I slowly came upon this theory like pouring molasses in January. (After reading everything I have written, can you tell that I am hugely influenced by Michael Crichton? And yes, I only first became aware of the existence of the concept of fractals after reading Jurassic Park. No, I did not have knowledge of their existence before the early 1990s. I was a tween, so sue me already.)
My theory slowly took form. And as it did, nearly everything that humans have done, or have had done to them, has fallen neatly into place. This theory is supremely complex, sure. But it is simultaneously clean, straightforward. It manages to explain so many things. It appears to answer several burning questions about human history, about scientific discovery and creativity, about human developmental psychology, even about lack of scientific discovery and creativity.
Anyway. I had been reading on the internet about "racism" and all the tandem accusations spewed like slop, and I was getting a headache from the aggravation and the frustration. Of course not only because of the internet, since "racism" has been around longer than the internet. There is always nattering blather about how America is obsessed with "racism" and racial identity and racial politics, and always has been, ad nauseum.
Apparently there is a lot of conflict within the black community because there are shades and gradients of black -- brown, tan, beige, dark brown, etc. This produces a subset of racism called "colorism." I have known since at least my middle school days that black people, especially black girls and women, are particularly sensitive about their hair. Their hair length, texture, thickness, silkiness, softness-v-coarseness, resemblance to "white people's hair," natural vs. styled, weaves, sewn-in styles. In all honesty, I had known about the "colorism" since middle school also.
It seems that "colorism" causes as much aggravation and strife within the black community as racism does without the black community. I read this and I was rolling my eyes in frustration because I wondered why they have to get so upset and make such a big deal over something that is not really dire. And I realized that while I can sympathize with them -- this was not really my problem. They need to figure this out on their own. That has to be their learning experience, their evolution, their growth.
But I was astounded to learn that most populations of Asians *are* racist, and they are *okay* with this fact. They have come to terms with it. It does not cause crime, mugging, r--, gang activity, riots, violent protests. It does not cause emotional strife, it does not cause depression, anxiety, identity crisis, complaining about brown light-skin vs. dark skin.
Looking back through my memory, I realized that this was true. Indians, my own Bangladeshi, Chinese, Taiwanese, Indonesian, Malaysian, take your pick. Whatever Asian culture we are talking about, there has always existed a brand of colorism. Asians prefer to marry and mate light-skinned Asians within their country. There are shades and gradients of yellow, brown, yellow-brown, tan, wheatish, fair, et al.
Of course, a given person can only mate with someone that will accept him or her. This is universal throughout the human race. Which means that only the lightest will be privileged with marrying the lightest, the next lightest will get to marry anyone darker than that, and on and on down the color line.
Full disclosure, I have always been fine with this. This makes sense. The light-skinned people are not obligated to hook up with anyone darker than them. Not out of any nonsense notion of "equality" or "fairness," and not for any reason unless one is truly madly deeply head over heels in love with another one. In which case, go have a crazy over-the-top wedding and have lots of marbled babies.
But to claim that colorism is "evil" is exaggerated, hysterical idiocy. Come off it. Marriage and romance are about whom you are most comfortable with, not about who is most politically correct. The darker brown ones can bitch and moan and groan all they want. But the fact remains, light-skinned people are not under any moral obligation whatsoever to raise dark-skinned people's self-esteem by having sex with them. Light-skinned folks should not be forced to include dark-skinned folks in the popular crowd. The dark ones got rejected by the light ones. Get over it.
Asians do not obsess over this "racism" as a national pastime. There are no "national conversations about race" that need to occur. It has already been settled. Yes, we're racist, we're over it, that's old news, move on.
This was breathtaking discovery for me. This was fascinating. I am forever grateful to fate, destiny, etc. that I stumbled upon this. So you are saying it is possible for people to be keenly aware of racial differences, and yet not abuse and flagellate and torment themselves over it?
When I say racism, I do not mean a harmless innocuous being proud of one's own family and cultural heritage. That is not racism. I am talking about actively engaging in behaviors that indicate that one feels that certain ethnic groups are more fit and acceptable than others. This would include the act of only socializing with people that one feels most comfortable with. This means promoting a particular race as more well-suited to particular careers and livelihoods. And yes, this includes romancing and marrying someone that one deems acceptable for oneself to marry.
