Best social sciences books according to redditors

We found 3,842 Reddit comments discussing the best social sciences books. We ranked the 1,694 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Subcategories:

Popular culture in social sciences books
Disaster relief books
Povery books
Holidays books
Criminology books
Customs & traditions books
Demography books
Emigration & immigration studies books
Folklore & mythology studies
Gender studies
Gerontology books
Human geography books
Social sciences methodology books
Philanthropy & charity books
Study of pornography books
Social sciences reference books
Social sciences research books
Social work books
Specific demographic studies
Urban planning & development books
Linguistics reference books
Library & science information books
Children studies
Violence in society books
Communication & media studies
Museology studies
Privacy & surveillance in society books

Top Reddit comments about Social Sciences:

u/dmix · 270 pointsr/polandball

There was a book written by a black american economist about how African-American culture is actually a hold over from 18-19th century southern US redneck culture which was itself a hold over from some poor Scottish and some northern English farmer towns who emigrated en masse to the south.

These people became wealthy enough to buy slaves and black people grew up living among their culture, eventually adopting it, with their own adaptations of course, that persisted. Once they became free they eventually brought it with them as they moved into northern inner cities where it became a symbol of "blackness". It has survived longer in it's original form thanks to US social stratification that still exists today in many forms - while the middle/upper southern white culture has more generally merged with the north/west.

So we can still thank Europe for at least a part of black culture.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1594031436

u/SatoshiKamasutra · 213 pointsr/KotakuInAction

Sounds like someone needs to read Black Rednecks and White Liberals

TL;DR: Thomas Sowell (who is black) explains how language and behavior that liberals describe as "authentically black" is actually derived from the culture of poor white "rednecks" who brought it with them from the Scottish Highlands.

u/Rev1917-2017 · 115 pointsr/politics

I encourage everyone to read this book. Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky he explains detail about how the media is changing everything.

u/quirt · 70 pointsr/TrueReddit

On average, black Americans are poorer than white Americans. This was initially due to pre-Civil Rights Movement blatant racism and discrimination. After the Civil Rights Movement, blatant racism started to fade away, but our educational system has kept blacks from escaping from their poverty. Schools are funded by local taxes, so when the people are poorer, the schools aren't as good. The abundance of land and quality of roads has allowed the wealthy to geographically isolate themselves from the poor (usually black, but also white and Hispanic).

However, African American culture may also play a detrimental role, as addressed in this book by anthropologist John Ogbu.

u/Transgender_AMA · 64 pointsr/science

Hello! Cei here. Thank you for your question and for your willingness to learn and grow for your community!
Question 1.a. If you are providing a space (a group, a confirmation class, a retreat, a bible study, a weekly potluck, a movie night, etc) for these young people to be themselves- to use they name they choose, to use the pronouns that fit for them, and to create norms where the other youth in the space must be respectful of these identities- then you are creating a safe space for the youth to go through the process of self-actualization in their identity. Ideally the church congregation would also be asked to affirm these youth in their identity. Depending on your comfort level, you could address the congregation and explain that you would like the church to be a sacred and safe space for all, and that in the interest of achieving this goal, you would ask them to respect names, pronouns, and gender expressions of all congregation members. b. One of the best ways to advocate for young people to their parents is to explain that the young person is happy, responding well, and thriving in environments where they are allowed to be themselves. If you have a young person who comes to your group/bible study/etc. who is using the name they choose, the pronouns that fit their identity, and is affirmed by the group around them and they are thriving, tell the young person's parents so. It may be that at home the parents see a kid who is struggling and sad and they are scared that being gender diverse will make things harder for their already unhappy child. To show that gender affirmation can radically improve a kid's quality of life is often the best motivator for parents to adopt affirming language.

2. Here are links to a few resources that we've found helpful over the years: Trans Bodies, Trans Selves, The Transgender Teen, The Genderquest Workbook, Confi's Article on Gender, Families In TRANSition.

I hope this helps, and thanks again for advocating for the gender diverse people at your church!

u/blne · 52 pointsr/KotakuInAction

Don't get me wrong, I don't support any "hate crime" or "hate speech" legislation, hence why I said it would almost be worth it. I just think it would be hilarious to see people like Jessica Valenti and Jess Philips and The Guardian charged with hate crimes. Trolls in the UK could have a field day (actually they already could, given current hate speech statutes; what are they waiting for?).

Ironically the epidemic of "misogyny" is mostly imaginary (at least in mainstream British culture), while the epidemic of misandry is mostly real. So who are the real trolls? You can read explicit anti-male "hate speech" on any given day in mainstream news publications, but feminists have to search far and wide (cat-calling, fat-shaming, attractive women in video games etc.) to find their misogyny boogeyman. Indeed according to some academics in Canada, misandry has now become institutionalized in the western world.

There is an argument to be made that making misandry illegal could force feminists to realize their own stupidity/solipsism/irrationality, and therefore put an end to hate think laws, but unfortunately I wouldn't bet on that. Due to aforementioned stupidity/solipsism/irrationality.

u/AbandoningAll · 49 pointsr/MensLib

I've seen a handful of people say that this sort of academic content is only produced (or acceptable to produce) about white men. I'd like to note that cultural, anthropological and historical studies of specific demographics, especially groups of alienated men, are actually pretty common. Take this classic study about Kashmiri Jihadists, or this one about drug dealers in East Harlem or hell, this study of the changing mores and social expectations in samurai culture. In other words, studying the identity of a group of men who are finding their social status threatened, uncertain or rapidly changing is actually quite a common academic pursuit.

In academic contexts like this there are clear epistemological and ethical considerations to keep in mind. The first is that any study of a group of people, whoever they are, needs to engage with the voices, experiences and worldviews of those people in good faith. This doesn't mean agree with, or even have an overall positive view of them or their beliefs - see the studies about Kashmiri Jihadists or drug dealers above - but it does mean that the purpose should be to reach a kind of understanding of the way these people think and feel about their world. A course that talks about the experiences of white men, with an aim at looking at processes of anger or radicalisation, would almost certainly be approaching the issue from this angle. I don't see anything to indicate that this won't be the case.

From the responses I've seen, a lot of people imagine this course to basically be a semester long dunk-session on white dudes without any nuance. From where I stand it seems pretty clear this course is intended to deconstruct, understand and talk about the experiences and alienation of certain white men in the US and UK in the last 70 years.

I think, in 2019, most Westerners with eyeballs have realised that young white men are a demographic that is noticeably prone to radicalisation, extremism and alienation. I think it's inevitable that this will be a phenomenon that is increasingly discussed and researched in academic and public circles.

u/DashingLeech · 46 pointsr/IAmA

This is, of course, brilliant and practical. But, I will point out that it isn't new. This, after all, the basis of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the approach to progress espoused by old school liberalism, from J.S. Mills to Jonathan Rauch.

The idea that calmly listening and addressing issues as a better approach than forming groups that fight each other is also consistent with ingroup/outgroup psychology, particularly modeled by Realistic (Group) Conflict Theory. Once you take away the idea that people belong to an identity group, and are just individuals, and that you aren't a member of a different group (tribe) in combat with their group (tribe), people can talk and resolve differences.

But yes, it takes patience and integrity. And you have those like few I've ever seen. That is awesome and inspiring!

u/randomfemale · 37 pointsr/ProtectAndServe

A reply to the down-votes you are getting for stating a fact:

It is distressing in particular that many people refuse to acknowledge that over 50% of murders in the US are committed by the black minority (around 13%), as if it were some kind of embarrassing chronic racial failing instead of a consequence of lack of education and the breakdown of the family dynamic - and other issues. On a related note, how ironic is it that black Americans were growing richer as a group from the 1930's until momentum slowed dramatically in the 1960's - after the civil rights era? (Am reading black scholar Thomas Sowell's book "Black Rednecks and White Liberals")

We cannot fix the problem by pretending that our reality is only racist hate-speak. This willful ignorance I find rather terrifying because it is being manifested with such vehement, unreasoning anger.

I spent this last January in the Dominican Republic which is largely black and mixed race. Was great to be around black people who felt free to just be people and without all the silent undercurrents of fear, resentment and blame that we have in the states. The Dominicans I met live in the now, take you at face value, and were just wonderful people: cheerful, kind, hugely family oriented and as a group, amazingly good looking. But they are incredibly poor. I really don't know how they do it; they were inspiring.

Edit: Excellent series of essays on origins and ramifications of southern and northern, black and white cultures, plus more:Black Rednecks and White Liberals.

u/HAMMER_BT · 36 pointsr/KotakuInAction

> Japan watchers have made a perennial sport out of opining on the causes of Japan’s low marriage and birth rates, even though they’re common to most advanced economies. ...

>... Though feminist ideals are widespread and women’s career opportunities are expanding, Japanese women who marry are still expected to end their careers and take on a traditional role in the household, making the prospect less attractive.

I really love how the article you quote seems to make the amazingly counterfactual link that, somehow, an increase in feminists ideals will solve Japan's demographic crisis.

To be fair this notion seems to be widespread. There seems to be a cottage industry devoted to churning out books that claim if only men would just man-up and stop thinking of enjoying their own lives... thinks would somehow work out. Because, as we all know, what all women really want is a cuckold in the kitchen and Pablo in the bedroom.

On the Left and Right, there seems to be no evidence that can convince some people that feminism is the problem. One of the rare exceptions I know of is Helen Smith's Men on Strike.

u/matts2 · 35 pointsr/AskHistorians

Have you read Trickster Makes This World (excerpt here? Great book on the use and meaning of Trickster stories.

u/liatris · 34 pointsr/news

You might enjoy this book; Black Rednecks and White Liberals by Dr. Thomas Sowell it's written by a black, Harvard educated economist. He makes the argument that ghetto culture in the black community is actually white cracker culture from the antebellum South. He traces it's roots back to the Celtic fringe culture of pre-Anglicisation Scotland, Wales etc. He compares the black cultures that formed in the North under the influence of New Englanders who immigrated from the South of England (an area that was more cultured) to the black culture that formed in the Southern US under the influence of the Celtic fringe immigrants from the borderlands of England who immigrated before Anglicisation took hold in the region and led to a more educated population.

Here is the book on tape from YouTube, it's about 11 hours long.


***

This explosive new book challenges many of the long-prevailing assumptions about blacks, about Jews, about Germans, about slavery, and about education. Plainly written, powerfully reasoned, and backed with a startling array of documented facts, Black Rednecks and White Liberals takes on not only the trendy intellectuals of our times but also such historic interpreters of American life as Alexis de Tocqueville and Frederick Law Olmsted. In a series of long essays, this book presents an in-depth look at key beliefs behind many mistaken and dangerous actions, policies, and trends. It presents eye-opening insights into the historical development of the ghetto culture that is today wrongly seen as a unique black identity--a culture cheered on toward self-destruction by white liberals who consider themselves "friends" of blacks. An essay titled "The Real History of Slavery" presents a jolting re-examination of that tragic institution and the narrow and distorted way it is too often seen today. The reasons for the venomous hatred of Jews, and of other groups like them in countries around the world, are explored in an essay that asks, "Are Jews Generic?" Misconceptions of German history in general, and of the Nazi era in particular, are also re-examined. So too are the inspiring achievements and painful tragedies of black education in the United States. "Black Rednecks and White Liberals" is the capstone of decades of outstanding research and writing on racial and cultural issues by Thomas Sowell.

u/0ptimal · 33 pointsr/Futurology

First, I don't have anything to say about the UK, but someone already ran numbers for replacing the US welfare system (the entire system mind you; welfare, TANF, disability, SS, medicare, medicaid) with an unconditional basic income system that provides 10k per year per person for everyone over 21, starting in 2010 or so, and it was roughly even. The book is In Our Hands: A Plan to Replace the Welfare State http://www.amazon.com/books/dp/0844742236 . Some countries, such as Australia and Brazil already have some degree of basic income systems in place, so just because such a thing might not be viable today, or for everyone yet, doesn't mean the concept has no merit.

Second, an economy runs on the flow of money. I don't find it terribly complex to understand the following argument: a) increasing automation will lead to higher capital/investment costs and lower ongoing costs for businesses b) businesses will need less employees and spend less money over time to produce their products c) wealth will collect in the accounts of the people that own the capital and businesses because they have minimal costs to pay; no employees, production costs are paid upfront, etc d) economy grinds to a halt as the owners continually make more money than they spend or lose through taxes until no one else has any money.

We're already seeing this happen to some degree; corporations are sitting on stacks of cash because they have no reason to invest it because there's no one left who can/will consume more of their products. Inflation seems by far to be a minor concern compared with this kind of problem, where we have the effective capability to provide for the needs of everyone, but we don't because of the mechanisms of our economic system isn't capable of dealing with our technological progress. In such a world money is much less important as a means of storing value than it is as a means of efficient resource distribution/allocation.

And finally, I'm missing the issue with corporate taxes. Corporate taxes are on profits; I don't see how this affects consumers, and I don't see how its a bad thing or affects investment. Corporate taxes should encourage investment by my measure, because it means you're better off spending a chunk of cash on R&D or whatever instead of putting 70% of that in your bank account and sending the other 30% to the government. Unless I'm missing something, in which case by all means, enlighten me.

u/tofurocks · 33 pointsr/DarkEnlightenment

----------------Diversity and Ethnocentrism Hate Facts------------------

More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion. http://www.citylab.com/housing/2013/11/paradox-diverse-communities/7614/

Diversity increases psychotic experiences. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity increases social adversity. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin. http://www.pnas.org/content/108/4/1262.abstract

Ethnic diversity harms health for hispanics and blacks. http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300787

Babies demostrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-whites. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01138.x/full

Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~axe/research/AxHamm_Ethno.pdf

Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

Ethnic diversity reduces concern for the environment. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10640-012-9619-6

Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust. http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/130251172/Dinesen_S_nderskov_Ethnic_Diversity_and_Social_Trust_Forthcoming_ASR.pdf

Ethnic diversity directly reduces strong communities. https://www.msu.edu/~zpneal/publications/neal-diversitysoc.pdf

Ethnically homogenous neighborhoods are beneficial for health. https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/living-ethnically-homogenous-area-boosts-health-minority-seniors

Diversity in American cities correlates with segregation. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-most-diverse-cities-are-often-the-most-segregated/

Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational. http://www.amazon.com/The-Ethnic-Phenomenon-Pierre-Berghe/dp/0275927091

It is evolutionary rational to be friends with someone genetically similar to you. http://www.livescience.com/46791-friends-share-genes.html

Racism and nationalism are rational and evolutionary advantageous strategies. http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

There is extensive evidence people prefer others who are genetically similar. http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/n&n 2005-1.pdf

.

.

.

-----------------------Gender and Sexuality Hate Facts-----------------------

Gay men are 60x more likely to have HIV than straight men. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3462414/

Women with more sexual partners are more likely to divorce. http://s3.amazonaws.com/thf_media/2003/pdf/Bookofcharts.pdf

Women with more than 20 sexual partners have an 80% chance of divorce. http://s3.amazonaws.com/thf_media/2003/pdf/Bookofcharts.pdf

White and Asian women have more successful marriages than black or Hispanic women. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr049.pdf

Gay people are 2-3x more likely to abuse alcohol than straight people. http://www.amazon.com/Unequal-Opportunity-Disparities-Affecting-Bisexual/dp/0195301536

A women’s number of sex partners is linearly linked to alcohol and drug abuse. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3752789/

Gay men are six times more likely to commit suicide than straight men. http://www.amazon.com/Unequal-Opportunity-Disparities-Affecting-Bisexual/dp/0195301536

Gay men are 12x more likely to use amphetamines than straight men. http://www.amazon.com/Unequal-Opportunity-Disparities-Affecting-Bisexual/dp/0195301536

Gay men are 10x more likely to use heroin than straight men. http://www.amazon.com/Unequal-Opportunity-Disparities-Affecting-Bisexual/dp/0195301536

Liberal arguments in favor of homosexuality are based on logical fallacies. http://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=clanak&id_clanak_jezik=19028&lang=en

Transsexuals who undergo sex reassignment surgery are more likely to commit suicide. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21364939

College majors with a greater proportion of women have lower average IQ’s among their students. http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/25/average-iq-of-students-by-college-major-and-gender-ratio/

Less attractive women are more likely to want careers. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2129456/Do-girls-want-career-attract-man-Provocative-study-casts-high-fliers-new-light.html

.

.

.

--------------------------------ISLAM HATE FACTS--------------------------

35% of Palestinians have a favorable opinion of Al Qeada. http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2013/09/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Project-Extremism-Report-Final-9-10-135.pdf

40% of British Muslims want Shariah law. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510866/Poll-reveals-40pc-of-Muslims-want-sharia-law-in-UK.html

1 in eight Muslims worldwide has a favorable view of al Quaeda. http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2013/09/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Project-Extremism-Report-Final-9-10-135.pdf

1 in 3 Muslims favorably views Hamas, a known terrorist organization. http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2013/09/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Project-Extremism-Report-Final-9-10-135.pdf

25% of Egyptian Muslims support terrorist attacks to enforce Shariah law. http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2013/09/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Project-Extremism-Report-Final-9-10-135.pdf

1/5 British Muslims sympathize with the 7/7 terrorist attack. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510866/Poll-reveals-40pc-of-Muslims-want-sharia-law-in-UK.html

65% of European Muslims believe that Shariah law is more important than the law of the country they reside in. https://www.wzb.eu/sites/default/files/u6/koopmans_englisch_ed.pdf

European Muslims are 7.5x more likely to be fundamentalists than Christians. https://www.wzb.eu/sites/default/files/u6/koopmans_englisch_ed.pdf

45% of European Muslims believe that Jews cannot be trusted. https://www.wzb.eu/sites/default/files/u6/koopmans_englisch_ed.pdf

60% of European Muslims are explicitly homphobic. This is not due to poverty or education. https://www.wzb.eu/sites/default/files/u6/koopmans_englisch_ed.pdf

40% of Palestinians support attacks on US civilians in America. http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf

87% of Egyptians agree with Al Qaeda’s goals. http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf

78% of Egyptians support attacks on US soldiers in the Middle East. http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf

62% of Palestinians support the use of suicide bombings. http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2013/09/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Project-Extremism-Report-Final-9-10-135.pdf

28% of British Muslims would like for Britain to become a fundamentalist Islamic state. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-british-muslims-put-islam-first/

68% of British Muslims support criminalizing criticism of Islam. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-british-muslims-put-islam-first/

3 out of 4 British Muslims support criminalizing drawings of Mohammed. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-british-muslims-put-islam-first/

9% of British Muslims define themselves as “hardcore Islamists”. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-british-muslims-put-islam-first/

Only 3% of British Muslims support free speech. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-british-muslims-put-islam-first/

0/500 British Muslims believe that homosexuality is morally acceptable. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/may/07/muslims-britain-france-germany-homosexuality

38% of Muslims believe 9/11 was partially or wholly justified. http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/just-like-us-really

62% of Canadian Muslims want Shariah law. http://www.torontosun.com/2011/11/01/strong-support-for-shariah-in-canada

More than 1 in 3 Canadian Muslims refuses to repudiate Al Qaeda. http://www.torontosun.com/2011/11/01/strong-support-for-shariah-in-canada

Britain will become a Muslim country by 2050 if demographic trends continue. http://www.thecommentator.com/article/3770/the_islamic_future_of_britain

At least 85 legally binding Sharia courts operate in Britain. http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/ShariaLawOrOneLawForAll.pdf

85% of rapists in Sweden were non-Swedish immigrants. http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape

North African migrants to Sweden are 23 times more likely to rape than native Swedes. http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape

African migrants to Sweden are 16 times more likely to rape than ethnic Swedes. http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape

Iraqi migrants to Sweden are 2000% more likely to rape than real Swedes. http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape

More than 1/2 of rapists in Denmark are immigrants. http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape

u/CopperFox3c · 30 pointsr/asktrp

NMMNG is a good starting place, a gentle introduction.

Now you should move on and read the Book of Pook and Jack Donovan's The Way of Men. You should also be learning more TRP theory and applying it IRL. Lift, approach women, find your mission and pursue it, etc.

If you don't wanna fall backward, then it is incumbent that you keep moving forward.

u/SomeGuy58439 · 26 pointsr/slatestarcodex

Betsy Stevenson tweeted this with an accompanying figure:

> Women's participation climbs while men's stagnates. Our greatest challenge: men on strike from life: Not marrying, raising kids, or working.

Made me think back to Helen Smith's book titled Men on Strike: Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood, and the American Dream - and Why It Matters, but with Stevenson being from what I'd consider largely the opposite side of the political spectrum (and with Stevenson having a much higher public profile - i.e. on Obama's Council of Economic Advisors / previous Chief Economist at the US Department of Labor).

u/Mswizzle23 · 24 pointsr/changemyview

Thomas Sowell and a number of others have argued African American hip hop culture is basically white redneck behavior, Sowell in "Black Rednecks And White Liberals" which I'm about to begin. Colin Woodward's "American Nation's" touches on this as well, as do other authors who've penned books on the topic, although his book is more about all of the regional cultures that make up our country dating back to the groups that founded those regions and how their beliefs are still resoundingly alive and well and how politicians actively exploit these differences we have between one another. There are other academics I've heard doing research like this but I'm having trouble recall their names, I heard about them in some podcasts. But, there's definitely more reading you can do to explore this idea more.

Amazon links to check out both titles I mentioned:

https://www.amazon.com/American-Nations-History-Regional-Cultures/dp/0143122029

https://www.amazon.com/Black-Rednecks-Liberals-Thomas-Sowell/dp/1594031436/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1502125308&sr=1-1&keywords=black+rednecks+and+white+liberals

u/Chisesi · 23 pointsr/JordanPeterson

First off, I don't think it's helpful to take the hard position of "there is a war on boys/men" unless you can thoroughly argue that position. A "War" implies aggressors and defenders which puts people you're trying to convince on the defensive. Even if you believe it's true, taking such a hard position without having your arguments air tight just defeats your purpose. Even if you do have your arguments on point, it's easy for people to use a strawman to say you think women are oppressing men. Even worse they will take you as saying women seeking equality oppresses men, or that you're saying men are powerless, then dismiss your claims based on that misunderstanding.

I would recommend making a softer assertion along the lines of "the well being of men has been declining in the Western world." That softer claim is much easier to defend, just look at suicide rates, incarceration rates, education stats, life expectancy rates etc. Take an approach that is closer to "we are all int his together so we should all want both men and women to do well and right now men need help." That triggers the leftist desire for collectivism and cooperation.

Tucker Carlson is running a Men in America segment every Wednesday this month about how men are in trouble these days. He provides a ton of stats and statistics on the topic. I'll edit this if I can find links to the segments.

March 7 Tucker: Something ominous is happening to men in America

March 14 Tucker: Washington not worried about male wage crisis

With any of these books, I highly recommend looking up video interviews with the authors to get more information and to see how they condense their arguments.

The war against boys: How Misguided Feminism Is Harming Our Young Men by Christina Hoff Sommers.



Men on Strike: Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood, and the American Dream - and Why It Matters Paperback –
by Helen Smith PhD


Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010 Paperback – January 29, 2013
by Charles Murray



The gender gap stuff has been going on since the 1970s. Economist Thomas Sowell, student of Milton Friedman, has been explaining how asinine the claim is for decades. Here he is dismantaling it back in the 1970s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_sGn6PdmIo

[Here is another take down from more recently.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EK6Y1X_xa4
) This interview covers his book Economic
Facts and Fallacies, the chapter Male-Female Facts and Fallacies would be a good resource for you to read and take notes on concerning the pay gap myth. Here are some good quotes from that chapter.

>“History shows that the career paths of women over the course of the twentieth century bore little resemblance to a scenario in which variations in employer discrimination explain variations in women’s career progress.”

> “The proportion of women in professions and other high-level positions was greater during the first decades of the twentieth century than in the middle, all before anti-discrimination laws or the rise of the feminist movement.” Further, “There is no pay gap for full-time workers 21-35 living alone,” and, “As far back as 1969, academic women who never married earned more than academic men who never married.”

>In another study, from 2005, “Among college-educated never married individuals with no children who worked full time and were from 40 to 64 years old, men averaged $40,000 a year and women $47,000.” What, then, explains cases when the numbers tilt the other way?

Here is a transcript of the above interview. Here is a good one...

>Interviewer: Well, you're right. I'm gonna quote you again. "Among the many factors which influence male-female economic differences, the most elusive is employer discrimination."

>Dr. Sowell: Yes, that when you correct for all the various factors such as the number of hours worked, the continuous employment versus taking a few years out to have children and so on, you take all that into account, the differences between men and women become quite trivial. If you look at the academic world or as far back in 1969, women who were
never married and earn higher incomes than men would never marry. They became
tenure professor at a higher rate than men who would never marry. And then later on if
you look at the general population, if you take the women who are past the childbearing
years and they work continuously, their incomes were higher than men who would work
continuously and so on. So the difference is that not that the employer is paying them
differently, but that they have different characteristics.

>Interviewer: So, the central variable and explaining economic differences between men and
women is not employer discrimination, not the rise of feminism, it's that women--it's
child rearing, marriage and child rearing, that's the variable.

>Sowell: Yes.

>Interviewer: As that varies, a woman's arrival or participation rate in higher level occupations
varies with that, that's—

>Sowell:Absolutely.

>Interviewer: Okay. Now in principle, you note, family responsibilities could be perfectly evenly divided between fathers and mothers. But that isn't the way it has worked in practice.
Quote, I'm quoting you again. "Since economic consequences follow from practices
rather than principles, the asymmetrical division of domestic responsibilities produces
male-female difference in income." Question, what are the policy implications of that?
If we become fixed on eliminating male-female income differences, is it the case that the
only choice, the only route for doing that is to involve the government in redesigning the
very nature of the family?










The Pay Gap Myth and Other Lies That Won’t Die
By THOMAS SOWELL


Thomas Sowell takes down the gender 'wage' gap


***

Milton Friedman - Case Against Equal Pay for Equal Work - Professor Friedman explains how support for "equal pay for equal work" helps promote sexism.

This is an interesting argument but to fully understand what he is referring to you need to understand that minimum wage laws have traditionally been used as a way to oppress weaker social groups.
If there is any work where being a man or being a woman makes an individual more qualified for a job or better suited to the job, then the only power the unsuited party has is to offer to work for less money. If you insist on equal pay though you remove that one economic incentive the less desired group has to convince someone to hire them, they cost less.

This is captured well in the generally true claim "No man hates another more than he loves himself." You can be the biggest racist or sexist in the world but it's very rare for that prejudice to be motivating enough that you would see your business where you derive your livelihood and the security of your children fail just to spite someone. There are so many examples of very racist people putting their prejudices aside in order to hire minorities simply because it's cheaper to do so. Establishing equal pay or minimum wage laws completely removes the economic incentive to put your own prejudices aside. They remove greed as a motivating factor for giving people opportunity.

Economist Walter E Williams has written a book on this called South Africa's War Against Capitalism based on his study of the country during apartheid. Milton is making a similar argument against equal pay as Williams did concerning minimum wage. Williams point was that if you have racism in a society where people are irrationality predisposed not to hire a certain group, then the only power that group has to get a job is to offer to work for less. That's why white, racist labor unions have always been the ones to push minimum wage laws when confronted by a minority population competing for jobs. You saw the same thing happen in the US when black men moved North and competed with white laborers for railroad jobs. The white unions pushed for our first minimum wage laws which removed the economic incentive from employers to hire minorities.

If you take the feminist argument seriously, that there is rampant sexism in certain industries, then it makes no sense to force those industries to pay women an equal amount. Rather than hiring them despite their sexism because they can pay them less, those employers will simply stop hiring women altogether because they hate women. To me this shows the irrationality of the claims that feminist make about sexism being the cause of a lack of representation in certain fields. It's not because of sexism but because of self-selection. In countries with higher levels of gender equality you see even higher rather of self-selection in jobs. There are far more women in tech in countries that rate low on women's rights. Russia for example.

Economist Walter E Williams - Minimum Wage as a Racist Tool 2:20

u/actingverystrangely · 21 pointsr/OneY

I down voted you because the content of your post is so poor. Erasing male experience of domestic violence and portraying men as sole perpetrators is the purpose of the Duluth model. This is not "try(ing) to make the world a better, safer place", this is part of a structured program of communication and actions to discriminate against men.

Think I'm exaggerating? Read this

>"...doesn't do it exactly right"

In the same way that Jackie at UVA was trying to win back her crush, but didn't exactly do it right?

u/Mr_Biophile · 21 pointsr/altright

.

More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion. http://www.citylab.com/housing/2013/11/paradox-diverse-communities/7614/

Diversity increases psychotic experiences. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity increases social adversity. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin. http://www.pnas.org/content/108/4/1262.abstract

Ethnic diversity harms health for hispanics and blacks. http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300787

Babies demostrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-whites. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01138.x/full

Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~axe/research/AxHamm_Ethno.pdf

Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

Ethnic diversity reduces concern for the environment. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10640-012-9619-6

Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust. http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/130251172/Dinesen_S_nderskov_Ethnic_Diversity_and_Social_Trust_Forthcoming_ASR.pdf

Ethnic diversity directly reduces strong communities. https://www.msu.edu/~zpneal/publications/neal-diversitysoc.pdf

Ethnically homogenous neighborhoods are beneficial for health. https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/living-ethnically-homogenous-area-boosts-health-minority-seniors

Diversity in American cities correlates with segregation. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-most-diverse-cities-are-often-the-most-segregated/

Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational. http://www.amazon.com/The-Ethnic-Phenomenon-Pierre-Berghe/dp/0275927091

It is evolutionary rational to be friends with someone genetically similar to you. http://www.livescience.com/46791-friends-share-genes.html

Racism and nationalism are rational and evolutionary advantageous strategies. http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

u/LucifersHammerr · 20 pointsr/MensRights

A Reference book of men's issues is probably your best bet for finding relevant studies.

[MRRef] (https://www.reddit.com/r/MRRef/) is more extensive but will require more digging.

Videos:

The Red Pill (NYA)

Everything by Karen Straughan

Everything by Janice Fiamengo

Books:

[Is There Anything Good About Men?] (https://gendertruce.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/baumeister-roy-is-there-anything-good-about-men.pdf) (full book online) by Roy Baumeister

The Myth of Male Power: Why Men are the Disposable Sex by Warren Farrell

The Privileged Sex by Martin Van Creveld

The Second Sexism: Discrimination Against Men and Boys by David Benetar

The Fraud of Feminism (full book online) by Earnest Belford Bax

Who Stole Feminism? by Christina Hoff Sommers

The War Against Boys by Christina Hoff Sommers

Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young

Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young

Sanctifying Misandry: Goddess Ideology and the Fall of Man by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young

Replacing Misandry: A Revolutionary History of Men by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young

No More Sex War by Neil Lyndon

A few works that I think deserve more attention. Some are directly related to Men's Rights, others tangentially.

