The Fighting 44s

10 Responses

#1

jaehwan

2:15 am | May 27, 2008

Hey Lopes and all,

Thanks! It was loads of fun!

I was a bit nervous at how it turned out, but I guess it turned out okay.

If you all want to see the “feminist” dialogue about mixed race Asians at around 38:40, go here. You can see Minbo’s brilliant defense. My policy (and the policy of the 44’s) has always been one of open debate. I don’t remember William’s exact words concerning the nature of debate, but I’m ready, anytime, anyplace. Come on, Asian American faux-minists who justify their racism with pseudo-science. Let’s bring it on!

#2

uRB4N

1:12 pm | May 27, 2008

Minbo posted an awesome comment on 8asians.com about the stupidity of one of the author’s statement that kids with mixed blood is a benefit to mankind because it helps fight disease.

WTF?

#3

groinpull

1:25 pm | May 27, 2008

I don’t know how accurate minbo’s comment was but it was exceptional. I first learned of hybrid vigor on eurasiannation.com and immediately recognize what a crutch it was for an Asian woman to use if she only dated whites. Not to mentioned that it was the perfect propaganda tool to elevate one’s own status.

#4

Dialectic

1:53 pm | May 27, 2008

Canada’s Wonderland was GREAT; the Behemoth makes you feel like you’re in free-fall!

I haven’t listened to the first 20 min. myself, but I gather it was pretty boring, so you should all skip that and tune into our conversation about CCBs, the Mongol weightlifter, and weed in the woods.

#5

nskripchun

3:20 pm | May 27, 2008

Good stuff. Sounds like if you guys were ever to do a “Part 2″, there’s still lots left to talk about since a large part of the podcast seemed to be focused on how the F44s even got started.

#6

minbo

5:44 pm | May 27, 2008

My post is as accurate as any three paragraph summary comment on a post will ever be. As John posted, 8asians is not a bio/genetics blog and the post is not meant to be a rigorous exploration on the entirety of “hybrid vigor”, “crossbreeding” within the human population or evolution. To truly explore the subject in proper detail, accurately with cite-able quotes so that it can be defended against all comers would be impractical for a blog comment, which again is what John recognized.

For example, selective breeding for specific traits can skew the “bell curve” for success in hybridization and it is in some sense a forced “evolution”. I did not mention it because I think that all would agree that the ethics of forced/selective breeding applied to humans is obviously outside accepted social norms.

Another aspect that I also did not get into because I wanted to refute on less ambiguous and less debatable statements: Genetic diversity IS vital for continuation of the species to adapt to new environments, expand into new niches, etc and it IS a function of evolution, which is why sexual reproduction has been so wildly successful. However, genetic diversity as applied to the human population: race is a socio-political construct, in reality if you disregard the construct of race, scientifically, the range of humankind is the diverse genetic pool. Unless you are an isolated and inbred population with a large number of genetic erros, when and “Asian” mates with a “White”, or a “Asian” mates with an “Asian”, as far as genetics is concerned (unless you are close relatives) and as far as evolution is concerned, there is really no difference as far as dominant/recessive genes. Again, this would require far too much typing to present fully and defend…

In the end, the goal of the post was to be specific enough and irrefutable enough (though contradictions and exceptions to what I posted do exist) that basic assertions will hold true, those being: evolution does not favor intra-racial children or inter-racial children. The science of evolution is not a valid way to justify who people should or should not be in relations with (either for race supremacists who dislike inter-racial relations or for those who advocate inter-racial relations).

#7

Xian

10:37 pm | May 27, 2008

I really enjoyed it–missed some parts as I was previewing video at the same time, but I think you all represented quite well.

I found the follow-up discussion amusing–China as homogeneity? Really? Sure, the Han majority intermarried a ton, but there’s still nearly a hundred ethnic groups in there somewhere…

#8

Makulita

1:21 am | May 28, 2008

I liked it, I’m unbelievably disappointed that no one had the balls and/or ovaries to call up and talk with jaehwan, D or Jade.

I just realized that I miss tojo.

#9

jaehwan

1:41 am | May 28, 2008

Just wanted to say that Minbo’s post is accurate. I’ve read Dawkins, Darwin, and some of the non-specialist race theorists like Jon Entine. I have a really great respect for Minbo’s post because he managed to lay out the facts without opening up too great a can of worms, which is something that happens often when discussing race and genetics.

#10

Akrypti

3:15 pm | May 28, 2008

You should read Stephanie Wildman’s “White Privilege.”