Now, I am NOT saying that hate crimes are okay. Crimes are crimes are crimes. Doesn't matter what the motivation is. Lynching, r--, gang-beating, what happened to Medgar Evars. Those are sick and filthy and vile, and just because I am slightly racist in terms of human intimacy and comfort does not mean I am okay with the existence of crimes against humanity. Colorism is not even close to advocating violation of a human being.
A criminal that violates a person's right to bodily autonomy, should be charged with the same crime as any non-racially-based or non-sexually-based crime. Black people, dark-skinned Asians, whoever we are talking about must have the same individual freedoms and rights of any group of people, no argument there. Do not take my words out of context.
Anyway. You cannot imagine the relief I felt when I chanced upon this revelation. It felt like I could finally let go of a breath I had not even realized I was holding. A huge burden was lifted from my shoulders.
I detected a parallel between this peculiarity of Asian culture, and the fact that adults tend to be okay with their flaws, whatever the flaws may be. If they can learn to live with it and still function in society just fine, then this is not a problem. I have grown to accept it. I have learned to accept myself for who I am. I am a colorist. I have made my peace with this fact. I have accepted it, and I am moving on.
Hmm, interesting. What other ways have Asians demonstrated that they are more progressed along the timeline of civilization development?
- The above information combined with the high mean IQ of Asians,
- As well as the vast expansive history that spans several millennia back into the past
I hold a similar, if more impatience and vehement, view towards western women and women's rights issues.
A pandemic number of western society first-world females proclaim themselves so oooo confused about their role and lot in life because, gosh darn, they are just so trailblazing, capable, independent, and glass-ceiling-busting that traditional women's roles just don't fit them anymore.
As we have all heard, western society women claim that they are now emancipated, feministed, empowered, liberated, modern young women free from the shackles of an outdated oppressive patriarchal regime. They claim that because of this newfound freedom, the traditional social roles of men and women are now topsy-turvy y and confusing as all get out, and therefore the old answers and approaches to life don't work anymore. They have declared traditional societal roles as "obsolete."
___relationships, baby-daddy situations, (These liberal females are too chicken to use the word "marriage." "Marriage" is a dirty four-letter word in the liberal feminist lexicon; it is the worst foul-language curse that a liberal female could possibly utter.
they are still trying to figure out how
oh it is all just so confusing, }}}insp, insppp||||
What the hell is so Goddamn confusing about this?
I'm not really following. What the hell is so damn difficult to understand?
What is do damn confusing about this?
|||||these females say that "society" expects them to act like dumb bimbos... erm, let us examine this accusion towards "society" a bit more carefully.||||
Notice that when these females say that "society" expects them to whore themselves out for pleasing the crowd, they do not actually mean society. They actually only mean the entrainment media: hollywood/pnr.
This is because actual society, as in flesh and blood human beings, do NOT tell them this, and in fact have never told them this. Their families, their genuine friends, teachers and other people at school, church groups -- none of these normal human beings ever advised the aforementioned young ladies that they had to be dumb bimbo xsluts in order to make their mark in life.
The truthful account is that the dumb sluts chose of their own volition to discard common sense and morals.
-----
Several years ago I wrote an essay that drew from everything I knew, at that time, of the human experience. I drew from facts of economics, international trade, history, different cultures, general social progress, and individual progress. I constructed a theory that cleanly but complexly wove all this complex information together into a coherent tapestry. There, I had theorized that civilizations rise and fall in cycles. I remarked that we in this society are fortunate enough to be living in the Golden Age of the United States.
However, now that I am a bit older, I realize that I did not have all the necessary information back then. Crucial pieces of the puzzle, heretofore unseen, are now revealing themselves.
Now I am seeing more sociopolitical patterns that still fit that same previous theory of mine -- but which add massive mountainous strata. Not to mention, the angle of my vantage point has completely revolved. I see that the puzzle of human past and future is far more complex, and far larger than I previously even knew existed. It is as though I were a Flatlander before, being conscious of only two dimensions. And now the cloak has dissolved, and I see in three dimensions. I revel in their saphenous nature.
In my defense, I like to think that my previous theory was not simply a matter of youthful hubris. I think that at the time, events truly had not progressed which might have offered some insight into human history. I think that a tiny little bit of time has passed, enough for humans to experience what happens next in the timeline. And I realize I have to amend my previous theory.
