the lie that 'asian women don't like beards''they like fem guys'

[Tsar]

Who cares if they have good social skills if they laugh while beating their so called "brothers?" I've heard of people getting drugged up on cocaine and then raped, I've heard of people being left out in the middle of the forest, during the winter time and forced to find their way back to campus. I knew one guy in my hall who joined a fraternity and he came back every night with bruises all over him. One time, he had bruises leave a huge trail down his back. One frat was kicked off of campus because they were stringing their pledges up by their feet and hitting them all over their body with paddles. They also would set up these "fight clubs" and place bets on who would get the crap beaten out of them. I saw videos of fraternities having these giant brawls and basically having 100 people fighting with 100 people. My roommate went to a party where they ordered 1,000 goldfish and the competition was to see who could swallow the most goldfish. And I'm not talking about goldfish crackers, I mean actual goldfish. My roommate came back, bragging about how he killed 12 goldfish just for me (cause he knew I was vegetarian).

Are you talking about "homosexual rape" as part of the hazing?

[Outcast9428]

Who cares if they have good social skills if they laugh while beating their so called "brothers?" I've heard of people getting drugged up on cocaine and then raped, I've heard of people being left out in the middle of the forest, during the winter time and forced to find their way back to campus. I knew one guy in my hall who joined a fraternity and he came back every night with bruises all over him. One time, he had bruises leave a huge trail down his back. One frat was kicked off of campus because they were stringing their pledges up by their feet and hitting them all over their body with paddles. They also would set up these "fight clubs" and place bets on who would get the crap beaten out of them. I saw videos of fraternities having these giant brawls and basically having 100 people fighting with 100 people. My roommate went to a party where they ordered 1,000 goldfish and the competition was to see who could swallow the most goldfish. And I'm not talking about goldfish crackers, I mean actual goldfish. My roommate came back, bragging about how he killed 12 goldfish just for me (cause he knew I was vegetarian).

Are you talking about "homosexual rape" as part of the hazing?

Yes... Frat boys are very closeted homo type guys. They seem to love being naked in front of other guys for some reason, and even explicitly enjoy peeing together. One time while my friend and I were at a nightclub, he saw 5 frat type dudes emerge from the same bathroom. And it was a bathroom with one f***ing toilet. One roommate of mine who was the most stereotypical frat boy ever would take shits with the door wide open so that anybody walking by could see him on the toilet. It was absolutely f***ing disgusting, the man had no sense of privacy. He would have sex with girls with the door open as well. He literally never shut his damn door. A lot of hazing rituals have homosexual themes to them. Ever heard of the elephant walk? Its literally forcing pledges to strip their clothes off, get in a circle, reach between the legs of the pledge in-front of them and grab his penis and balls while they are marched around in a circle. I've also heard of other hazing rituals where they take their pledges clothes off and make them submerge in cold, icy water. Many of the pranks they pull on each other involves borderline gay shit. Not to mention they seem weirdly interested in touching one another a lot. They often try to explain

Yet these are the same guys calling everybody else faggots all the time, saying everything is gay, and claim to be proudly homophobic.

That's another thing, if nerds are gay they just f***ing say they're gay. They don't do all this weird, sneaky, repressed gay shit and then pretend to be the most heterosexual men on Earth. Heterosexual nerds never want to see each other naked or touch each other at all really.

[MrMan]

If a woman is Asian, that doesn't mean she loves beards. Asian women have individual tastes, just like white women.

[Lucas88]

How long ago it happened is very relevant to the conversation because human beings have biologically/genetically changed a lot in the past 1,000 years. Consider that in the 10th century AD, the average White IQ was only 80. The average White person back then was about as intelligent as the people in Afghanistan are today. Biological/genetic change happens much faster then people believe it does. Yes it takes hundreds of thousands of years for humans to evolve into a completely different species, but it doesn't take anywhere near as long for humans to change, on a biological level, quite substantially. As part of a completely natural process as well, not just because of artificial ingredients.

I'm sure that violent and warlike tendencies in human populations don't disappear so quickly in a matter of centuries since capacity for violence is closely linked to survival and, even in the modern world, some people of all races still retain warrior traits, even if they channel these into constructive activities such as combat sports or the military, but the point is moot anyway since there have been plenty of battles and armed conflicts in China, Japan and Korea in much more recent times all the way into the 20th century. I mean, the first Sino-Japanese war took place between 1894-1895 and the second between 1937-1945, not to mention all of the other brutal battles that Japan was involved in during WW2. Less than a century ago Japan was a militaristic superpower making war throughout much of Asia and the Pacific.