Hierarchy in the Forest: The Evolution of Egalitarian Behavior by Christopher Boehm

War, Peace, Human Nature: Converging Evolutionary & Cultural Views by Douglas Fry et. al

Female Forms of Power and the Myth of Male Dominance: A Model of Female/Male Interaction in Peasant Society (paper online) by Susan Carol Rogers

Favoured or oppressed? Married women, property and ‘coverture’ in England, 1660–1800 (paper online) by J. Bailey

The Mothers: A Study of the Origins of Sentiments and Institutions (full book online) by Robert Briffault

Gynocentrism: From Feudalism to the Modern Disney Princess by Peter Wright

Sex and Culture (full book online) by J.D. Unwin

The Manipulated Man (full book online) by Esther Villar

Unknown Misandry (website)

Real Sexism (website)

u/Vwar · 20 pointsr/MensRights

Misandry is not only normal it is institutionalized

u/cuntdishuns · 19 pointsr/altright

It's not about obvious conflicts like race riots, so much as it's a general lack of social cohesion. Here are some examples I've copied from another comment on how diversity degrades quality of life.

More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion. http://www.citylab.com/housing/2013/11/paradox-diverse-communities/7614/

Diversity increases psychotic experiences. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity increases social adversity. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin. http://www.pnas.org/content/108/4/1262.abstract

Ethnic diversity harms health for hispanics and blacks. http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300787

Babies demostrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-whites. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01138.x/full

Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~axe/research/AxHamm_Ethno.pdf

Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

Ethnic diversity reduces concern for the environment. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10640-012-9619-6

Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust. http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/130251172/Dinesen_S_nderskov_Ethnic_Diversity_and_Social_Trust_Forthcoming_ASR.pdf

Ethnic diversity directly reduces strong communities. https://www.msu.edu/~zpneal/publications/neal-diversitysoc.pdf

Ethnically homogenous neighborhoods are beneficial for health. https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/living-ethnically-homogenous-area-boosts-health-minority-seniors

Diversity in American cities correlates with segregation. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-most-diverse-cities-are-often-the-most-segregated/

Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational. http://www.amazon.com/The-Ethnic-Phenomenon-Pierre-Berghe/dp/0275927091

It is evolutionary rational to be friends with someone genetically similar to you. http://www.livescience.com/46791-friends-share-genes.html

Racism and nationalism are rational and evolutionary advantageous strategies. http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

u/Mytecacc · 18 pointsr/MensRights

A lot of it is born out of feminisms covering up of abuse and using the false claim that abuse is mainly patriarchal to demonise and legislate against men.

The fathers rights movement is in response to feminist jurisprudence in family and divorce law discriminating against men.

The issue with education is feminism making false claims that girls were being held back in school back when boys and girls were doing equally well, and using the false claims as justification to slant the system in favour of girls.

The issue with patriarchy theory is that its a hatefully conspiracy theory.

The objections to the feminist abuse industry is that its discriminates against everyone bar heterosexual women.

http://www.amazon.com/Legalizing-Misandry-Systemic-Discrimination-Against/dp/0773528628




u/TNXJHZ · 17 pointsr/TumblrAtRest

The book the writer was working on at the time, the strikingly but misleadingly titled Redneck Manifesto, is truly great. It's like a print version of the most biting, knowledgeable, and funny commentary at TiA—but written two decades ago. It was "ahead of its time," as people say when they don't know how long the world's already been the same kind of fucked up it is now.

Reviewers I'd expected to embrace it all had the same wrongheaded complaints about it. The first was that it's a "Marxist" book. Nobody (to this day) seemed to recognize it as a unique entry in a long tradition that's recently come to be called libertarian class analysis, a framework that the non-establishment right (and some of what refuses to call itself the "right" because "right" means redneck cooties) is just now finally coming (back) around to. It's the original, irrecuperable, not bullshit version of "privilege" talk, the one longed for by everyone who thinks there's something to it but it's gone too far now. That's not quite what happened.

Reviewers' other complaint was that too much of a book that said Redneck on the cover was about the proto-"hipster" scene the author lived in, the conspicuous alterna-consumers and self-obsessed public diarists ("'zine" makers) of the post-punk world. '90s tumblrinas! He accurately pegged their cultish pen-pal network as a hazardously overspilling poison vat of hypocritical upper-class white assholery, cultivated pseudo-illness and pseudo-guilt, etc.—everything that makes us here today wonder "Where the fuck did all this shit come from?!"

He saw it first. He even predicted the "trucker hat" fad and the return of lumberjack beards. How the fuck?!

A lot of Goad's other work is crazy and/or trollin', but Redneck is a monster truth bomb about the one thing he truly understands. Non-referrer Amazon link because Thought Catalog is fuccbois. Best $1 (plus shipping) you can spend right now.

u/mwatwe01 · 16 pointsr/AdviceAnimals

This phenomenon is covered in the book Black Rednecks and White Liberals by Thomas Sowell. The basic premise is that one of the root causes for poverty is not race, but behavior.

Prior to the Civil War, there were free, moderately successful blacks living in the North. After the war, freed slaves gradually learned oafish behavior from their white trash neighbors. Then they moved north and brought their "culture" with them, slowly displacing the existing culture, which placed more of a value on marriage and education.

u/George_Rockwell · 16 pointsr/subredditoftheday

> Any different between races is negligible to the point that social conditions can make up for them.

You're gonna want to hold onto your tendies for this one:

Humans can be genetically categorized into five racial groups, corresponding to traditional races.
http://pritchardlab.stanford.edu/publications/pdfs/RosenbergEtAl02.pdf

Genetic analysis "supports the traditional racial groups classification."
http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf

"Human genetic variation is geographically structured" and corresponds with race.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15508000

Race can be determined via genetics with certainty for >99.8% of individuals.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15625622

Oral bacteria can be used to determine race.
http://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-10-oral-bacteria-fingerprint-mouth.html

Race can be determined via brain scans.
http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(15)00671-5

96-97% of whites have no African ancestry.
http://www.theroot.com/articles/history/2013/02/how_mixed_are_african_americans.3.html

97% of Whites have no black ancestry whatsoever.
http://www.unz.com/isteve/nyt-white-black-a-murky-distinction-grows-still-murkier/

There was "minimal gene flow" between archaic Europeans and Asians.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/20/science/20adapt.html

Common-sense racial categories have biological meaning.
http://www.ln.edu.hk/philoso/staff/sesardic/Race2.pdf

Human intelligence is highly heritable.
http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v16/n10/abs/mp201185a.html

Scientific consensus is that IQ tests are not racially biased.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289608000305

Very poor Whites are comparably intelligent to very wealthy blacks.
http://www.jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html

Privately, intelligence experts hold more hereditarian views than they express in public.
http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1994egalitarianfiction.pdf

Black children raised in White households have similar IQs to black children in black households.
http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1977-07996-001

The average African IQ is estimated at 79.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912003741

The average African-American IQ is 85, compared to the average White IQ of 100.
http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1997mainstream.pdf

The white-black gap in SAT scores, a proxy for IQ, is increasing.
http://www.jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html

Genes for large brains, linked to high IQ, are common everywhere except Africa.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB115040765329081636

Intelligence has a 40-50% genetic basis.
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/10/news/la-heb-genetic-study-intelligence-20110809

IQ scores are the best predictor of success in Western society.
http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf

IQ is 75% heritable among Whites.
http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf

More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion.
http://www.citylab.com/housing/2013/11/paradox-diverse-communities/7614/

Diversity increases psychotic experiences.
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity increases social adversity.
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes.
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin.
http://www.pnas.org/content/108/4/1262.abstract

Ethnic diversity harms health for hispanics and blacks.
http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300787

Babies demostrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-whites.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01138.x/full

Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin.
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~axe/research/AxHamm_Ethno.pdf

Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group.
http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

Ethnic diversity reduces concern for the environment.
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10640-012-9619-6

Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust.
http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/130251172/Dinesen_S_nderskov_Ethnic_Diversity_and_Social_Trust_Forthcoming_ASR.pdf

Ethnic diversity directly reduces strong communities.
https://www.msu.edu/~zpneal/publications/neal-diversitysoc.pdf

Ethnically homogenous neighborhoods are beneficial for health.
https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/living-ethnically-homogenous-area-boosts-health-minority-seniors

Diversity in American cities correlates with segregation.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-most-diverse-cities-are-often-the-most-segregated/

Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Ethnic-Phenomenon-Pierre-Berghe/dp/0275927091

It is evolutionary rational to be friends with someone genetically similar to you.
http://www.livescience.com/46791-friends-share-genes.html

Racism and nationalism are rational and evolutionary advantageous strategies.
http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism.
http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality.
http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

There is extensive evidence people prefer others who are genetically similar.
http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/n&n 2005-1.pdf

u/throwaway37421 · 15 pointsr/asktransgender

> if I have a ton of POC family whom I never saw as any different until people got angry for me for seeing them as equals, how could I be racist?

Colorblindness ("I don't see race") is a step backwards. See this book.

>Actual racists aren't friends with people of color

Considering how it's a cliche now that racists say "But some of my best friends are black!," this is also bullshit.

u/squeezebuttmagic · 15 pointsr/worldnews

That might be true for a small minority of black Republicans, but the reasons Black Republicans vote GOP are varied, and the vast majority of them are very well-educated people who feel that Democrats are very [subtly] racist, reinforcing dependence and victimhood in blacks and using them to feed their savior complexes.

In fact, if you look at the largest Black church congregations, the preachers heavily endorse Democratic candidates. Over 90% of blacks vote democrats, and most of them are religious.

There are books written on this issue, as well as talks with various members of the black community.

You might want to listen to what they have to say instead of making assumptions for them, which is pretty much what the left has always done.

There is a whole series of these talks.

There are books about this by John McWhorter, Thomas Sowell

Some minorities loathe the victim complexes within their communities and the removed intellectuals in their ivory towers who tell them what they need.

EDIT thank you, for proving exactly what I said by down voting me, and proving exactly what they all express during those talks.

Assuming that all black people are a hivemind who have to vote in the exact same way. The horrifying notion that highly educated black people might have a different opinion, must be religion. They simply can't think for themselves. /s

u/VirginWizard69 · 14 pointsr/Conservative
u/divertissemang · 14 pointsr/sweden

Jag tycker det är okej att betala så mycket till fattiga länder så att vår välfärd försvinner, men jag tycker inte det är okej att betala ineffektivt. Dvs att hjälpa de som kommit till västvärlden, istället för att hjälpa i närområdet.

Etnisk heterogenitet inom ett område sänker det sociala kapitalet.

Inte ens genom att i teorin kombinera alla kända insatser lyckas man i genomsnitt åtstadkomma den etniska homogenitetens höga sociala sammanhållning (Neal & Neal 2013)

Andra effekter av ökad etnisk heterogenitet inom ett område är att de försämrar ekonomi, demokrati (Vanhanen, 1999), altruism (Salter, 2004), villighet att investera i det allmänna (Alesina, Glaeser & Sacerdote, 2001; Salter, 1999; Schubert & Tweed, 1999) och ökar korruption (Easterly & Levine, 1997).

Desstuom ökar risken dramatiskt för för etniska konflikter (Vanhanen, 2012) samt (Van Der Bergh, 1987)

Dessa problem, bl a brist på trygghet och tillit skapar en störande skolmiljö som försämrar de nya generationernas möjligheter att utbilda sig till de exceptionella nivåer som ett toppland bland kunskapsländer kräver.

Kom ihåg att de vetenskapliga och teknologiska framsteg som världens främsta åtstadkommer kommer så småninom hela världen till nytta. Så när man sackar den globala spjutspetsmotorn så får Eritrea färre nya hjälpmedel att resa sig ur fattigdom med.

u/Blackbelt54 · 14 pointsr/communism

Not all of these are ML and not all of them are that recent, but here's some good Marxist books written by women & trans comrades:

u/sayoneko · 12 pointsr/asktransgender

According to at least one book I've read, transgender people were recognized in a number of civilizations that would predate the Greeks by a few thousand years. They tended to be widely recognized and respected among communal, matriarchal and hunter-gather type societies. It was the emergence of patriarchy that forced the division of people into male/female binary categories for reasons of power, inheritance and such in patriarchal cultures, and that's when the repression of trans began. Hermaphroditus came to the game very late...

u/[deleted] · 12 pointsr/videos

When you control for all of the things you're mentioning, blacks are still convicted more often and receive harsher penalties than their white counterparts.

This is a well established, well researched, well documented fact of social life.

Google scholar can pull up more articles on structural racism than anyone cares to read. A good book to start with is "Racism Without Racists", which addresses some of the softer parts of racism.

u/notallittakes · 12 pointsr/sjsucks

Naturally, almost all white people are like this.

They start by defining a contradictory term:

> Colour-blind racism

Gender-blind sexism anyone? Use contradictions to increase the edge!

> is racism that acts as if skin colour does not matter – even when it does.

This could be an interesting concept. Too bad they forget to write about it.

> also known as aversive racism

It's not, actually. Good thing they mentioned this though, because that seems to be what the rest of the post tries to talk about.

I don't really know what to say about this. Is it a strawman? It seems contradictory on multiple levels, and they never actually describe a racist behavior. They seem to just be saying that they're oppressed because white people just think racist things while somehow not realizing it. Then they complain about white people stereotyping others, while stereotyping white people like crazy.

What really gets me though is simply the terminology. It's not enough to call it racism, or 'stealth racism' or 'subconscious racism' - simply saying exactly what you mean is not postmodern enough. Apparently this particular term was made popular by a book which:

  • Sets up a case of a white person discriminating
  • Asserts that the white person is not a racist
  • Concludes that you can have racism without racists

    I just can't anymore.
u/JackGetsIt · 12 pointsr/Libertarian

Sam Harris also defends and has conversations with Charles Murray; is Sam Harris a Nazi? Thaddeus Russell also agrees with the data and he's a lefty.

If a person puts on a lab coat and tests a thousand black people and white people and finds a variance in the data are they a Nazi?

You do know that Murrays IQ findings were one part of one chapter of a 800 page publication? You do know the co-author of The Bell Curve, Herrnstein, was one of the most respected social science researchers in the country?

Have you even read the Bell Curve? or unbiased summaries? Or any of the countless interviews where Murray systematically and repeatedly explains why he is not a supremacist in any way and tirelessly walks through what the data actually means. Should we start censoring academics because we don't like their data?

If a black researcher compiles data that shows a one percent 'average' advantage on jumping ability of black people is he a 'black supremacist? If a man compiles data that men have better spatial reasoning is he a misogynist? What if a women compiles the data?

If I put a level on the ground and it gives me a flat reading and I record that on a piece of paper does that make me a flat earther?

Nazism and White Supremacy are broad political ideologies with lots of made up data and cherry picked history to warp their followers to their toxic evil ideology. IQ data is not a political ideology and acknowledging that one particular IQ data set is true does not mean you subscribe to white supremacy.

Please recognize the insanity and lack of logic in what you are clumsily trying to suggest.


Edit. You do realize that this country ended slavery, ended Jim Crow, ended segregated schools and had a civil rights movement culminating in laws that enshrine protections for minorities? Why do you see racists around every corner? You realize that there are multiple black intellectuals that give strong arguments that systemic racism is gone in the US right?

Let go of identity politics, embrace MLK Jr., Not Malcolm X.

u/castiglione_99 · 11 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

According to the author of this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Black-Rednecks-Liberals-Thomas-Sowell/dp/1594031436/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1457129505&sr=8-1&keywords=black+rednecks

The bulk of white southerners can trace their ancestry to a region of England where the people were: Very religious, sexually promiscuous, prone to violence and under-valued education.

He mainly discusses how this affected black culture in the US since black and southern cultures are closely aligned but he also mentions that until the big diaspora of black southerners to the rest of the US, black northerners routinely outscored not only black southerners on school tests but also white southerners.

u/gELSK · 11 pointsr/RedPillWomen

// , Men are no longer the keepers of commitment, either.

Rollo Tomassi has written about this, as well.

The situation has become far more intense than Helen Smith predicted: https://www.amazon.com/Men-Strike-Boycotting-Marriage-Fatherhood/dp/1594037620

Here's a link to Rollo's article on the subject, which surprised me a great deal:

https://therationalmale.com/2016/08/21/the-key-masters/

Excerpt:

>For obvious reasons, highly desirable women, women at the peak of their sexual market valuation, are always the least concerned with men’s capacity to commit. They largely have the luxury to be selective, but furthermore the time at which women are at their highest SMV is usually the point at which men are still building upon their own. Eventually, commitment only has an appreciable value to a woman when she is most in need of it; when her SMV is in decline.

>I should also point out that men, the majority being Blue Pill Betas, are the most necessitous of a woman’s commitment when she is at her highest, his is an unproven commodity, and he appreciates the value of a woman’s commitment. Thus, most men look for a stable monogamy in their early to mid 20s, while more mature men who’ve had time to build their SMV into their mid to late thirties tend to be less concerned with monogamy. This is why we hear the constant drone of women bemoaning that highly valuable, supposedly peer-equitable men’s unwillingness to commit and settle down with women aging out of the sexual marketplace. Women are far less concerned with the commitment-readiness of young, unproven men who themselves would commit to even a women in the mid-range of her SMV.

>At the end here, I think it’s time Red Pill men disabuse themselves of the idea that they are the ‘gatekeepers’ of commitment, and rather employ their internalized Red Pill awareness and Game to be the ‘key masters’ of women. While I have no doubt that commitment can be a carrot on the stick for some women, the problem really lies in how that commitment is in anyway valuable and balance that knowledge with the fact that commitment, once given, becomes valueless and taken for granted when it’s established. The fact that you’d commit to a woman isn’t something that carries a relationship, no matter how badly she wanted it from you before.

>There really is no quid pro quo when it comes to commitment or value in believing you’re a gatekeeper of it.
~

u/Intertubes_Unclogger · 11 pointsr/watchpeopledie

I know what you mean, but it's not only a possible excuse, it's also one of the factual causes. When your whole world tells you that education and a job aren't an option, that crime is your destiny, it's extremely hard to choose a different path.

This book opened my eyes on the issue. The author isn't blind to the moral side of things but set out to describe a bad neighborhood in detail. It's a great but depressing read.

u/NicCageKillerBees · 10 pointsr/Pennsylvania

There's an interesting book about this, The Big Sort by Bill Bishop. It looks at how people have moved to areas that align more with their politics, consciously or unconsciously, over the past 50 years. Worth a read if you like this sort of thing.

u/etch_ · 10 pointsr/politics

I think that is a terrible response, to dismiss something because of where it comes from, not because of the content it contains.
How about an 88 year old black dude who grew up in Harlem and is a senior fellow at the hoover institute?
https://www.amazon.com/Black-Rednecks-Liberals-Thomas-Sowell/dp/1594031436

u/adamwho · 10 pointsr/AgainstAtheismPlus

I have posted this before but I cannot say enough good about the book, Kindly Inquisitors: The New Attacks on Free Thought, which covers this type of PC censorship on college campuses.


http://www.amazon.com/Kindly-Inquisitors-Attacks-Free-Thought/dp/0226705765

u/Abraamus · 9 pointsr/unpopularopinion

> Facts don't care about your feelings

I'm glad you agree.

> Who told you it was a lie...?

Reality, common sense, and mountains of data.
__
> More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion.

>Diversity increases psychotic experiences.
____

>Diversity increases social adversity.

> A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes.
__
>Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships.
_
>Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life.
____
>Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health.
____

>Ethnic diversity harms health for Hispanics and Blacks.

>Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group.
____

>Ethnic diversity reduces concern for the environment.

>Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust.
____
>Ethnic diversity directly reduces strong communities.

> Ethnically homogeneous neighborhoods are beneficial for health.
__

> In America, more diverse cities have more segregation.


>Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism.


>States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality.


>There is extensive evidence people prefer others who are genetically similar.


>Borders, not multiculturalism, reduce intergroup violence.


>Diversity reduces charity and volunteering.


>People who live in diverse communities rather than homogenous ones are poorer and less educated.


>Black people trust their neighbors less than do White people.


>Spanish speakers trust their neighbors less than do English speakers.


>Asians trust their neighbors less than do White people.


>Ethnically diverse workplaces have lower cohesion, lower satisfaction and higher turnover.


>Ethnic diversity reduces social trust.


>Ethnic diversity among members of the same race reduces infrastructure quality, charity, and loan repayment.
__

>Diversity of any sort makes people more likely to defect in game theoretic scenarios.
__

>Homogeneous military units have less desertion than diverse units.


>Diversity correlates with low GDP.
____

>Ethnic homogeneity correlates with strong democracy.
__

>Genetic diversity causes societal conflict.
__

>Ethnic diversity causally decreases social cohesion.


>Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin.


>Babies demonstrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-Whites.
_

>Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin.
____

>Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational.


>Ethnocentrism is biological in origin and a superior evolutionary strategy to altruism.
__

>Humans are more altruistic to individuals who they are more closely related to.


>People subconsciously prefer those who are genetically similar to them for biologically rational reasons.


>Kinship between members of an ethnic group is greater than expected.


>Social trust is negatively affected by ethnic diversity: Case study in Denmark from 1979 to the present.


>Ethnic homogeneity and Protestant traditions positively impact individual and societal levels of social trust.


>“In longitudinal perspective, [across European regions], an increase in immigration is related to a decrease in social trust.”


>Immigration undermines the moral imperative of those who most favor welfare benefits for the neediest.


>The negative effect of community diversity on social cohesion is likely causal.


>In Switzerland, social peace between diverse factions isn’t maintained by integrated coexistence, but rather by strong topographic and political borders that separate groups and allow them autonomy.


>Increasing social pluralism (diversity) is correlated with increased chance of collective violence.
____


>In Germany, residential diversity reduces natives’ trust in neighbors, while it also reduces immigrants’ trust but through a different pathway.
_


>“Ethnic heterogeneity [diversity] explains 55% of the variation in the scale of ethnic conflicts, and the results of regression analysis disclose that the same relationship applies to all 187 countries."
__

>Genetic Similarity Theory (GST) could help explain why diverse groups in close proximity increases ethnic conflict and ethnic nepotism.
__

>Genetic diversity has contributed significantly to frequency of ethnic civil conflict, intensity of social unrest, growth of unshared policy preferences, and economic inequality over the last half-century.


>Using social science data and computer modeling, researchers found that policies that attempt to create neighborhoods that are both integrated and socially cohesive are “a lost cause”.


>The numbers and the genetic distance matter. Minority groups that get above a certain critical mass, and that are culturally distant from the majority culture, begin to self-segregate from the majority, moving society toward division and away from cooperation.


>School integration (forced proximate diversity) will not close race achievement gaps.


>As diversity increases, politics becomes more tribalistic.
_

>Company diversity policies don’t help minorities or women, and they psychologically discriminate against White men.
__

>Greater classroom and neighborhood diversity is linked to stronger tendencies to choose same-ethnic rather than cross-ethnic friends.
_


There's even more where that came from, but you should probably just take the L and move on.

(edit:Fixed some dead links, will fix the rest later. There's already more than enough there to discredit the baseless "diversity is our strength" neomarxist dogma though.)

u/Nachstenliebe · 9 pointsr/DebateFascism

I personally can connect better with people of my own race. That is not to say it is impossible for me or anyone to connect with someone of a different race, it is just easier. Humans evolved as social animals that live in tight-knit communities based on familiarity and trust. There actually have been many studies that have backed this idea up.

Just to link a few:


More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion.

A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes.

Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships. OP referred to this, and it's true.

Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life.

Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health.

Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group.

[Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust.] (http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/130251172/Dinesen_S_nderskov_Ethnic_Diversity_and_Social_Trust_Forthcoming_ASR.pdf)

Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin.

Ethnic diversity harms health for hispanics and blacks.

Babies demostrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-whites.

Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin.

Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational.

It is evolutionary rational to be friends with someone genetically similar to you.

Racism and nationalism are rational and evolutionary advantageous strategies.

Ethnically homogeneous neighborhoods are beneficial for health.

Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism.

States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality.

u/Aaod · 9 pointsr/FeMRADebates

Not /u suicidedreamer but this segmentation of society is not just online you also have multiple books written on it http://www.amazon.com/Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded-America/dp/0547237723/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1457777624&sr=8-1&keywords=the+big+sort

Even before that you had the removal of urban centers which were focus points/meeting grounds for exposure to people from different walks of life.

u/BlaiseDB · 9 pointsr/TheRedPill

On it's face, the organization she is writing for is traditional and counter-feminism. She puts the blame on feminism and in a very RP manner notes that men are the relationship gatekeepers.


However, it comes across as a dig to mention "perpetual adolescence". The "normal progression into adult roles of responsibility and self-sufficiency, roles generally associated with marriage and fatherhood" is more of an objective observation.


However, she doesn't go into any analysis like in, say, Men On Strike. No-fault divorce is probably the biggest factor. Why would you invest time, money, and emotion into a life that can be taken away from you for any reason or no reason at all?


IMHO, all the other factors are either secondary or are effects rather than causes.

u/veringer · 8 pointsr/todayilearned

Interesting hypothesis. There's also Thomas Sowell's book which argues that Black Americans inherited the old South's backward and violent culture of honor. I could see your suggestion fitting pretty nicely into that framework as well.

EDIT:

> Poor white people sit in their trailer parks smoking meth, not conspiring to kill a guy for not respecting them.

Piggybacking on my previous thought a little. It's worth noting that, actually, whites (poor or not) did conspire to kill guys for not respecting them. But it was primarily a feature of Southern culture (think: Hatfield and McCoys and The Caning of Charles Sumner) in bygone centuries. This phenomenon was is mentioned in Gladwell's Outliers. Interestingly there is an apparent modern artifact. Namely Southern men were found to have significantly heightened responses to perceived insults. You can read more about it here: http://gladwell.com/outliers/harlan-kentucky/

So, it may be that there's a slow cultural pacification process taking place. Maybe the most violent people are/have-been removing themselves from the planet. Maybe wider norms in America are showing that it's okay to not be violent. Maybe Sowell is on to something.

u/CyriusBloodbane · 8 pointsr/AskThe_Donald
u/TheOldGuy54 · 8 pointsr/MensRights

I lost respect for Feminists back when Bill Clinton was president . Two women brought sexual harassment cases against him. Even back then the feminist were saying we always have to believe the women in these cases. Until it was Bill Clinton and then Gloria Steinem and other feminist sided with the Clinton's

I am not a right wing conservative, But over the years I have seen feminist turn their back on a lot of women simply because they did not like their politics.

​

I agree with you that men's issues have been completely ignored and if you are a man and you speak up you are a misogynist. Some great books and a movie you might be interested in

​

The Boy Crisis

https://www.amazon.com/Boy-Crisis-Boys-Struggling-About/dp/1942952716

​

Men on Strike

American society has become anti-male. Men are sensing the backlash and are consciously and unconsciously going “on strike.” They are dropping out of college, leaving the workforce and avoiding marriage and fatherhood at alarming rates. The trend is so pronounced that a number of books have been written about this “man-child” phenomenon, concluding that men have taken a vacation from responsibility simply because they can. But why should men participate in a system that seems to be increasingly stacked against them?

https://www.amazon.com/Men-Strike-Boycotting-Marriage-Fatherhood/dp/1594037620/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1537219858&sr=1-1&keywords=men+on+strike

​

The movie " The Red Pill" I think it is on Amazon

u/Local_Human · 8 pointsr/politics

>You’re shooting yourself in the foot.

For the Jungians out there, as you know that’s what the trickster archetype does sooner or later. Whether the trickster is a super-genius Coyote or an overgrown stable-genius Oompah-Loompah. Trump is dominated by the trickster archetype.

https://www.amazon.com/Trickster-Makes-This-World-Mischief/dp/0374532559

u/CesarShackleston · 8 pointsr/WayOfTheBern

>It's important to note that this is a cultural phenomenon, not a political one.

I may be misunderstanding you but I'm not sure you're correct on this particular point. Cultural misandry is indeed being reflected in actual laws. See Legalizing Misandry by the Canadian academics Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young (both left-wingers, incidentally).

Indeed analyses of political discrimination against men go back to at least the late 19th century when the socialist Earnest Belfort Bax wrote The Legal Subjugation of Men (1896).

The very idea that males can suffer gender-based discrimination is extremely counter-intuitive for both men and women. This is in part because the male gender role is rooted in strength. The other problem is that most people in positions of overt power are male; however powerful men do not actually try to "privilege" other males; quite the opposite; males (unlike females) lack in-group preference and indeed tend to favor the opposite sex. Powerful men loving being chivalrous. Study after study has determined that there is a very large "empathy gap" between the sexes. Several have found eg if forced to choose between killing an innocent man or woman, both sexes will choose the man.

One academic, albeit an Israeli right-wing military strategist, has even claimed that females are and always have been the privileged sex. I wouldn't go that far, but it's pretty clear if you look at the statistical data alone that "patriarchy" hypothesis is fundamentally irrational. No, men don't want to oppress their own mothers and daughters, and no, males aren't privileged. Rich men, sure.

Since we're talking about feminism and political power, it's very interesting to note that there is probably a Machiavellian aspect to this as well. The first "gender studies" courses were financed by the Ford and Rockefeller foundations, and extreme anti-male feminism (what we would now call mainstream feminism) arose during the "COINTELPRO" era.

Left wing media analysis Mark Crispin Miller stated the following during Occupy Wall Street, after being accosted by feminist Laurie Pennie:

"It’s interesting to note that Ford and Rockefeller and the other foundations with strong CIA connections started giving grants in the early 70s to study race and gender. It was a sudden move towards identity politics by these organisations and the theory is that the reason they did this was to balkanise the left and to prevent it from pursuing any kind of a class or economic analysis. Without denying the justice of what you’re saying, this is not an irrelevant theory. I don’t think, anyway."

His opinion is bolstered by an FBI document from 1969:

"The Women’s Liberation Movement may be considered as subversive to the New Left and revolutionary movements as they have proven to be a divisive and factionalizing factor.... It could be well recommended as a counterintelligence movement to weaken the revolutionary movement.” This was from an August, 1969 report by the head of the San Francisco FBI office.[4] Within several years, the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations were pumping millions into women’s studies programs on campus.







If you actually look at the statistics you find that men and boys fare worse on practically every quality of life indicator. So at minimum, leftists need to abandon this "male privilege" nonsense.

u/Dreamboe · 8 pointsr/MensRights

>There can be no law that says "you're not allowed to hate other people", even though society considers it a big taboo.

lol hating men is the last thing from a "big taboo." It's literally institutionalized in every aspect of Western society.

u/Mauve_Cubedweller · 8 pointsr/AskFeminists

I used to be a huge fan of the Men's Rights Movement... like, a huge fan. I started buying into the MRM when I was working at a bookstore for a summer job, and I happened across the book "Spreading Misandry" in the psychology/social science section. Here was a book - published by a university press no less - that detailed all the ways that men were being systematically fucked over in society! Wow! I devoured it, and I was hooked. It told me all of the ways that I, as a white Canadian man, was being screwed, and it pointed out in a series of powerful arguments (or so I thought at the time) how movements like feminism had helped spread this toxic attitude that victimized men. From there it was a fairly simple step to reading the staples of the MRM like "The Myth of Male Power", and lurking on MRA and MRA-friendly websites. By the time I had begun my 3rd year of university I was an "egalitarian" with strong MRA leanings - you know, the usual stuff an MRA says when in public.