I suppose it is strange that a live-wire topic such as racism was the gentle nudge that led me to this theory. Then, everything clicked into place.
My theory slowly took form. And as it did, nearly everything that humans have done, or have had done to them, has fallen neatly into place. This theory is supremely complex, sure. But it is simultaneously clean, straightforward. It manages to explain so many things. It appears to answer several burning questions about human history, about scientific discovery and creativity, about human developmental psychology, even about lack of scientific discovery and creativity.
Anyway. I had been reading on the internet about "racism" and all the tandem accusations spewed like slop, and I was getting a headache from the aggravation and the frustration. Of course not only because of the internet, since "racism" has been around longer than the internet. There is always nattering blather about how America is obsessed with "racism" and racial identity and racial politics, and always has been, ad nauseum.
Apparently there is a lot of conflict within the black community because there are shades and gradients of black -- brown, tan, beige, dark brown, etc. This produces a subset of racism called "colorism." I have known since at least my middle school days that black people, especially black girls and women, are particularly sensitive about their hair. Their hair length, texture, thickness, silkiness, softness-v-coarseness, resemblance to "white people's hair," natural vs. styled, weaves, sewn-in styles. In all honesty, I had known about the "colorism" since middle school also.
It seems that "colorism" causes as much aggravation and strife within the black community as racism does without the black community. I read this and I was rolling my eyes in frustration because I wondered why they have to get so upset and make such a big deal over something that is not really dire. And I realized that while I can sympathize with them -- this was not really my problem. They need to figure this out on their own. That has to be their learning experience, their evolution, their growth.
But I was astounded to learn that most populations of Asians *are* racist, and they are *okay* with this fact. They have come to terms with it. It does not cause crime, mugging, r--, gang activity, riots, violent protests. It does not cause emotional strife, it does not cause depression, anxiety, identity crisis, complaining about brown light-skin vs. dark skin.
Looking back through my memory, I realized that this was true. Indians, my own Bangladeshi, Chinese, Taiwanese, Indonesian, Malaysian, take your pick. Whatever Asian culture we are talking about, there has always existed a brand of colorism. Asians prefer to marry and mate light-skinned Asians within their country. There are shades and gradients of yellow, brown, yellow-brown, tan, wheatish, fair, et al.
Of course, a given person can only mate with someone that will accept him or her. This is universal throughout the human race. Which means that only the lightest will be privileged with marrying the lightest, the next lightest will get to marry anyone darker than that, and on and on down the color line.
Full disclosure, I have always been fine with this. This makes sense. The light-skinned people are not obligated to hook up with anyone darker than them. Not out of any nonsense notion of "equality" or "fairness," and not for any reason unless one is truly madly deeply head over heels in love with another one. In which case, go have a crazy over-the-top wedding and have lots of marbled babies.
But to claim that colorism is "evil" is exaggerated, hysterical idiocy. Come off it. Marriage and romance are about whom you are most comfortable with, not about who is most politically correct. The darker brown ones can bitch and moan and groan all they want. But the fact remains, light-skinned people are not under any moral obligation whatsoever to raise dark-skinned people's self-esteem by having sex with them. Light-skinned folks should not be forced to include dark-skinned folks in the popular crowd. The dark ones got rejected by the light ones. Get over it.
Asians do not obsess over this "racism" as a national pastime. There are no "national conversations about race" that need to occur. It has already been settled. Yes, we're racist, we're over it, that's old news, move on.
This was breathtaking discovery for me. This was fascinating. I am forever grateful to fate, destiny, etc. that I stumbled upon this. So you are saying it is possible for people to be keenly aware of racial differences, and yet not abuse and flagellate and torment themselves over it?
When I say racism, I do not mean a harmless innocuous being proud of one's own family and cultural heritage. That is not racism. I am talking about actively engaging in behaviors that indicate that one feels that certain ethnic groups are more fit and acceptable than others. This would include the act of only socializing with people that one feels most comfortable with. This means promoting a particular race as more well-suited to particular careers and livelihoods. And yes, this includes romancing and marrying someone that one deems acceptable for oneself to marry.
