Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Groveshield t1_iu7ga55 wrote

Now I'm sure this is some white supremacist awfulness, however...

Races have differences in terms of averages.

If people are going to sit here and try to tell me it's just coincidence that the Summer Olympics running events are dominated by Jamaicans and Africans, I am going to have to laugh.

The problem is when people use these observations of differences to assume its true for EVERYONE of that race, and to treat someone worse or better for these differences.

Science doesn't care about people's feelings, but WE should.

2

Professional-Can1385 t1_iu7mm7g wrote

>Races have differences in terms of averages.
>
>If people are going to sit here and try to tell me it's just coincidence that the Summer Olympics running events are dominated by Jamaicans and Africans, I am going to have to laugh.

It is world of difference to compare running speeds of different groups of people on the same course than comparing intelligence or IQ of different groups of people. It's not as straight forward as running from point A to point B as quickly as you can.

But even Olympic competitions are not a great way to compare groups of people in the same sport. In the 1970s and 1980s the Eastern Bloc countries dominated many Olympic events. They had set up state-sponsored athletic schools that they funneled sporty kids into. They could train kids in a specialty from a very young age, controlling their entire lives to make them the best athletes they could be. Compared to the US system where if a kid has an interest, talent, willing parents, and money they may turn into elite athletes. Saying Eastern Bloc countries during this time had better athletes because they won more Olympic medals would not be accurate. They set up athlete factories most other countries would not or could not replicate.

tl/dr: race/ethnicity is never the only factor

15

PaterPoempel t1_iu7uvcc wrote

The Eastern Block countries, especially the Soviet Union and East-Germany had absolutely massive state-sponsored doping programs which are probably the main reason for their athlete's dominance in the Olympic games.

11

Groveshield t1_iu7rzvj wrote

Never the only factor.

But it is a factor.

I do agree though that "intelligence" is a far tricker metric than "who tends to run fastest."

Regardless, its a really touchy subject that is typically more trouble than its worth to research or write about imho.

5

Lvl100Centrist t1_iu8ci2e wrote

>Races have differences in terms of averages.

Races cannot be objectively defined, therefore this line of thought will get you nowhere. For example, "African" is not a race, neither is "Jamaican".

2

ragavan_control t1_iu92fuj wrote

Race is a categorical designation that holds explanatory power in grouping people together with similar genetics. Whether or not “race” means anything beyond that is purely semantics, but it is undeniable that the term has a clear meaning and use. Arguing otherwise is just an intentional obfuscation of the obvious.

So yeah, calling it a social construct doesn’t make it less real. All categories, and I mean all, are social constructs. It’s like asking for the definition of a chair. The answer can’t be precise - it inherently requires some degree of generalization and imprecision

2

Lvl100Centrist t1_iu94hgs wrote

Race is clearly a social construct that doesn't really hold any explanatory power in modern societies. This should be obvious because there is no objective way to determine one's race.

The term has absolutely no clear use in any meaning; it barely makes sense in the most extreme of circumstances i.e. if you live in a predominantly "white" town and categorize everyone else as "black" or "asian". It doesn't make sense nor has any meaning for people who have received a basic education and understand science and history.

All categories are absiolutely not social constructs. If we categorize people by height or blood type then these are categories that can be objectively defined.

Whereas with race you have no clue which race you belong to, you cannot prove or determine what race I belong to. You don't even have a fixed list of races to chose form. Hence, social construct.

−1

randoredirect t1_iu7gymq wrote

Kenya wins in running because running is one of the few forms of entertainment that they have. They don't have gameboys like we do

−7

modsarebrainstems t1_iu7hk06 wrote

Actually, Kenyans and Ethiopians do have a strong advantage in marathon running. I can't remember exactly what it came down to but it seemed to me that the gist of it was that generations of starving had enabled them to ration out their energy much more efficiently. Sort of like how Nepalese have a huge advantage at high altitudes.

9

Groveshield t1_iu7j3t1 wrote

It's funnily enough more racist to me to imply that Kenyans are good runners because they "dont have gameboys" and must resort to running for fun, than it is to just acknowledge that they seem to at least on average have a sort of biological running advantage.

6

randoredirect t1_iu7jbul wrote

Not really because circumstances do effect upbringing

−2

Groveshield t1_iu7jntx wrote

Yet AMERICANS who are of Jamaican ethnicity typically outperform their fellow Americans who are white at the absolute top of running competition?

You can literally just watch the fucking olympics to realize your opinion is beyond flawed.

If upbringing was what decided who the top 0.01% of competitors were in sheer sports of athleticism like track, you would see more diversity. But you dont. Because when a 1% advantage decides if you win or lose then every possible factor tends to matter.

10

Synensys t1_iu8551b wrote

We're Jamaicans all brought over from the same part of Africa?

0

ClimateCare7676 t1_iu892xb wrote

It still can be heavily impacted by cultural component. Cultures that have heavy focus on football have more top football players, regions that emphasise fighter culture and invest a lot in wrestling sports have top wrestlers in the Olympic games. Cultures that practice running and have running as their top preference will focus on running and encourage this skill through training, financially and by trying to seek the people who have good characteristically for running through screenings. A person living overseas will still be at least somewhat impacted by their country of origin or by their culture through their family and identity. Natural advantage would mean little with no training, financial support or cultural encouragement.

0

walter_2000_ t1_iu7x3mn wrote

Entertainment and game boys and Kenyans. No, man. No assumptions. You have a question, you create a process, and you study it. There's a board of ethics that reviews what you're doing. They can stop you before you begin. Something as serious and political as race will get srutinized beyond anything I can imagine. I simply would not even ask a question about race. I have a career and am older, we'll see what happens with his life. If he's a full of shit racist, which I doubt he is, then this will end soon.

3

sobanz t1_iu7purz wrote

so what advantages do Asians have if their physical traits are genetic but not their intellectual potential?

1