Sorry to burst your bubble but Asians are certainly not the ultra-pacifistic, non-violent race that you seem to want to imagine them to be. You know what? I commend them for their historical martial strength and virtue.

Asian men, you guys aren't really the weak, effeminate pussies which the media portray you as and which modern society has engineered you to be. You guys descend from some authentic baddasses. Reclaim your noble ancestral Bushido spirit! Gambare zo!

Yes, many people are a mixture of intellectual/athletic. I said in my post that frat boys are not the same thing as jocks. I'm not using frat boys as a synonym for anybody who is athletic. Plenty of athletic people have no frat boy tendencies at all. I am specifically mentioning people who joined fraternities, because those organizations instill a certain mindset in the people who join them. They are hyperconformist and if you do not obey their every instruction, you will not be able to join.

Exactly! Like I've been saying all along, there are guys who are at the same time athletic and primally masculine and highly intelligent and intellectual. Take the MMA fighter Rich Franklin, for example. He became the UFC middleweight champion back in the mid 2000s and also held a master's degree in mathematics and was a math teacher and, from what I've heard, speaks Korean fluently. Rich Franklin is an example of the kind of complete man which I idealize.

I don't feel like you ever actually went to a university because if you did, you would know what I am talking about with these people. They are just rich boy thugs, and yes, they are incredibly stupid. I don't know how most of them got into university to begin with. Many of these guys end up having to drop out after a year or two because their grades are so terrible.

I went to university in the UK but I think that you are forgetting that the UK is different. The frat house thing is more of an American phenomenon. I only know of it from TV. But the UK university scene is nevertheless populated by droves of party people who have frat boy tendencies and spend their years in higher education getting constantly boozed and drugged up at clubs or in the university dorm and behaving like complete idiots because student life is supposed to be about "having fun". Sure, they're not very pleasant to be around and lack intellectual depth beyond what is absolutely necessary for their course, but most of them still manage to graduate and then find decent employment after graduation. They don't just become losers. The truth is that most positions of employment don't require copious amounts of knowledge and erudition; they simply require certain practical skills that most people who have gone through a basic university course can acquire. So most of the reformed party boys/girls do fine.

Who cares if they have good social skills if they laugh while beating their so called "brothers?" I've heard of people getting drugged up on cocaine and then raped, I've heard of people being left out in the middle of the forest, during the winter time and forced to find their way back to campus. I knew one guy in my hall who joined a fraternity and he came back every night with bruises all over him. One time, he had bruises leave a huge trail down his back. One frat was kicked off of campus because they were stringing their pledges up by their feet and hitting them all over their body with paddles. They also would set up these "fight clubs" and place bets on who would get the crap beaten out of them. I saw videos of fraternities having these giant brawls and basically having 100 people fighting with 100 people. My roommate went to a party where they ordered 1,000 goldfish and the competition was to see who could swallow the most goldfish. And I'm not talking about goldfish crackers, I mean actual goldfish. My roommate came back, bragging about how he killed 12 goldfish just for me (cause he knew I was vegetarian).

Employers care. Good social skills and charisma are extremely useful attributes in many lines of work. That's why many of the frat boy types can still get hired and do well in the world of employment despite being not the most intellectual and also being major dickheads. I'm not disputing that those types aren't very nice people. They're certainly not. I'm just saying that plenty of them still find career success by playing to their strengths and that they don't all just end up as useless bums.

If those guys want to fight each other and feel a sense of belonging - and let's be clear that there's nothing wrong with a nice gentlemanly scrap among honorable men -, they would be better joining an MMA gym instead. They would learn how to fight for real, develop athleticism, learn discipline, and maybe even acquire some better values through the way of the martial warrior. Of course, the booze and cocaine would have to go. Men fighting each other is necessary for developing toughness and learning practical combat skills but it should be done in the right kind of setting - one that is conducive to the growth of all those involved.

People keep trying to act like "oh those nerds with their superiority complex." Well I'm sorry but we have good reasons to consider ourselves superior to these kind of guys. Because we don't do shit like that. We don't bully people for no f***ing reason, we don't think to ourselves "oh this person's weak, let me hurt them." You don't see nerds getting into brawls and fist fights with other nerds. You do not see nerds having these insane hazing ceremonies that literally require legal intervention in many cases. You don't see nerds throwing beer cans at police officers. You don't see nerds committing all the sexual assaults and rapes that frat boys do (and don't try to pretend that this is an untrue stereotype. Studies show that frat boys are only 10% of college students but commit 30% of the rapes).

Nerds are indeed less violent, in part because most of them don't have much capacity for violence and are not particularly tough by and large, but it's not really about that anyway.