Now, I am NOT saying that hate crimes are okay. Crimes are crimes are crimes. Doesn't matter what the motivation is. Lynching, r--, gang-beating, what happened to Medgar Evars. Those are sick and filthy and vile, and just because I am slightly racist in terms of human intimacy and comfort does not mean I am okay with the existence of crimes against humanity. Colorism is not even close to advocating violation of a human being.
A criminal that violates a person's right to bodily autonomy, should be charged with the same crime as any non-racially-based or non-sexually-based crime. Black people, dark-skinned Asians, whoever we are talking about must have the same individual freedoms and rights of any group of people, no argument there. Do not take my words out of context.
Anyway. You cannot imagine the relief I felt when I chanced upon this revelation. It felt like I could finally let go of a breath I had not even realized I was holding. A huge burden was lifted from my shoulders.
I detected a parallel between this peculiarity of Asian culture, and the fact that adults tend to be okay with their flaws, whatever the flaws may be. If they can learn to live with it and still function in society just fine, then this is not a problem. I have grown to accept it. I have learned to accept myself for who I am. I am a colorist. I have made my peace with this fact. I have accepted it, and I am moving on.
Hmm, interesting. What other ways have Asians demonstrated that they are more progressed along the timeline of civilization development?
- The above information combined with the high mean IQ of Asians,
- As well as the vast expansive history that spans several millennia back into the past
I hold a similar, if more impatience and vehement, view towards western women and women's rights issues.
A pandemic number of western society first-world females proclaim themselves so oooo confused about their role and lot in life because, gosh darn, they are just so trailblazing, capable, independent, and glass-ceiling-busting that traditional women's roles just don't fit them anymore.
As we have all heard, western society women claim that they are now emancipated, feministed, empowered, liberated, modern young women free from the shackles of an outdated oppressive patriarchal regime. They claim that because of this newfound freedom, the traditional social roles of men and women are now topsy-turvy y and confusing as all get out, and therefore the old answers and approaches to life don't work anymore. They have declared traditional societal roles as "obsolete."
___relationships, baby-daddy situations, (These liberal females are too chicken to use the word "marriage." "Marriage" is a dirty four-letter word in the liberal feminist lexicon; it is the worst foul-language curse that a liberal female could possibly utter.
they are still trying to figure out how
oh it is all just so confusing, }}}insp, insppp||||
What the hell is so Goddamn confusing about this?
I'm not really following. What the hell is so damn difficult to understand?
What is do damn confusing about this?
|||||these females say that "society" expects them to act like dumb bimbos... erm, let us examine this accusion towards "society" a bit more carefully.||||
Notice that when these females say that "society" expects them to whore themselves out for pleasing the crowd, they do not actually mean society. They actually only mean the entrainment media: hollywood/pnr.
This is because actual society, as in flesh and blood human beings, do NOT tell them this, and in fact have never told them this. Their families, their genuine friends, teachers and other people at school, church groups -- none of these normal human beings ever advised the aforementioned young ladies that they had to be dumb bimbo xsluts in order to make their mark in life.
The truthful account is that the dumb sluts chose of their own volition to discard common sense and morals.
-----
Several years ago I wrote an essay that drew from everything I knew, at that time, of the human experience. I drew from facts of economics, international trade, history, different cultures, general social progress, and individual progress. I constructed a theory that cleanly but complexly wove all this complex information together into a coherent tapestry. There, I had theorized that civilizations rise and fall in cycles. I remarked that we in this society are fortunate enough to be living in the Golden Age of the United States.
However, now that I am a bit older, I realize that I did not have all the necessary information back then. Crucial pieces of the puzzle, heretofore unseen, are now revealing themselves.
Now I am seeing more sociopolitical patterns that still fit that same previous theory of mine -- but which add massive mountainous strata. Not to mention, the angle of my vantage point has completely revolved. I see that the puzzle of human past and future is far more complex, and far larger than I previously even knew existed. It is as though I were a Flatlander before, being conscious of only two dimensions. And now the cloak has dissolved, and I see in three dimensions. I revel in their saphenous nature.
In my defense, I like to think that my previous theory was not simply a matter of youthful hubris. I think that at the time, events truly had not progressed which might have offered some insight into human history. I think that a tiny little bit of time has passed, enough for humans to experience what happens next in the timeline. And I realize I have to amend my previous theory.
I suppose it is strange that a live-wire topic such as racism was the gentle nudge that led me to this theory. Then, everything clicked into place.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment