Originally Posted by timetogrow80
True we’re all of one race in the scientific sense, so let’s call them different “varieties.”
Well, I think girls will uniformly decline you when you demonstrate reactionary tendencies. Unless they agree with them.
We are all one species, within that the species there are various races - and it’s important to recognize that within races there are varieties - or ‘breeds’ if you prefer.
illpo's point that Africa is huge - actually the largest continent on the planet - is well taken. There are variety of ‘blacks’, for lack of a better word, within that given ‘race’, just on that continent alone. It is true that the Masai, for example, are indeed very tall, slender and big boned as compared to, say, the people of color of the Australian outback, who are little folk. I am certain there will be differences of the Senegalese people from these, and so on. Perhaps if you were to do a comprehensive study on the African continent alone illpo’s apparent thesis that there is no difference between black and white in matters of size would be proven. I wouldn’t rule it out - could be true.
It is also true that designations of ‘black’, ‘white’ and ‘Asian’ are not comprehensive and they do leave out the peoples of South and Central America, the Inuits, and Native Americans, etc.. So the web-site posted is not without flaws. I don’t think you get any argument there.
However it is important to note we can already make similar analyses about the ‘white’ or Caucasoid peoples. Certain regions of Ireland, or Wales had definite genetic tendencies different than those of Norway, Germany or Italy. As invasions and cultural intermingling steadily occurred, over time these distinctions have blurred. In the European community these tendencies are much more ‘trace’ effect than immediately recognizable as they once were.
This has to do with breeding and it also has to do with diet, which has an influence on matters of height, weight and other matters of size. As the world has gotten smaller; with import/export influencing and narrowing the wide variety of nutritional differences formerly defined in the world, and as humans travel far and wide, interbreeding along the way, these distinctions have lessened over time and will continue to lessen. There are no longer the same strictly regional (at least for the industrialized world) diet constrictions and mating habits that once wholly defined a people; this has had and is having a far-reaching impact world wide.
However to say there are not still significant differences of race, with regard to our overall physicality, seems either unusually naive or just flat denial; the differences do persist. To ignore them would just be silly.
I will also say, illpo, to quote ‘scientific’ data from two centuries ago - data that inarguably had an agenda to rationalize the slave trade - is a bit much in the context of this discussion. I don’t see that the web-site posted has any such agenda, even remotely, and I feel confident in saying nor do we here at Thunder's.
So I think we’ll all agree that when one speaks in generalities one sacrifices the accuracy of specifics, but we can speak about patterns, tendencies and trends in a general way and learn something as well. It’s not without its usefulness, informationally.
We just want to know about dicks. As scientifically as possible with the data available.