Nerds tend to see themselves as superior to non-nerds because of their intelligence - either real or imagined. Believe me, I've come across a lot of stuck-up and arrogant nerds who are quick to talk shit about others and think that everybody outside of their own little subculture is beneath them. This attitude only serves to rub others up the wrong way and is the real reason why many people don't like them.

But most of those nerds aren't really superior and their superiority complex is unfounded. Some of them might really have high intelligence (as opposed to simply imagining themselves to be highly intelligent as some do) but often they lack in other areas such as physique/athleticism, martial virtue, social skills, attractiveness, etc., things which they like to dismiss as "normie traits" (simply because they don't possess these things themselves). So how can they even pretend to be superior when they aren't even complete well-rounded individuals?

In high school I didn't like the nerdy cliques either and found them to be just as obnoxious as most other groups. I was mostly a lonewolf who formed alliances with individuals of various subcultures on a case-by-case basis depending on the qualities of the individual.

People say that nerds don't have "social skills," yet we seem remarkably good at maintaining our relationships with one another and treating each other well whereas normies are constantly backstabbing one another, treating one another like shit, and have these incredibly superficial and fake relationships. That's why they cycle through friends and relationships so much is because they are incredibly selfish and only think of themselves.

When people say we don't have social skills, what they really mean is we don't bother with the bullshit games that normies play with one another. We have this incredibly innovative concept called, be friends with one another because you like being friends and get along well and try to support and uplift your friends rather then looking at them as a tool to get ahead in the game.

No, when people say that nerds don't have social skills, they mean that they have difficulty grasping subtle social cues and reacting accordingly - deficiencies which make social encounters more difficult. I'm speaking from experience. I'm on the spectrum myself and used to struggle immensely with social skills and had to make a great effort to improve enough to manage normal everyday social situations. I was extremely socially awkward - probably even more than you claim to be - and didn't get a girlfriend until I was 23, but gradually I learned to pick up on neurotypical social cues and modify my behavior to be more appropriate to the situation and through practice - mostly in Spain and Latin America - I got better with each passing year. Social skills are important. That should be obvious to anybody who is worldly and experienced in life. A lack of social skills is almost certainly a major disadvantage as many of us know all too well.

[WanderingProtagonist]

How long ago it happened is very relevant to the conversation because human beings have biologically/genetically changed a lot in the past 1,000 years. Consider that in the 10th century AD, the average White IQ was only 80. The average White person back then was about as intelligent as the people in Afghanistan are today. Biological/genetic change happens much faster then people believe it does. Yes it takes hundreds of thousands of years for humans to evolve into a completely different species, but it doesn't take anywhere near as long for humans to change, on a biological level, quite substantially. As part of a completely natural process as well, not just because of artificial ingredients.

I'm sure that violent and warlike tendencies in human populations don't disappear so quickly in a matter of centuries since capacity for violence is closely linked to survival and, even in the modern world, some people of all races still retain warrior traits, even if they channel these into constructive activities such as combat sports or the military, but the point is moot anyway since there have been plenty of battles and armed conflicts in China, Japan and Korea in much more recent times all the way into the 20th century. I mean, the first Sino-Japanese war took place between 1894-1895 and the second between 1937-1945, not to mention all of the other brutal battles that Japan was involved in during WW2. Less than a century ago Japan was a militaristic superpower making war throughout much of Asia and the Pacific.

Sorry to burst your bubble but Asians are certainly not the ultra-pacifistic, non-violent race that you seem to want to imagine them to be. You know what? I commend them for their historical martial strength and virtue.

Yeah but too bad Japan is too weak to reclaim all of that back. They surrendered after WWII, and now the U.S. controls them, that's why Yohan keeps talking about how eager Japan is to join the U.S. in fighting Russia. You would think after getting your ass bombed by a country that bullies the entire world the last thing you would want to do is team up with them. Plus too many Japanese males have given up on life, have NRT fetishes and prefer the Herbivore life. I doubt the same will ever happen with the Chinese since they actually have a Government that WANTS the men to remain warlike and they'll never let America turn them into their bitch like Japan did.

[Outcast9428]

@Lucas88

It can definitely disappear, not entirely but become significantly less common in a matter of centuries. The homicide rate in Europe in 1,000 AD for example was 100 per 100,000 people. Homicide rates of this scale were pretty normal in the Ancient world.

By 1200 AD, however, it had dropped to 10 per 100,000. Between 1300-1340, the homicide rate in London was only 3.5 per 100,000 if you take the average of all those years. 14th century London was actually less violent then the majority of modern US cities are. Homicide rates that low would have been unthinkable in the Ancient world.

WW2 was definitely the last hurrah so to speak for Japan’s militarism. It is very possible that all the violent people in Japan essentially got exterminated by WW2.

I don’t think being athletic is the same thing as being primally masculine.

I would assume the Chavs in the UK are basically your frat boys.

I don’t find that people lacking social skills makes developing friendships with them and social interactions more difficult at all. If anything it seems to make it easier. People who “lack social skills” in my experience are the easiest people to get along with.

The people who claim to have good social skills don’t really have valuable skills because the skills they claim to have don’t translate into deep, long term, loyal relationships and friendships. Normies have terrible relationships with one another and one only has to spend a little time on Reddit, looking at the batshit insane kind of drama that normies seem to find themselves involved in to realize that what normies call “social skills” is a bunch of horseshit.

Normies are good at playing these weird, complex games of social manipulation with one another. That’s all it is really. Nerd friendships on the other hand are far more open, far more honest, have significantly less drama and conflict, and tend to last much longer.

I’m pretty sure my girlfriend is actually autistic and it’s incredible how much easier it makes it to date her. It’s like nothing goes unsaid, everything is precisely verified, there’s no ambiguity to our conversations at all and she doesn’t leave any doubts in my head about anything. She doesn’t expect me to do any guesswork, to ever just figure out what she means.

Getting into scraps for no good reason is not very gentlemanly. That’s just being a thug.

[MrMan]

@Lucas88

It can definitely disappear, not entirely but become significantly less common in a matter of centuries. The homicide rate in Europe in 1,000 AD for example was 100 per 100,000 people. Homicide rates of this scale were pretty normal in the Ancient world.

By 1200 AD, however, it had dropped to 10 per 100,000. Between 1300-1340, the homicide rate in London was only 3.5 per 100,000 if you take the average of all those years. 14th century London was actually less violent then the majority of modern US cities are. Homicide rates that low would have been unthinkable in the Ancient world.

Who was performing the surveys in the ancient world? My guess is no one, or if they did, not record of it remained. Are they going by examining graves or something like that?

But if this is true, I'd assume it is the influence of Christianity that explains the drop in murders.

WW2 was definitely the last hurrah so to speak for Japan’s militarism. It is very possible that all the violent people in Japan essentially got exterminated by WW2.

Did the less violent men have a choice? They didn't sent women with violent DNA on the front lines?

I have a friend who said that Europeans tend to be warlike because they have more testosterone... and body hair... than Asians. He said the Japanese were warlike, but they were the hairiest Asians. I haven't inspected any Mongolians, but I wouldn't imagine the Mongols were especially hairy.

[Lucas88]

It can definitely disappear, not entirely but become significantly less common in a matter of centuries. The homicide rate in Europe in 1,000 AD for example was 100 per 100,000 people. Homicide rates of this scale were pretty normal in the Ancient world.

Violent tendencies don't ever disappear. They are part of our nature and exist for the benefit of our survival. Violent tendencies can be constrained through the effects of civilization but they cannot disappear completely. They simply take a back seat in times of peace until the next war or conflict breaks out.

The warrior disposition exists in people of all races. Asians aren't exempt from this.

WW2 was definitely the last hurrah so to speak for Japan’s militarism. It is very possible that all the violent people in Japan essentially got exterminated by WW2.

I think that at this point you're just grasping at straws in order to defend your thesis that Asians are somehow biologically less prone to violence (even though there have undeniably been plenty of wars throughout Asia until relatively recently). In wars the violent people don't all die. Plenty of them survive and then impregnate women upon their return. In Japan today there will be millions of men with the warrior disposition walking the streets and going about everyday life. They simply don't act upon their violent instincts because in their present environment there is rarely any need to do so. But like anywhere else, Japan is one apocalyptic societal breakdown away from becoming a land of violence. Should the country ever fall into anarchy for whatever reason, people's violent instincts would immediately return (even among those gay-looking Japanese men) and the movie Battle Royale would become a reality!

I don’t think being athletic is the same thing as being primally masculine.

Athleticism is not the same as primal masculinity but some athletic activities such as MMA and other combat sports do require primal masculinity since the act of fighting is inherently primal and they certainly serve to cultivate it.

As a martial arts instructor I recommend basic combat training to all men for the cultivation and proper channeling of our violent instincts and primal masculinity as well as the acquirement of practical combat skills for self-defense and survival. This requires that men be exposed to violence in a controlled environment. In fact, I taught my own fight classes a few years ago (@Pixel--Dude and I called it "fight club"). I gathered a handful of guys who wanted to learn how to fight and, after teaching them a few basics, I got them to fight each other and rough each other up a little, but not to a degree where people would get seriously hurt. After a few months of the training, all of the guys felt much less scared of violence and more confident in their ability to defend themselves. That's because through my training program I reactivated their primal instincts and primal masculinity. Actual combat under controlled conditions is the best thing for that.

Yes, as a martial arts instructor, my job is to take little pussies - pussies who have been pussified by the major-league pussyholery of the modern world - and turn them into warriors through the reawakening of their warrior spirit.

I would assume the Chavs in the UK are basically your frat boys.

No, chavs are not analogous to frat boys. Chavs are a delinquent subculture from deprived neighborhoods and almost none of them go to university. They typically drink cheap alcohol, take drugs, wear fake designer clothes, listen to stuff like Uprising, and act "tough" (although that is mostly just posturing and most of them soon back down whenever anybody stands up to them).

The party people at university who I consider similar to America's frat boys are usually middle class.

The people who claim to have good social skills don’t really have valuable skills because the skills they claim to have don’t translate into deep, long term, loyal relationships and friendships. Normies have terrible relationships with one another and one only has to spend a little time on Reddit, looking at the batshit insane kind of drama that normies seem to find themselves involved in to realize that what normies call “social skills” is a bunch of horseshit.

What you are describing is not the same as what psychology regards as social skills. Real social skills are extremely useful for success in various areas of life and to have them well developed is enormously advantageous.

Normies are good at playing these weird, complex games of social manipulation with one another. That’s all it is really. Nerd friendships on the other hand are far more open, far more honest, have significantly less drama and conflict, and tend to last much longer.

I don't know if there is really a normie vs. nerd distinction when it comes to this. I've met plenty of regular mainstream people whose friendships and relationships didn't consist of social games or manipulation. It probably has more to do with underlying social dysfunctions and personality disorders in a subset of the population.

[Lucas88]

Yeah but too bad Japan is too weak to reclaim all of that back. They surrendered after WWII, and now the U.S. controls them, that's why Yohan keeps talking about how eager Japan is to join the U.S. in fighting Russia. You would think after getting your ass bombed by a country that bullies the entire world the last thing you would want to do is team up with them. Plus too many Japanese males have given up on life, have NRT fetishes and prefer the Herbivore life. I doubt the same will ever happen with the Chinese since they actually have a Government that WANTS the men to remain warlike and they'll never let America turn them into their bitch like Japan did.

I've always suspected that the feminization of Japanese masculinity post WW2 was the result of American social engineering imposed upon the surrendered party. After Japan's defeat, warlike masculinity was demonized, effeminate celebrities started to appear in the media and promote metrosexual fashions and faggy forms of masculinity, and totally unmasculine nerd culture became the norm. Certain elites wish to feminize the male populace in order to make it easier to control.

China is a different story. A few years ago, the Chinese government accused the new "sissy pants" masculinity with its effeminate aesthetics and androgynous clothing of being a CIA psychological warfare operation against the various nations of Asia. The CIA psychological warfare operation is supposed to include pop culture trends such as J-pop, K-pop, anime and manga. China doesn't want its men to become feminized.

Needless to say, the deliberate feminization of men is already in full swing in the West too with feminism and its crusade against "toxic masculinity", gender ideology and the promotion of transgenderism, the sudden emergence of non-binary gender identities, and the mainstreaming of nerd culture. Yes, while we are on the topic of nerds, it is no secret that nerd culture has become much more mainstream in the last decade or so at the expense of older more virile forms of masculinity. Now being a weedy, p***y-ass nerd is celebrated as though it were something to be proud of. I think that this is very much by design. The elites want to suppress all true warlike masculine traits and instead promote weak and unmasculine male identities in order to pussify the majority of men and render us unable to resist the Great Reset when the NWO decides to implement it.

[WanderingProtagonist]

Yeah but too bad Japan is too weak to reclaim all of that back. They surrendered after WWII, and now the U.S. controls them, that's why Yohan keeps talking about how eager Japan is to join the U.S. in fighting Russia. You would think after getting your ass bombed by a country that bullies the entire world the last thing you would want to do is team up with them. Plus too many Japanese males have given up on life, have NRT fetishes and prefer the Herbivore life. I doubt the same will ever happen with the Chinese since they actually have a Government that WANTS the men to remain warlike and they'll never let America turn them into their bitch like Japan did.

I've always suspected that the feminization of Japanese masculinity post WW2 was the result of American social engineering imposed upon the surrendered party. After Japan's defeat, warlike masculinity was demonized, effeminate celebrities started to appear in the media and promote metrosexual fashions and faggy forms of masculinity, and totally unmasculine nerd culture became the norm. Certain elites wish to feminize the male populace in order to make it easier to control.