I rejected the reality of the pay gap; I refused to accept that feminists gave a shit about men in any way - or if they did, it was only so that the "radicals" among them could break men and make them weak. I smugly pointed out that only men had the desire - and strength - to work the really "dirty jobs" and that when men were depressed, they were the ones who would seriously and aggressively attempt suicide. I was also just beginning my trek into the realms of atheism and skepticism, so I basically rejected anything from the social sciences - especially that bullshit field of sociology - that disconfirmed my views.

And then, because I needed some credits, I decided that I'd take a couple of gender courses. After all, I was a pretty well-read amateur gender theorist: maybe I could argue my case in front of some professors and bring a little "balance" to those courses. After all, gender theory is basically the study of women; they would almost certainly be interested in hearing from the perspective of a man!

And then, in my first class, I saw the textbooks we'd be using: "Masculinities", and "The Men and the Boys", both by Raewyn Connell. Here was a gender studies course, taught by a straight up radical feminist, in the sociology department of my university, and the principle textbooks were almost exclusively about men and men's lives. And it only got worse from there. I was introduced to dozens of articles published through the "Men and Masculinities" journal (some of which appear in the textbook "Men's Lives", and unlike the books and blogs I was so familiar with, these articles had substance to them; they had empirical meat. I was in a space where the only evidence I would accept for any argument - no matter what it was for - had to come from hard, empirical data. And here it was, in black and white, so to speak. The material I read and the discussions I had in class scrutinized the concept of masculinity and the realities of men's lived experiences from a number of theoretical and empirical angles, and in doing so showed me without a shadow of a doubt, that the works I had been reading before were basically play-acting at being concerned about men's experiences. The work that had been dropped on me in these courses showed me what it really looks like to examine men's lives in detail - straight men, white men, gay men, trans men, men of colour and indigenous men; masculinities of huge variety and scope. And the overwhelming majority of people engaged in the study of men and men's lives were feminist or pro-feminist.

So to answer your question: it wasn't a single argument or source, and it wasn't a single perspective that "shifted my stance" towards feminism. It was the recognition of a massive, empirically-rigorous corpus of actual, honest research being conducted by feminists and pro-feminists from around the world - in defiance of the bullshit claims by the MRM that "no one" cared about men but them - that convinced me that the MRM was a festering boil of anger and bitterness, and that if I wanted to help men and understand men's lives, I needed to get on the level of the feminists whose work I'd end up relying on.

Because that's the punchline, I guess: I'm a sociologist now. I study men and men's lives; I've published papers on the subject, chaired conference committee meetings about it, and taught classes about it and not once have I ever - ever - been attacked, mocked or criticized by any feminists for it.

But I do occasionally get death threats from MRAs who read about the work I do and feel the need to silence it.

u/dan_blather · 8 pointsr/AskSocialScience

Cites you want?

There have been many studies done on the schools in Shaker Heights, Ohio, an affluent (generally middle class to very wealthy), racially integrated suburb of Cleveland. Even in one of the best funded districts in the state, black students perform worse than white students.

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/csd/summary/v044/44.6jackson.html

Black American Students in an Affluent Suburb presents an interesting departure from traditional studies of the Black and White achievement gap. A trio of elements made this study uniquely different. First, the school district is considered to be one of the best in the nation. Second, Shaker Heights is an upper middle-class suburb with a median family income of $66,000. Third, Shaker Heights is a highly educated community with an estimated 61% of the residents over 25 years old holding at least a bachelor's degree. The presence of these three elements, which are traditionally used to explain the achievement gap, adds a perplexing dynamic to the research contained in this book.

The gap in academic achievement between Black and White students in Shaker Heights led to the fundamental question that guided this research: Why do Black students, who seemingly have the appropriate conditions of life that should lead to academic success, still perform far below their White counterparts? Interestingly, the academic performance of Blacks in Shaker Heights was above the state and national average for Black students.

A few more cites:

http://www.amazon.com/Black-American-Students-Affluent-Suburb/dp/080584516X (considered the most authoritative study)
http://wesscholar.wesleyan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1565&context=etd_hon_theses (pdf)
http://generaltoolbox.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/the_canary_in_the_mine.pdf (pdf)
http://annenberginstitute.org/pdf/cj_acheivement_gap.pdf(pdf)


For several years, I lived in South Euclid, a lower middle- to upper middle-class, stably racially integrated suburb not too far from Shaker Heights. There was the same gap between black students and white students, with special programs at the high school targeted specifically towards black students to ensure they graduate.

http://www.clevescene.com/cleveland/class-action/Content?oid=1502634

TL/DR: the district didn't succumb to the soft bigotry of low expectations.

Meanwhile, district officials, led by Superintendent Bill Zelei, refused to let daunting national trends discourage them. Half of black male students drop out anyway. Why bother trying? They didn't ship the new arrivals to special ed or let them coast in dumbed-down classes. They didn't pull money out of the high school and into majority-white elementary schools. They kept the honors courses, the Japanese language instruction, the art classes, and the drama club.


u/WildBilll33t · 8 pointsr/AskMen

There are a few core psychological drives that compel men to do what they do. In no particular order:

Sex, obviously. Sexual dimorphism results in males on average having stronger libidos than women of similar demographic. Year+ dry-spells often lead men to suicide ideation.

Female companionship Ties in closely with sex, but is moreso the emotional connection component. Sex alone isn't enough to satisfy men's psychological needs; a supportive and loving partner is necessary. But on the flipside, a supportive female companion but lack of sex is also insufficient for healthy psychological functioning. Case study: /r/deadbedrooms

Male companionship Men generally seek esteem and reputation among their peers. For reference, the feeling a man gets when his fellow men look to him for leadership or admire his skills is similarly emotionally pleasurable as sexual release or close romantic moments. It's a very different type of emotional gratification, but is on a similar level of pleasurable intensity. This is what fuels male competitiveness.

Competence Along with social gratification from other males, men need to convince themselves of their own competence. A man that does not believe in himself is not psychologically healthy, regardless of how others view him.

Independence For most men, there is no greater disgrace than being a burden to others. Case study: chronic unemployment or underemployment is strongly correlated to suicide.

Purpose Ties in a good bit with male companionship and independence. Men want a cause. I know that personally, I feel much more driven, dilligent, and psychologically healthy when I know people are counting on me. I'd postulate than a cultural "lack of feeling of purpose" has contributed to increasing suicide rates as well. I'd also postulate that desire for purpose leads many men to military service or radical social movements. (Case study: Disaffected European men joinging ISIS)

There's a comment I read a while back about the "male romantic fantasy" which is incredibly insightful into the male psyche. I'll see if I can dig it up.

EDIT: Found it! Incredibly insightful comment chain on "the male romantic fantasy" (The third comment down is the one I want to especially draw attention to. Quoted below)

> The Male Romantic Fantasy
I'd say that men usually feel most loved when this normal state of affairs is negated; when they are made to believe that a woman's love is not conditional in the cause-and-effect manner described in the parent post. Love is work for men, but it can be rewarding work when things are going smoothly and the woman is happy as a result. But the male romantic fantasy is to be shown that the woman feels the same way and stands by him when he's down on his luck, when the money's not there, or when he's not feeling confident. He wants to know that the love he believes he's earned will stay even when the actions that feed it wane (however temporarily). A good woman can often lift a man up in his times of need and desperation and weather the storm even when things aren't going well. The male romantic fantasy is an enduring and unconditional love that seems to defy this relationship of labor and reward. A man wants to be loved for who he is, not for what he does in order to be loved.

> An interesting way to examine this is to look at what women often call romantic entitlement. An entitled guy is a dude who maintains an unrealistic notion of men's typically active role in love. Before acknowledging reality, this boy uncompromisingly believes that he shouldn't have to do anything or change anything about himself to earn a woman's love; he wants to be loved for who he is, not what he does.

> All men secretly want this, but there comes a day when they eventually compromise out of necessity. After that day, they may spend years honing themselves, working, shaping themselves into the men they believe women want to be chosen by. A massive part of what causes boys to "grow up" is the realization that being loved requires hard work. This impetus begins a journey where a boy grows into a man by gaining strength, knowledge, resources, and wisdom. The harsh realities of the world might harden and change him into a person his boyhood self wouldn't recognize. He might adopt viewpoints he doesn't agree with, transgress his personal boundaries, or commit acts he previously thought himself incapable of. But ultimately, the goal is to feel as if his work is done.

> When he can finally let go of the crank he continually turns day after day in order to earn love and, even if only for a moment, it turns by itself to nourish him in return, that is when he will know he is loved.

If you're up for more in depth reading, I recommend, "The Way of Men" by Jack Donovan. (Disclaimer: towards the end of the book, the author espouses some rather radical personal philosophical views. His personal views in no way reflect my own, but I still see his book as a fantastic window into the baser male psyche)

u/Cyhawk · 7 pointsr/TumblrInAction

http://www.amazon.com/The-Redneck-Manifesto-Hillbillies-Scapegoats/dp/0684838648

While it covers a lot of subjects from racism to classism and the 'liberal' (read: modern SJW movement, SJW didn't exist in 99ish). This book will blow your mind. It takes about the exact things that SJWs are, products of an entitled family so hateful they direct their hate to anything that doesn't conform to their preconceived ideas about what is. I don't do it justice, but it pretty much outlines everything they are. The most hateful, vile people you will ever come in contact with.

u/kanuk876 · 7 pointsr/reddit.com

misandry: (mis·an·dry): noun, hatred of males (Wikipedia link)

Books by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young:

Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture

Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men

u/MondoKai · 7 pointsr/TransyTalk

Not doing summaries/reviews, cause it's late and I'm tired. On request, I suppose. Mostly books, with a couple docs and a few blogs.


Less theory, more personal experiences:

u/ProsperosRage · 7 pointsr/news

>Actually, the fact that these conservatives were invited in the first place would suggest the opposite about academia.

Usually by much maligned campus groups, like The Federalist Society, College Republicans, and other organizations which liberals bunch their panties over. (Asuza's President made the call, among the usual cacophony of humanities student protest.)

I could cite entire books, like Allan Bloom's Closing of The American Mind or Bruce Bawer's The Victims' Revolution: The Rise of Identity Studies and the Closing of the Liberal Mind, both of which convincingly demonstrate the top-down liberal "worldview" (with blinders) of universities.

Look at the response toward Lawrence Summers at Harvard for suggesting cognitive differences between men and women are a partial source of women's lack of representation at the elite-level of STEM fields.

Or, for polling numbers:

>College Faculties A Most Liberal Lot, Study Finds

>By their own description, 72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal and 15 percent are conservative, says the study being published this week. The imbalance is almost as striking in partisan terms, with 50 percent of the faculty members surveyed identifying themselves as Democrats and 11 percent as Republicans.

u/gitesy · 7 pointsr/JordanPeterson

>He clearly was very knowledgeable in knowing how to generate so much attention to him and to win the election.

No one disputes this. They dispute that this is sufficient qualification for the highest office in the land. The very real concern and fear is that the President will no longer matter after Trump, because his behavior will necessitate circumventing his office to get anything done.

You simply declare that the people who oppose Trump have no reason for it, that it's simply rabid SJW college students and resentniks (Alan Bloom term). This tells me you don't know enough about American politics, because there is an almost limitless volume of credible, well reasoned, and well supported arguments against Trump and his policies available to you. Here's a sampling of decidedly non-SJW voices:

The Weekly Standard

The National Review

Commentary

The American Conservative

Reason


You've said that all the critics you've heard so far are SJWs. If you come back with the canard that all these conservative and libertarian voices I just listed are RINOs or 'insiders', then ask yourself whether you're not the one dismissing all critics with name calling.

u/earwaxremovalsystem · 7 pointsr/pussypassdenied

It has little to do with race. The driver was black and very decent.

Read Black Rednecks and White Liberals by Thomas Sowell for a better understanding.

u/JihadNinjaCowboy · 7 pointsr/MGTOW

My friend, you are correct but late:

Men ARE starting to stop agreeing to get married:

https://www.amazon.com/Men-Strike-Boycotting-Marriage-Fatherhood/dp/1594037620/

And it Western society is already rotting from within.

u/Grant1412 · 7 pointsr/MGTOW

>the manipulated man

It looks very interesting:

https://www.amazon.com/Manipulated-Man-Esther-Vilar/dp/1905177178

I like the top review.

u/mwobuddy2 · 7 pointsr/unpopularopinion

u/Pleasedontstrawmanme u/Umbly u/maluno22

In context, its about a minority of women who claim the large F (feminism) who scream and bray about 'objectification' which was an invented idea by large F, as a means of shaming and dominating sexual discussion and behavior.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVYiJV_1IwM


Consider the fact that women attack others through Reputation Destruction rather than punches to the face. Consider also that big F has always described and reduced sexual activity down to Power Games, Power Dynamic, etc.

Within the context of PD and PG, the term objectification makes sense. They have literally been pounding away at these memes since the 1960's, to shift the narrative from "people are selfish and sometimes want to just have sex with someone for pleasure" to "men, specifically, objectify women by desiring them sexually without knowing anything about their family life or their accomplishments, or lack thereof".

To put it another way, does a lion or chimp objectify potential partners because its horny and just wants to screw the other? if humans are an extension of basic animal behavior, then objectification has to be something all species do. But you can see the problem with this because objectification is defined by large F as willful and intentional degradation of others, and I don't think any animals, even humans, are doing that simply because they find something attractive.

If there's one thing you notice among large F people who discuss objectification, they typically fall WELL outside social norms of beauty. The suffragette panels of the early 1900's looked like a leper colony.

https://www.amazon.com/Manipulated-Man-Esther-Vilar/dp/1905177178

Consider the fact that today merely questioning the honesty and integrity of large F or people who cry about objectification gets you attacked and shamed nearly universally in the western world. Consider also the fact that narcissism, sociopathy, and psychopathy exist in women just as much as it does in men, and the fact that such people are NOT 100% raving lunatics, but often careful and meticulous in playing with others and looking for power and dominance over others. Consider that every group or movement can be co-opted by people with truly evil intentions and no actual connection to humanity.

Consider that all of this "women are wonderful" business has provided the PERFECT cover for female narcissists, sociopaths, etc, to abuse, shame, humiliate men in general or specific for any man transgressing against women by "objectification" while not being sexually valuable.

What's that joke? How to avoid sexual harassment. Step 1: Be attractive. Step 2: Don't be unattractive.

Women seem perfectly fine being "objectified" if the guy has some sort of value or attractiveness. I've met more than one woman who complained about their ex being "objectifying" or "sexist" AFTER breaking up from 3 years. And more than once this has involved really decent guys who actively tried to keep the relationship together.

In particular, there was one woman who claimed her ex tried to rape her, which is completely ridiculous because she was always a slut and was once fucking 3 different guys before she got with her boyfriend, he is not a rapist and he's now happily married to a non-psycho, and she consistently gets drunk and tries to have sex with the nearest pole. There's no need for him to try to rape her. And when she talked about it, there weren't any details, it was just vague suggestion. This same person also showed me texts of another guy talking about his dick to her, and she was pretending to be upset about it, but it was really a demonstration of sexual value because she had been fucking this guy previously and was using him as a form of narcissistic supply, for sex and attention, when she was lonely, and then shit talking him when she wasn't. She's been PUA spinning him as a plate for 2 years.

What this comes down to is Reputation Destruction as Revenge because of ill will and bad feelings, or laying the groundwork for sympathy, etc.

Maybe not all men have experienced the worst that there is in women, and they can count themselves lucky. Maybe they HAVE experienced the worst, but have been unable to understand it or reason it out because they've consistently been fed the narrative that men are predators and women are victims of men, and that "women are wonderful", so they can't conceive that women could be highly manipulative and that especially women who want to dominate would claim positions of authority, like large F, to manipulate men on a grand scale.

Just look at how women are benefiting from the double standard, able to behave that way while men basically cant. Look to who benefits and who is controlled, and you should see that its all a game of power.

u/simpleisideal · 7 pointsr/politics

Someone made a sub this time around to document the widespread absurdity:

/r/BernieBlindness

It's hard to not conclude the media aren't a corrupt monolith.

EDIT:

Noam Chomsky concluded this long ago:
Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media

Noam Chomsky​ Lecture with introduction by Bernie Sanders​

u/backtowriting · 7 pointsr/videos

You should read this short article by Jonathan Rauch:

The Case for Hate Speech

Rauch has also written a very good book about the subject. Rauch thinks that no, you can't ever define the line what constitutes hate speech and that it's never a good idea to outlaw any type of speech.

u/theredknight · 7 pointsr/AskHistorians

Personally, I'd argue that the archetype of the trickster is one of the oldest there are. One book you might be curious to read is Trickster makes the World by Lewis Hyde. Hyde goes through the more elements of trickster characters, such as Hermes, Coyote, or Raven very well and outlines their common patterns.

Essentially, the reason I expect trickster archetype to be very old (might not always have been a coyote) is that it is a very common archetype worldwide and due to something else, a hypothesis I'm sort of working on.

Now, that hypothesis hinges on one interesting motif: If you want to get a trickster to reveal itself when it is cloaked, is to spread some filth around and it is forced to roll in it. (See African Mbulu stories as one example)

If I were to take my own dog, who is a sweet lab mix. He has no cunning or trickery in him. He is straightforward, predictable and extremely well mannered. The only time he ever ever does anything to "trick" is when he finds filth to roll in, to hide his scent. That is truly the only trick he knows.

So my theory is, that if evolutionarily this is the first trick, or the origin of the archetypal pattern which later in our bigger brains became the idea of the trickster, then this 'character' must be very old because it is common in lots of animals as a form of disguising themselves. That's just my hunch but I hope it helps, and I'd love feedback on what you all think as well.

Edit:

Since we're dealing with the topic of Tricksters and tricks, I felt the need to hide one in this post. Have fun!

u/drewcordes · 6 pointsr/asktransgender

Tell her to do the work herself. She is a professional therapist, that's her job! I guarantee you aren't the first or last person she'll see with gender issues.

Books:
http://www.amazon.com/Transgender-Emergence-Therapeutic-Guidelines-Gender-Variant/dp/078902117X

http://www.amazon.com/Trans-Bodies-Selves-Transgender-Community/dp/0199325359

u/-Kast- · 6 pointsr/nottheonion

Surely you're aware that the average "gun enthusiast" is more trained than the average law enforcement official, and also less likely to break the law (police are 23x times more likely to break the law than a concealed carrier)? See 1 and 2.

During the last study that was done (1993), Police were also more likely (1200x more likely) to accidentally shoot someone than a concealed carrier. See 3.

1: http://crimeresearch.org/2015/02/comparing-conviction-rates-between-police-and-concealed-carry-permit-holders/

2: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0226493644/ref=pd_sxp_elt_l1/102-3993670-7898564

3: http://crimeresearch.org/2015/02/cprc-in-fox-news-police-are-extremely-law-abiding-but-concealed-handgun-permit-holders-are-even-more-so/

u/FrogShepherd · 6 pointsr/altright

More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion.
http://www.citylab.com/housing/2013/11/paradox-diverse-communities/7614/

Diversity increases psychotic experiences.
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity increases social adversity.
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes.
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin.
http://www.pnas.org/content/108/4/1262.abstract

Ethnic diversity harms health for hispanics and blacks.
http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300787

Babies demostrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-whites.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01138.x/full

Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin.
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~axe/research/AxHamm_Ethno.pdf

Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group.
http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

Ethnic diversity reduces concern for the environment.
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10640-012-9619-6

Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust.
http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/130251172/Dinesen_S_nderskov_Ethnic_Diversity_and_Social_Trust_Forthcoming_ASR.pdf

Ethnic diversity directly reduces strong communities.
https://www.msu.edu/~zpneal/publications/neal-diversitysoc.pdf

Ethnically homogenous neighborhoods are beneficial for health.
https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/living-ethnically-homogenous-area-boosts-health-minority-seniors

Diversity in American cities correlates with segregation.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-most-diverse-cities-are-often-the-most-segregated/

Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Ethnic-Phenomenon-Pierre-Berghe/dp/0275927091

It is evolutionary rational to be friends with someone genetically similar to you.
http://www.livescience.com/46791-friends-share-genes.html

Racism and nationalism are rational and evolutionary advantageous strategies.
http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism.
http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality.
http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

There is extensive evidence people prefer others who are genetically similar.
http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/n&n2005-1.pdf

u/jessy0108 · 6 pointsr/Anthropology

For my Intro to Cultural Anthropology class last semester we read an ethnography called "In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in the Barrio" by Philippe Bourgois. It was an interesting read, very captivating and real. I really liked it.

u/yvaN_ehT_nioJ · 6 pointsr/MensRights

It's quite surprising. I just finished reading Spreading Misandry and though it was originally published in like 2000 (or shortly after) a lot of what it talks about either still rings true or has gotten worse. It takes a look at how pop-culture spreads misandrist ideas/values and how those came from certain circles of academia/marxism.

It's worth a read if for no other reason than to see how there were people talking about the same issues we worry about back in the 1990s. Pretty well referenced and has a decent chunk of the book just devoted to explaining why the two profs who wrote it included/talked about the issues they did.

u/mauritia · 6 pointsr/changemyview

That fear may be overblown but this is a thing that some people are doing-- making certain strong women from history who were uncomfortable with gender roles or wore men's clothing into trans men.

Here's a New Yorker piece suggesting Carson McCullers was really a trans man for no good reason: http://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/white-writer/amp

Here's a book about "transgender warriors" that includes Joan of Arc: https://www.amazon.ca/Transgender-Warriors-Making-History-Dennis/dp/0807079413

u/Cialis_In_Wonderland · 6 pointsr/Anarcho_Capitalism

I have many gay friends, so when I first shifted from an ideological libertinism to traditional value set, I was having trouble reconciling my views. Isn't the right supposed to hate gays? I am against cultural degeneracy, and homosexuality seems degenerate, so what does one make of it? Furthermore, the science clearly shows that homosexuality, whether an aesthetic preference or
"sexual orientation," is generally not a choice (though there is nuance).

Reading The Way of Men by Jack Donavan, who is gay, helped to clear this up for me. He argues that what we need to fight is not homosexuality, but the men who work to upend and destroy traditional masculine values (strength, honor, courage, mastery). The two heavily overlap, especially in urban circles, which leads to the association, but this still leaves a quite significant percentage of honorable gay men.

Interestingly, a counterculture is emerging among male homosexuals to distance themselves from their peers. They've been coopted by the Left, willingly, in exchange for sinecures like gay "marriage." This is what happens when you sell your soul; you no longer get to determine how it is used, and they are now open to blowback. The risk is that the public will take back all of their gains and then some, which the gays with foresight recognize in leaving L-BT behind.

u/QuietlyLearning · 6 pointsr/TheRedPill

I've heard good things about Vox Day. I haven't read much but there were a few good posts along our lines.

The book "The Way of Men" by Jack Donovan is a strong read for anyone.

u/OxKnowledge · 6 pointsr/CoonTown

His best book in my opinion is Black Rednecks, White liberals. It explores the degeneracy of black culture and how it was learned from whites in the south that brought their degenerate culture here from Scotland and England. I am black by the way. You should also read his autobiography, My Personal Odessey, so you can see how he developed his worldview. http://www.amazon.com/Black-Rednecks-Liberals-Thomas-Sowell/dp/1594031436/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1418434657&sr=8-1&keywords=Black+rednecks+white+liberals

u/shit-zen-giggles · 5 pointsr/JordanPeterson

>In terms of the bad legal climate, fight back dammit. Fight for yourself, your kids and everyone else’s kids.

Won't have any success. MRAs have been pushing that load for decades and gotten nowhere with it.

But men are becoming aware of their power.

The power to say no.

see: https://www.amazon.com/Men-Strike-Boycotting-Marriage-Fatherhood/dp/1594037620

​

u/Frilly_pom-pom · 5 pointsr/progressive

Awesome article.

For more, here's a decent documentary based on Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent:

>It's basically an institutional analysis of the major media, what we call a propaganda model[...] they do this in all sorts of ways: by selection of topics, by distribution of concerns, by emphasis and framing of issues, by filtering of information, by bounding of debate within certain limits. They determine, they select, they shape, they control, they restrict -- in order to serve the interests of dominant, elite groups in the society.

u/ddp · 5 pointsr/SandersForPresident

That was right out of Manufacturing Consent last night, if you ask me.

u/Sentennial · 5 pointsr/NeutralPolitics

In no specific order: The Dictator's Handbook: presents a realist perspective on international and intra-national politics, specifically it presents a real-world analysis of politics through the lens of Selectorate Theory.

Something from Chomsky, I'd say Manufacturing Consent or Understanding Power or both. Chomsky has written about 40 books so it's impossible to keep up with him and you may end up disagreeing on substantial points, but I think he's probably the most important to read because he situates his political analysis outside the invisible constraints of American political culture, and American political culture tends to be naive about the goals and methods of government and other institutions.

Watch this CGP Grey video and consider how it applies to political parties, political discourse, and political activism. Afterwards you should either read the meme wikipedia page or Dawkins' book The Selfish Gene.

Looking back I notice all my recommendations circle around studying politics itself as a phenomena, I don't know if that's what you meant but you might enjoy it. If you're more wondering which political stances you should take, decide that by which policies have empirical evidence of working and base your decisions on how robust you think the evidence is.

u/haroldp · 5 pointsr/worldnews

They had the story from an NSA informant (actually a FISA court lawyer). They were told by the Bush administration that "the terrorists would win" if they published it, so they buried it.

http://www.npr.org/2014/06/05/319233332/new-york-times-editor-losing-snowden-scoop-really-painful

If you want a better idea of the timeline on it, Frontline covered it pretty well.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/united-states-of-secrets/

If you want a better idea why the New York Times would cow-tow to the White House like that, Manufacturing Consent does a pretty good job of explaining the forces at play here (access, flack, anti-terror hysteria).

u/stemgang · 5 pointsr/guns
u/Matexqt · 5 pointsr/edefreiheit

Klingt für mich wie eine Wunschwelt.
"Es soll allen gut gehen".
"Jeder soll freie Bildung haben!"

Und wie will man so etwas machen?
"Keine Ahnung"

Wenn jeder Bildung umsonst kriegt, gibt es keine gute Bildung mehr. Es gibt keine millionen von Top-Professoren, die einer Hand voll von Superbegabten zur zukünftigen Intellektuellen Elite die etwas erreichen wird und das Volk bereichert, die magischerweise jeden unterrichten können.

Alles, absolut alles, auch gute Bildung, wird mit Blut und Schweiß erkämpft und über Jahrzehnte aufgebaut. Schau mal wie schnell wir alles zerstört haben. Die heutige Bildung ist ein absoluter Witz im vergleich zu den 30ern, unsere Frauen von heute sind schlechter gebildet als unsere Töchter im Mittelalter, sowie davor.

Klingt nach einem erfolgreichem Weltbild, muss man aber durch um die Realität zu sehen, schaffste schon haben wir auch gepackt.

PS: Ausländer sind keine Mitmenschen, sind höchstens deine Nachbarn. leider kenne ich nur des Buch, vllt gibts das iwo alsPDF

hier was anderes

u/scubachris · 5 pointsr/insanepeoplefacebook

In Search of Respect is a good way to understand how this happens. An anthropologist goes to East Harlem to study crack dealers in the 90's.

u/360-No-Stump · 5 pointsr/educationalgifs

A demographic shift taking place nationwide. This book puts it in a good context.

u/Stubb · 5 pointsr/WTF

His book Redneck Manifesto should be required reading in high school.

u/Menckenite3 · 5 pointsr/TumblrInAction

There is an excellent book on this subject called [The Redneck Manifesto: How Hillbillies, Hicks, and White Trash Became America's Scapegoats] (http://www.amazon.com/Redneck-Manifesto-Hillbillies-Americas-Scapegoats/dp/0684838648). Highly recommended for people who are interested social history.

u/DerpyGrooves · 5 pointsr/BasicIncome

This one by Allan Sheahen is considered to be one of the best books on the topic, and Allan Sheahen is one of the oldest supporters of UBI in America.

This one is also great, from a more libertarian perspective. Charles Murray is a well-respected libertarian thinker.

If you're looking for something academic, these textbooks are pretty awesome- one and two.

u/Deleetdk · 5 pointsr/slatestarcodex

Why don't you just read his book on the topic?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Our-Hands-Replace-Welfare-State/dp/0844742236

u/rhetoricetc · 5 pointsr/Feminism

Colorblind racism is a researched concept itself, you can read more about it here in lay terms or the actual scholarship here.

I also don't see them defining racism so much as explaining how they chose to measure racist attitudes given their data set. In academic settings racism is almost always defined as systemic, rather than your definition.

To answer your other questions, they likely rescaled variables to make the data easier to interpret and/or compare. To account for the oversampling, they used propensity score weights, which you can read about here.

u/themsc190 · 5 pointsr/Christianity

That’s what I’m saying. The laws don’t explicitly target Black people but they disproportionately affect Black people. It’s like what GOP strategist Lee Atwater said:

>Y'all don't quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."

Bonilla-Silva has discussed this in Racism Without Racists, terming it “color-blind racism.” And Bobo et al have called it “laissez-faire racism”. And, of course, Michelle Alexander’s The New Jim Crow is popular as well on the topic. If you don’t want to read a book or article, Ava DuVernay’s Netflix film 13th is insightful too. Examples abound. Take a look at the disparity in sentencing between crack cocaine and powder cocaine. They’re essentially the same drug, but the former is more likely to be found in Black communities and the latter is more likely to be found in white ones, but the former has much harsher penalties. Or look at sentencing for marijuana. Surveys show that white and Black people use and sell it at the same rate, but Black people are put in jail for marijuana offenses at a rate of 20 to 50 times more than white people. So I’d point to the example of the war on drugs, mass incarceration, and broken-windows policing as ways that racism has evolved.

u/Enailis · 4 pointsr/TheWire

http://www.amazon.com/Search-Respect-Structural-Analysis-Sciences/dp/0521017114/ref=la_B001IGHNIW_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1368699663&sr=1-1 this is a VERY intresting book about an anthropologist who studied crack dealers, its pretty cool.

u/Saltmineinspector · 4 pointsr/The_Donald

in the meantime read this

u/mr_egalitarian · 4 pointsr/FeMRADebates
u/greenishdragonfly · 4 pointsr/GenderCritical

I've heard of this book but never read it, so maybe I'm misunderstanding it, but I was quite surprised and disappointed to see this book by the same author in the Vancouver Women's Library catalogue.

https://www.amazon.com/Transgender-Warriors-Making-History-Dennis/dp/0807079413/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1486467745&sr=8-1&keywords=Transgender+Warriors%3A+Making+History+from+Joan+of+Arc+to+Dennis

Joan of Arc?

u/Bizkitgto · 4 pointsr/C_S_T

A lot of what you are describing of the Trivium appears to be very similar to the (lost?) Liberal Arts: are those subjects or skills that in classical antiquity were considered essential for a free person (Latin: liberalis, "worthy of a free person") to know in order to take an active part in civic life, something that (for Ancient Greece) included participating in public debate, defending oneself in court, serving on juries, and most importantly, military service. Grammar, logic, and rhetoric were the core liberal arts, while arithmetic, geometry, the theory of music, and astronomy also played a (somewhat lesser) part in education. LINK

I believe what you are talking about is summarized in the book: Closing of the American Mind

The liberal arts have been largely removed from education, and is de-emphasized in colleges and universities. I took STEM, and when I was in college liberal arts were looked down upon. It's only recently that I have taken up an interest in the liberal arts and I know have a profound respect for it. St John's university runs a very interesting course on The Great Books that looks fascinating, and is what I believe is missing from our modern education.

The Great Books Curriculum: The four-year program of study, nearly all of which is mandatory, demands that students read and discuss the works of many of Western civilization's most prominent contributors to philosophy, theology, mathematics, science, music, poetry, and literature.

The program involves:

  • Four years of literature, philosophy, and political science in seminar
  • Four years of mathematics
  • Three years of laboratory science
  • Four years of language (Ancient Greek, Middle/Early English, and French)
u/Lottabirdies · 4 pointsr/PoliticalVideo

If only people had started pointing this out a long time ago... 1987

u/BTC_Brin · 4 pointsr/Firearms

Actually, it isn't classism so much as a statement on culture, and an acknowledgement of the economic consequences thereof.

I suggest you read Thomas Sowell's book "Black Rednecks and White Liberals.": it does an excellent job of explaining how bad culture can act to prevent upward social mobility.

u/frugalNOTcheap · 4 pointsr/nba

Take it up with Thomas Sowell and his book

Even Barkley called Karl a redneck.

u/Kyrra · 4 pointsr/Conservative

Just tell them to go read https://www.amazon.com/Black-Rednecks-Liberals-Thomas-Sowell/dp/1594031436 to show them that way of talking came from northern England hillbillies. (Along with most of the "black culture" that seems cherished today.)

u/greetingstoyou · 4 pointsr/news

I would actually argue that it has more to do with men choosing not to marry...or date even. There's no economic or family incentive. A friend let me borrow this book a few weeks ago and it was eye-opening. It's one opinion, but an interesting read with some valid points.

Men on Strike: Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood, and the American Dream - and Why It Matters: http://www.amazon.com/Men-Strike-Boycotting-Marriage-Fatherhood/dp/1594037620/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1419206286&sr=8-1&keywords=men+on+strike

u/Salivon · 4 pointsr/unpopularopinion

To quote someone else in this thread.
> Facts don't care about your feelings

I'm glad you agree.

> Who told you it was a lie...?

Reality, common sense, and mountains of data.
__
> More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion.

>Diversity increases psychotic experiences.
____

>Diversity increases social adversity.

> A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes.
__
>Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships.
_
>Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life.
____
>Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health.
____

>Ethnic diversity harms health for Hispanics and Blacks.

>Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group.
____

>Ethnic diversity reduces concern for the environment.

>Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust.
____
>Ethnic diversity directly reduces strong communities.

> Ethnically homogeneous neighborhoods are beneficial for health.
__

> In America, more diverse cities have more segregation.


>Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism.


>States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality.


>There is extensive evidence people prefer others who are genetically similar.


>Borders, not multiculturalism, reduce intergroup violence.


>Diversity reduces charity and volunteering.


>People who live in diverse communities rather than homogenous ones are poorer and less educated.


>Black people trust their neighbors less than do White people.


>Spanish speakers trust their neighbors less than do English speakers.


>Asians trust their neighbors less than do White people.


>Ethnically diverse workplaces have lower cohesion, lower satisfaction and higher turnover.


>Ethnic diversity reduces social trust.


>Ethnic diversity among members of the same race reduces infrastructure quality, charity, and loan repayment.
__

>Diversity of any sort makes people more likely to defect in game theoretic scenarios.
__

>Homogeneous military units have less desertion than diverse units.


>Diversity correlates with low GDP.
____

>Ethnic homogeneity correlates with strong democracy.
__

>Genetic diversity causes societal conflict.
__

>Ethnic diversity causally decreases social cohesion.


>Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin.


>Babies demonstrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-Whites.
_

>Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin.
____

>Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational.


>Ethnocentrism is biological in origin and a superior evolutionary strategy to altruism.
__

>Humans are more altruistic to individuals who they are more closely related to.


>People subconsciously prefer those who are genetically similar to them for biologically rational reasons.


>Kinship between members of an ethnic group is greater than expected.


>Social trust is negatively affected by ethnic diversity: Case study in Denmark from 1979 to the present.


>Ethnic homogeneity and Protestant traditions positively impact individual and societal levels of social trust.


>“In longitudinal perspective, [across European regions], an increase in immigration is related to a decrease in social trust.”


>Immigration undermines the moral imperative of those who most favor welfare benefits for the neediest.


>The negative effect of community diversity on social cohesion is likely causal.


>In Switzerland, social peace between diverse factions isn’t maintained by integrated coexistence, but rather by strong topographic and political borders that separate groups and allow them autonomy.


>Increasing social pluralism (diversity) is correlated with increased chance of collective violence.
____


>In Germany, residential diversity reduces natives’ trust in neighbors, while it also reduces immigrants’ trust but through a different pathway.
_


>“Ethnic heterogeneity [diversity] explains 55% of the variation in the scale of ethnic conflicts, and the results of regression analysis disclose that the same relationship applies to all 187 countries."
__

>Genetic Similarity Theory (GST) could help explain why diverse groups in close proximity increases ethnic conflict and ethnic nepotism.
__

>Genetic diversity has contributed significantly to frequency of ethnic civil conflict, intensity of social unrest, growth of unshared policy preferences, and economic inequality over the last half-century.


>Using social science data and computer modeling, researchers found that policies that attempt to create neighborhoods that are both integrated and socially cohesive are “a lost cause”.


>The numbers and the genetic distance matter. Minority groups that get above a certain critical mass, and that are culturally distant from the majority culture, begin to self-segregate from the majority, moving society toward division and away from cooperation.


>School integration (forced proximate diversity) will not close race achievement gaps.


>As diversity increases, politics becomes more tribalistic.
_

>Company diversity policies don’t help minorities or women, and they psychologically discriminate against White men.
__


>Greater classroom and neighborhood diversity is linked to stronger tendencies to choose same-ethnic rather than cross-ethnic friends.


u/Desay · 4 pointsr/DebateAltRight

We shouldn't need science, since basic observation and understanding tells us everything we need to know, but cucks worship science as the new religion so it's useful to have on hand to hammer them with.

Some of the science, btw

“It is inaccurate to state that race is biologically meaningless.” Source: http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1435.html

Race is biologically real and represents “genetic clusters” of variation. Source: http://stx.sagepub.com/content/30/2/67.abstract

Humans can be genetically categorized into five racial groups, corresponding to traditional races. Source: http://pritchardlab.stanford.edu/publications/pdfs/RosenbergEtAl02.pdf

Genetic analysis “supports the traditional racial groups classification.” Source: http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf

“Human genetic variation is geographically structured” and corresponds with race. Source: http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1435.html

Race can be determined via genetics with certainty for >99.8% of individuals. Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15625622


Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin. Source: http://www.pnas.org/content/108/4/1262.abstract

Babies demonstrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-Whites. Source: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01138.x/full

Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin. Source: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~axe/research/AxHamm_Ethno.pdf

Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational. Source: http://www.amazon.com/The-Ethnic-Phenomenon-Pierre-Berghe/dp/0275927091

Ethnocentrism is biological in origin and a superior evolutionary strategy to altruism. Source: http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

Humans are more altruistic to individuals who they are more closely related to. Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17456276

People subconsciously prefer those who are genetically similar to them for biologically rational reasons. Source: http://www.psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/Genetic%20Similarity%201989.pdf

u/PrincessArjumand · 4 pointsr/AskHistorians

On the Roman side, you have the comedies of the author Plautus, which are actually adapted from Greek New Comedy. Greek New Comedy came around in the Hellenistic World, and was less of the raunchy fart jokes of Aristophanes (and is thus less fun), and more poking fun at social class. Menander is the only extant author we have of this type of comedy, but the Roman authors like Plautus translated some plays, and wrote others in the same tradition. These comedies are based on stock characters...the most popular of these is the "clever slave". My favorite of Plautus is Amphitryon, which mocks the parentage of Hercules...unfortunately, it's hard to find a good translation. Miles Gloriosus is also popular, and a fairly good translation is here.

Laughter in Rome was actually considered good luck in some instances, because it could divert the Evil Eye. For other instances of Roman laughter, check out satire in Juvenal and Martial. If you want to go earlier in the Greek world, there are a few lyric poets who make fun of people, such as Semonides.

I don't know about the eastern side of this, although I do know that tricksters such as those featured in the Chinese text Monkey were meant to be funny. It might at least give you a start for the east...wikipedia link here. It's a really fun read. Come to think of it, trickster tales from all sorts of cultures might help you...the book Trickster Makes This World.

u/energirl · 4 pointsr/Anthropology

Just read ethnographies on a subject or group that interests you.

One of my favorites in college was [In Search of Respect(]http://www.amazon.com/Search-Respect-Structural-Analysis-Sciences/dp/0521017114). Philippe Bourgeois was studying crack dealers in El Barrio (a mostly Hispanic are of New York City also called Spanish Harlem). It's a very good ethnography because it is objective, showing how social capital and other phenomena play a role in keeping the crack dealers from "going legit," yet it does not make apologies for the sometimes obscene things they do to other human beings.

Thunder Rides a Black Horse is about a traditional Mescalero coming of age ceremony for women.

Life and Death on Mt Everest is an intimate look at the experienced Sherpas who aid mountain climbers as they tackle the world's tallest mountain.

There are ethnographies all over the place on just about every culture you could ask for. Just do a google search on something that interests you and use the keyword "ethnography" in your search. You're bound to come up with something.

u/Khatinc · 3 pointsr/asktransgender

there's kinda two spectrums of beliefs on what is trans. some people adhere to social construction theories to explain trans stuff. some people adhere to peer-reviewed scientific research to explain things. i prefer the later, so i'd suggest searching this sub for research as well as reading the papers off pubmed. here's a nice overview of concepts from harvard: Between the (Gender) Lines: the Science of Transgender Identity. i also like the center of excellence for transgender health care as well as the world professional association for transgender health's standards of care document.. there's also an excellent book available called trans bodies, trans selves on amazon that covers a huge amount of information from the perspective of trans people. i really like this book a lot as it gives a very human touch to us as well as attempts to cover the vast diversity of the transgender experience. lots of people are given a voice in this book and it is very beautifully written. honestly, this is where i'd start with us.

the transgender community is incredibly diverse and it really is one of the best parts of being a part of the community.

u/OverTheShore · 3 pointsr/TiADiscussion

OP, buy the following book, and get wise on the specifics of the arguments presented. We all have a good idea why SJW Fundamentalism is bad, but knowing how to present those arguments in a clear, cogent way should go a long way to persuading your peers.

http://www.amazon.com/Kindly-Inquisitors-Attacks-Free-Thought/dp/0226705765

Good luck, and godspeed.

u/RaulChamgerlain · 3 pointsr/gifs

Sure, friend

More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion. Source:http://www.citylab.com/housing/2013/11/paradox-diverse-communities/7614/

Diversity increases psychotic experiences. Source:http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.full

Diversity increases social adversity. Source:http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.full

A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes. Source: http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.full

Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships. Source:http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract

Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life. Source:http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract

Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health. Source:http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

Ethnic diversity harms health for Hispanics and Blacks. Source:http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300787

Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group. Source:http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

Ethnic diversity reduces concern for the environment. Source:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10640-012-9619-6

Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust.
Source:http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/130251172/Dinesen_S_nderskov_Ethnic_Diversity_and_Social_Trust_Forthcoming_ASR.pdf#page=2

Ethnic diversity directly reduces strong communities. Source:https://www.msu.edu/~zpneal/publications/neal-diversitysoc.pdf

Ethnically homogeneous neighborhoods are beneficial for health. Source: https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/living-ethnically-homogenous-area-boosts-health-minority-seniors

In America, more diverse cities have more segregation. Source:http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-most-diverse-cities-are-often-the-most-segregated/

Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism. Source:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10464-013-9608-0

States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality. Source:http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

There is extensive evidence people prefer others who are genetically similar. Source:http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/n&n%202005-1.pdf

Borders, not multiculturalism, reduce intergroup violence. Source:http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.1409

Diversity reduces charity and volunteering. Source:http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract

People who live in diverse communities rather than homogenous ones are poorer and less educated. Source:http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract

Black people trust their neighbors less than do White people. Source: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract

Spanish speakers trust their neighbors less than do English speakers. Source:http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract

Asians trust their neighbors less than do White people. Source:http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract

Ethnically diverse workplaces have lower cohesion, lower satisfaction and higher turnover. Source:http://jom.sagepub.com/content/23/3/239.short?rss=1&ssource=mfc

Ethnic diversity reduces social trust. Source:http://www.nber.org/papers/w5677

Ethnic diversity among members of the same race reduces infrastructure quality, charity, and loan repayment. Source:http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract

Diversity of any sort makes people more likely to defect in game theoretic scenarios. Source:http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract

Homogeneous military units have less desertion than diverse units. Source: http://www.nber.org/papers/w8627

Diversity correlates with low GDP. Source:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/05/16/a-revealing-map-of-the-worlds-most-and-least-ethnically-diverse-countries/

Ethnic homogeneity correlates with strong democracy. Source:https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2013/05/16/a-revealing-map-of-the-worlds-most-and-least-ethnically-diverse-countries/

Genetic diversity causes societal conflict. Source:https://www.nber.org/papers/w21079

Ethnic diversity causally decreases social cohesion. Source:http://esr.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2015/08/20/esr.jcv081.full

Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin. Source:http://www.pnas.org/content/108/4/1262.abstract

Babies demonstrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-Whites. Source:http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01138.x/full

Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin. Source:http://www-personal.umich.edu/~axe/research/AxHamm_Ethno.pdf

Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational. Source: http://www.amazon.com/The-Ethnic-Phenomenon-Pierre-Berghe/dp/0275927091

Ethnocentrism is biological in origin and a superior evolutionary strategy to altruism. Source:http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

Humans are more altruistic to individuals who they are more closely related to. Source:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17456276

People subconsciously prefer those who are genetically similar to them for biologically rational reasons.
Source:http://www.psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/Genetic%20Similarity%201989.pdf

Kinship between members of an ethnic group is greater than expected. Source: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.372.1009

u/Themaster1989 · 3 pointsr/PussyPass

----------------Diversity and Ethnocentrism Hate Facts------------------

More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion. http://www.citylab.com/housing/2013/11/paradox-diverse-communities/7614/

Diversity increases psychotic experiences. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity increases social adversity. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin. http://www.pnas.org/content/108/4/1262.abstract

Ethnic diversity harms health for hispanics and blacks. http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300787

Babies demostrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-whites. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01138.x/full

Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~axe/research/AxHamm_Ethno.pdf

Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

Ethnic diversity reduces concern for the environment. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10640-012-9619-6

Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust. http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/130251172/Dinesen_S_nderskov_Ethnic_Diversity_and_Social_Trust_Forthcoming_ASR.pdf

Ethnic diversity directly reduces strong communities. https://www.msu.edu/~zpneal/publications/neal-diversitysoc.pdf

Ethnically homogenous neighborhoods are beneficial for health. https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/living-ethnically-homogenous-area-boosts-health-minority-seniors

Diversity in American cities correlates with segregation. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-most-diverse-cities-are-often-the-most-segregated/

Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational. http://www.amazon.com/The-Ethnic-Phenomenon-Pierre-Berghe/dp/0275927091

It is evolutionary rational to be friends with someone genetically similar to you. http://www.livescience.com/46791-friends-share-genes.html

Racism and nationalism are rational and evolutionary advantageous strategies. http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

There is extensive evidence people prefer others who are genetically similar. http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/n&n 2005-1.pdf

.

.

.

-----------------------Gender and Sexuality Hate Facts-----------------------

Gay men are 60x more likely to have HIV than straight men. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3462414/

Women with more sexual partners are more likely to divorce. http://s3.amazonaws.com/thf_media/2003/pdf/Bookofcharts.pdf

Women with more than 20 sexual partners have an 80% chance of divorce. http://s3.amazonaws.com/thf_media/2003/pdf/Bookofcharts.pdf

White and Asian women have more successful marriages than black or Hispanic women. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr049.pdf

Gay people are 2-3x more likely to abuse alcohol than straight people. http://www.amazon.com/Unequal-Opportunity-Disparities-Affecting-Bisexual/dp/0195301536

A women’s number of sex partners is linearly linked to alcohol and drug abuse. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3752789/

Gay men are six times more likely to commit suicide than straight men. http://www.amazon.com/Unequal-Opportunity-Disparities-Affecting-Bisexual/dp/0195301536

Gay men are 12x more likely to use amphetamines than straight men. http://www.amazon.com/Unequal-Opportunity-Disparities-Affecting-Bisexual/dp/0195301536

Gay men are 10x more likely to use heroin than straight men. http://www.amazon.com/Unequal-Opportunity-Disparities-Affecting-Bisexual/dp/0195301536

Liberal arguments in favor of homosexuality are based on logical fallacies. http://hrcak.srce.hr/index.php?show=clanak&id_clanak_jezik=19028&lang=en

Transsexuals who undergo sex reassignment surgery are more likely to commit suicide. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21364939

College majors with a greater proportion of women have lower average IQ’s among their students. http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/25/average-iq-of-students-by-college-major-and-gender-ratio/

Less attractive women are more likely to want careers. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2129456/Do-girls-want-career-attract-man-Provocative-study-casts-high-fliers-new-light.html

.

.

.

--------------------------------ISLAM HATE FACTS--------------------------

35% of Palestinians have a favorable opinion of Al Qeada. http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2013/09/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Project-Extremism-Report-Final-9-10-135.pdf

40% of British Muslims want Shariah law. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510866/Poll-reveals-40pc-of-Muslims-want-sharia-law-in-UK.html

1 in eight Muslims worldwide has a favorable view of al Quaeda. http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2013/09/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Project-Extremism-Report-Final-9-10-135.pdf

1 in 3 Muslims favorably views Hamas, a known terrorist organization. http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2013/09/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Project-Extremism-Report-Final-9-10-135.pdf

25% of Egyptian Muslims support terrorist attacks to enforce Shariah law. http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2013/09/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Project-Extremism-Report-Final-9-10-135.pdf

1/5 British Muslims sympathize with the 7/7 terrorist attack. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510866/Poll-reveals-40pc-of-Muslims-want-sharia-law-in-UK.html

65% of European Muslims believe that Shariah law is more important than the law of the country they reside in. https://www.wzb.eu/sites/default/files/u6/koopmans_englisch_ed.pdf

European Muslims are 7.5x more likely to be fundamentalists than Christians. https://www.wzb.eu/sites/default/files/u6/koopmans_englisch_ed.pdf

45% of European Muslims believe that Jews cannot be trusted. https://www.wzb.eu/sites/default/files/u6/koopmans_englisch_ed.pdf

60% of European Muslims are explicitly homphobic. This is not due to poverty or education. https://www.wzb.eu/sites/default/files/u6/koopmans_englisch_ed.pdf

40% of Palestinians support attacks on US civilians in America. http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf

87% of Egyptians agree with Al Qaeda’s goals. http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf

78% of Egyptians support attacks on US soldiers in the Middle East. http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/feb09/STARTII_Feb09_rpt.pdf

62% of Palestinians support the use of suicide bombings. http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2013/09/Pew-Global-Attitudes-Project-Extremism-Report-Final-9-10-135.pdf

28% of British Muslims would like for Britain to become a fundamentalist Islamic state. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-british-muslims-put-islam-first/

68% of British Muslims support criminalizing criticism of Islam. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-british-muslims-put-islam-first/

3 out of 4 British Muslims support criminalizing drawings of Mohammed. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-british-muslims-put-islam-first/

9% of British Muslims define themselves as “hardcore Islamists”. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-british-muslims-put-islam-first/

Only 3% of British Muslims support free speech. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/many-british-muslims-put-islam-first/

0/500 British Muslims believe that homosexuality is morally acceptable. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/may/07/muslims-britain-france-germany-homosexuality

38% of Muslims believe 9/11 was partially or wholly justified. http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/just-like-us-really

62% of Canadian Muslims want Shariah law. http://www.torontosun.com/2011/11/01/strong-support-for-shariah-in-canada

More than 1 in 3 Canadian Muslims refuses to repudiate Al Qaeda. http://www.torontosun.com/2011/11/01/strong-support-for-shariah-in-canada

Britain will become a Muslim country by 2050 if demographic trends continue. http://www.thecommentator.com/article/3770/the_islamic_future_of_britain

At least 85 legally binding Sharia courts operate in Britain. http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/ShariaLawOrOneLawForAll.pdf

85% of rapists in Sweden were non-Swedish immigrants. http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape

North African migrants to Sweden are 23 times more likely to rape than native Swedes. http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape

African migrants to Sweden are 16 times more likely to rape than ethnic Swedes. http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape

Iraqi migrants to Sweden are 2000% more likely to rape than real Swedes. http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape

More than 1/2 of rapists in Denmark are immigrants. http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape

u/jerichojak · 3 pointsr/mythology

http://www.amazon.com/Trickster-Makes-This-World-Mischief/dp/0374532559

This one's a great book for trickster gods across cultures: the Raven, Coyote, Odysseus, Hermes, Krishna, etc.

u/gangofminotaurs · 3 pointsr/france

Certains avancent que ce triage social nourri la polarisation politique excessive que beaucoup de pays développés connaissent à divers degrés. Et la France n'est pas nécessairement la pire élève de ce coté là, mais n'est pas non plus indemne de cette situation.

u/hazabee · 3 pointsr/CGPGrey2

There's a book titled The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America is Tearing Us Apart by Bill Bishop. I haven't read it myself and only came across it yesterday, but it seems relevant to what we're discussing here.

u/wolfnb · 3 pointsr/goodyearwelt

>It didn't really change anybody's mind, and one's view on it was 99% shaped by what they were already thinking.

These books are about why they think that way. Hillbilly Elegy is about communities (mainly the non-urban communities that gave Trump huge support) that feel left behind and the recent history and thinking of those groups. The Big Sort is about the homogenization of social groups and thinking in the US, leading to why people feel comfortable throwing "grenades". The Righteous Mind is a book on the psychology of morality and politics in the US and why the ideologies are so different.

Trump may have won big with white voters of all stripes, but he also did better among Latinos than Romney, so it's obvious that it isn't just "poor uneducated whites", but if people don't try to figure out why the division is so strong and where the other side is coming from, what chance do we have for uniting and restoration?

I live in the most liberal district in one of the most liberal cities in the US. I have no difficulty in understanding that perspective and its driving forces. The other view is not so well illuminated

Edit: though I shouldn't have said anything in the first place. This is the one place I can go to avoid all the cross-talk about politics and ideologies. I like all of you guys and our light conversations about shoes. I'd rather not ruin that for myself.

u/890989 · 3 pointsr/MensRights

That wasn't the claim. The claim was that misandry is much more common than misogyny -- it appears literally every day in mainstream newspapers, is taught every day in schools etc.; indeed it is institutionalized. Police have to investigate hate crimes when a complaint is made. Therefore feminists would come under direct threat, legal precedents would have to be set etc. It would certainly make for some interesting debates, because most "misogyny" is just a figment of the feminist imagination. It would also force feminists to deal with fundamentalist religion, which is arguably misogynistic in some respects (and misandric in others).

Don't get me wrong, I don't support hate crime/speech laws.

u/DavidByron2 · 3 pointsr/MensRights

So I'm reading the Amazon reviews of the second book mentioned. Does anyone know if this statement is accurate?

> Perhaps the single most important thing Nathonson and Young do is refuse to draw back from saying that academic feminists--most of the feminists they discuss are professional scholar-teachers, most with PhDs--are unabashed hatemongers. In going so far they only stop short of annoncing that the "gender war" is in no way a metaphor, that feminists are just as determined to wreak damage on males as they contend males are determined to wreak on them.

> In a way, it will be interesting to see just how far this gauntlet thrown down to academic feminists will be picked up by them and responded to. To admit that feminists are explicitly anti-male, for instance, is to open up the whole academic industry of "Women' Studies"--which includes the female professors who teach in them--to the charge that they violate federal, state, and institutional regulations against hostile environment sexual harassment.

http://www.amazon.com/Legalizing-Misandry-Systemic-Discrimination-Against/dp/0773528628

u/Rygarb · 3 pointsr/MensRights

Check out the books:

Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture



Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men

They are described as "massive and massively-researched volumes", and "thoroughly documented scholarly work". These two books are must read material.

u/Goodard · 3 pointsr/MensRights

I think you are ignorant about what feminism actually does


http://www.amazon.com/Legalizing-Misandry-Systemic-Discrimination-Against/dp/0773528628

And as Othompson said, fuck off.

u/ManAid · 3 pointsr/MensRights

Title: Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men
Link: http://www.amazon.com/Legalizing-Misandry-Systemic-Discrimination-Against/dp/0773528628/ref=pd_sim_b_4

Title: Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture
Link: http://www.amazon.com/Spreading-Misandry-Teaching-Contempt-Popular/dp/0773530991

Title: The Manipulated Man
Link: http://www.amazon.com/The-Manipulated-Man-Esther-Vilar/dp/0953096424

u/Munchausen-By-Proxy · 3 pointsr/MensRights

> Large proportion of men are CEOs (like extremely large proportion)

You have that backwards. Most CEOs are men, most men are not CEOs. Around here, this is called the apex fallacy. More men are homeless or in prison than are CEOs, but only one side of this coin is seen as a gender issue.

> Through fiction/mythology: Men are always the heros, women are the helpless creatures who can't do anything themselves.

What does that have to do with the value of their lives? Children are considered helpless, but also valuable.

> Through media: only 16% of oscar nominees are women, so men are better actors? Women are always nagging while men are always trying to avoid nagging spouses.

Again, nothing to do with value. Men achieve more because for men achievements are the path to value. They work longer hours, take bigger risks, but if they fail they are much more likely to kill themselves.

> Through policy: Ties back in with CEOs, most policy makers are men themselves (21/100 congress members are women)

But most voters are women. The behavior of politicians reflects society's wider values, not the other way around.

> It's easy to come up with anecdotal points that prove your ideals.

None of what I said qualifies as an anecdote. They are all well-documented trends.

> Do you have any actual scientific sources that back up what you're saying?

There have been books written on the subject, from both cultural and evo-psych perspectives. More research is needed, unfortunately the problem is self-reinforcing with many people being actively hostile to spending money researching men's issues.

u/TRPACC · 3 pointsr/masculism
u/tgjer · 3 pointsr/lgbt

For ancient stuff, Leslie Feinberg's book Transgender Warriors is a place to start. It's not really academically rigorous, but a good introduction to gender-variant people and stories from ancient history to today.

u/ftmichael · 3 pointsr/asktransgender

Also http://www.amazon.com/Transgender-Warriors-Making-History-Dennis/dp/0807079413 , which isn't US-specific but has a lot of US-based content.

u/Sidewinder77 · 3 pointsr/BasicIncome

There are lots of other great documents and videos of Murray explaining his idea that he details in his book In Our Hands: A Plan to Replace the Welfare State

u/HunterIV4 · 3 pointsr/FeMRADebates

Interestingly, I'm not totally opposed to it, as long as it is implemented as a replacement for current welfare systems (or at minimum a massive reduction). I actually really like Charles Murray's version in his book In Our Hands, and would actively support it.

The problem is most conservatives oppose it "morally" (people don't deserve my money) for the same reasons they oppose welfare, and most liberals oppose it because they want it in addition to our current welfare system, which is economic suicide and doesn't actually fix any of the problems with welfare as is. For many liberals, people deserve a basic income, and welfare, and basically whatever they want, because rich people have "too much" money, so they're unlikely to support a replacement of welfare with UBI, which is (in my opinion) the only viable solution.

Murray sells it really well, but sadly I don't see how either political view would buy it. Which is too bad.

Side note: I also believe we should drop half of our mandatory humanities programs in school and replace them with finance education. Giving people money when they don't know how to use it is pointless, and it's insane we give more attention to Oliver Twist than budgeting, paying bills, avoiding debt, and investing.

Giving the poor money is necessary to eliminate poverty in the short term, but if you want to keep them out, we need to be teaching people personal finance. It's more universally applicable than sex ed (not everyone will have sex, but everyone will deal with money), yet we spend even less time on it.

A UBI combined with basic finance education minus our horrid welfare state would be, in my opinion, a huge economic bonus to the United States and those in poverty. It only helps the poor, not special interest groups and voting blocks, however, so it'll probably never go anywhere.

u/-Anteros- · 3 pointsr/TheRedPill

> MGTOW Doesn't Get The Respect It Deserves

Now why is that? We know that its not respectable for a man to quit, to run away from that which he finds appealing (all healthy young men find women appealing). Let alone walking away from a challenge, which women today are.

Lets set a definition. From our side bar glossary:

  • Men Going Their Own Way; the growing contingent of the male population who are saying “Fuck It All” to the Mating Dance.

    MGTOW are committing an act of self-betrayal. Especially the younger ones. They don't seem to realize an important fact: Eventually we all go MGTOW. Its called "Getting old".

    MGTOW just gives a feeling of validation to a generation of young men wasting their days on videogames and porn, completely hoodwinked into thinking that they are wasting nothing by doing so. There is no book, no art, no website that will teach a young man more than he would learn by going out and socializing. Particularly with women he is interested in.

    Yes, dating sucks. Yes, it has never been this hard. No, young men should not give up. They should change strategies and improve their socializing skill while they have the energy and availability to do so. Throwing their opportunity in the trash is self-betrayal even if they don't realize the mistake they are making.

    Even worse, by accepting the validation that MGTOW provides, they are taking on an identity that other people have made for them.


    > backlash from women because it is a direct threat to their sexual strategy

    Absolutely not. Read the sidebar. They will happily move on to the available men, particularly the top 20%.

    > Even those that are in happy relationships seem to understand why MGTOW makes sense and can come to a rational agreement and support the freedom that MGTOW gives men.

    Running away is not freedom. Freedom when one is able to do something one wants to do. This is granted via the right perspective, which is for a man to put himself first. MGTOW cannot lay claim to this perspective or any other self-improvement despite its attempts to redefine itself.

    > However it is not meant to be a lifetime commitment as it directly challenges our biological need to procreate and reproduce.

    This is somewhat correct but for the wrong reasons. The challenge from MGTOW is not to our biology but to our freedom, which is (indirectly) what MGTOW will do to a young man as he ages.

    From the MGTOW subreddit sidebar definition:

    "We are men going our own way by forging our own identities and paths to self-defined success; cutting through collective ideas of what a man is."

    > forging our own identities

    Admirable try. Identity is created by harsh experiences and reactions from others, as undesirable as that may be.
    Also, interpersonal identity is not as self defined as one would hope


    > paths to self-defined success

    Here is the problem: If one does not know what a successful life is or its potential, how would one know what success is or can be? I ask rhetorically because its clear that younger men do not personally know their potential . They have no business writing off the things they aspire to, this is essentially why MGTOW gets a bad rap, as it should.

    The men who experience high levels of success do everything they can to continue it and increase it. They do not check out because of the complaints that MGTOW espouse.

    > cutting through collective ideas of what a man is.

    Thanks to feminists and gender identity politics "A man" is a murky concept that everyone believes they have a valid opinion on. Young men are understandably unclear about it.

    Here is a part of one of my definitions:
    A man changes his environment to his will, as best he can.

    Here is a good book on the matter


    In conclusion, game (Socializing) is a skill and if every MGTOW built up that skill instead of rationalizing away his retreat there would be no such thing as MGTOW. I have empathy for these boys but they are making the wrong choice. We only live once.
u/ValjeansGhost · 3 pointsr/lostgeneration

Two books I'd recommend.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Narcissism-Epidemic-Living-Entitlement/dp/1416575995

http://www.amazon.com/The-Age-Acquiescence-Resistance-Organized/dp/0316185434

One is a psychological perspective of Millennials, while the other is a Sociological perspective of Millennial politics, when compared to history.

I would also read this one.

http://www.amazon.com/Closing-American-Mind-Education-Impoverished/dp/1451683200

If there isn't any reading of this, then bascially there is going to be a tremendous misconception about the reality of things. The book will lack any basis in reality, because the former three books have strong empirical backing, but their conclusions are highly unpopular, and so modern intellectuals don't want to deal with the fact that excessive overconfidence has removed the capacity for people to politically organize.

Fuck any other conclusion, this is what the data states over and over again. Preach excessive individualism to the masses, and the masses dissolve their bonds with each other. More importantly, people lose the capacity to see the point of group work all together, and therefore a common project is impossible.

Things like this cannot be understand unless one is prepared to go against the status quo established in the 1960s.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r7cwWegXCU

u/XOmniverse · 3 pointsr/JordanPeterson

In Black Rednecks and White Liberals, Thomas Sowell puts forward a pretty convincing case that the cause is that the Jews often played the role of a "middle man minority", which is to say, when they entered a culture or a society, they tended to enter into professions in which they are middle men (bankers, lawyers, etc.) rather than directly producing goods and services. Since people don't intuitively understand how such professions add genuine value, the money obtained through them was perceived as unfair rent seeking rather than genuinely earned.

u/hga_another · 3 pointsr/KotakuInAction

And now Men [Are Going] On Strike, the ungrateful wretches.

u/dalurkingluke · 3 pointsr/MensRights

Men on strike, Dr. Helen Smith. Her articles are regularly linked in this reddit, so just do a search for a fast preview.

u/Listen2Hedges · 3 pointsr/SandersForPresident

That’s not surprising. Propaganda works. There’s a book you might want to check out called Manufacturing Consent that explains why the media pushes certain ideas even if those ideas are lies. The book was written in the 80s but it’s just as true today as it was then.

https://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media-ebook/dp/B0055PJ4R0

u/BlackSuperSonic · 2 pointsr/pics

Thanks for the response.

Then let me be clear, I think the country has made great strides in the last 50 years. But, we still do have state racism within our justice system. If you are interested in learning more about the role of institutionalize racism, I encourage you to read

u/palagoon · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

I understand what you're saying completely, but I hope one day you can see that the reason this stuff happens is not because "black people are bad people" but rather "white people made black people bad people."

That's a pretty big claim to make, so let me explain myself.

From the moment we (I say we because I'm white) brought blacks over to be used as slaves, we stripped them of everything that they could be proud of. We took their tribal names, their tribal religions and customs, and put them at the absolute bottom of society with no way out.

When slavery ended, discrimination didn't. Jim Crow laws are something everyone knows about, but throughout the country, if you were black you were likely illiterate and poor because the education system for blacks just was not up to par. Additionally black workers (even skilled ones) had trouble finding work all over the country because no one wanted to risk hiring a "Negro" and having all the white workers get their panties in a bunch.

So in the 150 years since slavery ended we've slowly eroded away at the massive systems of inequality that placed and kept blacks at the bottom of society, but it hasn't been enough. Segregation might be over, but inner city schools are predominantly black and underfunded (because all the whites left and property values tanked leading to robber baron landlords buying up all the property to make a quick buck). The system is still heavily rigged against blacks.

And so what does it mean to be black in America? Especially if you're not one of the lucky few who can call themselves "Middle Class"? You grow up surrounded by other poor black folks, you learn very quickly that [White] society doesn't give a fuck about your or your family and you have to deal with the cognitive dissonance of being on welfare while the country calls you lazy and unmotivated and accuses you of stealing from the hardworking [White] citizens of the country.

It's hard. No one ever offers you a break, no one ever lets you cut a corner. Instead, society continually puts up barriers to your success (some mentioned above, some not), and so you grow to distrust the rest of [White] society, and you don't care about the system, and you're just going to take what you want because that's what the system has been doing to you for 300 years.

Does that excuse the behavior of people like the woman you talk about in your story? No, it absolutely doesn't. But these people aren't out to get you, per se, it's just something they've been trained to do by their peers and their families and implicitly by a society that repeatedly says "We don't care about you, you are scum and worthless."

I worked for the better part of a year in a low-pay part-time job where I was the only white person and the only person with a college degree; most people I worked with had several felonies and most didn't finish high school. It was rough and it was a big adjustment period for me (I transferred when I moved, the division that I worked for in my old place of residence was staffed by college students and retirees looking for a distraction).

But you know what? Over time, I became friends with a lot of these gang-banger types. I watched them do drugs on the clock, I had to cover a shift more than once because someone just didn't come to work (because they were still out partying from the night before, they couldn't get a ride to work, or just didn't want to go), and to this day I have nothing in common with any of them.

But I didn't judge them for the color of their skin. I listened when they talked. I heard a story from a co-worker (now a small-time molly pusher at the local clubs) about how he slept on the floor his whole childhood because he was the oldest of five kids, and the one bed they had only had room for the four youngest kids. He has screwed up and been in jail more than once in his life, but he's an okay guy overall.

But you know what? I also worked with his younger brother (one of the lucky four to have a bed), and he has a high school diploma, he's got some college classes under his belt, and he's got a good music career going such that he opens for all the big Hip Hop acts that come through our town. Maybe he hasn't quite made it yet, either, but I like to think that for all the shit his brother went through, he has more of a chance to make it because of it.

It's not easy being black in America. In fact, it downright sucks. There are a lot of shitty poor black people in America because society has pushed them into ghettos for the better part of the last 150 years.

Geez, I don't have the source completely handy, but I know it is referenced in Eduardo Bonilla-Silva's "Racism Without Racists" Amazon Link ...anyway, some Social Scientist determined that if all the institutional barriers that hold blacks down were instantly removed, it would take something like another 80 years to fully achieve equality between races.

TLDR - I don't blame your for your attitudes towards blacks at all, and it's not even wrong to say that your views of poor black people are correct, BUT there are a whole lot of reasons as to WHY this is the case, and acknowledging these reasons may actually get us to a point where something positive happens.

u/mossimo654 · 2 pointsr/changemyview

>My statement about the field studies was in response to you when you said that people don't know from anecdotal evidence that we're all the same. According to you, this can only be learned from "studying the field". So, you're claiming that Ethnic Studies is useless by your own standards because it doesn't study the field?

When you said "we're all the same" I was assuming you were referring to genetics (which isn't entirely, but mostly true). With regards to culture, history, and levels of discrimination, we're very different, but the white perspective is what gets expressed broadly in culture. In addition, it's inculcated by the idea of "colorblindness" which is in itself a form of racism. Here's an article that says as much although the book's much better.

> What does this matter to the kids who are studying? If we want more minorities with great educations, have them spend less time working on PC perfection and more time studying the subjects at hand.

That is what we currently do. No one's saying don't teach kids math, US history, English etc. That's what our culture and educational system demands, and so it would be a disservice not to educate kids. However, does it seem to be working that well? Our schools are the most segregated they've been since Jim Crow ended. As I stated in my post, I'm not arguing we replace anything, and as the districts that now have ethnic studies have shown, you don't have to.

> Combine that with the fact that minority communities tend to be uneducated and poor for some reason, this leads to yet another decrease in the chances of minorities leading the field in a certain subject.

Are you ok with this? If so, then I don't know why we're having this discussion because I'm guessing there's nothing I can say that will change your mind. Education is literally the main conduit out of poverty in this country. Your level of education does more to predict your income, your chances of staying out of prison, and your lifespan than any other factor for people of color.

> You seem to speak from a position of a "white privilege apologetic". It's true that I'm lucky to be where I am, but that doesn't change the validity of what I claim

No, I speak from a platform of white privilege. Unequivocally. And I don't apologize for anything. I just try and stand up for what's right.

u/WillieConway · 2 pointsr/askphilosophy

E. D. Hirsch's Cultural Literacy often gets attacked as being too conservative. I haven't actually read it to give my own opinion, but that's the reputation.

Allan Bloom's Closing of the American Mind might interest you, too. Bloom was definitely conservative, but the book curiously gets a certain amount of play among leftist thinkers.

u/Cardiff_Electric · 2 pointsr/TumblrInAction

> And the book destroys SJWs and postmodern thought.

I feel it is appropriate here to give a shout out to The Closing of the American Mind by Allan Bloom which touches on those issues in a slightly more direct way than Rand.

u/ewk · 2 pointsr/zen

Oh, you made up your own flavor of perennialism? You aren't the only one. It's very popular in the New Age crowd. Aquarius has a lot to answer for. Or hippies. Or Aquarius hippies.

> anyone who practices meditation practices zen.

Zen Masters don't teach this. So it isn't your opinion, just like it isn't your "opinion" that Abraham Lincoln said he was from the planet Grog and he had a wife there who was a lovely shade of cheese.

What you really have is a misrepresentation of Mumon. Which you flog, apparently, to validate your religious Perennialism.

I mean seriously man, come on. You can't go around telling people Abraham Lincoln said he was from Grog. That's BS. You know that. So why do you BS people about Zen?

There has got to be some area of your life in which you practice some intellectual integrity. Put yourself in my shoes. What if I showed up in your place of business and told people something about the field you studied for your job that was total BS that I made up?

I mean you don't have to go to school and get a degree in Zen, but read a book before you make up stuff and pretend Mumon said it.

If it isn't okay to do it about Abraham Lincoln, it's not okay to do it about Mumon or anybody else in his family, the family to which the name "Zen" refers.

.

I will add for those watching at home that I said Dogen's zazen was prayer-meditation. Note that this classification isn't as crazy cakes as some have suggested, at least to perennialists.

Wait, does that kind of evidence bolster my argument or not?

n/m.

u/bnr55 · 2 pointsr/education

Believe it or not, I actually have read that piece. These are issues I am very passionate about and follow closely. Free speech is still free speech and attempts to shut it down are totalitarian. What is considered 'hateful' has been expanding at an alarming rate and fewer and fewer views are considered acceptable. This is an incredibly dangerous trend.

I want to beg you to read: https://www.amazon.com/Closing-American-Mind-Education-Impoverished/dp/1451683200

I wish there was an article length synopsis, there might be one out there. I'm NOT saying you have to agree with it, we can agree to disagree but it's just another perspective.

Important edit

u/sentient_NSA_bot · 2 pointsr/news

>“It just seems that in our quest to be tolerant of everything, we’ve become intolerant to everything,”

>That is a fantastic line.

I highly recommend the book, "The Closing of the American Mind" by Allan Bloom. It was written some time ago, but it pretty much nails today's intellectual landscape. I think even he'd be shocked to see the trends taken to the highest degree in 2015.

EDIT for link: http://www.amazon.ca/Closing-American-Mind-Education-Impoverished/dp/1451683200

u/stardos · 2 pointsr/esist

For anyone interested, I suggest reading Alan Bloom's seminal work Closing of the American Mind which gives one explanation of how we ended up here (and it was published in the mid-80s)

u/formerprof · 2 pointsr/The_Donald
u/TecnoPope · 2 pointsr/TooAfraidToAsk

This is a strange understanding of history imo. We should strive to be better historians. The word slave literally comes from the word slav. White people have also been enslaved and oppressed since the beginning of time as well. Even as recently as the 19th century white people were being enslaved during the barbary wars. If you want to look at the Arab slave trade it dwarfs that of the western / american slave trade and is still going on today. If the logic is that white people have been oppressing people of color more than people of color oppressing each other its just simply not true. Historically european and american whites were actually involved in the chantal / race based slave trade for the least amount of time than other groups and white puritans were the reason slavery started to become abolished. /u/Kayddps check out Black Rednecks & White Liberals by Thomas Sowell (A black economist and historian). It will blow your mind.

u/Teen-la-queef-a · 2 pointsr/StreetFights

There are other points of views from yours that I'm sure you're entirely unwilling to investigate, much less embrace. If you do decide to take your own advice and do even the smallest bit of research to discover a more nuanced opinion, you can read "Black Rednecks and White Liberals by Thomas Sowell. he's a well-respected Harvard economist, who also happens to be black, if that matters to you.

u/lifestuff69 · 2 pointsr/TheRedPill

Watch The Rubin Report on YouTube. Dave Rubin interviewed both Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson, as well as MANY of the other names I see posted by others here. He interviews people from different political, social, and economic philosophies. I even fund him on Patreon because his channel is great (and important).

 

If I had to pick three people that made the most dramatic impact on my life in terms of how I think, seek and evaluate evidence, and use reason, these people would be at the top. While the people on my list did not always agree on everything, I do believe that they are/were intellectually honest:

 

Thomas Sowell

u/ericdimwit · 2 pointsr/barstoolsports

https://www.amazon.com/Black-Rednecks-Liberals-Thomas-Sowell/dp/1594031436

read that, and then never worry about the rest of the world...they hated us under bush, they hated us under obama, they hate us under trump....the US has done nothing as bad as: The Germans, The British, The French, The Spanish, The gooses, The Russians, The Chinese, Continental Africa....goes on and on...Indian caste system...the difference is now that they know trump won't be impeached, they are afraid of us again.

u/--Steak · 2 pointsr/MGTOW

Give him the book "The Rational Male" and "Men on Strike" lol

 



Just tell him you don't want to be a third wheel and that you respect his girlfriend, but feel weird about being part of a trike..

There is nothing wrong with saying that you want to have some "Bro time", because you are kinda burned out from dealing with all the women stresses at work all the time. Makes you sound like an awesome dude, while kinda getting the point across. Plus he's your brother, he should understand, right?

u/tintedlipbalm · 2 pointsr/RedPillWives

Before I even found TRP/RPW I was deep into MRA discussion. I will keep on recommending Karen Straughan's videos, more specifically Feminism and the Disposable Male (probably the most powerful of her pieces). After that, sorting by popular, even if you are already familiar with Karen's content. There's honestly a lot of material on youtube that I would go to before a book because of how non establishment the criticism is.

While Karen's style is more of a take down of specific articles/videos/ideas, TyphonBlue (now Based Bager) approached the subject by analyzing Threat Narrative tropes (not sure if she coined it but I firstheard it from her), here's a playlist. I can't rewatch right now to make sure it's beginner's content, it is less approachable than Karen's but equally insightful.

The thing with a lot of YouTubers though is that it all expires so quickly. Either it's a take-down that was relevant then and it hardly makes any sense now (it peaked around 2011), or the user deleted the channel or became super extreme or changed the focus of the channel...

Why I'm No Longer a Feminist has some good points about how feminist circles are (I generally enjoy such videos, Lauren Southern has one.. I tried to find more in my liked videos and they are either deleted or private), here's a mirror of Christy0Misty's videos before she deleted.

For books, the most obvious would be Christina Hoff Sommers' (Who Stole Feminism?, The War Against Boys) which haven't read aside from articles and videos. A book I have read is Men on Strike by Helen Smith, it's sorta repetitive but books on definite topics are easier to find (she writes a column here). I think articles is where it's mostly at, but I would love to read recommended books.

A lot of antifeminist thought goes hand in hand with criticism of the left. It's so vast though I wouldn't know where to start. I generally look into individual people and their timelines. And A LOT of it has to be your own conclusions of feminist thought you read first-hand. So it's really important to know its main ideas and waves. A very popular criticism is about it being rehashed Marxism, for example. So looking into western philosophy as a primer is always advised. Here's a free introductory course to the History of Western Philosophy.

u/TheExSexOffender · 2 pointsr/MGTOW

https://www.amazon.com/Manipulated-Man-Esther-Vilar/dp/1905177178/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1493220573&sr=8-1&keywords=the+manipulated+man

Look at the price on the hardcover and softcover.

That's about the same price, if not more than a college textbook.

u/MALOSAIMI · 2 pointsr/Documentaries

Here’s some books:

9 books

-most of these can be found in video form on YouTube

understanding power

manufacturing consent kindle (couldn’t find it as a pdf)

Chomsky is a great read, he also has some great lectures on YouTube. The reason that only a tiny minority knows him is because of his lack of appearance in mainstream media (in my opinion). He summarizes it greatly in this video:

Noam Chomsky- concision

u/potsandpans · 2 pointsr/videos
u/thywayth · 2 pointsr/gaybros

I would stay with them and see how you feel. Also it REALLY helps to learn as much as you can about the trans experience and trans issues.

http://www.youtube.com/user/tsdollhouse/

reddit.com/r/transgender

http://www.amazon.com/Trans-Bodies-Selves-Transgender-Community/dp/0199325359

u/dry_zooplankton · 2 pointsr/ftm

I think what you posted is a really good start if it's specific to your area. For additional resources, this website has a lot of info for providers on prescribing T (http://transhealth.ucsf.edu/trans?page=guidelines-masculinizing-therapy) & the WPATH Standards of Care would be a good one (https://www.wpath.org/publications/soc), but I know there's some disagreement about some of its recommendations. The book Trans Bodies, Trans Selves (https://www.amazon.com/Trans-Bodies-Selves-Transgender-Community/dp/0199325359) is a really good comprehensive overview & would be a great place for a psychiatrist who wants to learn more to start. It's basically a textbook but costs around $30 on Amazon, they keep the price low to make it as accessible as possible.

u/speedy2686 · 2 pointsr/AskLibertarians

You’re welcome. I also want to share this book with you: Kindly Inquisitors.

u/William_DuBane · 2 pointsr/conspiracy

Absolutely. Any time you want confirmation of a statement, just ask.

Harvard professor of political science Robert D. Putnam conducted a nearly decade long study how multiculturalism affects social trust. He surveyed 26,200 people in 40 American communities, finding that–when the data were adjusted for class income and other factors–the more racially diverse a community is, the greater the loss of trust. People in diverse communities “don’t trust the local mayor, they don't trust the local paper, they don't trust other people and they don’t trust institutions,” writes Putnam. In the presence of such ethnic diversity, Putnam maintains that “…we hunker down. We act like turtles. The effect of diversity is worse than had been imagined. And it’s not just that we don’t trust people who are not like us. In diverse communities, we don’t trust people who do look like us.

Even Halyard knows this is all a pile of “feel good” shit. Like a religion, it relies on persecuting those who don’t agree to keep itself mainstream thought.

After the study was released, Putnam was intimidated and harassed because he was accused of helping racists. He later came out and gave a very vague statement saying diversity “had problems but was worth it in the long run” to keep these morons appeased. This statement gives no indication of the “long run” and, in fact, is not quantified by anything.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract

~:~

According to conflict theory, distrust between ethnic groups rises with diversity, but not within a group. Putnam describes people of all races and socioeconomic statuses, ages, and both sexes as “hunkering down,” avoiding engagement with their local community–both among different ethnic groups and within their own ethnic group. Even when controlling for income inequality and crime rates–two factors which conflict theory states should be the prime causal factors in declining interethnic group trust–more diversity is still associated with less communal trust.

u/AnonDidNothingWrong · 2 pointsr/conspiracy

Diversity is cancer. NOTHING good comes from muh diversity


Putnam's study: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x

Good Fences: http://necsi.edu/research/social/scienceofpeace.pdf

Self-identification study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15625622

Everything else:

More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion.

http://www.citylab.com/housing/2013/11/paradox-diverse-communities/7614/

Diversity increases psychotic experiences.

Diversity increases social adversity.

A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes.

http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships.

Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin.

http://www.pnas.org/content/108/4/1262.abstract

Ethnic diversity harms health for hispanics and blacks.

http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300787

Babies demostrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-whites.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01138.x/full

Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~axe/research/AxHamm_Ethno.pdf

Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group.

http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

Ethnic diversity reduces concern for the environment.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10640-012-9619-6

Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust.

http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/130251172/Dinesen_S_nderskov_Ethnic_Diversity_and_Social_Trust_Forthcoming_ASR.pdf

Ethnic diversity directly reduces strong communities.

https://www.msu.edu/~zpneal/publications/neal-diversitysoc.pdf

Ethnically homogenous neighborhoods are beneficial for health.

https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/living-ethnically-homogenous-area-boosts-health-minority-seniors

Diversity in American cities correlates with segregation.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-most-diverse-cities-are-often-the-most-segregated/

Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Ethnic-Phenomenon-Pierre-Berghe/dp/0275927091

It is evolutionarily rational to be friends with someone genetically similar to you.

http://www.livescience.com/46791-friends-share-genes.html

Racism and nationalism are rational and evolutionary advantageous strategies.

http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism.

http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality.

http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

There is extensive evidence people prefer others who are genetically similar.

http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/n&n_2005-1.pdf

Our analysis shows that peace does not depend on integrated coexistence, but rather on well defined topographical and political boundaries separating groups

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0095660

The more integrated a neighborhood is, the less socially cohesive it becomes, and vice versa.

http://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2013/study-asks-is-a-better-world-possible/

The more ethnically diverse the people we live around, the less we trust them.

http://macaulay.cuny.edu/eportfolios/benediktsson2013/files/2013/04/Putnam.pdf

Ethnocentrism, often thought to rely on complex social cognition and learning, may have arisen through biological evolution.

http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

Diversity experiments in Germany end in disaster

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany-s-immigrants-integration-in-theory-alienation-in-practice-a-433006.html

Immigrants in Norway are a net loss to the economy

http://www.emnbelgium.be/publication/report-norwegian-welfare-and-migration-committee

Immigrants in Sweden are a net loss to the economy

http://www.amid.dk/pub/papers/AMID_48-2006_Jan_Ekberg.pdf

Denmark saved billions by restricting immigration:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/putting-a-price-on-foreigners-strict-immigration-laws-save-denmark-billions-a-759716.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/denmark/8492822/Denmarks-immigration-laws-save-country-6-billion.html

Increases in diversity correlate with problems worldwide, and the downsides of diversity effect everyone, it’s a universal human problem:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/the-downside-of-difference/story-e6frgcjx-1111112914289

More diversity in police departments correlates with more abuse, poorer performance and less trust:

http://www.mediafire.com/?1fe8x0egftpbp6f

Decreased community spirit, decreased altruism, and depressed social capital, less ethical behavior, more crime, fear, isolation and depression:

http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon2007-06-25jl.html

Also, a nice little study from Cornell University about how segregation creates peace:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1110.1409

Multiculturalism doesn’t work:

http://books.google.com/books?id=zqMCc37dW1kC&pg=PA129

http://books.google.com/books?id=ZyAt3T1V4EcC&pg=PT97

http://books.google.com/books?id=TmlGzr4s0uMC&pg=PA16

ncreasing social pluralism (diversity) is correlated with increased chance of collective violence-http://docdro.id/D9GRWG7

Using data from Copenhagen school registers, researchers found that native Danes opt out of public schools when the immigrant population concentration hits 35% or more-https://web.archive.org/web/20170216222016/http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/School-Choice-Universal-Vouchers-and-Native-Flight-from-Local-Schools.pdf

UK immigrants segregate into their own ethnically homogenous communities-https://web.archive.org/web/20180627132302/https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/575975/The_Casey_Review_Executive_Summary.pdf

Increases in immigrant density at the school level triggered an important native flight from tuition-free, public schools toward private ones-

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0927537118300010

http://docdro.id/c1ahKvP

u/Twigryph · 2 pointsr/marvelstudios

> The Trickster's Skin

Ah, realized I got the name wrong :It's "Trickster Makes this World"
https://www.amazon.com/Trickster-Makes-This-World-Mischief/dp/0374532559

I'll look up Galveston :)

Yeah, GOT doesn't hold up in the later seasons when I think about it. Makes me sad.

u/double-happiness · 2 pointsr/Documentaries

> I am male, and to cut a long story short, yes i am 'particularly masculine' by the usual metrics.

Ah right, well this is all very easy for you to say then, isn't it? Strikes me you are talking from a position of privilege in that respect.

> Can you answer the part about who your favourite articles were to teach on? I'm quite curious!

I have no idea why that would be. What possible difference could it make to you? It sounds to me like you are testing me.

Anyway, if you really want to read some sociology, here are a few suggestions...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Intimacy-Personal-Relationships-Modern-Societies/dp/0745615740

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Managed-Heart-Commercialization-Human-Feeling/dp/0520272943

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonaldization

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Search-Respect-Structural-Analysis-Sciences/dp/0521017114

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discipline_and_Punish

I will try and add some more if I think of anything, but TBH I think you are just trying to test me anyway. For some reason redditors often seem to be incredulous that someone could actually do a sociology degree and a post-grad, and go on to work in teaching, though it is actually a pretty humble accomplishment AFAIAC.

Edit: one of my favourite sociology books when I was an undergrad was Scotland the Brand.

u/VanSlyck · 2 pointsr/suggestmeabook

In Search of Respect is often used in modern cultural anthropology classes as a first hand look at the culture and life of drug dealers and associated characters. It's a bit dry in some points, but it's pretty detailed. The author depicts things sort of 'from the ground up', as he slowly gains the trust of the neighborhood, and access to more influential figures in the trade.

u/haplesstaco · 2 pointsr/IAmA

About culture? Anthropology may be the area you want to check out. It's a very complex topic, but has loads of interesting reports on marginalized cultures within America. The Navajo probably have had a few ethnographies already done for them.

One of my favorite that you may find interesting is In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio. Oddly, it really reminded me of where I grew up.

u/illimitable1 · 2 pointsr/nashville

I'm not a felon because I was never arrested nor charged for a felony. Consequently, I was not found guilty of a felony.

On the other hand, the people who are, indeed, arrested for felonies tend to be poorer and blacker than everyone else. And the people who actually get convicted for a felony? If you had to pick poor and black, you'd be right more than wrong.

Possible explanations for this would be that there are more blacks than whites in the US, but this is obviously false.

The next possible answer is that white people use less dope than black people, or that white people don't sell dope, or that white people commit fewer crimes. But I've seen white people smoke plenty of weed, snort lots of coke, sling plenty of stuff. I'd reckon your favorite explanation is that black people just commit more crimes, but I don't buy it.


I say that black people get busted more often because of unequal attention from law enforcement. Once they get arrested, and then are less likely to be able to defend themselves adequately because $$. Generations of public policy in the US, from slavery, through Reconstruction, to Jim Crow, to redlining, to the GI Bill have all made it so that black people are less likely to have the money to buy the same justice that others can.

There is certainly an element of personal choice to everything. And certainly I have had white acquaintances who got busted for heavy things (larceny, burglary, heroin x 5) and went away for awhile. That said, there's a pattern here that is greater than individual choice.

I am not a convicted felon because I live in the right neighborhood, had the right sort of parents, and never got busted for any crime. I don't think that my story would be the same if I were African American or poor.

If we accept that more black people are convicted because more black people do crime-- which I wouldn't-- then one still has to ask why is that so? Is it because black people were born somehow inherently incapable of making good decisions? That doesn't seem likely.

As for your second question, the only dealers I've been acquainted with were supporting a habit or making some side money. I have read an ethnography or so that shows the ultimate hourly wage of a crack dealer at the height of the crack boom to be less than minimum wage, tho.

u/jmk816 · 2 pointsr/politics

Hmm ok I'm glad you clarified. I can see where you are coming from, but I just see it differently in that, American culture tends to put too much emphasis on the individual without considering the strutural. Since I studied social science (if you couldn't tell!) I changed a lot of my views, about the value of work (in regards of "skilled" and "unskilled labor), about oppertunity in America and about how larger structual issues creates a direct impact on people's lives and how we aren't willing to even look at those options to change (God forbid if we do anything against the mighty capitalism!).

A book that really stuck with me, because of the quality of writing, research and the insights it has, was In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio. Also people will give you funny looks for reading it!

http://www.amazon.com/In-Search-Respect-Structural-Analysis/dp/0521017114

u/BeenJamminMon · 2 pointsr/todayilearned

I read an ethnography called "In Search of Respect" that details the lives of the impoverished in the Barrio in New York during the 1980s. It covers in depth the societal and cultural conditions that create drug and gang violence. Yes, there are many people who just draw on welfare, but many of those people work in the untaxed workforce. They might be the neighborhood plumber, electrician, automotive repairman, or refrdgerator specialist. They don't have formal jobs or titles or pay taxes so they are unaccounted for. These people also sell drugs and steal car stereos. Its all part of their 'underground' economy. In fact, many drug dealers start selling either because they became unemployed, or they were trying to lift themselves out of poverty.

u/RoundSimbacca · 2 pointsr/law

> You're fooling yourself if you think that's the primary issue.

And yet, report after report shows that geographical self-sorting is the number one driver. ^123

> No one is debating compactness as the main problem that creates gerrymandering. The issue is political lines drawn to minimize Democratic voters.

And yet, here you are doing exactly that.

u/kingoftheoneliners · 2 pointsr/Foodforthought

A fairly popular book was written on this very subject back in 2009. The Big Sort

u/InitiatePenguin · 2 pointsr/currentaffairs

Historically in broad strokes no.


https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/vox/the-ezra-klein-show/e/55554701

There's arguably good reason for the ideological homogeneous formations around identity, coalitional, and party politics.


This can only happen within political systems which prop up binary choices.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger%27s_law


Edit: additional polarization reading

https://www.amazon.com/Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded-America/dp/0547237723

Keyword: The Big Sort

u/dakta · 2 pointsr/inthenews

> forcing people into echo chambers of conformity

Nah man they do that on their own really really well. For an investigation of this phenomenon at scale in the real world, check out Bill Bishop's The Big Sort.

> excessive moderation

Funny, the least echo-chamber-ey subs I know of are some of the most heavily moderated. See /r/NeutralPolitics or /r/PoliticalDiscussion.

u/very_old_guy · 2 pointsr/changemyview

If conservatives had their way, the federal budget would be smaller. Certain large federal bureaucracies would be shut down and dismantled. There would be no Obamacare and no Dodd Frank.

What we have right now is not conservative rule, it's a stalemate. Given the polarization in society at large, the stalemate is a product of politicians on both sides of the aisle representing their constituents as best they can.

The problem isn't Congress; it's the constituents. A radical polarization has occurred in American society over the past few decades. This book offers one possible explanation. Unless we citizens can bridge the gaps in society, we should not expect Congress to do it for us.

Edit: I shouldn't say the budget would be smaller under conservatives. They certainly didn't do much to shrink it in the Bush years.

u/rodentdp · 2 pointsr/ableton

This is probably the best argument I've ever read describing what racism is really about. It is inflammatory at first, but you have to read on through to understand Goad's purpose. Cannot recommend it enough.

u/mnemosyne-0002 · 2 pointsr/KotakuInAction

Archives for the links in comments:

u/thedarkerside · 2 pointsr/KotakuInAction

I am reading this book right now and it is also draws a pretty bleak picture and shows this has been going on for 40 odd years.

> Wehret den Anfängen ;)

Way too late for that I am afraid.

u/neofool · 2 pointsr/MensRights

The misandry series.


u/kloo2yoo · 2 pointsr/Equality

Erin Pizzey, author of prone to violence

also, Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young, authors of Legalizing Misandry and Spreading Misandry

u/NiceIce · 2 pointsr/MensRights

Not what I mean at all. Where the hell do you live? As I told you, I live in SoCal. Give me examples that are somewhat remotely relavent to me. Do you think that Egalitarians/MRAs support ANY of those things? Are you new to this subreddit? If you are trying to justify the evils of feminism by comparing them to the Taliban, you're setting the bar pretty damn low.


For over half a century, feminism has been Spreading Misandry, Legalizing Misandry and Sanctifying Misandry.


Waging a war on men and sadly, even a war against boys.

That is why I, like most members of this subreddit, are vehemently antifeminist.

u/Spoonwood · 2 pointsr/FeMRADebates

There's a book on this topic published by two Canadian academics called Spreading Misandry http://np.amazon.com/Spreading-Misandry-Teaching-Contempt-Popular/dp/0773530991

Also some articles in the New Male Studies journal concern this topic http://newmalestudies.com/OJS/index.php/nms/index

u/jolly_mcfats · 2 pointsr/MensRights

If you want to talk to someone expert on the subject, I'd suggest you contact Paul Nathanson or Katherine Young. Or even talk to the guy who runs this channel on youtube

u/TomwaIvory · 2 pointsr/MensRights

I will certainly do so, just give me a bit to get it all together.

A great place to start is how feminists diverted funds for shovel ready jobs (The recession in America hit those most, majorly affecting men) into jobs in health care. This negatively impacted men and the industries they work in.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/016/659dkrod.asp

I'll go grab some more later, but it's 1AM.

Edit:

Thought of another one:

Amanda Childress has this to say about Men in higher education:
"Why could we not expel a student based on an allegation?" Childress asked at the panel, before noting that while 2 to 8 percent of accusations are unfounded (but not necessarily intentionally false), 90 to 95 percent are unreported, committed by repeat offenders, and intentional. "It seems to me that we value fair and equitable processes more than we value the safety of our students. And higher education is not a right. Safety is a right. Higher education is a privilege."
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/02/12/disagreement-campus-judicial-systems

Edit2:

I'd like to add Ezra Klein (Mr. Feminist says "False Accusations are Good") and Jessica Valenti (Ms. "I bath in male tears") to the list as well.

Ezra Klein: http://www.vox.com/2014/10/13/6966847/yes-means-yes-is-a-terrible-bill-and-i-completely-support-it
Jessica Valenti: https://twitter.com/JessicaValenti/status/494591618519805953/photo/1

Edit3:

Or those in the IMF who think women should pay less in taxes than men:
"IMF staff estimates show that cutting labor income taxes paid by women by 5 percentage points would increase the GDP level by 1¾ percentage points, for a fiscal cost of ½ percentage point of GDP. "
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/spn/2010/spn1019.pdf

Edit4:
A good book to read: http://www.amazon.com/Spreading-Misandry-Teaching-Contempt-Popular/dp/0773530991/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1296042616&sr=8-1

Edit5:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gudrun_Schyman

"Schyman left the Left Party in 2004 and in 2005 co-founded Feminist Initiative"

"In October 2004, Schyman together with other MEPs of the Left Party proposed before the Riksdag, a national assessment of the cost of men's violence towards women; furthermore they demanded that the state fund women's shelters.[5] The proposal attracted wide attention, with the media calling it a "man tax.""

Edit5: (I think I edit this too much)
I'd also like to bring up the fact that feminists have repeatedly attached men's rights speeches.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Yg-f7fC0Uw&list=PLOn14Uiedi_5VxHKA89DUT77CFehp_WEF

Can you show me one instance where an MRA has stood outside a feminist conference shouting? Or pulled a fire alarm to prevent them from speaking?

u/discontinuity · 2 pointsr/Cleveland

Bullet three is exactly backward. Shaker Heights high school used to be ranked in the 90th percentile, but as the mix changed to the one you quote, the Percentage of Students Passing All Four Parts of the Ohio Graduation Test dropped to 67.4%, the high school stopped being one of the most desirable, and white flight has and is occurring.

I agree with you that Clevelanders do NOT fear integrated education, but people value education and will chase these rankings. So if an influx of black students changes a highschool's pass rate, you will see white flight based on the change in status of the highschool. It's also worth noting that the high desirability of these schools is a draw which creates demand for real-estate and as the rankings decline, people will abandon the community as it is a precursor to declining home values, which is where most of the middle-class has the majority of their wealth, exasperating the "white flight" scenario.

There was a Black American Students in An Affluent Suburb: A Study of Academic Disengagement written about the phenomenon.

The author John U. Ogbu was ostricized by the black community because of it.

u/griffxx · 2 pointsr/GCdebatesQT

https://www.amazon.com/Transgender-History-Studies-Susan-Stryker/dp/158005224X
Transgender History (Seal Studies) (9781580052245): Susan ...

Used as the definitive Text at College and Universities.

https://www.amazon.com/Transgender-Studies-Reader-1/dp/041594709X
The Transgender Studies Reader (Volume 1 ... - Amazon.com
Also used in college Gender Studies courses.

https://www.amazon.com/Transgender-Warriors-Making-History-Dennis/dp/0807079413
Transgender Warriors : Making History from Joan ... - Amazon.com

I don't know how they labeled themselves, but it was definitely under the Tran Umbrella.

u/LilianH · 2 pointsr/GCdebatesQT

It's not that new. There is a book about this from 1997 (source)

u/jakt_ · 2 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

Charles Murray (conservative) wrote a book about universal minimum income, at 10K/adult https://www.amazon.com/Our-Hands-Replace-Welfare-State/dp/0844742236

unsure if that would work, but he put the idea out there

u/Ronfar · 2 pointsr/new_right

The Way of Men, by Jack Donovan is a must read. Just finished it recently myself.

u/ok_go_get_em · 2 pointsr/TheRedPill

Speaking of redpill reading, I feel the need to shout out Jack Donovan here. Two of his books, "The Way of Men" and "Becoming a Barbarian" have been absolutely revolutionary for me. These are dangerous books, full of dangerous ideas. The former one, in particular, is an excellent primer in masculine virtue. I bet I've given half a dozen copies away. Read them, learn them, commit them to memory. Also recommended: "Meditations" by Marcus Aurelius and "Letters from a Stoic" by the one and only Seneca.

u/sammayylmao · 2 pointsr/unpopularopinion

I agree with you to a degree. There is a paper called "color blind racism" that explains in America how society is systemically keep the rich, rich and the poor, poor. It is racism that doesn't target minorities (sounds weird right?). It does historically affect non Caucasians to a greater degree. Being poor in this country sucks because the rich keep you there. But being a minority and poor is still measureably worse.

Here's a link to the book: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1442202181/ref=cm_sw_r_sms_apa_i_ZDxDDb9T4C3TA

If anyone is seriously interested, because the book is pricey, I could link a paper I wrote on this for a college sociology course.

u/gbacardi · 2 pointsr/sociology

This was required reading for one of my classes in undergrad and I think it does a good job.

u/nonsignifier · 2 pointsr/news
u/the_well_hung_jury · 2 pointsr/NeutralPolitics

I just finished The New Jim Crow.

I was really expecting it to be much more slanted than it was. A few parts blew my mind -- especially that bit about the "war on drugs" having been thrust onto the public prior to the point that drug abuse was actually becoming a problem. Overall though, it really provides a vastly wider perspective whitewashed from most high school history classes and I cannot recommend it enough to understanding race relations in America.

I read this in conjunction with Racism without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in America . There was some overlap but both informed the other. I'd recommend if interested in the topic of race relations specifically; though I'd recommend Michelle Alexander's book to everyone -- regardless of interest level.

u/projectrevo505 · 1 pointr/WhiteRights

Wow, you have to be really bigoted to think that was the only reason these things happen. It's not as simple as that. It's a huge cycle of poverty, violence, and drugs that all contribute to this. Please please educate yourself so you don't embarrass yourself. This book will help you. It's not about black people mainly, but it'll give you an idea what the reasons are.

u/zuoken · 1 pointr/reddit.com

Kling blaims the poor for their poverty. I disagree with him and think his argument is not firmly developed.

Poverty is a structure whose product is the poor. Class reproduces itself. The children of the wealthy and well-educated grow up to be wealthy and well-educated because their parents bestow upon them the ability to navigate this socioeconomic system. Similarly is true for the poor and poorly-educated. (read the sociological study Unequal Childhoods if you want something more substantial than my rambling comment).

He is coding class warfare in "libertarian beliefs." Rather, we should recogonize the poor are disadvantaged not only because of their poverty, but because they don't understand our current socioeconomic system. "Hard work" alone won't help you (drug dealers work hard). Teach kids to discard constraining notions of gender, teach kids how to talk to professionals, teach kids to how to speak and dress like the hegemonic class - like rich white people. That (unfortunately) will likely get you far in this country.

u/EverWatcher · 1 pointr/politics

> It feels like we're gerrymandered, but honestly it's just the nature of our population. The Blue is too clustered for it's own good.

Yep, the suspicion of gerrymandering is generally accurate but is not always correct. Some possibilities about population distribution need to be kept in mind.

u/StevenMaurer · 1 pointr/politics

You are certainly welcome to believe anything you'd like, but if you insist on holding pejorative views of others, don't be shocked when they don't react positively.

In terms of you claiming that the Democratic party leadership not reflecting the values of the Democratic electorate - you are correct. Democratic leaders are considerably more liberal and progressive than the general public at large. Again, the whole thing that started this conversation we're having is me pointing out the election results, which clearly shows this issue.

I clearly understand how you get to that condition. Thanks to The Big Sort, lefties in big emerald blue cities almost can't help but fall into group-think. While suburban and rural Democratic activists are stuck trying to explain to you that America isn't all a bunch of frustrated socialists.

In terms of Donald Trump, please understand that there is a huge white temper tantrum going on, as the 1950s economy, where if you were American, white, and male, you could get a job more or less straight out of highschool, even if you learned nothing there. The US hasn't fallen behind in the market, so much as the rest of the world has caught up, and succeeding if you're the "right" kind of person, isn't so easy anymore. Hence the tantrum.

Most of this tantrum exhibits itself as blatant white racism and nativism, but there is the leftist version of this as well. Scratch the surface of a so-called "millennial" supposedly angry at "capitalism", you find they're no more in favor of raising taxes on the rich than others. Measure 97 in particular, lost in Oregon because the public got convinced by the "rich plutocrats give people jobs and low prices as a gift - not because that's what the market will bear - so tax increases on them will all be passed on to you" canard. It's depressing.

Quite literally, in 150 yeas, no non-incumbent Democratic party candidate has ever followed a Democratic President. This is not due to "incompetence", it's due to the fact that 25% of the public always just votes against the president's party no matter what. It is generally true for Republicans as well, with the exception of Reagan, who successfully convinced the public to shift dramatically to the right.

The voters, mind you. Not the leadership.

No. Democrats are not socialists. We worship neither at the altar of "free markets" nor "government everything". Both concentrate power in the hands of a few, which leads inevitably to authoritarianism. We happen to be pulling in the same direction as socialists - advocating for more government control of completely out of control crony-capitalism and plutocracy that the GOP espouses. But we also see the lessons of socialist corrupt fascism, and don't want that either.




u/salpa · 1 pointr/de

Wen das Thema interessiert, dem kann ich "The Big Sort" von Bill Bishop empfehlen. Ist zwar schon von 2008, aber auch in den USA aktueller denn je.

u/tjshipman44 · 1 pointr/todayilearned

I think you're confusing cause and effect.

The big thing that's happened in the last 30-40 years in American politics has been sorting. Look up The Big Sort.

Essentially, before 1965, you had lots of Southern Democrats who were more ideologically conservative and a smaller, but still significant number of Rockefeller Republicans in the North who were more ideologically liberal. The largest reason for congressional dysfunction is that increasingly representatives are more responsive to their constituents than before. This causes more gridlock, not less.

Now, you can argue that those constituents are frequently not thinking of their own best interests, but it's hard to make the case that in the vast majority of instances, congress is more responsive, not less.

u/JinxsLover · 1 pointr/politics

How is it victim blaming when you are the one carrying out the action..... If a district is 50-50 in Kentucky and 10% of Democrats are continually moving to a more liberal area rather it is a city or a state to be surrounded by people with similar views then that district will probably never go blue again. There is even a good book on the topic called the big sort. https://smile.amazon.com/Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded-America/dp/0547237723?sa-no-redirect=1 . Also regardless of your strong personal opinion on the topic that will result in losing the House and state legislatures in most of the south and west every year barring a financial collapse or impeachment that provokes a backlash.

u/SammyD1st · 1 pointr/RealEstate

> By living in the same place where there are role models of people who care about the property, and the property itself is maintained to very high standards, you create an atmosphere that demands respect.

Nope, there is tons of data showing that this is demonstrably not true. That is exactly how people theorized Section 8 would work, and it hasn't: the worst drag people down, the best get the hell out and form their own communities.

I realize you're in the ivory tower. I hope that you'll actually listen to what the real landlords are telling you here.

u/jamestown112 · 1 pointr/Libertarian

I'm not sure your hypothesis is backed by the evidence. People are plenty different, not just due to cultural differences, but also due to basic differences in their personalities (which are largely determined by genes).

Moreover, to say that Ice-T's agreement with Rush on the issue of gun control is evidence that we're all simiilar s spurious. Let's see how they compare on other issues? These two are oil and water. That they agree on one issue at all is surprising.

Edit: This is a great read on the issue http://www.amazon.com/The-Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded/dp/0547237723/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1343416477&sr=8-1&keywords=the+big+sort

u/unfuckreddit · 1 pointr/Suomi

Trollaat nyt jäämällä kiinni hyvin epäoleelliseen asiaan, mutta okei. Ihan hauska aihehan tämä on.

Olemassaoleva tiede tuntuu tukevan väitteitäni, vaikkakin en usko että sitä voi suoraan soveltaa Suomen monipuoluejärjestelmään.

https://academic.oup.com/joc/article-abstract/64/2/317/4085994 Tässä tutkimuksessa havainnoitiin erittäin merkittävää homofiliaa republikaanien ja demokraattien twitterin sosiaalisissa graafeissa.

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137276773_2 Lisää poliittista homofiliaa graafien avulla

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0093650218813655 Vähän erilainen tutkimus poliittisesta homofiliasta redditissä

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25953820 Todettiin aika selkeää poliittista homofiliaa facebookin sosiaalisissa graafeissa.

https://www.amazon.com/Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded-America/dp/0547237723
https://www.economist.com/united-states/2008/06/19/the-big-sort En saanut kirjasta helposti kopiota, mutta economistin artikkelissa on mielenkiintoista juttua poliittisesta homofiliasta liittyen asumiseen.

Voisin jatkaa mutta eiköhän noilla pääse hyvin alkuun.

Oletan että olemme tässä vaiheessa samaa mieltä vahvan poliittisen homofilian läsnäolosta sosiaalisessa mediassa. Jos näin on, graafianalyysi vaikuttaa äärimmäisen tehokkaalta työkalulta äänestyskäyttäytymisen ennustamiseen ainakin kaksipuoluejärjestelmässä. Koska pystymme luotettavasti ennustamaan ihmisten äänestyskäyttäytymistä, pystymme myös havaitsemaan mahdollisia poikkeamia sosiaalisen piirin sekä äänestyskoppikuvien välillä.



Toki voitaisiin myös yksinkertaistaa ja lähettää poliittisia kyselyitä äänestyskoppikuvien postaajille, merkittävät poikkeamat kyselyvastausten ja todellisen äänestyskäytöksen välillä kertoisi jo aika paljon.

Uskoisin että näitä kahta tekniikkaa yhdistämällä voitaisiin jo päästä aika selkeisiin tuloksiin.



>Eli tämä vaalivilppikuvaaminen erotetaan normikuvaamisesta "työkalujen" ja "graafin analyysin" avulla. Mites toimitaan jos kuvaaja on vaihtanut kameran polaarisuuden tai jos salamavalon vaiheinen on ollut tainnutus -asennossa?

Ehkä puhuit tässä jonkinlaisesta teknisestä keinosta tunnistaa äänestyskoppikuvia? Jos näin oli, en koe teknisiä keinoja tässä kovin tarpeelliseksi. Suomen populaatio on niin pieni että tämä olisi triviaalinen ongelma ratkaista vaikkapa mechanical turkilla.

u/VoodooIdol · 1 pointr/politics

>hate crimes apply to any racially motivated crime, whether it's white on black or black on white.

Unfortunately the US judicial system says otherwise.

>affirmative action is not my bag and I never mentioned it

Because it goes against your belief that white men aren't oppressed.

>white men do get public assistance too

I can name several people I know personally who were turned down for public assistance specifically because they were white. I have been as well.

>your points make no sense and I am getting pretty tired of this

They make no sense to you because you're programmed to believe otherwise. Step outside the brainwashing for a moment.

http://www.amazon.com/Redneck-Manifesto-Hillbillies-Americas-Scapegoats/dp/0684838648/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1219888166&sr=8-1

Read it and get back to me.


edit

And for the record, I'm a registered Democrat, pro Gay marriage, pro Choice, and pro equal rights.

u/willtel76 · 1 pointr/todayilearned

Read this book if you are interested in learning more about the beginnings of the white slave trade and forced indentured servitude. It is truly an eye opener and all of it's statistics and figures are backed up with the sources you seek.

It explains in great detail why being a white indentured servant was often much worse than being a black slave. In short, a slave was property that was paid for and owned so you generally took care of them. An indentured servant was like a rental and if they died during their service period it was beneficial because you didn't have to pay them out with property at the end of their term.

During that time in Ireland it was a crime to be poverty stricken and something as innocent as begging for bread was enough to have you arrested and put on a ship to America or Barbados and forced into indentured servitude. The term redneck comes from pale Irish whites that were worked in the Barbados sun. It was a way for the upper class to maintain control and have peasants removed from the landscape to further their grasp on the country and it's resources.

Do you ever wonder why everyone claims that America was founded by entitled whites and built by black slaves yet most white people are poor and own no property? It is because most of us are descendants of lower class servants, not noblemen. All told more Irish people were forced into this situation than black slaves were brought over from Africa.

u/serpentjaguar · 1 pointr/WTF

>It's not a lie that Jeff Foxworthy and Larry The Cable Guy's audience is almost entirely lower class white people, their shows and movies have been marketed exclusively to them since the beginning.

And your point is?

Basically, I rest my case. Here's an underprivileged and undereducated population that has been taught that it's OK to laugh at and make fun of everything they are and not only that, they should somehow be perversely proud of their backwardness.

As far as I'm concerned, that's clinical malfeasance on a grand cultural scale.

The dirty truth is that while racism is a big no no, classism is still open season in this country so long as it's poor whites that you're making fun of. The fact that it's rednecks and hillbillies themselves who laugh the hardest at their own lack of dignity bespeaks precisely of the problem.

These are a people who have, on a grand cultural scale, been given little or no recognition and dignity within our wider cultural milieu. Yeah, Doc Watson is probably one of the baddest-ass guitar players of all time, sure, Earl Scruggs plays a mean banjo and Emmy Lou Harris sure can sing. Flannery O'Connor is one of our greatest short story writers and Sam Walton owns your ass and neighborhood, but guess what? They're the exceptions, not the rule, the ones who for whatever reason were able to break out of Appalachia.

The fact is that no one gives a fuck about poor white people, least of all themselves, and this is exactly the type of pathology that sociologists have come to expect in the forgotten corners of society.

Edit: I cordially refer you to Jim Goad's excellent book, "The Redneck Manifesto" for an often humorous but nonetheless in-depth look at the issue.

u/rAtheismSelfPostOnly · 1 pointr/INTPBookmarks

Things to Buy
http://www.amazon.com/Miracle-Years-Hanna-Schissler/dp/0691058202

http://www.amazon.com/Redneck-Manifesto-Hillbillies-Americas-Scapegoats/dp/0684838648

http://www.amazon.com/review/product/039332169X/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?%5Fencoding=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Everyone-Darwins-Theory-Change/dp/0385340214

http://www.amazon.com/Andromeda-Strain-Michael-Crichton/dp/006170315X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1225932164&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/Primates-Classroom-Evolutionary-Perspective-Childrens/dp/0870236113/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261589323&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/Paleolithic-Prescription-Program-Exercise-Design/dp/0060916354/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261589224&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/Exiles-Eden-Psychotherapy-Evolutionary-Perspective/dp/0393700739/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261589294&sr=1-2

http://www.amazon.com/Chimpanzee-Politics-Power-among-Apes/dp/0801886562/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261589183&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/YOU-Updated-Expanded-Insiders-Healthier/dp/0061473677/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1263303625&sr=1-5

http://www.amazon.com/YOU-Updated-Expanded-Insiders-Healthier/dp/0061473677/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1263303625&sr=1-5

http://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-Bad-Controversial-Science/dp/1400033462/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1297305735&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/New-Sugar-Busters-Cut-Trim/dp/0345469585/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1297305615&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Omnivores-Dilemma-Natural-History-Meals/dp/0143038583/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1297305420&sr=8-2

http://www.amazon.com/Skinny-Bastard-Kick-Ass-Getting/product-reviews/0762435402/ref=cm_cr_dp_all_helpful?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1&sortBy=bySubmissionDateDescending

http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Everyone-Darwins-Theory-Change/dp/0385340214

http://www.amazon.com/Food-Rules-Eaters-Michael-Pollan/dp/014311638X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1297305420&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Primates-Classroom-Evolutionary-Perspective-Childrens/dp/0870236113/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261589323&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/Exiles-Eden-Psychotherapy-Evolutionary-Perspective/dp/0393700739/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261589294&sr=1-2

http://www.amazon.com/Paleolithic-Prescription-Program-Exercise-Design/dp/0060916354/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261589224&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/Chimpanzee-Politics-Power-among-Apes/dp/0801886562/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261589183&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Stranger-Strange-Land-Robert-Heinlein/dp/0441788386/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258348123&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Full-Plate-Diet-Great-Healthy/dp/1885167717/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1266199288&sr=1-13

http://www.amazon.com/Religion-War-Scott-Adams/dp/0740747886/ref=ntt_at_ep_dpi_9

http://www.amazon.com/Full-Plate-Diet-Great-Healthy/dp/1885167717/ref=sr_1_13?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1266199288&sr=1-13

http://www.amazon.com/Blindsight-Peter-Watts/dp/0765319640/

http://www.amazon.com/Miracle-Years-Hanna-Schissler/dp/0691058202

http://www.amazon.com/Redneck-Manifesto-Hillbillies-Americas-Scapegoats/dp/0684838648

http://www.amazon.com/review/product/039332169X/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?%5Fencoding=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

http://www.amazon.com/Andromeda-Strain-Michael-Crichton/dp/006170315X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1225932164&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/Atheist-Manifesto-Against-Christianity-Judaism/dp/1559708204

http://www.amazon.com/Mayo-Clinic-Family-Health-Book/dp/1603200770/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1267299889&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/Body-Sculpting-Bible-Men-Revised/dp/1578262380/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1298573232&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Mens-Health-Big-Book-Exercises/dp/1605295507
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1594866279/ref=asc_df_15948662791442125?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&tag=pg-1583-01-20&linkCode=asn&creative=395093&creativeASIN=1594866279

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0345498461/ref=asc_df_03454984611442018?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&tag=pg-1583-01-20&linkCode=asn&creative=395093&creativeASIN=0345498461

http://www.amazon.com/Beginning-Runners-Handbook-13-Week-Walk-Run/dp/1553650875/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1298575384&sr=8-1
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703558004574581891694514228.html

http://www.amazon.com/Edible-Wild-Plants-Foods-Adventure/dp/1423601505

http://www.amazon.com/Shoppers-Guide-Organic-Food/dp/1857028406/ref=sr_1_16?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1308213453&sr=1-16

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Portrait_of_the_Artist_as_a_Young_Man

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_of_consciousness_writing

http://entertainment.time.com/2011/08/30/all-time-100-best-nonfiction-books/#fast-food-nation-by-eric-schlosser

http://www.amazon.com/Stranger-Strange-Land-Robert-Heinlein/dp/0441788386/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1258348123&sr=8-1

http://www.webmd.com/sleep-disorders/sleep-apnea/continuous-positive-airway-pressure-cpap-for-obstructive-sleep-apnea

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Catcher_in_the_Rye

http://www.amazon.com/Catch-22-Joseph-Heller/dp/0684833395

http://www.amazon.com/Starting-Strength-2nd-Mark-Rippetoe/dp/0976805421/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1253993543&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Aero-Speed-Hyperformance-Jump-Rope/dp/B00017XHO8

http://www.invisibleshoe.com/#ecwid:category=135066&mode=product&product=278983

http://view.exacttarget.com/?j=fe621670756c0575741d&m=fe7215707561047d7315&ls=fde817797d6d037977177974&l=fe9215717260007a70&s=fe2d13707d600478751c72&jb=ffcf14&ju=fe2e167375640d75711576&r=0

http://www.amazon.com/Element-Surprise-Navy-Seals-Vietnam/dp/0804105812/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1304634342&sr=8-1

http://www.amazon.com/Lone-Survivor-Eyewitness-Account-Operation/dp/0316067598

http://www.amazon.com/Diving-Bell-Butterfly-Memoir-Death/dp/0375701214/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1312848167&sr=8-1

Political
Iraq Research

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Tawhid_Wal-Jihad

http://www.ontheissues.org/Drugs.htm#Barack_Obama

Congress Related

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/r110query.html

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_110_1.htm

http://www.usdoj.gov/

http://www.issuedictionary.com/Barack_Obama.cgi

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r110:75:./temp/~r110y7HfAa::

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists
/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237

http://allafrica.com/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/??

Health & Exercise
Green Tea

http://www.teatrekker.com/store/tea/green/green+-+japan.php

http://www.o-cha.com/brew.htm

http://www.ehow.com/how_2080066_steep-loose-leaf-tea.html

http://cooksshophere.com/products/tea/green_tea.htm

http://whfoods.org/genpage.php?tname=foodspice&dbid=146

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_of_tea

http://blackdragonteabar.blogspot.com/2008_09_01_archive.html

http://blackdragonteabar.blogspot.com/

https://www.itoen.com/leaf/index.cfm

http://www.maiko.ne.jp/english/

http://www.mellowmonk.com/buyGreenTea.htm
http://www.o-cha.com/home.php

http://www.denstea.com/

http://www.theteaavenue.com/chgrtea.html

http://www.teafrog.com/teas/finum-tea-brewing-basket.html

u/Kurgan_Warrior · 1 pointr/The_Donald

Jim Goad made a very good start in the late 90s through his book the red neck manifesto- a worthy read. After you read it you see their racism everywhere.

https://www.amazon.com/Redneck-Manifesto-Hillbillies-Americas-Scapegoats/dp/0684838648

u/modusponens66 · 1 pointr/AskReddit

>Never underestimate how much "greater society" influences people. It's about pop culture...

I am all too aware of the corrosive effect of pop culture on society. I currently teach English and ethics as an adjunct at a community college here in northeast Ohio (Akron/Cleveland) area while finishing my law degree. 85 to 90% of my students are black (25% of my last class had seen prison time) and I regularly receive essays full of 'text-speak' (e.g. 'u' for 'you') extolling the virtues of looking 'fresh' and other such nonsense. I also taught freshman level philosophy courses at Ohio University and had similar experiences though not as pronounced.

>This was an experiment conducted by scientists...

Well, social scientists anyway... : )

>However, you aren't recognizing the impact race has on determining class.

I do recognize this and referred to it somewhere in this thread when asking someone about the legacy of slavery and segregation. I agree that this is one factor that does limit minorities, though I think it is more an issue of how it affects class presently (it's a longer journey to the top when one starts at the bottom) than one of overt racism.

>But it is very different that almost no minorities have any generational wealth.

The minorities and I, we have a lot in common. : )

Please don't get the impression that I am insensitive to the plight of minorities or in some state of denial regarding the persistence of racism. My point is simply that while racism continues to be an issue, class is the more daunting obstacle (though there is of course a relation between race and class).

You should read this book. The title is intentionally silly and the author has a great sense of humor, but there is much more to the book than that.

Have a nice day "cute little middle class white girl!" : )


u/Capolan · 1 pointr/offbeat

I recommend everyone in this thread to read this book:

The Redneck Manifesto: How Hillbillies, Hicks, and White Trash Became America's Scapegoats

It's very well written, insightful and amusing. And it does tackle the redneck and white trash lifestyle and explain things quite well. Good read.

u/satanic_hamster · 1 pointr/PurplePillDebate

> Seriously you expect me to watch all that?

Watch however much you want whenever you want to.

> Please summarize.

They hate divorce court. They hate the institutionalized and legally codified misandry (here, here, here, here, here, etc.). They hate contempt for men in society.

The reasons have been accounted for, documented and published all over the place.

u/Inconnu2u · 1 pointr/MensRights

I have done extensive research, which is why I hate feminists. I am an antifeminist - someone who is against the feminist movement, which for the past four decades have been systematically Spreading Misandry, Legalizing Misandry, waging an all out War Against Men and sadly even a War Against Boys.

u/Operator77 · 1 pointr/IAmA

>I'm not really associated with the feminist movement.

Really? Then why defend it?

I read the wikipedia article. Wikipedia is a great resource, I love it.

Third wave feminism?! These waves need to stop. The article did mention Christina Hoff Sommers, though.

I have her book The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism is Harming Our Young Men. Fantastic book, it really should just how harmful feminism really is.


Two more I would highly recommend:

Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture



Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men


I am all for equal rights. People who feel likewise should call temselves equalists.
I would embrace that in a heartbeat.
They should not continue to describe themselves as feminists, which is such a loaded term so full of negative connotations.

I posted this in Eqality - what do you think?

u/Feminism_Is_Evil · 1 pointr/MensRights

Legalizing Misandry by Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young.

u/ee4m · 1 pointr/JordanPeterson

>For one, communism was a complete wash

Ok, thats one - but it lead to lots of polices that your parents benefited from, social mobility, decent wages, good access to education.

>or another thing, most right-wingers today are liberal rather than reactionary or monarchical.

Yes, but at the time the right were fighting the left on these matters and the liberals (the left) were the enemy. The liberalism that the right wants today, is a right wing intrepretation of it that adam smith disapproved of.

> Would you considered Peterson to be right wing?

Going by his activity and affiliations in twitter he is extreme right.

>"Freedom of speech" is this a left/right thing?

Freedom of speech was a hard fought battle against the right which had to be won over and over, the right to speak against the church, the right to protest war etc.

>"Evolution" again, not a left/right thing.

Yes, the right fought for biblical fundamentalism.


>Also, even if all of what you said was true, it wouldn't mean today's right wing thought had nothing to argue.

the majority of the rights arguments against feminism and sjw's today came from the left. Warren Farrell was the one who debunked all the feminist talking points in the 1970s and talked about men falling behind in education due to neolibral left policies.

These two as well.

https://www.amazon.com/Spreading-Misandry-Teaching-Contempt-Popular/dp/0773530991

u/JoJoFoFoFo · 1 pointr/samharris

Evidence shows the differences in academic aptitudes among races are so small as to be negligible. The same is true about gender where females tend to be very slightly better at some tasks on average ... but who cares. It's negligible on average and says nothing about any individual.

The problems with inner city schools that you mention are primarily socio-economic and also cultural (see Shaker Heights: https://www.amazon.com/Black-American-Students-Affluent-Suburb/dp/080584516X ), not genetic.

I think you are arguing that teachers should be evaluated based on growth rather than proficiency.

u/NiggerJew944 · 1 pointr/AskReddit

Seriously you ask for my opinion and that's the reply I get? And I thought we were friends. I also find you attitudes on the achievement gap to be quaint. Here is a study by a black sociologist on the reasons black students perform poorly in a rich middle class school district. His conclussion...It isn't the teachers.

http://www.amazon.com/Black-American-Students-Affluent-Suburb/dp/080584516X

http://www.eastbayexpress.com/ebx/rich-black-flunking/Content?oid=1070459

Here is another perspective from a white teacher who chose to teach in a primarily black school district. I am sure the blame for the achievement gap rest on his shoulders as well.

http://martynemko.blogspot.com/2009/06/white-teacher-speaks-out-what-is-it.html

u/scallon · 1 pointr/TrueReddit

I didn't realize I had to do your homework for you. This was the top result of a google search for "shaker heights sociology study schools". When I saw this study last it was in article format but I am not surprised the author wrote a book about it.

Anyways, you are remembering the study incorrectly. It was a study of middle class black families in comparison to middle class whites within the same community. He found that the white parents were significantly more likely to preach the value of education and homework and hold their children responsible when they performed poorly academically, whereas the reverse was true with the black parents. They did little to reinforce the importance of school or homework and blamed the teachers/schools when their children did poorly. So yes, actually, it addresses this point directly.

Look, I do not care to "convert" you. I couldn't care less if you believe what I am saying. The link to the book is of zero help to you as you are not going to order it and read it and you have demonstrated an unwillingness to search for any evidence that is contrary to your claim (unless it is spoon fed to you), so what do you want? Shall I xerox the relevant pages of the article (assuming I ever find my copy) and mail them to you? Why is that my responsibility? I have told you that there is evidence to support my claim, I gave you a really good jumping off point, and you do not want to do any work. Fine. Again, I don't care. But do not make the mistake of assuming that your laziness or my apathy is reason enough to continue believing you are right about this.

u/Koskap · 1 pointr/news

You really, honestly should. Especially if you take your interest in sociology seriously. It would be like not reading The Bell Curve (which a bunch of people disagree with)

https://www.amazon.com/Black-American-Students-Affluent-Suburb/dp/080584516X/

u/SD_TMI · 1 pointr/sandiego

You're just spamming the sub now with this.
Repeating the same things and not advancing your position.

Nor are you responding to my questions so that we can have a rational discussion by establishing what is "racism and privilege" exactly and how it pertains to the city.

Because right now it's all this fuzzy notion that makes excuses far too easy. Talking to you really does remind me of a good will hunting secene. I even brought up Howard Zin for cryin out loud.

Anyway, Perhaps something like John Ogbu's study "Black American Students in an Affluent Suburb: A Study of Academic Disengagement" would be of benefit here.

Otherwise this is isn't going anywhere and it's clear that no amount of reasoning is going to change whatever some militant BLM mantra crept into your mind.

u/tammyfromthelibrary · 1 pointr/news

Here's a book that more or less sums it up:
https://www.amazon.com/Black-American-Students-Affluent-Suburb/dp/080584516X

I agree with you on two points:

  1. The condition blacks are in today is due in large part to being enslaved for ~100 years, then being subject to institutional racism for another ~100 years.
  2. There are still people who hold positions of power that who knowingly or unknowingly hold black people back.


    After that our agreement ends. The position and opportunity of black people in society today is better than it has ever been. If they had the culture of Asians or Jews they could easily outpace white people in every metric. Further, whining and blaming everything on "white racism" will hold black people in the ghetto forever. Your viewpoints are actively oppressing African Americans.
u/HrunknerUnnerby · 1 pointr/PoliticalDiscussion

Spoiler: it's black people.

I don't know if there's a single perfect book, because it's a difficult problem and nobody knows all the answers. Here's a decent book that tackles the politically correct part of the problem. For the politically incorrect part, you can read between the lines of books like this or you can delve into the horrible dark corners of the Internet like this. As to the validity of the politically correct and politically incorrect theories, who knows. Maybe it's a combination?

u/1pct · 1 pointr/PoliticalDiscussion

I figured that was what you were thinking but didn't expect you to admit it openly.

> Spoiler: it's black people.
>
> I don't know if there's a single perfect book, because it's a difficult problem and nobody knows all the answers. Here's a decent book that tackles the politically correct part of the problem. For the politically incorrect part, you can read between the lines of books like this or you can delve into the horrible dark corners of the Internet like this. As to the validity of the politically correct and politically incorrect theories, who knows. Maybe it's a combination?

u/xeromem · 1 pointr/science

It has been noted that voluntary immigrants (whites, asians) do far better than most involuntry immigrants (most african americans, native americans).

u/DrDm · 1 pointr/science

Amazon link to the printed studies and other of his works.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=John+Ogobu&x=10&y=22

http://www.amazon.com/Black-American-Students-Affluent-Suburb/dp/080584516X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1289444666&sr=8-1-spell

Black American Students in An Affluent Suburb: A Study of Academic Disengagement (Sociocultural, Political, and Historical Studies in Education)

http://www.amazon.com/Minority-Education-Caste-Cross-Cultural-Perspective/dp/0125242506/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1289444666&sr=8-2-spell

Minority Education and Caste: The American System in Cross-Cultural Perspective (A Carnegie Council on Children Monograph)

http://www.amazon.com/Next-Generation-Ethnography-Neighbourhood-anthropology/dp/0127855890/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1289444666&sr=8-3-spell

Next Generation: Ethnography of Education in an Urban Neighbourhood (Studies in anthropology)

u/puredemo · 1 pointr/WTF

Yeah really. Like it or not, he is pretty much correct.

For instance, check out this 30-year sociology study on academic habits.

u/gbd_628 · 1 pointr/SlaughteredByScience

Haven't you ever wondered why the scientific consensus is the opposite of your claims?

For starters, IQ isn't a great all-around measure of intelligence. It does accurately predict social outcomes and is highly correlated with many intellectual and academic accomplishments, but it has severe flaws. Take for example the Flynn Effect: previous generations had much lower IQ scores than today, when normalized to be on the same scale. The rapid increase of IQ globally (Great Britain saw an increase of 15 points in 70 years) cannot be explained by any plausible genetic explanation—the increase has simply been too fast. Genetic effects couldn't have spread throughout the entire population. There is also no plausible argument that general intelligence has improved by that much. If it had, 40% of the British population a century ago would be mentally damaged by today's standards.

The reasons for the Flynn Effect are unclear. A rise in standardized testing and formal schooling appears to be at least part of it. What is clear is that when comparing people from wildly different environments, IQ is a poor measure of general intelligence. (When comparing people from similar environments, it does remarkably well. The reasons for this are still being studied.)

_

Even if IQ were a good measure of intelligence (which it isn't), that doesn't mean IQ score differences are genetic. Indeed, we know for a fact that they aren't.

Take the Burakumin of Japan. They are an ostracized class and have been for centuries; due to complex religious/spiritual/social reasons, if you have an ancestor who engaged in an "unclean" profession (e.g., a prostitute, a butcher, an actor, etc.), you too are unclean and are socially inferior. The important thing is that the class is genetically identical to the rest of the Japanese population. You can't tell the difference by looking, which is why the Burakumin were forced to get tattoos, and why corporations started keeping lists of who was Burakumin so they knew who not to hire. Today, while those lists are banned, they are still socially stigmatized, and the group forms the ranks of the Japanese mafia, with the tattoos becoming a source of pride.

Anyway, the average have an IQ of the Burakumin is 10-15 points lower than the average Japanese person. See here. This is the same as the gap between white Americans and black Americans. Importantly, both gaps have been shrinking. Most interestingly, the Japanese gap completely disappears among immigrants to the United States—the people here don't know that they're supposed to discriminate against one of the groups.

Similar stories of vanishing IQ gaps appear all over the field. Adopting someone at three years old from Sub-Saharan Africa into a European family cuts the IQ gap by 15 points., cutting the IQ gap in half. The remaining gap, to reiterate, is the same sized that is known to be caused by discrimination. And note further that this is without any improved pre-natal care, which is known to be extremely important to a child's health.

_


Finally, this is all assuming that "race" is a thing, scientifically speaking, which it isn't. To draw an analogy, it's like constellations. Yes, some stars are closer to others. But the physical differences have little connection with how they appear in the sky, any anyways are not clustered into distinct groups. The stars and the distances between them exist; the pictures only exist in your head. I mean, the idea of "whiteness" isn't even self-consistent and varies across time. Are Poles white? Are Russians? Are Italians? Are Southern-Europeans? Are North-Africans and Middle-Easterners? Are Indians? Are Jews? Are Spaniards? Are Mexicans? Are Chileans? (The last few are the most hilarious currently—the jumps required to assert that South Americans are genetically inferior to "us", but "us" includes the Spanish and Portuguese, are hilarious.)

__

Race doesn't exist the way you think it does. Intelligence might, based on the g-factor (scores in completely different aptitude tests are correlated, suggesting a legitimate "general intelligence"), but IQ is not a good measure of it cross-populations. Intelligence is not a metric of moral standing; the Jews aren't naturally the superiors of everyone else just because they have higher IQ. And IQ differences are entirely explainable by environmental factors.

u/kage-e · 1 pointr/genderqueer

Sorry for the late reply, I only now stumbled upon your question.

Here are some more books that I haven't seen mentioned. All of them are non-fiction, all of the authors have published more on the topic.

u/CinematicUniversity · 1 pointr/news

UBI, in the way Murray wants, it is not an expansion of the social safety net. He wants it to replace all other social services.


>This is the Plan, a radical new approach to social policy that defies any partisan label. Murray suggests eliminating all welfare transfer programs at the federal, state, and local levels and substituting an annual $10,000 cash grant to everyone age twenty-one or older. In Our Hands describes the financial feasibility of the Plan and its effects on retirement, health care, poverty, marriage and family, work, neighborhoods and civil society.


The libertarian version of UBI is a massive reduction in the benefits the average person uses

u/noelsusman · 1 pointr/dataisbeautiful

Of course it's redistribution of wealth, and that's not against libertarian principles. Charles Murray wrote a whole book about it. The Cato Institute has thoroughly discussed the idea in mostly glowing terms. It's far from universally supported among libertarians, but it has solid traction.

u/35mmFILM · 1 pointr/PoliticalDiscussion

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0844742236/ref=nosim/nationalreviewon

Great minds think alike... some of the details are different but the general idea has been out there for a while. Also google "basic income guarantee."

u/topdog82 · 1 pointr/asktrp

Male 23 last year of university graduating in a Computer Engineering degree

http://www.amazon.com/How-Be-Man-Corey-Wayne/dp/1411673360
Its basically a cross between a basic book like "Bang" and "The way of men". PUA crossed with some more serious/relevant messages about masculinity and purusing goals
http://www.amazon.com/Way-Men-Jack-Donovan/dp/0985452307

I have been in only one serious LTR. Girl broke my heart. I spent 1 year without touching a woman and wallowing in my own pity because the LTR cheated. I had a serious health issue that kept my bedridden for a long time. Other than that, I am just getting started with TRP and realizing my value in the sexual marketplace. So in short; fairly inexperienced. Just getting started. Thats why I am posting this topic

Well I guess that means I should just keep spinning plates till I get someone valuable. And if not, fuck marraige

u/BabaxGanoosh · 1 pointr/TheRedPill
  1. The Way Of Men.
    This book changed my life. Im sure anyone on this sub will recognize themselves and the situations Donovan writes about.

  2. Anything by Robert Greene.
    How to become powerful, seductive and master yourself.

  3. Meditations.
    This book helped me overcome my fear of death, which made me give less fucks. Because in the end, nothing matters.

    I dont have anymore than that at the moment, but i would suggest reading biographies of great men. Right now im reading Seven Pillars Of Wisdom, T. E. Lawrence(of Arabia)s first hand account of the Arab uprising during the First World War
u/zed_0mega · 1 pointr/AskMen

I highly recommend The Way of Men by Jack Donovan. One of the best books of this sort.

u/MetaMemeticMagician · 1 pointr/TheNewRight

Sex

The Way of Men – Jack Donovan***
Sperm Wars – Robin Baker
Sex at Dawn – Christopher Ryan
Why Men Rule – Steven Goldberg
The Manipulated Man – Esther Vilar
Is There Anything Good About Men? – Roy Baumeister
Demonic Males – Dale Peterson
The Essential Difference – Simon Baron-Cohen
The Mating Mind – Geoffrey Miller
The Red Queen – Matt Ridley

****

Government

Mau-mauing the Flak Catchers – Tom Wolfe
Public Choice: An Introduction – Iain McLean
On Government Employment – Foseti (blog post)
Yes, Minister – TV Show

****

​

u/Hailanathema · 1 pointr/TheMotte

Racist prejudice can exist in the absence of intention to be racist. This is the whole point of books like Racism without Racists. Systems can be set up to be systematically biased for/against particular races without individuals in those systems intending the result. The reason I mention intent specifically is that your comment was that people portraying interracial relationships had "intent to weaken or destroy" white people.

u/Im_Screaming · 1 pointr/Showerthoughts

Everyone cares subconsciously about what someone’s skin color is. My argument (and what the data shows) is that everyone has prejudice and you are most likely to fall victim to prejudice when you think you have none. It’s not racist to admit you have prejudice and attempt to overcome it and analyze each situation to understand when that bias was unwittingly applied to your decision making.

To use an analogy: Alcoholics are most at risk of relapse when they think they are can easily resist the temptation of alcohol. It lets them put their guard down which in turn makes them more likely to fall victim to temptation.

To be color blind is to be ignorant of our own biases and culturally laden judgements.


This form of color blind racism is considered to be racism without racists. It is when people are good-intentioned but blind to their biases.

I suggest you read the 3rd book since when I’m proposing is a major shift in world view for most people, which it often takes an entire book to truly convey the extreme degree to which color blindness is harmful.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/07/150715103510.htm

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/color-blind-policies-could-make-diversity-harder-to-achieve.html

https://www.amazon.com/Racism-without-Racists-Color-Blind-Persistence/dp/1442202181

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/culturally-speaking/201112/colorblind-ideology-is-form-racism?amp

u/crasstoise · 1 pointr/OkCupid

Yes, it does. I practice the hide + 1-star Quickmatch treatment.

It's an absolute dealbreaker, no matter what race the person is. I don't care if there's racial animus behind it or if it's a mere "preference"; as many cool, open-minded people as there are in my area who don't strongly prefer to date intra-racially, I can't be bothered to parse out what lies in the hearts who do prefer it. I realize that people of color have reasons for selecting "yes" that aren't rooted in white supremacy, but I still don't have time for it, especially since I'm the kind of person who, not fitting neatly into any particular cultural box, tends to focus more on individuals rather than groups. A lot of the pushback against the notion that selecting "yes" is racist (which it is, even under the narrow Merriam-Webster definition of "racism") is a byproduct of a modern Western society shot through with racism without racists.

For the record, I'm not white.

u/phish95 · 1 pointr/PoliticalVideo

This book was mentioned.

u/jub-jub-bird · 1 pointr/AskConservatives

The conservative viewpoint of the humanities tends to be focussed on the Western Canon and the great books curriculum or Classical education. A common conservatives opinion is that a classical liberal arts education is critically important and valuable, but that modern Academia mired in revisionist theories and nihilism and leaving students adrift in a sea of electives taught by radicals has lost the thread and are now largely useless at best and more often than not are actively destructive.

A few books about the humanities, philosophy, art & education by conservatives and/or approvingly cited by conservatives.

u/TheGhostOfTzvika · 1 pointr/NotMyPresident_News

From the "Required Reading List":

[The Closing of the American Mind: How Higher Education Has Failed Democracy and Impoverished the Souls of Today's Students]
(https://www.amazon.com/Closing-American-Mind-Education-Impoverished/dp/1451683200/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1495471445&sr=8-1&keywords=Alan+bloom+closing+of) by Allan Bloom

***
And for those who don't have the time to read (and who does, these days):

  • “ ... Americans cannot believe that any really intelligent and good person does not at bottom line share the Will Rogers Weltanschauung, ‘I never met a man I didn’t like.’ ”

  • “ Of course, we are told, the healthy inner-directed person will really care for others. To which I can only respond: If you can believe that, you can believe anything. "

  • “ The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities, that makes it seem inconceivable that other ways are viable, that removes the sense that there is an outside. ”

  • “ I have seen young people, and older people too, who are good democratic liberals, lovers of peace and gentleness, struck dumb with admiration for individuals threatening or using the most terrible violence for the slightest and tawdriest of reasons. They have a sneaking suspicion that they are face to face with men of real commitment, which they themselves lack. And commitment, not truth, is believed to be what counts. ”

    ***

    Other thoughts from Bloom:

  • “ Intellectuals committed to the revolution are the last to resign themselves to the facts. ”

  • “ Civil societies are constituted by what they respect, by what men bow their heads before in reverence. When they no longer have anything before which they can bow, their world is near its end, and all the suppressed and lawless monsters within man reemerge. ”
u/WhenIntegralsAttack · 1 pointr/Conservative

There's a great anthology of Rousseau's political writings that comes up in an Amazon search of "Rousseau". Kant's Critique of Pure Reason is a great book to understand why there might be a problem in establishing a society on pure reason and the progress of science (like we currently have). Locke's two treaties of government are his best works. Also, Descartes is great.

Beware, reading these books is not going to be done in a month or so. It takes years. As a result of this, I advise you to start off with the book The Closing of the American Mind by Allan Bloom. It's an absolutely devastating critique of modern America and its so-called "values". Basically, he chronicles the development of American thought from the Enlightenment to the modern day and shows that much of our language such as "value relativism"/"Multiculturalism", or "I just need to find myself" come from German philosophy which is deeply antithetical to Enlightenment ideals. If you ever had a sense that our Democracy is eroding from the inside out, and much of what we see if a result of the weakness of the people, this book will make a lot of sense to you. If you ever thought that our embrace of multiculturalism led to us "losing ourself" more so than "finding others", this book will make sense. If you enjoy that book, you can decide for yourself if "going to the sources" is worth it for you.

u/jellyravel23 · 1 pointr/JoeRogan

He's using Thomas Sowell's book, have you read it?

https://www.amazon.com/Black-Rednecks-Liberals-Thomas-Sowell/dp/1594031436

u/slimjimjohnson · 1 pointr/iamverysmart

According to Thomas sowell those beats and the rhyming scheme of rap actually stems from Celtic culture which intermingled with the free blacks during the time of the potato famine.

Since the blacks didn't have a culture of their own since it was stripped away from them they latched onto the remnant Celtic culture of the crackers


https://www.amazon.com/Black-Rednecks-Liberals-Thomas-Sowell/dp/1594031436

u/japenner · 1 pointr/IAmA

I've heard of a book that covers the cultural differences of black people to other ethnicities and the history of how the social reforms brought about by liberal Bureaucrats that gave them a specific mindset such as this, the book was Black Rednecks and White Liberals I believe...

u/donotswallow · 1 pointr/politics

Well, I'm not sure where Ron Paul would direct you but Thomas Sowell makes a damn strong argument in his book "Black Rednecks and White Liberals." ( http://www.amazon.com/Black-Rednecks-Liberals-Thomas-Sowell/dp/1594031436/ )

Milton Friedman makes similar (although, obviously not identical) arguments about "Equal Pay for Equal Work" here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsIpQ7YguGE

u/Lowbacca1977 · 1 pointr/AdviceAnimals

Thomas Sowell's got a book that explores exactly that:
https://www.amazon.com/Black-Rednecks-Liberals-Thomas-Sowell/dp/1594031436

u/bradfromearth · 1 pointr/politics

I voted for him. I'm white. I know tons of whites that voted for him. I live in Houston and whites seem to be the minority. Are we forgetting about all the blacks in the Bush administration?

I dare you to read this.

I'll even buy it for you..

u/TheManInBlack_ · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

Just popping in to recommend Black Rednecks and White Liberals, a collection of essays by Thomas Sowell that address these very topics. His arguments are quite convincing, as is his evidence.

u/iMalinowski · 1 pointr/BlackPeopleTwitter

Consider looking into the book by Thomas Sowell on the matter.

u/bluescape · 1 pointr/unpopularopinion

You're severely moving the goal posts.

>most Black and Hispanic people in the US were brought here / came here in extreme poverty and have been kept that way for centuries, whereas most immigrants (especially more recent ones) from Asia come from wealthy families who are actually able to make the move here

Your statement doesn't talk about police policy, nor do you specifically mention post WWII. That's why the Irish were brought up to begin with. Your premise based on the words you chose, was that black/hispanic people don't have the same opportunities because of poverty and racial discrimination. These are two things which were faced by other groups as well. Groups that now flourish.

Might want to check out Black Rednecks and White Liberals

u/_AnObviousThrowaway_ · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

The after effects, sure. But I don't think you can make the case that racism is the primary thing keeping black people down today. For example, take the period between the civil war and the civil rights act of 1964. Black people advanced socially in that time period much more quickly than in the period since the civil rights act, despite the fact discrimination was both legal and extremely common, at least in the south. This tells me there's something else going on. You can see a lot of the problems that plague the black community also plague some white communities, namely crime, poverty, and drug use. Charles Murray writes about said white communities here. And they appear to have similar causes, poor work ethic, single parenthood, and so on. As Thomas Sowell points out,, black culture and redneck culture aren't as dissimilar as you might think.

u/ExOttoyuhr · 1 pointr/CapitalismVSocialism

Nigeria has an Arab-like IQ; they don't have Arab genes, but they do have Arab cultural influence in the north, so much of it that they even have Arab pathologies. Nigeria also has British influences from colonization (which sometimes spread useful memes in spite of itself), and the native Ibo had an industrious, mercantile outlook on life even before colonization. If race causes IQ and GDP, Nigeria is random noise; if memes cause IQ and GDP, and can spread independently of race, Nigeria makes sense.

Race causing IQ and GDP also can't explain West Virginia nearly as well as memes causing them can. West Virginia has IQ of 99, higher than Canada's 97; but they have a GDP per capita of $30,000, much lower than Canada's $45,000, and there are obvious memetic differences between West Virginia and Canada that would obviously tend to hold West Virginia back. Thomas Sowell also argues that memes -- in fact the same memes that work their mischief in Appalachia -- hold back American blacks, and I already mentioned how A Farewell to Alms seems to be more an argument for memes evolving and spreading than for genes doing the same. (A Farewell to Alms claims that there was meaningful genetic change in the West in the past 1500 years; but the avoid-gluten crowd offers pretty compelling arguments that you can't have big evolutionary changes in short periods of time, so A Farewell to Alms must be documenting a form of evolution other than the one it thinks it's documenting.)

There are obviously other factors in intelligence and economic functioning (I mention nutrition below), but I think that different memes are a lot of what it comes down to -- and that outliers like Appalachia and Nigeria are arguments for a memes-first position.

Of course, beneficial and harmful memes don't mean that you have to rip out cultures wholesale and replace them. Sowell approves of New England's 19th-century cultural-replacement program for blacks, since he sees Southern black culture as a white imposition and is therefore willing to go shopping for the most useful white-imposed culture; but American Indian writers are much less enthusiastic about New England's 19th-century cultural-replacement program aimed at them, and they have a point. As A Farewell to Alms accidentally establishes, peace, stability, and a minimum of outside exploitation are enough for valuable memes to evolve -- and I'd say that doing more than that is counterproductive. The arguments for cultural diversity are the same as the arguments for ecological diversity, and I doubt that I need to rehash them here.

u/Bat_man_89 · 1 pointr/AskMen

This book i stumbled across described exactly your mindset and mine as well. I'm 30 and i've felt that way about being mentally checked out in a sense...since about...15 or so....checkout the book link here.

https://www.amazon.com/Men-Strike-Boycotting-Marriage-Fatherhood/dp/1594037620/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?keywords=men+on+strike&qid=1563427724&s=gateway&sprefix=men+on+stir&sr=8-1

u/Docbear64 · 1 pointr/MGTOW

As for Women who support or at least understand MGTOW I'd assume the two would be

Esther Vilar of The Manipulated man : https://www.amazon.com/Manipulated-Man-Esther-Vilar/dp/1905177178


and Dr. Helen Smith Of Men on Strike : https://www.amazon.com/Men-Strike-Boycotting-Marriage-Fatherhood/dp/1594037620


It's going to be harder to find sources that rationally argue against MGTOW because the typical arguments against MGTOW tend to attack mens sexuality , sexual abilities( incel / virgin ) , or tend to call men who do not subscribe to traditional male gender roles cowards and similar emasculating claims to evoke an emotional response .

The most common arguments against MGTOW are probably going to be listed as arguments in support of men marrying .

u/polakfury · 1 pointr/canada
u/DubsPackage · 1 pointr/IncelsWithoutHate

>Your one example of a house husband doesn't outweigh all the guys >that are successfully and happily doing it.

I'm sure all 7 of them are living the dream.

> Now you're saying that women don't like to work?

I'm saying women have options and statistically go for "fun" jobs, whereas men have no options and statistically chase money to provide for their families.

>There are plenty of men who work in corporate America in air >conditioned offices.

Most of which are swamped with HR harpies and #metoo bullshit, men are being driven out of the professional jobs, as well as most of academia and being alienated from wider society.

All of this is backed up by hard data, there are entire books written about this subject, you should go do your research.

>it's possible to teach men to do manual labor too

IIRC men are ~%95 of the construction profession and have been since the dawn of humanity.

>I already have a career in construction.

Yesterday you worked in an office, you should probably get your story straight but at this point I already see that you're an ideologue living in her own private idaho.

> Women have to perform just like men do.

Provably false

> On that topic, what about all the guys who post about being "proud" >of living off their parents and playing video games all day?

https://www.amazon.com/Men-Strike-Boycotting-Marriage-Fatherhood/dp/1594037620/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=men+on+strike&qid=1562070754&s=gateway&sr=8-1

>My question was what I would possibly miss if I turned male, and after >several replies, you still have no answer.

You have your answers, you simply lack the ability to think outside of your own vagina.

u/FreeManIsFrank · 1 pointr/MGTOW

>saying that I should man up and start acting like a man

I've always had the problem with someone saying "man up". It wasn't until I read Men on Strike by Helen Smith - Amazon that I finally learned that it means "do as I say and don't give me trouble". It's simply a shaming tactic, which all women, and many men, use on men.
 
The best response to anyone that says it is to tell them they have an opinion of what a man is but it's their opinion. You don't share their opinion so they should go away and leave you be.

u/vicious_armbar · 1 pointr/politics

If we as a society want more people to breed; then we should enact more favorable laws towards men around marriage and reproduction. The book Men On Strike does a pretty good job of explaining this.

u/pandolfio · 1 pointr/Marriage

That's not what this scholar says in her book.

Your opinion is interesting, but only anecdotal, given the extensive study on the subject.

They've had a similar situation in Japan, except that they're decades ahead. Men do not want to marry, they do not even want to be in relationship.

Do not think that this could not happen in the US.

As to evidence of bachelors getting laid, it may only be anecdotal, but judging by my co-workers, who are not at all alpha males, it's pretty clear that these guys do get laid much more frequently. Especially those without girlfriends.

And the issue with divorce is massive - this is the reason number 1 why men are very right to stay away from marriage, and yet, nobody seems to want to do something about it.

u/pngbk · 1 pointr/rant

You would like "The Manipulated Man" by Esther Vilar. She basically blasts women for being infantile jerks who trade access to their vagina for material support.

https://www.amazon.com/Manipulated-Man-Esther-Vilar/dp/1905177178

u/The_Best_01 · 1 pointr/MensRights

>Interesting point of view. I would say not having the right to vote and being considered “property” is oppression, but I can see why you would think otherwise.

Then men have just as much right to complain too, since most men in the west couldn't vote until the mid-19th century at the earliest, especially in the UK, where we couldn't vote until 1918, just a decade before most women could. Also, women might have been considered property but least society doesn't still treat you like a disposable utility. There was never much equality in the world, until recently. In fact, there still isn't.

>I don’t agree “protection” is the correct description.

It was in those days.

>It seems you don’t have a full understanding of why the feminist movement began in the 19th century, because there genuinely were unequal rights and women were seen as lesser than a man

When did I say they didn't have less rights? All I said was the movement was not entirely pure from the start. True equality was never their final goal.

