ridiculous as someone thinking there's a secret conspiracy by women to take over the world.

So you agree he shouldn't have said it because it's wrong? If not would you agree with a white person bragging "I've only got good strong genes because thousands of years ago my tribe left Africa"

 

[nightgoat]

He's got some pretty strong evidence to back him up to be fair, given that half of the white Olympic champions in sprint events of the last five Olympics were doped up Greeks. I got bored looking back any further than that.

 

[beats1]

He's saying he and other black athletes have a superior gene. However he disguises it, and how other gullibles interpret it, it amounts to the same quotation "Blacks are superior to whites". Bottom line, a white Olympian saying the same thing would get run out of the sport and have their lives ruined by it..

What a load of fucking bollocks, I must be fucking gullible because I understand Science

Again read the post I wrote before and then comment because he is saying that the people in the finals were all from a slave origin and not blacks are superior to whites. The fact of the matter is the 100m sprint races have been dominated by people of a african heritage in recent years.

 

[KentuckyYid]

What a load of fucking bollocks, I must be fucking gullible because I understand Science

Again read the post I wrote before and then comment because he is saying that the people in the finals were all from a slave origin and not blacks are superior to whites. The fact of the matter is the 100m sprint races have been dominated by people of a african heritage in recent years.

Would that same science by acceptable for a swimmer to brag on their superior white genes? Or in this politically correct world should that swimmer not say anything?

Interesting you say they were all slaves. You do know there were Irish slaves working in the W Indies that were shipped there on the same uncomfortable ships. When did the Irish last dominate the medal positions at anything other than drinking? (no offence Paddy)

Also interesting that this magnificent slave gene he's claiming only works at sprinting, and not anything else. I also wonder does he have any proof that the successful American or W Indian athletes were all born out of a slave family? In case you didn't know not every black person can claim slavery in their family history.

Yes slaves were bred to be big and strong, so breeding did take place but since when did big and strong also mean fast? If you want speed you normally look for something smaller and more nimble. Take US bred thoroughbreds as an example. Much faster in a sprint than their European counterparts.

I think he's talking bollocks to be honest. IMO slavery had nothing to do with some blacks being faster runners than most whites.

 

[nightgoat]

Yes slaves were bred to be big and strong, so breeding did take place but since when did big and strong also mean fast? If you want speed you normally look for something smaller and more nimble. Take US bred thoroughbreds as an example. Much faster in a sprint than their European counterparts.

Woah woah woah woah, what the fuck do horses have to do with this?

 

[KentuckyYid]

Woah woah woah woah, what the fuck do horses have to do with this?

Coz like humans they're mammals... When US started their own breeding programs they went for speed. In doing so they bred the horses to be smaller. The point being they didn't breed them to be fast by making them big and strong.

Shouldn't I have said 'horse'? Is that racist too now?

 

[nightgoat]

Yes, outrageously so.

Look, I'm sure the similarities between breeding horses for racing and humans training for sprint races are near endless, just not that endless, yeah?

 

[KentuckyYid]

btw a nice deflection on all the other points/questions I've raised by concentrating on the horse breeding comment.

Care to answer why the Irish aren't competing for dominating the medal positions? Surely out of the thousands of Irish slaves at least one of their descendants would have made it to the top at sprinting considering there's a mythical marvelous sprinting gene that evolved from the hardships of slavery.

 

[nightgoat]

Well it would be, if I was in the slightest bit interested in any kind of serious debate about it. But I'm sure you realised that from the tone of each of my posts in this thread.

I don't know why the Irish aren't dominating sprint events. What's your theory on it? Fact is, you have to go back to 1972 for the last time a white man won either 100m or 200m at an Olympics that weren't either doped up or competing against a seriously weakened field. Black people are good at sprint events, get over it.

Most importantly, I want to know what Spursking thinks of it.

 

[KentuckyYid]

Well it would be, if I was in the slightest bit interested in any kind of serious debate about it. But I'm sure you realised that from the tone of each of my posts in this thread.

I don't know why the Irish aren't dominating sprint events. What's your theory on it? Fact is, you have to go back to 1972 for the last time a white man won either 100m or 200m at an Olympics that weren't either doped up or competing against a seriously weakened field. Black people are good at sprint events, get over it.

Most importantly, I want to know what Spursking thinks of it.

