The Rolling Stones postpone a show in the US to allow singer Sir Mick Jagger time to rest his voice...

Hello there! I was just browsing blog of my friend and I've seen ink to yours, I was curious what's all about and what I can say is... I'm bit impressed! Good posting mate!

Good blog! I like your posting style, so your wording. It's good that people are so different and everyone has his own story.

http://celeb.anzwers.net/paysites/fiction/daily.html complimentwhosewondered

if u truly are native american, because judging from your name and nature it is highly doubtful, u need to pray to your god for forgiveness. My family and colleagues are all of native american descent and we are appalled and ashamed that someone like u is claiming to be one of us. u truly are a disgrace to your race and all mankind in general. your fixation with the "white" race belies the way you claim to want no part of it, and it only proves you have lots of "issues" and insecurties. as to your fixation with "darker" races, if it looks like a racist, talks like a racist then it must be a racist, that describes you perfectly. We also must add that you whine like 5-year-old. Grow up and get a life.

Christie, you're absolutely right about many white men secretely (if not openly) lusting after black women. There is a sense of abandon, or freedom from conscience, from self-consciousness, from guilt, all sorts of Freudian goodies in that package.

I think I'm defending the simple fact that I don't happen to be sexually attracted to black women, and therefore, do not understand the desire. I also resent, highly, being told that such a state, in myself, is a sign of prejudice or inequality, or some other such false pretense.

I'm being honest. Most people aren't, on this subject. That's what it appears like, to me.

I one wants porno, of any grade, there are specific places one goes for it. Prime time TV, during the SuperBowl, is not such a place.

I don't expect anything proprietous from MTV. Any kind of sexual theme comes there. Homosexuality will be followed eventually by bestiality. Only a metter of time, if it hasn't happened already. I don't watch MTV, or even CTV.

Perhaps it can be said that the JJ episode was just a coincidence of the "music" business. She needed a PR lift, they got a hot partner, JT, and those two decided what they were going to do...

Such circumstance is nevertheless the outworking of larger forces, such as the drive for racial equality based on interracial SEXUAL relations.
This is a conscious effort, repeated over and over. Some people are saying, "It's no big deal," the interracial thing. This only shows how successful the media pressure has been, and it has been supported by LAW, in the form of "equal rights" clauses. Equal employment, etc.

I know individuals caught up in it all are not necessarily responsible. They just live with the circumstances.

Okay, David. What do you mean by "First of all, no white woman exposed herself as a sneak attack on prime time, maintstream TV, at the most watched moment in the year, the SuperBowl. Don't forget that."?

I'm still interested in what kind of article you would write if it were a white woman, then. Sure, maybe if that was the case it wouldn't be an "interracial sexual ad" to you, but I still don't see it as an interracial sex ad. The thought didn't even cross my mind. I would assume the thought would only cross a person's mind if they were a racist, or a very race-aware person, which I am not.

For example, if a racist white man was watching TV with his children when this incident occurred, he would automatically think of not only the horror of an exposed breast, but the horror of a white man exposing a black woman's breast, and what this image would be imposing on his children.

I assumed that you were white since this article came off to me as a white elitist article. You said, "White society is literally being forced to accept the "black" body as equally sexually desirable." The theme of this article still comes off as whites are better than blacks.

By the way, who says that whites don't desire blacks? Think back to the slavery days, where plantation owners would rape a great deal of their black slaves. Or, make them their mistresses. Why didn't they rape other white women? Or have sex with their wife? Or RAPE their own wife? You can do that, you know.
So, who knows? Maybe many white men still do have a secret desire for black women. Plantation owners did.

Christie, I always feel free to comment on my own blog! (Just kidding. I like your style.)

A black woman, de-robed by a white man: and anyone thinks this didn't have to do with racial sex? What about a black man tearing off the clothes of a white woman? No racial sex there?

Many people have said they think I would have not have objected had it been a white woman. This is RACISM on their part, and utter assumption. First of all, no white woman exposed herself as a sneak attack on prime time, maintstream TV, at the most watched moment in the year, the SuperBowl. Don't forget that.

Interracial sex, between dramatically contrasting races, is uncomfortable for most people, still, in America, despite the rate of intermarriage in the country. You'll have to look at the studies done of "half-breed" children to get a handle on the other end of this subject.

But, if it's on TV, it must be right, it must be acceptable, it must be the thing to do.

This SuperBowl act was a interracial sexual ad. Nothing less, and nothing more. And it was done in a tryannical way, since no one was expecting it, and it was actually illegal, according to the laws of Texas. It was done in Houston. It's called indecent exposure.

This is an American Indian site. I'm Indian. Or, are you going to deny me that claim, because I spoke negatively about black and white sex on public TV? Now who's being racist?

Oh, geez. This is ridiculous.

"That JJ would use her own body to force racial sex in the face of the world is in fact racism. I am not the racist here. That is a deception, or at least a mistake."

Hold on, here. Who even said or assumed that Janet Jackson was using her body to "force racial sex in the face of the world" or using it to show that she could be attractive to the white race, except you? I must let you know you are assuming all of what you have said; you have no way to prove this is what she was trying to do. Maybe she just wanted to SHOW A BOOB. For reasons, unknown to all except her and maybe Justin, but you can't just assume this racist viewpoint and say it's true.

Does this mean if this incident occurred with a white woman you wouldn't care as much? Or if a black man was up there on stage with Janet you wouldn't care as much?
If the answer to one of those was yes, then you are a racist. Why is this even an issue of race at all? I certainly didn't see it this way, and I would not have even thought of it if I had not read this article.

From your article, I can say that you obviously do not think of the black woman's body as equally sexually desirable. This still does not mean that black people are trying to "force" whites to accept them as equally desirable. How are you coming up with all this? This article is one assumption after another.

I do agree with one sentence, though.
"America is being told what is sexually attractive."
This is true. We are told this through media with everything they daily jut in our faces. Most likely the only reason that you do not find black women attractive is because the media has painted this image of "the perfect female" being tall, white and blonde. According to them, no one else is beautiful. Maybe that's why "It's "black" men who desire white women". And as you said, there are more rapes done by black men against white women.
If it was black women who were portrayed in that way, you can bet that there would be more white men raping black women then black men raping white women.
So, in all, it does come down to the media and the other influences on our lives.

What JJ did WAS offense to many, I know that. But this issue has nothing to do with what color her skin is.

"Moreover, it was a white man, Justin Timberlake, that played the part of desiring her "black" body. Therefore, the message was loud and clear. "See?! Everyone wants my body! Especially the white man! I just proved it!""

Again, you are assuming that this had something to do with race. I don't mean to be redundant, but she probably just wanted to flash a boob, for whatever reason(s).

I'm sorry, but your article was extremely racist.
Don't get me wrong, but what I took from your article was, "Black people suck and are much lower class than I, an elite white man. (assuming you are white, from this article that clearly is trying to say whites are better than blacks"
Women shouldn't be able to show their boobs in public; especially black women. The fact a BLACK woman did this brings shame to everybody, whereas if it was a white woman, it would be bad, but still okay."
Feel free to comment on this.

Well, JW, you said what you had to say without obtrusive, juvenile vulgarity, which shows me you are above the worst of it.

However, you seemed to have taken an arrow to the heart, when it was meant for the head--I mean your mind, your thinking.

You four suggested alternative motives, however, do not offer any moral justification for what JJ and JT did. You seem to miss the moral issue entirely, which is the basis of my objection.

The racial element is only the "skin." The cover. That JJ would use her own body to force racial sex in the face of the world is in fact racism. I am not the racist here. That is a deception, or at least a mistake.

JJ deserves the severest reprimand possible for her abuse of not only the black race, but of the human race.

Of course, if you do not value the moral standard here, then you can't see the offense, and only focuse on the "race" part of the subject.

I think this is the problem in your response.

I don't know whether you are black or white or Indian, or Chinese. If I have a personal disrelish for a black woman because I happen not to be attracted to her body, you assume I am white, and that I am racist.

You think it is racist not to be sexually attracted to a black woman.

THIS IS RACISM on YOUR PART, not mine. You cannot dictate what some one is supposed to be attacted to or not. JJ presumed all are attracted to her. This is also RACISM.

I'm not the racist. It is your attitude, and JJ's attitude.

Dear Mr. David Yeagley,

You racist piece of scum! You don't deserve to breathe the same air I breathe. You deserve, in fact, to be boiled alive until your skin peels off like that of a tomato.

Racism is perhaps one of the most insidious problems of the age. And brain-dead morons such as you propagate it. Perhaps if you'd ever had to work a day in your life you'd understand. But instead you're just another useless white who has nothing more to contribute than bad karma. Do the world a favor and crawl back under your rock. You're article is a joke and your attitude of seriousness does not camouflage the fact that you're just another racist taking this opportunity to spew your vomit on the masses.

You'll probably want to tell me that I have my head in the sand and I'm ignoring the realities of life. On the contrary, I see everything quite clearly. And right now I see one pathetic white man trying to make himself look smart while capitalizing on an stupid stunt.

There's an old saying...perhaps you've heard it. "People who act like they know everything really irritate those of us who do." Well, pretender, I'm not fooled. I recognize you for the low, weak, puerile racist you are. Consider yourself marked.

Did you stop for even a moment to consider that there may have been other motivations for Janet's stunt? Like, for instance, the following.

1. increased record sales
2. bragging rights for MTV (as well as increased viewrship by teen males)
3. possible distraction from her brothers ongoing rape trial
4. or maybe she did it just to piss you off! Yeah, that's more likely. She did it because she doesn’t like you, David. Give me a break...you're not the center of the universe at all, are you?

I also wish to respond to the joker who said we need to "grow up" for wishing death on you. I suppose he would have said the same thing about Adolph Hitler as well? Perhaps he doesn't understand that sometimes the ideas and opinions people have are so bad that it is worth the death of those people just to prevent the spread of their ideas or opinions. You don't believe me? Ask the CIA, the FBI or the NSA. They'll be happy to explain.

So, on you, David...I wish death. No, this is no threat...I'd never do it myself and I feel confident that if you keep spouting opinions like this one that some other kind soul will do the work for me. However, in the meantime…I hope you (and all your ilk) get hit by a truck...a big, fast, BLACK one!

Sincerely

JW

I think this entire thread is slightly silly. Janet Jackson showed (part of) her breast on national TV. Wow. THAT wasn't coming for years. Move along, people, nothing (interesting) to see here.

As far as being attracted to women of different races, I think that's entirely up to the attracted and the attractee isn't it? As long as both of them are human, of legal age, and of (relatively) sound mind, who cares?

As for myself, I've always been attracted to women of different ethnic extractions than myself, finding them more beautiful than the female members of my own ethnic background. Is this unusual? Yes it is, overtly, but many white males secretly desire women of different ethnicity to themselves, for many different reasons. If the cultural stigma and intense racial divide in America was somehow magically erased tomorrow, I think you would see far greater numbers of interracial couples than you see today.

""Asian American Women who love us white boys." Lars writes
---
With no direct "HIT" toward you and your wife...but, of course the Asian American, Filipino and other non-citizens love you white boys...you are easy targets, easy lays and you can be used to make these women American citizens."
------------------------------------

Betty Ann, this may amaze you, but not everybody would give one's eyeteeth to live in the United States.

Maybe those women are FOND of their men and follow them even to the unknown?

And the fact that so many Western men marry Asian women has very little -- if anything -- to do with race. It has to do with the unreasonably demanding, unloving, uncaring, cantankerous, controversial attitude most middle class Western women -- and specifically American ones -- show nowadays.

Those Asian women I know are educated, well mannered, polite and have a non-controversial attitude towards men and marriage and, of course, the adoration they somewhat understandably experience from all those affection-starved white men triggers off a reaction...

If you want to know why white men like (and marry) Asian women go to www.nomarriage.com. It will considerably broaden your horizon.

"nora, could you please elaborate about the bad effects of hybred vigor? i looked but couldn't find any info about this on the web. Can you suggest some references?"

Well, this is a reference that discusses the possible pros and cons of the heterosis effect, which is responsible for the hybrid vigour phenomenon.

http://www.pollhereford.com.au/taurus_crossbreeding.html

I thought it was rather self-explaining that, if you cross two different breeds, the results may vary quite considerably, because it is just as likely that the specimen inherits the undesirable traits from both parents as the desirable ones.

The person I replied to said:

"Has anyone taken the idea of genetics into account? The fact that interracial breeding distills the human genome into it's most effective form. Of course this used to be limited by geography, which is how races arose, but today anyone can live anywhere they choose (for the most part) and the genetic code should eventually meld into the most desirable state for a global person."

That is wrong on several accounts. The most important ones being that the heterosis effect applies to the first generation ONLY. The second one is (and you can read that in the reference I provided, too) that one needs a considerable genetic gap between the individuals to-be-crossed to make the heterosis effect work. All human "races" are, however, genetically quite close.

It was just the sort of politically correct BS that needed some correction by facts.

As far as I am concerned, everybody should be free to marry everybody, mutual attraction given, but to say it would render "better" children is pure and undiluted crap.

nora, could you please elaborate about the bad effects of hybred vigor? i looked but couldn't find any info about this on the web. Can you suggest some references?

"Has anyone taken the idea of genetics into account? The fact that interracial breeding distills the human genome into it's most effective form."

Only in the first generation. It's called "hybrid vigor" and it may as well have an extremely BAD result as well.

Allirog, My what a post! Welcome to BadEagle.com.

I must say, at first I thought yours was a high level sacrasm or satire, but it seems quite serious, and I thank you for it. (Satire is just as welcome, so, don't be shy of humor here, either!)

I very glad you posted this, and I was wondering if anyone would come to say anything about the gorilla itself. I've looked at the photography available on the internet, and it is, I must say, rather spectacular.

I assumed, however, that most people have an immediate aversion to the animal, not bothering to analyze this at any depth. It was for "shock" purposes, in response the Janet Jackson's "flash." I felt she deserved the worst possible association, that's all.

I you look at the article below, "No Teat Left Behind," you will notice in the discussions I went more deeply into the animal element. I invite your comments there.

I might add, I never intended to say Janet looks like a gorilla, or that gorilla were actually horrible to look at. I need something that was a shocking, if even by association, as the lewd act of Janet.

As a member of the gorilla foundation, the dian fossey gorilla fund and a gorilla researcher for many years - and many years to come - and as a white, male, I would just like to state, on behalf of gorillas, "how dare you?" If you knew the true nature of these gentle, intelligent creatures as opposed to the crule and warfaring beasts we call humans, you would have never exploited the gorilla by using it in reference to such nonsense. There actually happens to be a good number of female humans out there that actually do find gorillas attractive (even in a sexual way), and if you just open your eyes to popular culture you would see that in many of human culture history. The idea survives, not just in reality, but in movies, literature, art. It's what makes the "Beauty and the Beast" syndrome live on. It's the same reasom why some woman or men can be attracted to the notion of being sexually attracted to an alien, (They do the wild thing with klingons and vulcan on sStar Trek, don't they? And Lois Lane is not innocent either. Just because he looks human doesn't mean the man of steel is. If instead of a gorilla, the kind Dr. referred to a lion, or a dolphin, everbody would be, like Huh? My personal research into this subject amazed even me, and I really like gorillas. I, myself, do not find female gorillas sexually attractive, but I can understand, to some extent, why humans can be attracted to them this way. As far as white woman having an attraction toward black men, I can only say there are many reasons, most of which are probably cultural, but I'm sure there are those who are attracted to black men sexually, the same way humans can be attracted to gorillas. (Though I am not comparing the two by race, mind you.) Woman I have talked with about this, claim, that it is a "primal" thing, a desire for a more fundamental relationship, a basic and pure mentality, and/or a complete difference to their own kind, whether it be black, white, chinese, whatever. (without getting into an issue of beastiality) The gorilla male often is seen as the ultimate masculine design - and though gorilla males have a much smaller penis than the average man, they have more stamina, catering to an average of seven to ten wives in their harems, daily. If I were a gorilla, I certainly would be greatly offended to be compared to those of mankind, a species that rapes, murders and spoils the very planet it lives on.

As the first person to respond on this thread, allow me to slap myself on the back. It did get people's attention...not that they were very reasoned in their responses.

With responses such as "(y)ou deserve the worst fate to befall you, and quickly. And anyone here in this thread who dares think your argument has merit, is also a cowardly racist and deserves nothing but utter contempt", it's easy to see that some of us have some growing up to do. Wishing ruin upon someone because of an opinion? Why not wishing ruin and bodily mischief upon someone because of skin color or accent, gender or political affiliation? Come now, people.

I don't think that the discussion here has advanced understanding very much, as people have talked -- often by rote, running up their standard replies on the matter, including outrage (as excerpted above) -- while not actually listening.

It would be nice if provocative actually provoked thought.

-- B

"By the way, on BadEagle.com we avoid vulgar language, and also emotional personal attacks--AT LEAST MOST OF THE TIME. I do miss a thing or two."
--
You have a real problem with dirty words, and yet you post some hideously filthy ideas. Strange set of priorities.

There is nothing "natural" about being attracted only to specific races, that's learned behavior. People raised in a racially diverse environment do not tend to prefer their own race over others. Only those raised in an environment where those other races are not part of their own local culture will see them specifically as a different thing. And different isn't inherently bad either, there are cultures where blondes are exotic and attractive, because they are not native to that culture, and yet they are not considered unattractive. But when your culture teaches you that those races are not only different, but inferior, then of course you will not find them to be attractive.

There is nothing natural about associating dark skin with uncleanliness, Freudian sexual aversion or lower primates.

Certainly people have different preferences, including which people they find desireable. However, appearances within any given race vary so much, that it's very unlikely that race could enter into that to any large degree for most people without cultural conditioning telling them that this race or that is unattractive. I've never met a person who thought all white women were attractive, but I have met some who thought that all black women were not. I've never met such a person who was not a racist in other ways as well.

Racism is not natural, it is learned, and it can be unlearned. The best way of unlearning it is to actually associate with people of other races. You'd probably be quite surprised to find out that the only real differences are skin color, and the cultures in which you were raised. (Oh, and I suppose the fact that statistically black men have 1.5" longer penises, on average, (and the fact that many white women are aware of this) probably explains a lot of the insecurity and hatred of white males towards blacks, but really, in a social setting, that's not something you need to be overly concerned with.)

I find it amusing to watch you assume that everyone disagreeing with you is black. Not that it should matter, but to you I'm sure it does: I'm white, and male.

David,
I'm not shocked to see your point of view expressed on the web, it's the inevitable right the world has come to with the existence of and access to the internet. I suppose I also shouldn't be shocked to see how fragile your oversized chauvinistic ego is when confronted with the reactions of the morally just of this great country. When you express your opinions on the net, you must be absolutely prepared to accept the counter opinions of others, and the lack of preparedness proves only your lack of intellect and twisted and poisoned false virtue represented by such racial and sexually phobic statements.
It's very easy to hide behind walls and shout loud cultural obscenity on the web, and also cowardly.

I respect your right to voice your opinions on your blog, but not your sophmorish reactions to the opinions given forth in response to those statements you carry with such distaste.

There is no actual respect to be had for you, nor your flammable title of Doctor.

You are a throwback to the actual paganis of ancient times, living in fear and cowering amongst the flock of cookie cutter sheep of the most starboard thinking corrupt politics.

-Allan

I'm not sure if the reason Ms. Jackson exposed
herself was some kind of feeling of racial inferiority or not. That would be speculation
about her motives that I'm not up to.

I do think that a woman of any color exposing herself in such a manner is not appropriate--
for prime time, for children to see, etc.

Her race is not inferior. They have been responsible for wonderful creativity in the USA,
jazz, rock 'n roll, spirituals, wonderful preaching, inventive solutions to all kinds of problems, etc. I mean, it would be impossible to list all their contributions.

A racist would say that a race is inferior.
I also think that racism implies someone who hates
a race and would try to harm someone of that race.
For a person to prefer their own "race" is not
racism. It is just personal preference, like
a certain nationality prefering it's own type of
cooking or language. That doesn't mean they HATE
the other kinds of food or language, does it?

Should I feel guilty for being attracted to men from the British Isles, particularly Celtic men,
more than others? And then find that, hey, most of my genetic background is Celtic? Is attraction a conscious decision? Can I force myself to be interested in a man from China? Or central Africa? They are not inferior to me, just so different, that they don't have the same appeal.

I have observed a super-sensitivity among blacks
towards white actions that had nothing to do with
race or color at all. Once, I cleaned my keyboard keys after a black person had typed there. But why? BECAUSE SHE HAD A VERY VERY BAD COLD and I couldn't afford to get sick, I was a temporary and not paid for days off!!!!! It is my understanding that you can get a cold this way, or from a doorknob, etc. But this was construed by blacks sitting nearby as a racist act!!!! Yikes. There have been other incidents similar, but that is just an example.

I have heard of incidents where blacks believe whites think of them as "like gorillas". This may be why Mr. Yeagley brought up this picture, I don't really know. It never even occurred to me to connect the two until blacks brought it up recently in the news, etc. Blacks are HUMANS
they are not animals, and don't look like gorillas at all. Should I be sensitive about albino gorrillas? I think not. And if anyone is
so ignorant to think that there is any relationship at all between blacks/gorillas, what they think is unimportant anyway.

If a person marries a person of another race and they have children, there are natural problems of society criticizing the children, them, conflicts of traditions, etc. It is good to avoid extra problems in this life, I guess. And of course,
the relatives of those two races may not like it, not because of racism, but because they like their own race and they want to keep it the same.
I am not sure if that is racism. They may not hate the other race at all or want to harm people of that race. They may not think the other race is inferior. And they may love the biracial children to pieces. They just like their own people. Their own ways, and their own color.
And their own way of making beef stew, for God's sakes.

So you don't want a black woman's body being pushed in your face??? But it would be ok if a white woman bared her body? Hmm... and you aren't a racist how again?
That is the difference between you and I. I didn't like Janet's stunt and her color has no influence on my distaste for her actions. It is the driving factor in your dislike for her baring a boob. You need to stop and think about that.

Aruna, I did not say that interracial attraction was inherently wrong.

Most people that have vehemently reacted to my three JJ posts are displaying an offense that belies their own insecurities. This is not necessary at all, and misses the point completely.

In America, where "Civil Rights" has politically defined behavior in terms of "quality," certain people feel that it is WRONG to be averse to anyone, for any reason. All are required to be equally sexually attracted to all creatures available.

This is called pushing the envelope.

Nishar, your words display the attitude I speak of, that is, trying to shove yourself (or your race, your ideas, your body, whatever) into someone else face. Can you see that? You presume I'm obssessed with a "black" woman's body, because I say I don't appreciate a "black" woman's body being pushed in my face.

I call that pushing the envelope.

Has anyone taken the idea of genetics into account? The fact that interracial breeding distills the human genome into it's most effective form. Of course this used to be limited by geography, which is how races arose, but today anyone can live anywhere they choose (for the most part) and the genetic code should eventually meld into the most desirable state for a global person. In my opinion, everyone should be allowed to make their own decisions, but blindly saying that interracial attraction has something inherently wrong to it is severely discounting this possible biological factor, and in essence mildly supporting a form of inbreeding.

Hmm... and here I thought Janet's and Justin's stunt was to get free publicity for their albums. After all, Janet has done this kind of thing before: after a fasion. Remember when she had he black boyfriend cup her boobs as she posed naked a few years back? Reading race into this is just plain stupid. It shows where your true thoughts lie. And that is you desire Janet Jackson... and that makes you angery. Please stop hating yourself and give in to your urges. Start dating a black woman; You know you secretly want to. Don't worry, I won't tell your Klan running buddies. OK? :)

Tek, I edited your anal/oral verbal sublimations, and left your post, because I want to address something you brought up: you think blacks "bother" me.

Attitude bothers me. Attitude has no color. Certain attitudes me seem manifested among people of certain colors, indeed, but do you think this has to do with the color? Does this arise from the color?

And still no one on Blogcritics has ventured an idea on what "racist" means. That, in my opinion, is weakness.

By the way, on BadEagle.com we avoid vulgar language, and also emotional personal attacks--AT LEAST MOST OF THE TIME. I do miss a thing or two.

And IP banning does work. I'm open to different people, and rarely ban. I would prefer educated contribution.

So, if you prefer your race, which you should, and everyone else should prefer his own, then it is not necessary to shove it in everyone else's face. Something's wrong when that happens.

Dear David Yeagley.

If you are going to post outrageous things, then you need to be strong enough to stand in the kitchen. If not, turn your comment completely off. "Banning" people does not work. Anyone with half an ounce of brain can get around a "ban". I suspect you don't realize this because as stated before, you lack a brain at all.

People who complain when they get flammed for posting really offensive things don't have a leg to stand on when they allow open comments.

My suggestion: Turn your comments off or use something other than MT that allowed for a "registration" system for comments. Of course, this only further proves that you are weak, but I'm sure that doesn't bother you half as much as blacks do.

Dawn and Tek, I will allow your outrage but once. If you have both registered on BadEagle.com, I warn you, I do ban people.

You have a right to your feelings, and that's all you have expressed, feelings.

Dawn, your last remark I leave, only as "exibit A", the kind of uncontrolled anal/oral preoccupation which I pointed out characteristic of a certain level of consciousness.

I expect to have to ban both of you, but, I hope not. I hope you can show a higher level of thought.

This is the most racist diatribe I have ever read by an individual trying to appear enlightened. Are you even of the same species as the rest of us humans?

You deserve the worst fate to befall you, and quickly. And anyone here in this thread who dares think your argument has merit, is also a cowardly racist and deserves nothing but utter contempt.

You sir, are the most offensive writer of garbage that I have come across in my entire life.

Oh, and please go screw yourself.

"My very civilized family were supportive and I heard that behind my back that my father said thank god I have two other sons,which was disapointing .But all in all they supported me because for one my fiance was smart educated and well spoken with a lot of class,like Conde Rice." Lars writes
---

Well thank God your family is civilized. But I am not civilized yet, really! So I say one last thing to you...you are a pipedream bounty hunter or collector of dark women. You have no love for them, but want to shock your family members and you do this by taking up with dark women, to make your inferiority become superior.

Now let me see..hmmm, I do need another scalp lock on our Sioux scalp lock pole...so'z thought maybe I can spiritually take yours and perhaps that will cool off your arrogance and white supremacy and attitude over dark women..trophy hunting, uh huh, thought that mind set ended years ago, but I guess it still exists.

Last white boy who tried this on my family (Scottish man) found out differently (trophy hunting Indian women). Man, you otta see that Scottish scalp lock, mmmm, mmmmm!

Betty Ann

"Asian American Women who love us white boys." Lars writes
---

With no direct "HIT" toward you and your wife...but, of course the Asian American, Filipino and other non-citizens love you white boys...you are easy targets, easy lays and you can be used to make these women American citizens.

Yep, they sure love you white boys!

Betty Ann

"David ,no I don't see myself as being superior because I don't have a problem with interaccial marriage and I think that most people ,even Black Americans agree with you on being "Primitive" . In America we marry our own kind more than not ,except for Asian American Women who love us white boys,I'm flattered by that since it seems that black men are seen as this super sexy macho athlete that can leap over buildings in a single bound." Lars writes
---

For a moment there I regress backed into the Sports Ilustrated article Leaps and Bounds, but, am doing alright and ready to respond to Lars.
---
First of all I would like to know sir, where you picked up your Asian American woman. I would like to know how you treat her and her family as you appear to be a white supremist punk, who makes prizes out of darker women. You smell of white dominance and white supremacy.

And you absolutely correct on one thing, you are not SUPERIOR. You lost your whiteness when you became a willing sperm bank to darker nations. You are now the inferior race and like I wrote before the more you white boys breed with Indians, Blacks, Asian/Orientals or whatever your weak white genes become diluted and watered down more and so I commend you for contributing to the dissolving of white America and supremacy in the good ole' USA!

WE NEED MORE WHITE SPERM BANKS!

Betty Ann

"In one of my most awkward moments at sounding like a liberal racist I said to my former in-laws and their extened family how great it was that they and their kids now live in a world in which they could marry white if they wanted .It was like a powder keg of insults swirling around me ."I don't won't no white man in my bed!"I don't know what your thinking I'm proud of being black!" I don't won't my grandkids running around with blue eyes" [mind you my wife had just had our sandy colored hair blue eyed twins]!!" Lars writes
---

CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF WHITE SUPREMACY IN AMERICA...KEEP READING MEIN KEMPF AND HITLER.

Did you ever stop to think that perhaps the racism was not directed at you white boy, but that the darker family members have dilute your blood line by inner breeding with the darker genes that you said had dominance over white boys and girls?

YES, mind you, your dark wife just gave birth to sandy haired, blue-eyed twins..soon to become a part of the past as they grow up and will be taken into the arms of the darker relatives and your white blood, white boy will and has already been diluted and trashed. Welcome to the world of the DARKER NATIONS taking over WHITE AMERICA. Mein kempf.

Betty Ann

"My grandfather was fan of Madison Grant author of the American version of Mein Kampf ,The Passing of a Great Race .I believe that White Americans fear has been of interracial love and sex because of the sexual attraction of blacks and their genetic dominace over us." Lars writes
---

Very true.

Betty Ann

I definetly believe and was raised to believe in being civil with those that I may have a disagreement with.Having Scandanavian Blood helps as well[fortunally or unfortunally we have lost that fighting spirit and prefer to reason on issues].I think that is the base of high civilization, not technology, architecture, science, music, arts etc.I agree with you that patriotism should be taught in school as well as civilty.Civilty is also the reason that the Jews and Palestianians will never get along [Jews civil people -Palestianians not].

David ,no I don't see myself as being superior because I don't have a problem with interaccial marriage and I think that most people ,even Black Americans agree with you on being "Primitive" . In America we marry our own kind more than not ,except for Asian American Women who love us white boys,I'm flattered by that since it seems that black men are seen as this super sexy macho athlete that can leap over buildings in a single bound.

In one of my most awkward moments at sounding like a liberal racist I said to my former in-laws and their extened family how great it was that they and their kids now live in a world in which they could marry white if they wanted .It was like a powder keg of insults swirling around me ."I don't won't no white man in my bed!"I don't know what your thinking I'm proud of being black!" I don't won't my grandkids running around with blue eyes" [mind you my wife had just had our sandy colored hair blue eyed twins]!!

My very civilized family were supportive and I heard that behind my back that my father said thank god I have two other sons,which was disapointing .But all in all they supported me because for one my fiance was smart educated and well spoken with a lot of class,like Conde Rice.

Must admit that that primordial defence arose in me in 1998 when I visted my ancestral homelands[Denmark/Sweden] and saw all the black brown and yellow faces seeking a better life. I wanted them to go Home !!To their Homelands !!

However, I must remark again at your uncanny ability to say VOLATILE things in such non-offensive, sincere, non-combatative ways! I pray that we all take a lesson from you on that

David ,thanks for the compliment, can't honestly say the same about you because you got me with the "Gorilla's Teat "Title .I had to say something and get it off my chest,because I don't share your writings with anyone else, especially black collegues of mine [they like white people love indians and romanticize them]and you'll give them a real eye-opener and have them thinking that every indian hate them, remember in my small way, for my twins, I'm trying not to build Utopia ,but a more civil community and nation

thanks

"I believe that if blacks were so disgusting to us we would not had to have bans on marriages." LARS

I would not want to equate interracial marriage with an act of superior intelligence and maturity, but, in the context of your treatise, you tend to make it sound that way.

Racial "purity" is a primordial defense mechanism, really, and perhaps those most advanced in evolution live above such instinct.

I may seem averse or prejudice. The only label I use for myself in this context it "primitive."
I think race is important. Many people don't.

However, I must remark again at your uncanny ability to say VOLATILE things in such non-offensive, sincere, non-combatative ways! I pray that we all take a lesson from you on that.