China is a different story. A few years ago, the Chinese government accused the new "sissy pants" masculinity with its effeminate aesthetics and androgynous clothing of being a CIA psychological warfare operation against the various nations of Asia. The CIA psychological warfare operation is supposed to include pop culture trends such as J-pop, K-pop, anime and manga. China doesn't want its men to become feminized.

Needless to say, the deliberate feminization of men is already in full swing in the West too with feminism and its crusade against "toxic masculinity", gender ideology and the promotion of transgenderism, the sudden emergence of non-binary gender identities, and the mainstreaming of nerd culture. Yes, while we are on the topic of nerds, it is no secret that nerd culture has become much more mainstream in the last decade or so at the expense of older more virile forms of masculinity. Now being a weedy, p***y-ass nerd is celebrated as though it were something to be proud of. I think that this is very much by design. The elites want to suppress all true warlike masculine traits and instead promote weak and unmasculine male identities in order to pussify the majority of men and render us unable to resist the Great Reset when the NWO decides to implement it.

That's exactly why I became so spiteful and hateful of a lot of these males. My brother watches anime a lot, I use to watch it a lot too in my early teens and 20s, but lost interest with the stuff when it stopped being cool like how Vampire Hunter D bloodlust was or Demon City those weren't all that nerdy at all. Anime started to get nerdy when stuff like Dragon Ball Z became more relevant in the US followed by Pokemon. I think Pokemon was bigger than DBZ was. I also hated hip hop culture influencing some of it like Samurai Champloo was just major cringe as hell but this was their way of trying to reach black audience by trying to fuse hip hop crap in with Japanese culture so they had their own way of trying to pander with anime.

Aside from that, everything you said is certainly true, if you can cripple the men of a country you can take that shit over easily. They tend to use and exploit black males by pushing interracial propaganda hard because they know how unorganized blacks are. If they can flood enough countries with them, they'll able to do even more damage than just sissifying the men of every nation that allows it to happen. I do remember how huge Jpop was, but it got replaced by all the Kpop stuff. Kpop eventually became bigger globally than Jpop ever did. Hip Hop culture can ruin a country just as much as the horrible pop stuff. Nothing is worse than seeing Asians trying to imitate blacks. Use to see it all the time at my high school despite they always avoided blacks. They would hang out in large groups and you'd hear Asians literately calling each other niggas. The only Asian girls I've heard use the word are the ones that dated black males.

[Outcast9428]

@MrMan

You can determine, examining the skeletons of Ancient burial sites, whether people died from a violent death or not. If you look at a country during a time period where that civilization was not actively at war or there was no peasant revolts or organized conflicts in the region, you can determine what percentage of deaths were caused by violent methods. Ancient world homicide rates tended to vary between 100 to 150 per 100,000. Homicide rates that high are unthinkable in today's world. Even the most violent countries in the world are nowhere close to having this level of homicide. These homicide rates indicate that, at the time, 5%-8% of all deaths were caused by homicide.

Christianity civilized the world. It is the greatest force of moral goodness the world has ever known. Without Christianity, our world would be unrecognizable. We would be living in hell and every time a country abandons Christianity, they go back to hell. Realizing that is what truly made me take "the Godpill" so to speak. We don't need to bother wondering what the next life might be like if we reject God. If we reject God, the devil will create hell on Earth, the idea that sin only punishes your soul in the afterlife is nonsense. It absolutely does punish you in this life, often immediately.

@Lucas88

Grasping at straws? You don't think a war that killed off approximately 7% of the most violent men in society (2.5 million soldiers out 35 million Japanese men died in WW2), and more like 20% of the most violent young males would do nothing to the biological makeup of that country? Imagine if we took the United States, and slaughtered 10 million of the most violent men in our country. You really think that wouldn't impact the biological makeup of our country at all? Let's use another example, let's say you slaughtered 10 million of the most intelligent or the dumbest men in our society. You think that wouldn't impact the average IQ of our nation?

In Ancient Times, the cycle usually perpetuated itself because the conquering army raped the conquered nation's women. The US didn't do that to Japan though, so Japan basically just lost all the warrior males in their society and had nobody to replace them.

My thesis on Asians being less biologically violent is indisputable, all you have to do is look at crime stats...



These statistics hold up pretty much everywhere in the world. Asians in the US actually commit more homicides then Asians in actual Asian countries do. Japan's homicide rate is 0.30, South Korea's is 0.70. China's is about 0.70 as well for the Asian population (not for the migrant population), Indonesia's homicide rate is 0.4 per 100,000, Singapore's homicide rate is 0.30 per 100,000, and Taiwan's homicide rate is 0.80 per 100,000. Almost every country that is homogenously East Asian will have a homicide rate that is below 1 per 100,000. I mean this is a sample size of almost 2 billion people we are talking about here.

