At what appears to be a culturally enriched children’s birthday gathering in some American city — Chicago, possibly, or Atlanta; it doesn’t really matter because the “urban” culture has been synthesized and exported by the media machine from coast to coast — a pair of children, one apparently 7 or 8 in an Air Jordan t-shirt and the other looking not a day over 3 in an Air Jordan track suit, can be seen waving (fake) cash and (probably fake, but let’s not give the parents the benefit of the doubt) guns in the same manner that can be seen in damn near every rap video from the last twenty years.
There are primarily cultural issues, along with DNA traits that influence who we are, but the common denominator of men in prison is that they grew up in homes without their father present.
I wonder how much the “fatherlessness” is a proxy for something else. A confounder rather than a cause. My children grew up just fine without a father in the home, and I have had no problems whatsoever instilling middle class values. Perhaps we should call it poverty due to single parenting in undecucated/unemployed young girls = welfare dependency. But even in those cases, the culture and value system was there first.
The majority of boys raised by single mothers do not end up in prison; the majority of men in prison were raised by single mothers. I agree there exists a significant cultural reality in modern America. I also don’t disregard the genetic component. As previously stated, many boys in single family homes have other males model appropriate masculine behavior for them.
My oldest son spent his formative first 5 years without a father. His grandfather became his father figure. That relationship remained his closest and most meaningful relationship until my father’s death. Even after I married and had additional children my oldest son thought of his grandfather, and later his coaches, as the men he aspired to be.
I am not blaming single mothers, although to your cultural point, some may deserve criticism for choosing to raise children in a non-traditional fashion because it benefits them but harms their children. The video in this article seems more about glorifying gangsta parenting to get views than it shows love or concern for the children.
Role models are certainly important. My point is, among other things, that what seems so obvious and logical to many isn't always factual.
My son did not have a male role model, such as a loving grandfather or a close relationship with a coach, and a rather distant and infrequent relationship with his father who lives elsewhere.
I believe that several things have nevertheless contributed to him growing up to be an absolute model male; healthy, self-confident, driven, organized, motivated, empathetic, spiritual (not religious), health conscious, drawn to capable women etc. Some of those factors include my allowing him to trust his body, as opposed to the anxious hovering that seems to constitute "good mothering" these days. I allowed my children to be self-sufficient, feel confident on their own, raised them with solid middle class values, raised them to be independent thinkers and think critically of authority, stand up for themselves etc. I never spoke ill of their father, nor men in general, and have actively spoken out against the current trend of labeling masculinity as "toxic".
Single motherhood as a pipeline to crime and prison is a dumb, oversimplified misuse of statistics that disrespectfully paints women as incapable of raising their children. Raising well-adjusted, happy children hinges on so much more than one's marital status. Women are quite simply not incapable of raising their children well without a father, and the woman who is, is probably not a great mother inside the confines of a marriage either.
While it is of course ideal to model a harmonious marriage for your children, a large majority of unhappy couples insist of staying together "for the sake of the children" and do more harm than good though their poor example. My own parents were a good example of that.
The correlation is just that, a correlation, and statistics prove absolutely nothing about individuals. Whether in marriages or alone, we can make both good and bad choices. Single motherhood may e.g. simply be a proxy for poverty, and if that factor would be accounted for a different picture might well emerge.
Yes, I agree, but I wish to add one caveat. The Eastern culture, especially in the literal East or Asia, forbids racism. Not by teaching children it's a bad thing. But by not allowing any other race in their countries. Take Japan as an example; try to immigrate as a white person, let alone a black. It's hard for whites to immigrate. Japan understands the race problem and its sources.
Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying on a recent podcast mentioned being in Prague for their book tour. They were impressed with how tranquil and "non-performative" people were. Of course the subtext was that homogeneous societies . . . get along. In any case they properly noted the virtues of cosmopolitanism over multiculturalism.
Yes because they stuck to the centre of Prague, meeting people that were interested in a book tour of such a book, could speak English, lived nearby etc etc. I suspect that book presentations in New York City, Chicago, even Detroit (well may be not there) attract the same types of person.
Did they go to the slums or slummy areas of the Prague?
While they are not angels quite a few countries in Central and Eastern Europe do not have a multi racial population (this is changing FAST for the EU members). Especially migrants from races that , well, tend to create problems.
Next door in Hungary and Romania, the Gypsy population is violent and has a very high incarceration rate . A population that is there at least since the early 1500s . Cultural ? Well...
Yes, and no. I have friends from China who say racism against whites is not only acceptable, it is encouraged. This attitude seems to be on full display in tour groups visiting California. Of course, not all Asian cultures are equal. Some of the nicest people I have ever met are from Vietnam.
Yes, that is true. Having spent a lot of time with various Asian groups I can tell you that the Asian community has some of the heaviest racism I have ever witnessed. The Vietnamese are at the bottom of the Asian culture feeding trough. As you mentioned, they are the friendliest, too, but are most hated by other Asian groups. This is a well-guarded secret few understand, but Asian groups hate each other intensely.
It is not just the culture . As someone mentioned here, there are DNA traits. DNA traits in a population of humans is called RACE. Sorry , don't shoot the messenger.
People are not like computers , ie common hardware in which one can install software (culture) at will. They are hardwired differently. For better or for worse.
Our understanding of DNA is at it’s infancy but the relationship between DNA and personality traits is undeniable. DNA is responsible for our disposition but NOT our actual behavior. Human beings have free will. I am predisposed to loud, silly interactions but I exercise restraint because time and place determines if such behavior will advance my situation or place me in jeopardy.
Of course human beings have free will. And a soul as well. Which can be exercised within the physical constraints to which we are subject.
Racial attributes are statistical qualities. They apply to large groups, not necessarily to all individuals. The 3 main races each have particular physical characteristics and others that are shared between them. Any international athletic competition will demonstrate that. And biology does NOT stop at the neck, it keeps going up. DNA is a genotype , it defines race, sex etc. Among the phenotypes that stem from it are intelligence and aggressivity. Those vary between races. The black race has lower IQ than the white one , which has lower IQ than the East Asians. The opposite holds for testosterone which is an indicator for aggressiveness.
Now, the most intelligent person on the Earth might very well be a black woman from Ghana. And I am sure there are many non aggressive blacks, as there are aggressive Chinese and Japanese (and how!) But we are talking about large populations.
Yes, aggressiveness might be supressed via conditioning. Or even by reasoning i e free will. But large populations will demonstrate the expected characteristics. We must take this into account in education, penal system, health etc.
Having said that we are all children of God (I AM a christian). And we should be treated all
equitably by human Law. That means no more or less leniency depending on the race .
PS: We have tried to overcome the IQ problem of blacks (as a whole). No child left behind, bussing , discriminative (ie affirmative) action and so on. The results are meager to non existent. May be our science will one day find a different way. (although I am scared to death of a science that tinkers with the building blocks of life).
Meanwhile (for me) Christian love is the answer. Along with realistic expectations , faireness and non discrimination of ANY kind. Even if that means that the black prison population will keep being disproportionate
Stephen Gardner had an interesting show with Larry Elder. Elder talked about the fatherless factor and the results from that. The family makes all the difference as seen in the Asian families and Latino families.
It’s not everything, but it is a big thing. The role of the father is to provide for and protect his family. Fathers also teach their children to submit to authority. If a child makes it to kindergarten without learning behavioral boundaries they don’t stand much of a chance in life. Lucky children forced to grow up without fathers have grandfathers or other family members fill the role. The unlucky ones are at high risk for self defeating behavior.
The way I heard it, the asian stats are because asians (at least some of them) are honorary whites. Which is also why it's acceptable to beat them in the streets, much to the chagrin of asians in west coast cities.
This is called the "Model Minority Myth" and it's a central tenet of social justice ideology in which whites "adopt" Asians into their culture. It's a way to explain away asian success in an alleged white supremacy nation
There are primarily cultural issues, along with DNA traits that influence who we are, but the common denominator of men in prison is that they grew up in homes without their father present.
I wonder how much the “fatherlessness” is a proxy for something else. A confounder rather than a cause. My children grew up just fine without a father in the home, and I have had no problems whatsoever instilling middle class values. Perhaps we should call it poverty due to single parenting in undecucated/unemployed young girls = welfare dependency. But even in those cases, the culture and value system was there first.
The majority of boys raised by single mothers do not end up in prison; the majority of men in prison were raised by single mothers. I agree there exists a significant cultural reality in modern America. I also don’t disregard the genetic component. As previously stated, many boys in single family homes have other males model appropriate masculine behavior for them.
My oldest son spent his formative first 5 years without a father. His grandfather became his father figure. That relationship remained his closest and most meaningful relationship until my father’s death. Even after I married and had additional children my oldest son thought of his grandfather, and later his coaches, as the men he aspired to be.
I am not blaming single mothers, although to your cultural point, some may deserve criticism for choosing to raise children in a non-traditional fashion because it benefits them but harms their children. The video in this article seems more about glorifying gangsta parenting to get views than it shows love or concern for the children.
Role models are certainly important. My point is, among other things, that what seems so obvious and logical to many isn't always factual.
My son did not have a male role model, such as a loving grandfather or a close relationship with a coach, and a rather distant and infrequent relationship with his father who lives elsewhere.
I believe that several things have nevertheless contributed to him growing up to be an absolute model male; healthy, self-confident, driven, organized, motivated, empathetic, spiritual (not religious), health conscious, drawn to capable women etc. Some of those factors include my allowing him to trust his body, as opposed to the anxious hovering that seems to constitute "good mothering" these days. I allowed my children to be self-sufficient, feel confident on their own, raised them with solid middle class values, raised them to be independent thinkers and think critically of authority, stand up for themselves etc. I never spoke ill of their father, nor men in general, and have actively spoken out against the current trend of labeling masculinity as "toxic".
Single motherhood as a pipeline to crime and prison is a dumb, oversimplified misuse of statistics that disrespectfully paints women as incapable of raising their children. Raising well-adjusted, happy children hinges on so much more than one's marital status. Women are quite simply not incapable of raising their children well without a father, and the woman who is, is probably not a great mother inside the confines of a marriage either.
While it is of course ideal to model a harmonious marriage for your children, a large majority of unhappy couples insist of staying together "for the sake of the children" and do more harm than good though their poor example. My own parents were a good example of that.
The correlation is just that, a correlation, and statistics prove absolutely nothing about individuals. Whether in marriages or alone, we can make both good and bad choices. Single motherhood may e.g. simply be a proxy for poverty, and if that factor would be accounted for a different picture might well emerge.
Yes, I agree, but I wish to add one caveat. The Eastern culture, especially in the literal East or Asia, forbids racism. Not by teaching children it's a bad thing. But by not allowing any other race in their countries. Take Japan as an example; try to immigrate as a white person, let alone a black. It's hard for whites to immigrate. Japan understands the race problem and its sources.
Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying on a recent podcast mentioned being in Prague for their book tour. They were impressed with how tranquil and "non-performative" people were. Of course the subtext was that homogeneous societies . . . get along. In any case they properly noted the virtues of cosmopolitanism over multiculturalism.
Yes because they stuck to the centre of Prague, meeting people that were interested in a book tour of such a book, could speak English, lived nearby etc etc. I suspect that book presentations in New York City, Chicago, even Detroit (well may be not there) attract the same types of person.
Did they go to the slums or slummy areas of the Prague?
While they are not angels quite a few countries in Central and Eastern Europe do not have a multi racial population (this is changing FAST for the EU members). Especially migrants from races that , well, tend to create problems.
Next door in Hungary and Romania, the Gypsy population is violent and has a very high incarceration rate . A population that is there at least since the early 1500s . Cultural ? Well...
Exactly
Yes, and no. I have friends from China who say racism against whites is not only acceptable, it is encouraged. This attitude seems to be on full display in tour groups visiting California. Of course, not all Asian cultures are equal. Some of the nicest people I have ever met are from Vietnam.
Yes, that is true. Having spent a lot of time with various Asian groups I can tell you that the Asian community has some of the heaviest racism I have ever witnessed. The Vietnamese are at the bottom of the Asian culture feeding trough. As you mentioned, they are the friendliest, too, but are most hated by other Asian groups. This is a well-guarded secret few understand, but Asian groups hate each other intensely.
It is not just the culture . As someone mentioned here, there are DNA traits. DNA traits in a population of humans is called RACE. Sorry , don't shoot the messenger.
People are not like computers , ie common hardware in which one can install software (culture) at will. They are hardwired differently. For better or for worse.
Our understanding of DNA is at it’s infancy but the relationship between DNA and personality traits is undeniable. DNA is responsible for our disposition but NOT our actual behavior. Human beings have free will. I am predisposed to loud, silly interactions but I exercise restraint because time and place determines if such behavior will advance my situation or place me in jeopardy.
Of course human beings have free will. And a soul as well. Which can be exercised within the physical constraints to which we are subject.
Racial attributes are statistical qualities. They apply to large groups, not necessarily to all individuals. The 3 main races each have particular physical characteristics and others that are shared between them. Any international athletic competition will demonstrate that. And biology does NOT stop at the neck, it keeps going up. DNA is a genotype , it defines race, sex etc. Among the phenotypes that stem from it are intelligence and aggressivity. Those vary between races. The black race has lower IQ than the white one , which has lower IQ than the East Asians. The opposite holds for testosterone which is an indicator for aggressiveness.
Now, the most intelligent person on the Earth might very well be a black woman from Ghana. And I am sure there are many non aggressive blacks, as there are aggressive Chinese and Japanese (and how!) But we are talking about large populations.
Yes, aggressiveness might be supressed via conditioning. Or even by reasoning i e free will. But large populations will demonstrate the expected characteristics. We must take this into account in education, penal system, health etc.
Having said that we are all children of God (I AM a christian). And we should be treated all
equitably by human Law. That means no more or less leniency depending on the race .
PS: We have tried to overcome the IQ problem of blacks (as a whole). No child left behind, bussing , discriminative (ie affirmative) action and so on. The results are meager to non existent. May be our science will one day find a different way. (although I am scared to death of a science that tinkers with the building blocks of life).
Meanwhile (for me) Christian love is the answer. Along with realistic expectations , faireness and non discrimination of ANY kind. Even if that means that the black prison population will keep being disproportionate
Stephen Gardner had an interesting show with Larry Elder. Elder talked about the fatherless factor and the results from that. The family makes all the difference as seen in the Asian families and Latino families.
It’s not everything, but it is a big thing. The role of the father is to provide for and protect his family. Fathers also teach their children to submit to authority. If a child makes it to kindergarten without learning behavioral boundaries they don’t stand much of a chance in life. Lucky children forced to grow up without fathers have grandfathers or other family members fill the role. The unlucky ones are at high risk for self defeating behavior.
The way I heard it, the asian stats are because asians (at least some of them) are honorary whites. Which is also why it's acceptable to beat them in the streets, much to the chagrin of asians in west coast cities.
This is called the "Model Minority Myth" and it's a central tenet of social justice ideology in which whites "adopt" Asians into their culture. It's a way to explain away asian success in an alleged white supremacy nation