David I think that you have the aversion to black people, and that's cool with me, but I think that your projecting that onto the white race and it isn't fair to us because I haven't found it to be true. It seems that history have shown us to be more attracted to them than not .

You told Betty that it was presumptous to say that whites secretly lust after blacks,but in the past you've said that dark men love white women which at the time I found to be very presumtous and I know from my ex-family in law that this wasn't true.My ex came from a family of high achievers and was the only one married out of her race including her cousins, and many of the male members were married to average to beautiful black women. Our nation's national statics show that only 3% of black males are married to white women. It seems that white men marry outside their race more than any other group [leaving their beautiful women to whoever wants them]Asian, Hispanic, [who could be white black indian or a combo of all three]and black in that order.

My grandfather was fan of Madison Grant author of the American version of Mein Kampf ,The Passing of a Great Race .I believe that White Americans fear has been of interracial love and sex because of the sexual attraction of blacks and their genetic dominace over us.In my own personal experences I never had a white person angry with me for being with a black woman ,just going out in public with her and marrying her, the advice was to keep her as a mistress. She would be a hindrance in my carreer.The biggest obstacle to my relationship was black females as well as males.Money not race destroyed my first marriage just as if I were married to a white woman.

It seems that on average Black Americans have 5% mitochondrial dna [white male] from Europe meaning that white men where six times more likely to father children with black women than the reverse. Of course this is from the before the end of segration when the races weren't mixing [wink wink].We had to demonize and belittle blacks so that they wouldn't mongelize us through our women .Our nation would probaly looked like other nations that dealt in large scaled race mixing of black white and red like Cuba, Mexico ,[the blacks are almost totally gone from their but I did see some in one of their coastal villiages when I was teenager]Puerto Rico, and many other Hispanic Nations .I believe that if blacks were so disgusting to us we would not had to have bans on marriages . I don't think that Blacks or even whites are beautiful I think that beauty is individual and like Pornography[Justin/Janet]we know it when we see it. Janet Jackson, Vivaca Fox, Halle Berry, Naomi Campbell, Beyonce, Lauren Hill ,and Tyra Banks are some of the most beautiful women in the world at this time and would have gone for premium prices at the time of slavery to white men ,of course Whoopi Goldberg would have been in the field picking cotton !

Did Janet Jackson really expose herself? She had a ring around her nipple that covered some of her breast.

And my younger children and older ones are not traumatized by this either...so we move on. It is a personal issue and personal issues or statements are important.

Betty Ann

Why all the comparison's with national geographic and M-TV video's? One is a magazine on people and culture's and the other is a TV program that we can choose to watch or not. The main issue here is do people have the right to expose themselves live on TV? If janet can do this what is to stop justin from exposing himself the next time!!!(Where do we draw the line)? This is the REAL issue here now isnt it. No I do not think my 11year old will be emotionally traumatized for life, but in the same token I do not want her to think this is the norm either.

"And by the way, you can think "black" is beautiful if you want. Doesn't mean other people do, or should. You shouldn't assume everyone secretly thinks the "black" race is adorable. That is completely presumptuous." Dr. Yeagley writes
---

I would never in my life assume everyone secretly thinks the "black race" is adorable...I said the darker nations as in not being lily white.

And it is completely presumptuous also to assume that everyone has to hide their sexuality and keep it safe in a chastity belt (men and women) and to abide by the ten commandments when incest, adultery, prostitution and other sexually deviant acts as you call them Yeagley are also in the bible. If humans cannot express themselves and be proud of their bodies (and by the way Janet does not have a aging body) then we are doomed all to hell!

And yes, some of us grew up in harsh environments where we seen rapes occur right before our eyes. I too grew up in a alcoholic environment, but instead of me tossing the 100 bottles of beer on the wall in anger I embraced my World War II father and helped my mother. Anger was not a part of this process, but understanding and compassion in knowing that my dad went through hell as a soldier and also knowing my mother took the brunt force of it all.

Betty Ann

"Jason and Jackson are criminals, according to our American laws, and should be prosecuted accordingly. Change the laws, and you'll only have more nudity. This is like the Libertarians who say we should legalize marijuana and cocain. Take the pressure off? You'll only have more of it." Dr. Yeagley writes
---

Why not legalize marijuana and cocaine. Americans have a high rating of pouring down the booze, inhalants, cigarettes and other legal drugs that are more powerful and damaging then illegal drugs.

If we were to abide by all the laws created in America, each and everyone one of us would be serving time in jail.

Jackson and Timberlake did nothing harmful comparable to the hip hop rap videos and the blacks (men and women) performing the sexual act when singing their songs...you only need to listen to the lyrics of Get Low by lil jon and the east side boys and you will find pedophilia.
Shake Your TailFeather and Saltshaker...

Then we have Madonna, Brittney Spears and the rest doing the same thing but in a different manner. So if we are to blame Timberlake and Jackson and toss them in jail, we need to start tossing everyone in the slammer...which reminds me the men cannot wait to get their hands on Janklow in jail.

Betty Ann

Sheila please excuse my sense of humor, that was a dumb joke .No viagra needed yet I'm just 35. But that leaves me to my other point about this sillines .I believe a lot of people are lying about being assulted by the half time show ,because I was watching the performance by Justin and Janet and didn't see the boob shot .All I saw was them dancing together and then the camera pull away to another shot of the stage.The image of her breast must have lasted for only a millisecond [The Outrage was quicker than the Eye]you blink or was not concentrating on the dismal performance you missed it.

On the other hand the outrage and raped crowd must really liked it because that's all their looking at and talking about. It seems that in the history of Tivo this is the most replayed clip ever !! and no ,Sheila ,I don't have Tivo!

Joe Scarbough and O'Reilly have shown their Hypocrisy by saying how they were offend and keep [no pun intended] titillating their audience by playing it over and over again!!!! " Oh this is horrible this is shocking" "let's see the clip again " ...Oh My God!!! "how could they do this to my family"!!! "Let's see it again from a different angle " Oh the Humanity!! "show it in slow motion this time" show a photo frame this time!! They go on and on with this same clip,but because they are saying what bad girl Janet is ,it's all good.
O'Reilly even said that Janet could come into his office and expose herself, just not in front of the kids[so I guess you were right about her trying to turn on white men ,but something tells me she could do a lot better than O'Reilly!!] Fine Janet, fine Justin, fine CBS ,fine MTV, but quit the phony outrage. People who are so damm offended they got to see it over and over again,come on !!I could live the rest of my entire life with out seeing the video of the Twin Towers coming down because I remember the pain inside my heart at seeing and don't won't to be reminded of it.

David I respect the people on this site and don't want them to get the idea that I'm for anything goes it's just that this is much ado about nothing

Lars, what in the world would you do with a hotter, younger wife??? Probably pass out trying to get your bottle of Viagra open... You are no doubt a legend in your own mind. I'm sure you enjoyed the SuperBowl halftime porn.

Lars, bare bodies are rightfully associated with "primitive" societies, which all have short life spans, full of disease and other "exotic" practices. Can't we attribute any benefits to "civilization" at all?

Let the young see such nudity in its true context: jungle life. Fine. But not in the living room, on family TV time.

Nudity is associated with promiscuity and polygamy. That's the social/historical context.
Why try to revive primitiveness?

Nora has a point, though, about the way America traumatizes itself through these high Protestant (Judeo-Christian) standards. But I interpret the cause differently. These standards literally empower the "indulgents" with marketability. It is our free-enterprise system, and our law system, however, and not our religion, that perverts this sexuality in such dramatic ways.

Jason and Jackson are criminals, according to our American laws, and should be prosecuted accordingly. Change the laws, and you'll only have more nudity. This is like the Libertarians who say we should legalize marijuana and cocain. Take the pressure off? You'll only have more of it.

For Nora I use the term current wife because it's a fact .This is my second marriage and who knows what the future my bring [hopefully a hotter younger wife!! lol].

I feel there is so much to say on this subject since you put it in terms of race and the entertainment industry having a negative agenda for this nation.As I have said before I am a Janet Jackson fan and was disapointed in what she did but it doesn't rise to the level of high treason, just bad judgement.Up till now she has had a pg-13 kind of image that I liked as oppose to Madonna who has done it all and with a lot of black men I might add Charles Barkley , Dennis Rodman,Bison Daley ,etc.

I'm just really sick of the phony outrage that a lot of people are expressing and how bad there children were damaged and raped ,I can't but laugh inside and play sympathetic to their outrage at Justin and Janet,especially to a porno collecting stipclub going male relalative of mine who was also raped and outraged!! I share a e-mail box with my 9 year old nephew and have to clean it out before I let him look at all the offers to enlarge his penis and to see all the horny young girls with their pets!!! I wonder how many of the Janet/Justin victims do that for their young charges.

Last of all I come from a somewhat conservative Scandanavian Protestant background and one of the staples of our reading materials that has been part of our family for generations was National Geographic and it showed brown and black breast from Nepal to Senagal.

All you Jackson/Timberlake victims better run to your kid's school library and take it out because I can bet it's in their.

Though I was offended in the past by Betty Anne's statements on black people am in lock goose steps with her on this issue.

Thanks David for giving us this forum in which we can express out viewpoints and also giving our brains the workout in thinking aboutissues in ways we never would have thought.....Gorilla's Teat ?!!! ....white's man sexual attraction!! never would have looked at this from that perspective

As for me Betty Ann I can honestly say that it wouldnt have mattered if the tit was black, yellow,red,green or white. A tit is a tit and what happeded at the super bowl was deplorable at any rate. I am not against the beauty of a womans body but there are certain context as to which you can call it art or porn and this certainly wasnt art in any form and if it was as "they say freedom of expression" then what was she trying to exrpess? So please all who red this let me know how you would feel if it were Brittney Spears or Christina Agulera or another white girl for that matter

David, I agree with you completely. I am not against ideas. Even that would be an idea, as you point out. [Though I think I disagree with Weber, that ideas are things like measuring sticks, but I am only going on what you said about Weber.]

However, the concept of what is "natural", as an idea, needs scrutiny, as we are doing here.

I maintain there is great danger, for example, in speaking as though skin color defines the nature of anyone with it [that's everyone], or of everyone who has a particular hue or "color".

It means something, and is worth looking at. But this area is very undeveloped, so far.

It's so undeveloped that, if Reparations come to pass, I am simply going to be black. No one can prove I'm not, that is, that I do not have "black blood" within me, genetically.

I certainly do not deny human variation. In fact human variation of physical characteristics can be argued to show how really similar we are. You can work it both ways.

As an irrelevant aside, I think it is really humerous that actually "black" is not a color. It is the absence of light. On the other hand, "white" has all the colors and is thus the epitome of being "colored".

BETTY, ideas are flexible. Thoughts can run in any direction the thinker chooses.

Some believe in certain standards, some don't. There are those who have grown up in the midst of chaos, and later in life come to value standards which were impossible (if not wholly unfamiliar) to them in youth. People can change.

But for example, I've never had a drink of alcohol in my life. Why? I grew up under alcoholism. I "rebelled" against it. This has nothing to do with "righteousness," so don't get accusatory. It has merely to do with the fact that I hated what it did, I hated the trouble it caused, and I hated the results. I hated everything about it. Call it rebellious youth on my part.

If you are worried about other people being more "righteous" than you, I think you should dismiss those feelings right away. First of all God is the judge; secondly, some of us are just "lucky" that we were born in a situation which spared us from certain struggles. That may have something to do with the "righteousness" of our parents, but not our own.

It is important to be humble about this. If someone else has an apparent advantage, they are not to be despised because of it. They are to be admired, and yes, imitated whenever possible.

Righteousness includes 10 commandments, the last of which is about jealousy, envy, or "covetousness."

And by the way, you can think "black" is beautiful if you want. Doesn't mean other people do, or should. You shouldn't assume everyone secretly thinks the "black" race is adorable. That is completely presumptuous.

JOE: I'm familiar with both Wittgenstein and Krishtamurti. But Weber comes to mind, as in the "Ideal Type" in his Soziologie/Universalgeschictliche Analysen Politik. Around p.234,235, he talks about the function of the "Idee." It is a necessary measuring stick. Yes, it is man made, but it is all we have. Objectively, we know it isn't the final word, but it is what we measure our universe by. We know it by our own standard, yes, but this is not to be decried so much as it is understood, that's all.

One mustn't idolize the idea, but recognize it as a relativistic tool through which we orient ourselves to the world around us.

It's not an "escape," but a necessary tool.

As far as human variation, I suppose one could say there is an "Idee" somewhere. Hitler sought to make it real. If that was idolizing the idea, we don't need the opposite, which would be to despise any step in that direction, thus being destructive of the order Nature has given us.

I'm not sure of your basis for thinking human variation is "not necessary." It itsn't a question of necessary. Nature brought it about. Only the true idolizer of the "Idee" would try to alter that, no?

David, I understand your criticism. I am not suggesting that we "escape" but rather that the standard operating procedure for most people is in fact to escape in the opposite way, and that this has produced the World we have now.

Whether people can look at themselves or are just strange operating mechanisms which usually resemble "control" machines, or "being busy" machines or "pop up" thought circuits is a question only they can answer, except that they can't answer any question if they are only these latter kinds of mechanisms. Maybe this is the overwhelming situation, but I'm not quite ready to give up even if it were. Who knows who seems to employ only these unthoughtful mechanisms, but does not need to? [The people who operate by means of these dysfunctional habits or mechanics generally seem tortured.]

At the same time the balkanization of people by "ethnicities", religions, sex, race, and so on is such a transparent tactic it cannot simply be dismissed as necessary. It is quite possible that there is a purpose to such balkanization which betrays a gigantic defect, and problem if allowed to simply go on politically, culturally, and as a personal thought process.

The Janet Jackson episode was an attempt to create a giant Balkan, by imposing a standard, getting away with it, then making it the norm.

If you agree with me on this one, then it's time to look at the others, such as race, sex, nationality, origins, ethnicity, language, religion, etc., with an eye to the possibility that they are largely unnecessary, and divisive, and part of the problem we would all like to see solved.

I must admonish: thought categories can become too familiar, thus seemingly "true" or necessary, leading to the dismissal of other thought simply on the basis of familiarity. This is a gigantic pitfall of thought, which easily produces dogma.

Look at it this way: it is certainly possible to keep different ideas in ones' head, as I am doing with the "real politic" model. Notice that it too, however, is a model. If you've read Wittgenstein or Krishnamurti you will note their focus on the danger of becoming entranced with a model. Something bad always happens.

I do not present a model but rather call you to a process, of thinking. This does not mean it is correct or even useful, though I claim it is the first thing one must do, if s/he is interested in 1] being, 2]solving, and 3] understanding. Otherwise, what's the point?

I must also say: I am honored to be here, no shit.

Attention, Bodvar, did you notice that you responded to me with cliche's?

If you think in cliche's, this is something you should look at.

I'm not going to do it for you.

"So what you and Miss Perfect Elizabeth are implying that "WE" the "PEOPLE" who express different opinions from you perfect ones are scarred...scarred as in what, Dr. Yeagley."

This is the last attempt I am making towards understanding. If you re-read the posts, Betty Ann, you are the one that attacked me because I expressed an opinion that was different from yours. Not only did you attack me, but also you implied that I was not entitled to my choice because it is different from yours.

Me, personally, I do not care one way or the other what you choose to view; we all have free moral will. What I have a problem with is you attacking my choices just because they are different from yours and then implying that I am not entitled to my choices because it does not agree with yours.

And I do not care if you agree with my choices or not; I do not need your agreement to make my choices valid. I am entitled to them regardless of your disagreement. If you do not have the strength and conviction of your own choices without other's validation of them, then perhaps the problem lies with you rather than those who do not agree with you. And by way, just for the record, I am far from perfect. I have nothing against you personally or your choices. You are entitled to your opinion and your choices just as I am. I just don't want your choices forced upon me. Thank you

"By the way, I don't think that anyone would have applauded or not complained had the bare-breasted slut in question been white (Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera), Puerto Rican (Jennifer Lopez) or of some other ethnic or racial background." Navid writes
---

The bare-breasted slut as in Janet Jackson? IF there ever were sluts in American societies media it would be the white female sluts too. Why should viewers applaude or complain if the woman had been white...there is nothing to show anymore, they have been put under the microscope for years and there is no more desire there with white women.

You white boys seen a beautiful African American's tit and near a white boy and even Dr. Yeagley flips out with the entire world. To me it still reveals the hidden sexual desires that many of you MEN have toward darker women and that fear truly shines through in these posts and in the words of Dr. Yeagley.

Betty Ann

"Because the marketing of black women (perhaps it would be more accurate to say mulatto women) as sex symbols to white, Asian, Hispanic and other men wouldn't be happening if it hadn't been for the marketing of black *men* (no mulattoes in this instance) as sex symbols to women of other races. The latter -- which we have endured for at least a decade now -- paved the way for the former." Navid writes
---

And you may need to endure more in the future....the constitution and bill of rights that govern the United States of America was not written by the darker nations, but by white Europeans.

White men and women have been "prostituted" out by the media for a long time. We only need to read history to see that perhaps the trend started with the christians. After all aren't some of their cherubs and angels exposing their breasts also.

Jacqueline Onassis was caught nude also and there was no uproar over that. Instead she was idolized. Howard Stern and Jerry Springer are the true "whores" of television who exploit both men and women and yet America is too afraid to say "no more". So if there is anyone to blame for all the heathenness in the eyes of white America, blame it on your founding fathers.

You would think that many of you were concieved through Immaculate Conception. Not!

Betty Ann

Bodvar used the word "cojones" in his first post in this thread and I certainly think that it took a *lot* of cojones for Dr. Yeagley to write this.

I guess my only complaint with it would be that it only addresses half the issue.

Because the marketing of black women (perhaps it would be more accurate to say mulatto women) as sex symbols to white, Asian, Hispanic and other men wouldn't be happening if it hadn't been for the marketing of black *men* (no mulattoes in this instance) as sex symbols to women of other races. The latter -- which we have endured for at least a decade now -- paved the way for the former.

As Dr. Yeagley alluded to in this piece, there is nothing accidental, hidden or subtle about this. It's about as subtle as a sledgehammer and it's quite out in the open and deliberate. Americans have been subjected to this kind of social engineering for decades now at the hands of their societal overlords who have determined that in their ideal society of the future all bonds of kinship, ethnicity, family and commonality will be null and void. It's up to us to prove them wrong.

By the way, I don't think that anyone would have applauded or not complained had the bare-breasted slut in question been white (Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera), Puerto Rican (Jennifer Lopez) or of some other ethnic or racial background.

"Conversely, those who are scarred usually have no concept of how the unscarred feel, nor why the unscarred are offended by the uncontrolled pre-occupation with sex which many scarred people seem to have." Dr. Yeagley writes
---

So what you and Miss Perfect Elizabeth are implying that "WE" the "PEOPLE" who express different opinions from you perfect ones are scarred...scarred as in what, Dr. Yeagley.

I am proud to say that I am scarred and that I will continue to be scarred for this is what makes many of us street wise at an early age.

And for you goody toe shoes, I do hope you make it into the pearly gates of heaven. Dare I say SEX, TEATS and etc. or would that offend you pure christians with such high morals and standards that WE the scarred offend ya!

Betty Ann

Betty Ann

I not sure if this applies, but, from my own social work experience, I have known young people who have "seen it all" (I mean ALL) by the time they were six years old. They've done everything, and had everything done to them, from the start. Their lives were then spent trying to form positive thoughts about what came to them in a very negative package.

Those people who did not grow up this way, and do not have those scars, often don't understand the pre-occupations of those that do.

Conversely, those who are scarred usually have no concept of how the unscarred feel, nor why the unscarred are offended by the uncontrolled pre-occupation with sex which many scarred people seem to have.

Like I said, I don't know if this applies.

Anyway, this is a terribly sensitive subject, and I hope we can all be respectful. An internet site is not really a therapy chat room, but, sometimes conversations do get going...

Betty Ann, the only reason I choose to dignify your comments with a response is those of us who choose not to view "sexualized" entertainment are tired of those of you who do cramming it down our throats and filling the public airwaves with it, so much so that we no longer have a choice.

Furthermore, your remarks imply that I do not have a right to my choice which, of course, I do and it is a valid one whether you agree with it or not. The lack of logic in your comments is more than obvious. First, I am not poor; second, I do not need saving; third, I am far from chaste; fourth, I am a WOMAN; and fifth, my husband holds the same values I do. But, what can I expect from one who thinks that Madonna and Britney kissing or Jackson exposing herself during family viewing time is good entertainment and/or good judgment. There are Americans who have values and they actually live out those values. Closing thought, just because you choose depravity, does not mean that everyone else does or has to.

"Dr. Y, interesting article. Especially the sentence, "Jackson raped the whole country." When we (my husband and I of 15 blissful, happy years) saw on TV news the next AM, about the offensive finale, not to mention the entire inappropriate "sexualized" nature of the half-time show, that is exactly how we felt, raped. Rape is unconsensual sexual contact. Until I read that in your article, I wasn't able to verbalize the feeling." Elizabeth writes
---

RAPED! Come on Elizabeth, this is the year 2004 and the days of the poor save me woman type of attitude is GONE! You were not raped by no one but yourself....that thought came from your mind and nobody elses. Take off that wussiness, white gloves and chastity belt and be a woman.

Betty Ann

Dr. Yeagley:

I have been known to write anti-black, but even with me I do not cross over in certain areas. I believe that by showing the gorilla's teat and Janet Jackson's that you were making a "hidden" comparison between the two and saying they are of lesser value then humans like the whites.

One thing I can say is, Janet had on a beautiful outfit and was stunning.

Betty Ann

Nora, any luck on finding a proper counsellor? It seems to be spreading.

----------------------

Can you specify why I should need counselling?

By the way, compliments to your ... errrrr... *current* wife!

Joe, you need to get out more. That Hallmark Card "we're all individuals at heart" rubbish flies in the face of history and human nature.

Nora, any luck on finding a proper counsellor? It seems to be spreading.

-- B

Joe, I've been on that path. But I don't see that it provides a solution. It is like the Buddhist "escape." We can deny our skin, and our immediate realities, but that doesn't mean that they go away. In a way, politics and power is dealing with all that which won't go away. Therefore, politics won't go away, either.

American Indians, particularly the northern tribes, do have a "oneness" theme in their relatively sophisticated cosmologies. "We are all related" is a continuing theme. It may be true, but it doesn't solve the tactile separateness.

I believe separateness exists for good reason, but, that's for another essay.

Raven, when people are dealt with as groups,or physical characteristics, this misses the point of what they actually are.

Of course it does not miss the point if that's all they are, which only they can decide or be individually.

This means you must decide this yourself, by looking at yourself. Each can decide, or at least be given an opportunity to see if they can, or want to do this. This is something almost never mentioned in school, so to speak: the importance of looking at oneself directly, or even that we do have this power. It seems almost to be a fearsom thing to do, useless at best.

But the cliche' "self-knowledge" remains. Yet no one then says how to do it, or talks about what it is.

Far less is it ever mentioned what thought is. It is taken for granted, instead of looked at.

Thought is nothing like any characteristic. It is not like black, or communist, or left-handed.

Thought is a living thing and creative. It, for lack of a better word, is what we are.

Strangely, once you look at yourself in this way [by looking at your thought], then the other characterizations we use in analyzing and dealing with people, such as as "Blacks" or "Jews" or "Capitalists" or "Christians" or "Mystics" or "Germans" become not so inflammatory or separatist, if rather in fact nearly irrelevant, though interesting.

But this only works on a large scale if many do look at themselves and find they are not really "Blacks", for example, but rather a discrete person, and that this is what really matters.

Otherwise, what's the point? Group power? Money? So what?

This only works one-on-one if each sees itself as a discrete author, for lack of a better word, that is, if each knows itself.

Then each sees the other as itself. Did I lose you? This is not mystical. It is practical, and actualy much of what life is about.

I'm not trying to lose you.

I'm asking you if you see what I mean. If you do, then you will see that we are basically the same, though this is not boring. Instead, the sky's the limit after that.

Others have actually done this. I am particularly struck by some American Indians, such as Hin-mah-too-yah-lat-kekht ["Joseph"], Ohiyesa, Luther Standing Bear, Too-hool-hool-zote, Crowfoot, and many others whose even fragmentary statements show this insight. The India Indian, J. Krishnamurti, hammered on this as his life. His book, "Total Freedom", should be required. He was not kidding, and he is not a mysic. I am not a mystic.

LARS, Did I call Janet a gorilla? I thought I covered that thought. I'm saying that people are born with sexual preferences and aversions, or certainly develop them very early. (Psychological experiements show this.) I was merely making this point. Furthermore, I believe people have "the right" to their aversions. It's how we handle them that shows our degree of "civility." I do not consider overcoming natural sexual preferences and aversions a mission in life, nor do I associate it with equality or any other social cause.

Of course, of course...everyone is free to pursue his own sexual preferences, or for that matter, to undo them, and pursue his aversions. (This often leads into homosexuality and bestiality.)

And, whatever Janet's personal "sex life," she is in an industry that DOES have a mission, and a very negative one, against morality. Therefore, my assessment relates to the imagery, the intnent, the industry, I should say.

However, this isn't really to contradict your points, either. I've never been disagreed with in such calm, classy, rational thoughts! I commend your civility, indeed!

Dr. Y, interesting article. Especially the sentence, "Jackson raped the whole country." When we (my husband and I of 15 blissful, happy years) saw on TV news the next AM, about the offensive finale, not to mention the entire inappropriate "sexualized" nature of the half-time show, that is exactly how we felt, raped. Rape is unconsensual sexual contact. Until I read that in your article, I wasn't able to verbalize the feeling. My husband and I changed the channel as soon as we saw the tone of the half-time show, so fortunately we did not have to view the vulgar displays and offensive finale until the next day on the news shows. We do not want to view that, nor do we buy any "sexualized" entertainment or contribute to that industry. We don't even go to a movie unless we screen it first because we aren't buying what Hollywood is selling which is anything debase in order to make a buck. For someone to view the American media and entertainment industry and then jump to the conclusion that all Americans are that way is not only absurd, but irrational and shows they do not understand economics and how many here will do anything to make a buck without any regard for decency and morality. The public airwaves are not to be used to allow others to rape us which is exactly what they are doing and what they did. Thank you for that concept.

Current wife from Brazil, of African, Portuguse, and Irish descent.
........................

I like the "current" bit! Never heard it before in context with a spouse.

Must be an Americanism...

OK, Joe! You go right ahead and talk to yourself about yourself. We'll make every effort to try to carry on while you are doing that. If you don't return from the deep nothingness we'll at least know what happened to you.

Raven

First, we must talk about ourselves, not what we are to other people, or about what they are, but about what we are to ourselves.

To do this, we must look at ourselves, not as other people look at us, but by looking at ourselves.

Forget the others, for a while.

Then, later, much later, if never, we can talk disputationally about sex, skin color, age, toenail width, kidney mass, asbestos exposure, genetic ancestory, nationality, history of my ancestor's oppression, history of my ancestor's failure to do anything except procreate, Hannibal crossing the Alps, etc..

We can talk infinitely about everything, and everything will multiply infintitely into a deep nothing.

We will continue to not like this.

Or we can talk about ourselves now, to ourselves.

Then go from there. The alleged conflict of race will be erased.

First of all I'm a white male with a prefrence for darker women . Current wife from Brazil, of African, Portuguse, and Irish descent.I have to disagree with your assment of Janet, because generally I have found that American Black Women to be least attracted to white males than any other women . Females that I'm friendly with and that have some class and take my feeling into consideration think that the old sterotype [that black men love ]of the well-endowed ,long lasting black male is a fact and only seek their affections. Known many beautiful black women with great careers who could atrract males of other races and who stay true to the lowest of low black men [umeployed babymaking wifebeating in out of jail lying cheaters!!]and blame white men for their men's predicament!! Whitney Houston comes to mind. The other reason being the white man's past sexual exploitment of black women, names such as Washington Jefferson and Strom Thurmond comes to mind . I've been aware of your website for over two years but felt very passionate about this because I've been a fan of Janet Jackson's since she was a child star and was very upset with you calling her a gorilla I think that it debases you more than her.I also don't think that she was trying to get white male attention and admiration, [here concerts are filled with men and women of all races]her first husband was black second husband a Mexican and her boyfriend now is black multimillionaire record producer Jermaine Dupri.Because of my 8 year-old twins I work very hard to bring understanding to the races because their is so much misunderstanding on both sides ,and your psychoanalysis doesn't help in the least esspecially since I feel that it is wrong . Janet has a new cd coming out and needed the attention to attract more sales and Justin Timberlake is a quadroon white boy trying to get a more adult street image so that everyone could forget him as a teen pop idol in a boyband ,and with all this media attention it has worked .I really like your website, even though I disagree with you about 30% of the time esspecially about Americans of African Descent.

"I figured everyone would be averse to a gorilla as a sex object."

I would sure hope so, David! Not only do I have no "desire" to reseach gorillas, I dont want to touch one or even go to the zoo to gawk at one. Maybe, the handful of white females that have been drawn to gorilla research became entranced by gorilla's because of King Kong's facination with Faye Wray.

"Everyone is taught to think it is cruel NOT to be attracted to "blacks." "

I must have missed this lesson as I was growing up, but then again, I don't think it is a lesson that would have made it through the doorway of my father's home.

There have been a couple of negro men who I have thought to be somewhat attractive as far as being a negro man, but that is no where near the same as being attracted to them, nonethless, sexually attracted to them. No matter how attractive one of them might be, I couldn't even start to picture myself being attracted to one them.

I had friends of different racial ancestory in high school. I don't believe my lack of being attracted to colored men is neccessarily a racial thing, but something that exists outside of what I am naturally attraction to. I am just naturally attracted to a male that is more reflective of myself, and this attraction goes beyond just physical attraction. To me, this is a natural attraction, but then some people like to court the dark and dangerous or mysterious, which can be more symbolic than just actually skin color. Survival use to depend more on natural attractions and aversions. If people would take off their rose colored glasses long enough so that they could see through the political correct smoke screen, I think they would see that it still does.

Raven

The VDARE articles are quite powerful, I know. (I publish on VDARE myself, if you didn't know.)

However, I must clarify something here. I'm not making a statement about the "black" race, per se. The gorilla thing was not really meant as a comparison so much as an illustration. Most human's would consider it a bizzare thing to feel sexual attraction to a gorilla. I'm just trying to make a point about sexual aversion, and how we are born with it, and are naturally attracted to certain things, and averse to others. I figured everyone would be averse to a gorilla as a sex object.

However, I can't help but notice it is generally white women academics that do all the main (and famous) research on gorillas...like Dian Fossey

http://www.gorillafund.org/

I can remember such women decades ago.

But my point here is that there is a real aversion, or at least ambilalence, with regard to non-"black" people and their response to "black" people as sexually attractive.

Everyone is taught to think it is cruel NOT to be attracted to "blacks." This is political, and actually ridiculous, dangerous, and defies ever natural law of psychology in sexuality. We have aversions. It comes with having preferences.

Studied attempts to expand our natural preferences are generally imbalanced and destructive. This is psychology, to say nothing of sociology.

Here's some interesting links you may find very informative:

http://www.vdare.com/sailer/rule_of_three.htm

http://www.vdare.com/sailer/la.htm
http://www.vdare.com/sailer/presentation.htm
http://www.vdare.com/sailer/marriage.htm

Well...primate imagery and black people...sexual desires and racial politics...this thread should get SOMEONE's attention, surely.

The subject of ethnic ual behavior and social structure is worth examining, but is a mine-field today, with everyone waiting, fingers on buzzers, to go on record as offended. It's almost impossible to discuss ethnic foibles today...but this is a good, honest stab at it.

It should be interesting, if people find the cojones to chime in.

-- B