@Pixel--Dude

See, nobody acted that way in any of the nerd circles I've been in. In the circles I've been in, any time somebody was someone else's girlfriend, you left her alone. Everybody left her alone.

[Lucas88]

Grasping at straws? You don't think a war that killed off approximately 7% of the most violent men in society (2.5 million soldiers out 35 million Japanese men died in WW2), and more like 20% of the most violent young males would do nothing to the biological makeup of that country? Imagine if we took the United States, and slaughtered 10 million of the most violent men in our country. You really think that wouldn't impact the biological makeup of our country at all? Let's use another example, let's say you slaughtered 10 million of the most intelligent or the dumbest men in our society. You think that wouldn't impact the average IQ of our nation?

Yep, just grasping at straws to justify your weabo fantasy that the Japanese are somehow a special race without violent instincts (even though just seven decades ago the country was the leading aggressor in one of the bloodiest wars of the modern age). Lol!

During a brutal war of that magnitude, it is not simply the most violent men who go off to fight; men of all walks of life and dispositions are conscripted into the military. Contrary to what some people might think, the military of a modern nation isn't populated exclusively by the natural warrior types but also heavily by men of a regular disposition who simply see the military as a job/source of income or who wish to serve their country. So, this being the case, why would only Japan's most violent men die out during WW2? Some warrior types would be killed but so would a whole lot of regular guys simply fulfilling their duty. In fact, if you really think about it, one could even suppose that the warrior types would more likely have a better chance of surviving due to their own warlike psychological constitution and innate "killer instinct" of a soldier. Not to mention that there will have been many carriers of warrior genetic traits among the women who remained at home. So your argument is flawed and is just another case of your wishful thinking.

Your statistics don't really prove that Asians are less biologically violent. Correlation does not necessarily equal causation. How can you be sure that it's not simply that Asian societies/communities might have developed cultural values that more effectively curb violent instincts? Wouldn't this hypothesis make more sense given that Asian populations too have experienced many periods of violence in the past?

As for homicide rates in Asia, why do you conveniently omit the Philippines? Might it be because it lends support to my hypothesis that Asians are just as biologically predisposed to violence as everybody else but that their societies have simply developed cultural values which curb violent tendencies? Or are you just going to blame it on the Spanish admixture?

[Lucas88]

As for statistics about homicide rates per country, I wonder how much of it is influenced primarily by culture and social factors as opposed to alleged biological racial dispositions.

Just out of curiosity I checked the most recent statistics available for various countries and in some cases found quite pronounced differences between countries with a similar racial composition.

For example, the UK has a homicide rate of 1.2 and Canada has 2.0 while the US has a homicide rate of 6.3!

Similarly, Poland and Czech Republic both have 0.7 while Russia has 7.3 and Ukraine has 6.2, even though these are all Slavic nations!

Let's look at Sub-Saharan Africa. Cameroon only has 1.4, Ghana has 2.1, Rwanda has 2.6, Kenya has 4.0, Angola has 4.8, and Nigeria has 34.5!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... icide_rate


These differences obviously cannot be explained simply by alleged racial characteristics. There must be other cultural and social factors at play.

[Outcast9428]

@Lucas88

I’m not the one grasping at straws… I mean you are trying to make the argument that a race that has extremely low violent crime levels in virtually every country they are apart of is just as violent as a race that seems to leave a giant trail of destruction everywhere they go. Just because the crime rates are not exactly the same in every case doesn’t mean there aren’t extremely strong correlations. Being more successful at civilizing your population is making them less violent on a biological basis. Dogs are much less violent then wolves. Certain breeds of dogs are much less violent then other breeds. Yes the way they were raised certainly matters a lot but a wolf will not be truly peaceful no matter what you do whereas dogs that are aggressive, 90% of the time were abused. The same applies to human beings. Environment certainly does shape us but the mold we begin with matters a lot.

Yes soldiers who aren’t that violent may have died too but it’s pretty much guaranteed that all of the most violent people would have joined the military at that time period. And most of the destruction caused in society is caused by an incredibly small group of people anyway. You don’t need many of them to die in order to dramatically change a country.

The United States does not have a similar racial makeup to Europe and you know that. We all know which group is responsible for making our homicide rate 6.3 despite only being 13% of the population. If it was just Whites in America our homicide rate would be the same as European countries are. American Blacks on the other hand commit homicides at a similar level to Blacks in South Africa.