My theory is that the suggestion of a marvelous slavery sprinting gene is a load of bollocks which is what I've been saying all along. If a white person had said something similar about their swimming genes they'd have gotten called out on it, and gone through a witch-hunt. Johnson should have kept his mouth shut on this. T

Just because they have dominated at sprinting, which they have, has nothing to do with slavery or else Ireland would be great at sprinting too. Latin America had more slaves than US did. Perhaps they picked up a marvelous football slavery gene eh?

 

[Mullers]

No, off course depicting a black guy as a fucking giant ape isn't racist.

Let me just check my calendar to see if we're still in the 1950's.

 

[Mullers]

Would that same science by acceptable for a swimmer to brag on their superior white genes? Or in this politically correct world should that swimmer not say anything?

Interesting you say they were all slaves. You do know there were Irish slaves working in the W Indies that were shipped there on the same uncomfortable ships. When did the Irish last dominate the medal positions at anything other than drinking? (no offence Paddy)

Also interesting that this magnificent slave gene he's claiming only works at sprinting, and not anything else. I also wonder does he have any proof that the successful American or W Indian athletes were all born out of a slave family? In case you didn't know not every black person can claim slavery in their family history.

Yes slaves were bred to be big and strong, so breeding did take place but since when did big and strong also mean fast? If you want speed you normally look for something smaller and more nimble. Take US bred thoroughbreds as an example. Much faster in a sprint than their European counterparts.

I think he's talking bollocks to be honest. IMO slavery had nothing to do with some blacks being faster runners than most whites.

Actually Johnson said on the Olympic program that scientists have found white people also have this supposed speed gene, so it's down to nurture rather than nature.

 

[TheGreenLily]

What a load of fucking bollocks, I must be fucking gullible because I understand Science

Again read the post I wrote before and then comment because he is saying that the people in the finals were all from a slave origin and not blacks are superior to whites. The fact of the matter is the 100m sprint races have been dominated by people of a african heritage in recent years.

But slavery had fuck to do with athletes today other than the fact they was moved to what ever place they was moved to. Probably closer to the fact that they was hunter gathers until more recently than us, so it was in there nature to run a lot.

Why he mentions the slave origin I don't know, but I think he is talking out of his arse personally when he thinks that slavery was the key to his success.

It's all bollocks if you ask me, yet another nothing blown out of proportion load of tosh by the P "spastic brain brigade" C mob and once more, probably pissing more people making it less like that they will sympathies will real cases of racism, thus doing more damage than good.

 

[rich75]

So, I googled it and :

ACTN3 is apparently the gene of choice when it comes to sorting out the elite athletes from the fat kids, wiki then says this :

The rs1815739 mutation

A mutation (rs1815739; R577X) has been identified in the ACTN3 gene which results in a deficiency of alpha-actinin 3 in a significant proportion of the population.[3] Based on ethnicity the deficiency is found in 20-50% of people. Generally, Africans have the lowest incidence of the mutation whilst Asians have the highest. Scientists believe that variations in this gene evolved to accommodate the energy expenditure requirements of people in various parts of the world.
Studies have linked the fiber twitch type with ACTN3, i.e. fast twitch fiber abundant individuals carry the non-mutant gene version. Also, studies in elite athletes have shown that the ACTN3 gene may influence athletic performance. Whilst the non-mutant version of the gene is associated with sprint performance, the mutant version is associated with endurance.[4][5][6][7][8]


So, people of African origin are more likely to have the sprinting gene whilst those of Asian origin are more likely to have the endurance version.

Whatever you want to make of what Johnson said, he potentially had a legitimate scientific point - that African heritage runners had a genetic advantage. In my opinion it was a risk to say it due to the potential for it to be construed in a racist manner but then he also acknowledged that it's a taboo subject so he is at least aware of what he's saying.

KY's post are the usual litany of half thought out attempts to prove that a black man has been racist and that white people are forced to bite their tongues continuously. The extraordinary lack of understanding about evolution and genetics displayed in the Irish slave comments is pretty impressive not to mention the surreal attempt to equate horse breeding with human genetics.

 

[Spursking]

Ahmed Abdullah Mumakar Mobarek Dumar de la Cruz de la Vega de Mare Ngyen.

Do you know the player ?

If this was a real player, would it be alright to make fun of it, or would you consider it as racism?