Yes, given that the Philippines is the only country in Asia that doesn’t have a low rate of violent crime and happens to be the only country we have talked about that isn’t pure Asian, I do think the Spanish admixture has something to do with it. Even then though, the Philippines crime rate is not outrageously high. It’s just high for an Asian country.

Russia’s and Ukraine’s people got raped to smithereens at the beginning of the century between the Cheka, the atrocities in WW2, and later the KGB. The rest of Europe did not endure the brunt of the Soviet Union’s crimes the way Russia and Ukraine did.

Crime is 50% genetic and 50% environmental.

Ah yes the whole correlation does not equal causation line. I have never seen someone make that argument and it not be a complete bullshit way to dismiss undeniable patterns.

In my head as soon as someone makes the correlation does not equal causation argument, I know they have lost and are just trying to whip out a revival card.

[Tsar]

@Lucas88

I’m not the one grasping at straws… I mean you are trying to make the argument that a race that has extremely low violent crime levels in virtually every country they are apart of is just as violent as a race that seems to leave a giant trail of destruction everywhere they go. Just because the crime rates are not exactly the same in every case doesn’t mean there aren’t extremely strong correlations. Being more successful at civilizing your population is making them less violent on a biological basis. Dogs are much less violent then wolves. Certain breeds of dogs are much less violent then other breeds. Yes the way they were raised certainly matters a lot but a wolf will not be truly peaceful no matter what you do whereas dogs that are aggressive, 90% of the time were abused. The same applies to human beings. Environment certainly does shape us but the mold we begin with matters a lot.

Yes soldiers who aren’t that violent may have died too but it’s pretty much guaranteed that all of the most violent people would have joined the military at that time period. And most of the destruction caused in society is caused by an incredibly small group of people anyway. You don’t need many of them to die in order to dramatically change a country.

The United States does not have a similar racial makeup to Europe and you know that. We all know which group is responsible for making our homicide rate 6.3 despite only being 13% of the population. If it was just Whites in America our homicide rate would be the same as European countries are. American Blacks on the other hand commit homicides at a similar level to Blacks in South Africa.

Yes, given that the Philippines is the only country in Asia that doesn’t have a low rate of violent crime and happens to be the only country we have talked about that isn’t pure Asian, I do think the Spanish admixture has something to do with it. Even then though, the Philippines crime rate is not outrageously high. It’s just high for an Asian country.

Russia’s and Ukraine’s people got raped to smithereens at the beginning of the century between the Cheka, the atrocities in WW2, and later the KGB. The rest of Europe did not endure the brunt of the Soviet Union’s crimes the way Russia and Ukraine did.

Crime is 50% genetic and 50% environmental.

Ah yes the whole correlation does not equal causation line. I have never seen someone make that argument and it not be a complete bullshit way to dismiss undeniable patterns.

In my head as soon as someone makes the correlation does not equal causation argument, I know they have lost and are just trying to whip out a revival card.

I agree with @Outcast9428 that the crime rate in Russia is mostly because of environmental factors.

Russia has had a lot of terrible events since the Bolshevik (Jew) Revolution (coup d'etat). Poverty, lack of opportunity (since the end of the USSR), Jews (the most criminal and evil race anywhere), and the West always trying to undermine Russia.

People who often do crime are people who are poor or pack opportunity.

Africans do the most violent crime but Jews are the most criminal.

Also, Japan and some Asian nations are extremely harsh. It's also more collective. Most have more opportunity. Men in most nations are more able to get a girlfriend. In Japan, it's often shameful for parents if their child is homeless or poor, so they'll get them a place, or children live with parents.

Are Asian nations genuinely less criminal? I don't think so if it's on a genetic level.

North Korea is still like a typical Asian society and China to some level. Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan are American vassal states. They had the warrior spirit temporarily weakened because of American neocolonialism.

Vietnam resisted and is another good example of the warrior spirit.

Japan chose to surrender and could surrender in WW2 because everyone respected the Emperor and Japanese culture emphasized honor. America also wanted to avoid a bloody war because Japanese soldiers and American soldiers would have been slaughtered. The Japanese would fight without retreating and that made them dangerous opponents. Both sides decided to end the war and part of it was because America was willing to let the Emperor live and keep his royal title and some level of authority, but an absolute monarchy became a constitutional monarchy and America wrote that constitution, which is actually better than America's own constitution in terms of free elections and other important things. The opportunity that Japan had is why they've been able to avoid having a high crime rate.

The factors for less crime are more about having opportunity and a good environment, more than genetic factors and learned through nurture.

Genetics can decrease probability because of racial and ethnic variations, and individual variations, but environmental factors and having good opportunity is what ultimately decides whether people will commit crime or not.