>legally women are equals, which is what the movement achieved

And much more than that, of course.

>I would be happy to delve deeper into your perspective of the topic if you are willing to share links or names of texts.

This and this are good places to start. I also encourage you to read this to learn more about how women have more or less manipulated society to their liking and how men (especially those in power) will often betray their own gender to bow to the demands of women. I think you'll find these books very interesting and eye-opening.

>Also, I’m not sure what you mean by “today’s morals” because morals are timeless. There are different philosophies, so of course you may disagree.

What is considered "right and wrong" throughout history changes is what I'm saying. You can't apply our standards to the past. I'm sure people in the future will look back in horror at things we don't even consider to be bad today.

u/ramblemn · 1 pointr/DeadBedrooms

one question: you leave the kids in the car with engine running?

and. awesome. those are great books and good for you overall. don't let her twist you in "The manipulated Man" ( https://www.amazon.com/Manipulated-Man-Esther-Vilar/dp/1905177178)

don't punish the kids though, they may like your routine.

get them ready and skip the rest of the "nice guy" stuff.




u/Pussylickersaurus · 1 pointr/pussypassdenied

>Oh so you’re sexist against your own gender? Do you just say this stuff to make yourself look better than most women?

@ u/roccoseinfeld - May I recommend a book to you?

It's called: "THE MANIPULATED MAN"

It's author is: ESTHER Vilar

https://www.amazon.com/Manipulated-Man-Esther-Vilar/dp/1905177178

u/awalt_cupcake · 1 pointr/TheRedPill

I was under the impression the manipulated man was the sidebar article. Is this the book you recommend?

u/sealfoss · 1 pointr/bestof

Not believing the CIA/mass media/whoever != believing Trump.

Here's something you should probably read.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0055PJ4R0/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

u/alpoverland · 1 pointr/soccer

Not a well known book outside of the UK I think but brilliantly simple and impactful. Has been a cornerstone in my view of media along with Manufacturing Consent and Propaganda. Once you've gone through those you'll probably be more inclined to focus on your own life.

u/Alucard3211 · 1 pointr/videos

Disgusting. Also far too common. Further reading : Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent
Here

u/Thirsteh · 1 pointr/worldnews

Very related and, frankly, required reading: Manufacturing Consent

u/kiDsALbDgC9QmLFiIrrj · 1 pointr/asktransgender

Trans Bodies, Trans Selves is pretty much an encyclopedia of trans.

u/newfacer · 1 pointr/asktransgender

Essay time! This and this are kind of like the primer essays for 'so you're questioning, now what'. They answer a lot of questions about the experience of gender dysphoria and how it is through someone's life as well as help to reframe the situation in various ways, would strongly recommend.

Books wise, I know Whipping Girl gets recced around a lot - whether you're MtF or FtM, it has a lot to offer and is pretty good. Gender Outlaws is another great read that is pretty current / up to date in terms of what it offers and has a ton of perspectives on the situation that you might find handy. I would also highly recommend Trans Bodies, Trans Selves as a great resource to pursue.

Edit: Couple more! Check out The Genderbread Person for a quick handy look at the different ways to think about gender identity and what it means, and if that interests you then you might also be interested in the accompanying book, Guide to Gender.

u/oregonpsycho · 1 pointr/psychotherapy
u/SobriKate · 1 pointr/asktransgender

Sure, susans.org is a huge forum with allies and partners and trans people of all stripes.

This website is part of the Silvia Rivera project who is a rather well known leader in the community, since Stonewall, who died of cancer.
https://srlp.org/resources/trans-101/

There’s tons of trans vloggers you can go to. Most but not all have a 101 video, and/or talk about their experiences being trans. Here’s a list:
https://blog.feedspot.com/transgender_youtube_channels/

There’s a number of authors you may look into as well, here’s some books:
https://www.amazon.com/Whipping-Girl-Transsexual-Scapegoating-Femininity/dp/1580056229
https://www.amazon.com/Redefining-Realness-Path-Womanhood-Identity/dp/1476709130/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1543615079&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=janet+mock&dpPl=1&dpID=5179e6QMxzL&ref=plSrch
https://www.amazon.com/Surpassing-Certainty-What-Twenties-Taught/dp/1501145797/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1543615079&sr=8-2&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_QL65&keywords=janet+mock&dpPl=1&dpID=511ZZslW8TL&ref=plSrch
https://www.amazon.com/Transgender-History-second-Todays-Revolution/dp/158005689X/ref=pd_aw_sbs_14_3?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=158005689X&pd_rd_r=0ddc8e87-f4eb-11e8-8ad5-2179f688e965&pd_rd_w=dZYLz&pd_rd_wg=l40fZ&pf_rd_i=mobile-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=926ebe02-3236-40c6-ac63-01ad178f498a&pf_rd_r=7XK0K0TEGTZS8SNQ9YMP&pf_rd_s=mobile-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=7XK0K0TEGTZS8SNQ9YMP
https://www.amazon.com/Trans-Bodies-Selves-Transgender-Community/dp/0199325359/ref=pd_aw_sim_14_of_15?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0199325359&pd_rd_r=0ddc8e87-f4eb-11e8-8ad5-2179f688e965&pd_rd_w=mqDub&pd_rd_wg=l40fZ&pf_rd_i=mobile-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=57b46099-d750-4d74-83ee-63ad64b310a4&pf_rd_r=7XK0K0TEGTZS8SNQ9YMP&pf_rd_s=mobile-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=7T7APJ7MA85RWVJHJW5T
https://www.amazon.com/Shes-Not-There-Life-Genders/dp/0385346972/ref=pd_aw_sim_14_of_17?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0385346972&pd_rd_r=0ddc8e87-f4eb-11e8-8ad5-2179f688e965&pd_rd_w=mqDub&pd_rd_wg=l40fZ&pf_rd_i=mobile-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=57b46099-d750-4d74-83ee-63ad64b310a4&pf_rd_r=7XK0K0TEGTZS8SNQ9YMP&pf_rd_s=mobile-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=BNNAHM1QDG52M4D25XX2
https://www.amazon.com/Gender-Outlaw-Men-Women-Rest/dp/1101973242/ref=pd_aw_sim_14_of_20?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1101973242&pd_rd_r=0ddc8e87-f4eb-11e8-8ad5-2179f688e965&pd_rd_w=mqDub&pd_rd_wg=l40fZ&pf_rd_i=mobile-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=57b46099-d750-4d74-83ee-63ad64b310a4&pf_rd_r=7XK0K0TEGTZS8SNQ9YMP&pf_rd_s=mobile-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=WC57YE4ZTSS8XPR20CRY

u/gnurdette · 1 pointr/asktransgender

How old is she?

I haven't read it, but this looks interesting: Trans Bodies, Trans Selves

Or, if you want to go for clothing, opaque black tights are easy to fit, go with everything, have a place in all but the butchest wardrobes, and nobody ever has too many.

You're awesome.

u/Taredis · 1 pointr/trans

Trans bodies trans selves is a pretty good resource for trans folk and allies alike. There is a lot in there and can be a bit dense but it's really informative. https://www.amazon.com/Trans-Bodies-Selves-Transgender-Community/dp/0199325359

u/executivesphere · 1 pointr/JordanPeterson

Straight up, you need to tell him you love him, you care about him, and that you’ll be there to support and accept him whatever he decides. You can’t control what he does, but your love and support will mean a lot to him. It’s important that you demonstrate that you’re truly willing to listen to him and understand him, rather than telling him what you think he needs to do without truly understanding what he’s going through.

A couple more things:
I noticed in one comment you doubted he could be trans because he had been sexually attracted to women in the past. This tells me you may not actually know much about the trans experience, as gender identity and sexual preference can be entirely separate from each other. (Plus, he’s still quite young and it’s possible that he hadn’t yet figured that part of himself out yet.)

If you haven’t already, you ought to read over the APA’s page on transgender people:

https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/transgender


I also highly recommend you read one or both of these books to familiarize yourself better with trans issues and the trans experience.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0199325359/
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0231157134/

(At the very least, download the free samples through the Kindle app and read through the first couple chapters.)

Also, resist the urge to make this about yourself. Im not sure why you gave details about your career, salary, and romantic life, but please don’t use those facts to guilt or shame your brother. It’s an unkind this to do and it won’t help your relationship with him. It’ll only make him feel worse.

Finally, try to understand how challenging and scary it would be to come out as trans. No one chooses to do this because it’s easy or fun. As cis straight guys, the world is kinda built for us; our experience is totally the norm. For trans people, not only are they different than 99% of the population, but they’re routinely stigmatized and ridiculed but large swathes of society. Imo, it’s pretty fucking brave to come out as trans.

Anyway, good luck, man. My little bro is also in his early 20s and struggling to figure things out. Just try be a good brother and help him move forward in a positive way 💪💪💪

u/ardamass · 1 pointr/trans

The best book ever I think for trans is "Trans bodies trans selves" http://www.amazon.com/Trans-Bodies-Selves-Transgender-Community/dp/0199325359
Its kind of like the bible of transition.

If you think he is still suicidal there is the Trevor line http://www.thetrevorproject.org/section/donate?gclid=COKv-OPRxsQCFdcSgQod5mkAdA
There number is 1-866-488-7386 and you can call text or chat with them.

The following sub reddits are good r/ftm r/asktransgender r/transeducate and r/TransCommunity

For his parents http://transparenthood.net/

Sorry I don't have more for you. I know he's family to you and Im sure you would never consider otherwise but thank you for helping him. Thank you for taking the time out to prepare. The next year is going to be really hard, probably the hardest in his life and he's going to need every bit of support from everywhere he can get it.
While I'm not FTM I am MTF and if you or he want to talk or need some general pointers Im happy to help just shoot me a pm.

u/chadsexytime · 1 pointr/pics

I would have preferred "Mein Kampf", "Helter Skelter", "The Anarchists Cookbook", or More Guns, Less Crime

u/akezf · 1 pointr/reddit.com

Well i guess the kid read this BS book and did what he considered the logical thing.

After all, nothing bad can happen when every person no matter how irresponsible or unhinged has a gun.

Property > Life.

u/Ioncannon · 1 pointr/videos

>Also the person who had the gun was and 9 times out of ten would not be taught self restraint for such a situation.

Please give me a source for this? It was studied that civilians actually make fewer mistakes then police. Firearm owners constantly enjoy their hobby while police do not get adequate training.

> A University of Chicago Study revealed that in 1993 approximately 700,000 police killed 330 innocent individuals, while approximately 250,000,000 private citizens only killed 30 innocent people.

-Study was compiled into this book here

Also a Newsweek article found:

>Only 2% of civilian shootings involve an innocent person being shot (not killed). The error rate for police is 11%. What this means is that you are more than 5 times more likely to be accidentally shot by a policeman than by an armed citizen.

>Which is obvious due to the shots he releases whilst the man in on the floor

Just because a person is on the floor does not mean he isn't a danger. What if he turned around and shot back? Hindsight is 20/20 but one doesn't take chances when their and other's life is in danger.

u/Expressman · 1 pointr/todayilearned

Talk about breeding paranoia. There is paranoia against legal carriers.

>Don't think that just because the police are trained in the use of firearms that they are less likely to kill an innocent person. A University of Chicago Study revealed that in 1993 approximately 700,000 police killed 330 innocent individuals, while approximately 250,000,000 private citizens only killed 30 innocent people. Do the math. That's a per capita rate for the police, of almost 4000 times higher than the population in general. OK, that is a little misleading. Let's just include the 80,000,000 gun owning citizens. Now the police are down to only a 1200 times higher accidental shooting rate than the gun-owning population in general.

>That still sounds high. So let's look at it in a different light. According to a study by Newsweek magazine, only 2% of civilian shootings involve an innocent person being shot (not killed). The error rate for police is 11%. What this means is that you are more than 5 times more likely to be accidentally shot by a policeman than by an armed citizen. But, when you consider that citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as do police every year, it means that, per capita, you are more than 11 times more likely to be accidentally shot by a policeman than by an armed citizen. That is as low as I can get that number.

>This is not meant to be an indictment of the police. In fact, because police often live on the edge, they naturally tend to shoot first and ask questions later. Although they are trained to repress this instinct, it does not always work, as evidenced by the number of innocent people killed by police. Also, since they are generally better marksmen, they tend to kill, rather than wound or totally miss their target.

>The Kleck study shows that police shoot and kill around 600 criminals each year. Yet the University of Chicago study shows that police killed 330 innocent individuals in 1993. That means that for every two criminals killed by police, one innocent citizen is killed by police. Although I have the greatest respect for the police and how they must respond under pressure, I think that I would much rather trust an armed populace.

u/controversalbird · 1 pointr/news

Which is why I clarified on what timeline I was basing my original comment on and expressed that it seemed like you disagreed. I said he should have been carrying and you are writing a dissertation of every choice he's made in his life. Sure man, lots of things can happen, and I'm just expressing my opinion. People can do whatever they like. It's my opinion, like I said, to feel which side the odds are on. For example, it's my opinion that it's probably safer carrying a gun in a gun free zone than not. It may not be (oh god what if I shoot myself!) but that's my opinion.

At that point I think we are just debating safety of himself and those around him on the basis of whether he is carrying or not. I don't think there is a way to convince someone on the fence either way, but the way I read the odds and my own confidence/experience/training, I'd rather be on one end of the situation than the other. You can point out statistics but so can I. You say it's statistically unlikely for a person to be in the situation, and I point out it's unlikely for a CCW to commit a crime or accidentally shoot someone in the heat of the moment as you point out that could happen. I think it's fair game, but you seem to think I'm upset and rabidly defending my position and decided to write a novel to me on the subject about confirmation bias and shit. I got shit to do man. I'm basing my argument in response to yours. You wanna use statistics, then I will too. But don't call me two faced for calling you out on it and using it against you. Like I said, you wanna talk about majority, then we'll talk about majorities. If you wanna talk about exceptions, then we'll talk about exceptions. That's pretty much all you talk about so let's talk about it.

> Than who? And I'd love to see the stats. I love stats.

Civilians. Police. Take your pick. There are plenty of comparisons on the Googles or just do math. I think they have less traffic violations too. :)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3518334/

https://crimeresearch.org/2015/02/comparing-conviction-rates-between-police-and-concealed-carry-permit-holders/

https://crimeresearch.org/tag/annual-report-on-number-of-concealed-handgun-permits/

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2011/12/foghorn/ny-times-uses-deceptive-statistics-to-promote-anti-gun-agenda-again/

https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0226493644/ref=pd_sxp_elt_l1/102-3993670-7898564

http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/concealed-carry/

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/who-are-the-greater-threats-to-public-safety-police-or-carry-permit-holders/

http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/31/auditing-shooting-rampage-statistics/

u/3Vyf7nm4 · 1 pointr/dragonage

> 'I would prefer if you made a note of when you are going to say a particular thing'

This is the absolute wrong onus. From the point of view of the person making the request, it seems on the surface to be reasonable. However, from the point of view of the person making the speech/content/art the logical conclusion is seven billion different "reasonable" points of view about notices for specific content. The correct onus is for the reader/lister/viewer to be mindful of offensive content, and act appropriately for themselves when that content presents itself. Anything else is absolutely bonkers.

>This world of 'ideal' free speech you are discussing does not exist.

Agreed. It is the ideal goal, however. A goal which permits the silencing of unpopular opinions is oppressive in nature, and contrary to liberty.

>Ironically, the judgment that "all speech should be permitted regardless of content" is also a false moral absolute - it reflects a particular cultural interpretation of 'freedom' that is not necessarily universal to every place and time.

It may not describe the realities of a given location or time, but it is the best ideal. Liberty is superior to oppression.

>Put yourself in the shoes of someone who is actually oppressed - do you really have 'free speech' when your voice is drowned out

History has demonstrated that your claim is false, by virtue the fact that popular opinion is where it is, and is moving ever more towards greater acceptance. What else has gotten us here except free speech by minority activists?

>'shit, dude, this is offensive, please stop doing that'.

This is absolutely not what they are doing. They are demanding self-censorship over a perceived slight where none exists. They are absolutely the ones who are shutting down speech.

>There is a very valid and nuanced discussion to be had about free speech and its limitations, and I feel that your perspective is too heavily founded on absolutes to adequately reflect that nuance.


At least you have avoided the "fire in a crowded theater" fallacy. Make sure you don't fall into that fallacy's trap by conflating the necessity of absolute freedom of speech with actions and their consequences.

Making a comment on twitter is speech. Publishing a game is an action (and also speech). Losing sales because of offensive content is a consequence. Furthermore, it's the most appropriate consequence to objectionable speech. Demanding self-censorship, especially to sooth a fragile ego, is fucking abhorrent.


e:

> Common ethical standards (by 'common', I mean generally shared by people in that particular cultural space and time) and common decency exist. I am not presuming a universal morality, but rather a time/culture-specific ethics

How do you presume those mores changed over time? They did not change because the cultural majority enjoyed a monopoly on what was decent and what was not. See Rauch: “A liberal society stands on the proposition that we should all take seriously the idea that we might be wrong. This means we must place no one, including ourselves, beyond the reach of criticism; it means that we must allow people to err, even where the error offends and upsets, as it often will.”

u/BlinginLike3p0 · 1 pointr/AdviceAnimals

That's not the point. The point is who gets to decide what good and bad thought is? here is a really good book on this topic

u/EternalArchon · 1 pointr/politics

I've read popper, have you read Rauch?

u/Hugh_Jadong · 1 pointr/politics

>Promoting diversity if only for the sake of promoting diversity is recognized objectively as an inherent good. Being exposed to a diversity of people and ideas helps widen your own perspective and in general be a more aware and thoughtful citizen.



u/SiegHeil_ · 1 pointr/WhiteRights

More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion: http://www.citylab.com/housing/2013/11/paradox-diverse-communities/7614/


Diversity increases psychotic experiences: http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc


Diversity increases social adversity: http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc


A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes: http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin: http://www.pnas.org/content/108/4/1262.abstract

Ethnic diversity harms health for hispanics and blacks: http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300787

Babies demostrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-whites: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01138.x/full

Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~axe/research/AxHamm_Ethno.pdf

Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group: http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

Ethnic diversity reduces concern for the environment: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10640-012-9619-6

Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust: http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/130251172/Dinesen_S_nderskov_Ethnic_Diversity_and_Social_Trust_Forthcoming_ASR.pdf

Ethnic diversity directly reduces strong communities: https://www.msu.edu/~zpneal/publications/neal-diversitysoc.pdf

Ethnically homogenous neighborhoods are beneficial for health: https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/living-ethnically-homogenous-area-boosts-health-minority-seniors

Diversity in American cities correlates with segregation: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-most-diverse-cities-are-often-the-most-segregated/

Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational: http://www.amazon.com/The-Ethnic-Phenomenon-Pierre-Berghe/dp/0275927091

It is evolutionary rational to be friends with someone genetically similar to you: http://www.livescience.com/46791-friends-share-genes.html

Racism and nationalism are rational and evolutionary advantageous strategies: http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism: http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality: http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

There is extensive evidence people prefer others who are genetically similar: http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/n&n2005-1.pdf

u/acantholysized · 1 pointr/altright

Could someone correct me in responding to the "Diversity and Ethnocentrism Hate Facts"?

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

(Detrimental) Effects of Multiculturalism

u/Spiritwalke · 1 pointr/DebateReligion

Well, not a dozen books. Let's start with one, maybe?

https://www.amazon.com/Trickster-Makes-This-World-Mischief/dp/0374532559

u/Yossarion · 1 pointr/SubredditDrama

I'm reading Trickster Makes This World, I'll throw down all smarty-pants with yas.

u/InsideOutsider · 1 pointr/mythology

Not analytical, but [The Marriage of Cadmus and Harmony] (https://www.amazon.com/dp/0679733485/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_WeFzyb8P38Y07) and [Trickster Makes This World] (https://www.amazon.com/dp/0374532559/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_rgFzybHSHHMHP) are both pleasurable reads.

u/at-night_mostly · 1 pointr/occult

>This is a foundational text and deserves to be read.

I'll second this. The book contains a wealth of references to research that is hard to find otherwise - experimental results that science fails to acknowledge because it cannot explain them. The author comes surprisingly close to outlining the basis of a magickal system.

I'd like to add Trickster Makes This World: Mischief, Myth and Art, for an analysis of trickster's many tales. If you know how to look, it's a good introduction to trickster magick.

And also Mutants and Mystics: Science Fiction, Superhero Comics, and the Paranormal - a comparative theologian's fascinating excursion into pulp fiction weirdness, the magick of writing, and how to make a hypersigil.

None of these books are likely to appear in the occult section, but I've found them more useful in developing my understanding of magick than many books that address the subject directly.

u/SibilantFricative · 1 pointr/linguistics

We Are Our Language: An Ethnography of Language Revitalization in a Northern Athabaskan Community by Barbra Meek

If anyone has any interest in language revitalization, I think this is a great read.

Wisdom Sits in Place: Landscape and Language Among the Western Apache by Keith Basso

A classic.

Trade of the Tricks: Inside the Magician's Craft by Graham Jones

Not nearly as heavy on the linguistics as the other two I mentioned (though he has a fair amount on language), but I thought it was a very entertaining and interesting read!

In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio by Philippe Bourgois

He constantly uses large chunks of quoted text from his informants, so there's really interesting code-switching and discussions of dialects and language ideologies happening, but it's not something that the author really focuses on or analyzes (his focus is on political economy). But I enjoyed it as an ethnography.

Writing Women's Worlds: Bedouin Stories by Lila Abu-Lughod

Fantastically written, really recommend this one, though it's not linguistic at all.

u/International_Foot · 1 pointr/suggestmeabook

In Search of Respect if you’re into anthropology at all

u/TwoBirdsSt0ned · 1 pointr/suggestmeabook

In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio, by Philipe Bourgeois, is an ethnography of street-level drug dealers written by an anthropologist. It's very readable for an academic analysis.

Makes Me Wanna Holler, by Nathan McCall, is an autobiography written by a gang-member-turned-journalist. It offers an unapologetic look at his experiences.

Public Enemies, by Bryan Burroughs, doesn't focus on the personal experiences and perspectives of gang members in the same ways. But it offers an interesting account of some of the big-name gangs and gang members of the 1930s and the FBI response.

u/twice-as-cheerful · 1 pointr/SubredditDrama

Interesting question. Off the top of my head, I would say that makes you not so much 'a feminist' as 'a person whose viewpoint has been influenced by feminism'. Personally, I don't think you can really call yourself a feminist if you don't believe in patriarchy, as in the idea that women are historically oppressed as a class, but that is a big discussion and not one I intend to get into here.

By the way, you say you 'really don't believe in a contemporary patriarchy' - what about the likes of Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan? Is patriarchy not expressed through the machismo of certain Latin American culture and households? If it was considered relatively normal for Latino men to beat their wives and have control over the household finances, (that's a big 'if', I know), would that not be considered a form of patriarchy? You might like to take a look at In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio, which could be said to portray a patriarchal society, in terms of the social norms and household arrangements of the subjects. Obviously, it depends a bit on what you mean by 'patriarchal', but I don't think it's too much of a stretch to refer to these families in that way.

u/distilledw · 1 pointr/Anthropology

If you want to read an Ethnography i suggest In Search of Respect by Phillipe Bourgois. I read it after my first semester of Anthropology and i think its the book that made me continue on and do a major in Anthro.

It is pretty easy to get through and very interesting and relevant subject matter.

u/board4life · 1 pointr/conspiracy

You should check out this book. Written by an actual researcher who lived in one of Harlem's worst drug neighborhoods. It deals with a lot of issues, but one is particularly related to your post- the family units. Given the societal pressure for a two parent home, most mothers (since primarily the fathers do the abusing) stay with them, thinking that's what is best for their children. However, the real problem is they don't kick them out. When the kid(s) grow up seeing the parents constantly arguing and fighting, they think that's how relationships are supposed to be, and perpetuate the cycle.

The whole book is really good though. Definitely demonstrates why it is so difficult for people to get out of very poor neighborhoods, where they make more money selling dope and committing crimes than the minimum wage jobs they are barely qualified for. It's not as easy as "pull yourself up by your bootstraps," like the politicians and MSM would like the population to believe.

u/conspirobot · 1 pointr/conspiro

board4life: ^^original ^^reddit ^^link

You should check out this book. Written by an actual researcher who lived in one of Harlem's worst drug neighborhoods. It deals with a lot of issues, but one is particularly related to your post- the family units. Given the societal pressure for a two parent home, most mothers (since primarily the fathers do the abusing) stay with them, thinking that's what is best for their children. However, the real problem is they don't kick them out. When the kid(s) grow up seeing the parents constantly arguing and fighting, they think that's how relationships are supposed to be, and perpetuate the cycle.

The whole book is really good though. Definitely demonstrates why it is so difficult for people to get out of very poor neighborhoods, where they make more money selling dope and committing crimes than the minimum wage jobs they are barely qualified for. It's not as easy as "pull yourself up by your bootstraps," like the politicians and MSM would like the population to believe.

u/subTropicOffTopic · 1 pointr/DecidingToBeBetter

Books I would add to balance this list out:

Anthropology

Cows, Pigs, Wars, and Witches by Marvin Harris. Unlike Germs, Guns, and Steel, this book is written by an actual anthropologist (sorry Mr. Diamond) and is a really easy read--it covers topics from the sacredness of cows to cargo cults. It's fun, too, as Harris is an entertaining and engaging writer, and it's a slim book.

Bonus Level Challenge Anthropology Read:

In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio by Phillipe Bourgois. This is another monograph written by an actual anthropologist. This book is more challenging subject matter, and I should put a big Trigger Warning on it for violence against women.

Economics

Wages, Price, and Profit by Karl Marx. It's a shame more people don't read Marx beyond the Manifesto, which he wrote fairly early on in his academic life. W,P and P is a preparatory work for Capital and outlines one of the arguments Marx makes in the much denser and more complete work that was to follow. It's short, and one of Marx's more approachable writings, dealing with something we are all familiar with: how much we get paid, and why.

Bonus Level Challenge Economics Read:

Imperialism: the Highest Stage of Capitalism by V. I. Lenin. This book contains much drier material, as Lenin draws upon common economic sources (I hope you like talking about tons of iron) to illustrate phenomenon like World War 1--which he saw as a competition of imperialist powers to redivide the Middle East and Africa--and even the Iraq Invasion that would come almost 100 years later.

u/captainsmoothie · 0 pointsr/Conservative

The speech codes enacted at certain colleges in the "PC nineties" have been revoked, largely for the best reason pointed out in Rauch's Kindly Inquisitors: nobody has a monopoly on knowing what's offensive, so the goal of "no hurt feelings" is unattainable. College campuses weren't looking to shut out odious speech, but to protect the feelings of certain people (and in doing so happened to shut out odious speech).

As far as workplace speech goes, I'm inclined to believe that speech that advances business is always preferred over all other kinds. I fail to see how incendiary commentary in the workplace would benefit anyone's business, and more importantly it's censure is not the same thing as being told "you can't express that opinion." It's more like "you can't express that opinion, in this building, 9-5, and keep this job for which we pay you our money." Which is really applied everywhere; you can exercise your free speech rights in a buddy's house, and find yourself thrown out for being a dick. It's not an overarching, rigidly enforced political correctness that encourages this kind of behavior, but simply getting along with one another and, in the case of business, trying to turn a dollar into two dollars. Even the most racially prejudiced car salesman turns it off when someone of the lesser race(s) comes to buy a car.

As a staunch defender of total free speech (including the neo-nazis, WBC, the Klan, etc) I frankly find the current trends encouraging, not discouraging. Unless I'm missing the point here.

u/UsernamesNeedMoreCha · 0 pointsr/conspiracy

CONTINUED.

A Harvard study done for ten years involving over 26,000 people.

Harvard professor of political science Robert D. Putnam conducted a nearly decade long study how multiculturalism affects social trust. He surveyed 26,200 people in 40 American communities, finding that–when the data were adjusted for class income and other factors–the more racially diverse a community is, the greater the loss of trust. People in diverse communities “don’t trust the local mayor, they don't trust the local paper, they don't trust other people and they don’t trust institutions,” writes Putnam. In the presence of such ethnic diversity, Putnam maintains that “…we hunker down. We act like turtles. The effect of diversity is worse than had been imagined. And it’s not just that we don’t trust people who are not like us. In diverse communities, we don’t trust people who do look like us.

Even Halyard knows this is all a pile of “feel good” shit. Like a religion, it relies on persecuting those who don’t agree to keep itself mainstream thought.

After the study was released, Putnam was intimidated and harassed because he was accused of helping racists. He later came out and gave a very vague statement saying diversity “had problems but was worth it in the long run” to keep these morons appeased. This statement gives no indication of the “long run” and, in fact, is not quantified by anything.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract

~:~

According to conflict theory, distrust between ethnic groups rises with diversity, but not within a group. Putnam describes people of all races and socioeconomic statuses, ages, and both sexes as “hunkering down,” avoiding engagement with their local community–both among different ethnic groups and within their own ethnic group. Even when controlling for income inequality and crime rates–two factors which conflict theory states should be the prime causal factors in declining interethnic group trust–more diversity is still associated with less communal trust.

  1. Lowered trust in areas with high diversity is also associated with:
  2. Lower confidence in local government, local leaders, and the local news media
  3. Lower political efficacy–that is, confidence in one’s own influence
  4. Lower frequency of registering to vote, but more interest and knowledge about politics and more participation in protest marches and social reform groups.
  5. Higher political advocacy, but lower expectations that it will bring about a desirable result
  6. Less expectation that others will cooperate to solve dilemmas of collective action (e.g. voluntary conservation to ease a water or energy shortage)
  7. Less likelihood of working on a community project
  8. Less likelihood of giving to charity or volunteering
  9. Fewer close friends and confidants
  10. Less happiness and lower perceived quality of life
  11. More time spent watching television and more agreement that “television is my most important form of entertainment”

    Putnam’s study was published in 2001. Genetic cluster analysis of the micro satellite markers produced four major clusters, which showed near perfect correspondence with the four self-reported race/ethnicity categories. Of 3636 subjects, only 5 (0.14%) showed genetic cluster membership different from their self-identified race/ethnicity.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15625622

    ~:~

    Good Fences: The Importance of Setting Boundaries for Peaceful Coexistence

    Alex Rutherford, Dion Harmon, Justin Werfel, Shlomiya Bar-Yam, Alexander Gard-Murray, Andreas Gros, Yaneer Bar-Yam

    We consider the conditions of peace and violence among ethnic groups, testing a theory designed to predict the locations of violence and interventions that can promote peace. Characterizing the model’s success in predicting peace requires examples where peace prevails despite diversity. Switzerland is recognized as a country of peace, stability, and prosperity. This is surprising because of its linguistic and religious diversity that in other parts of the world lead to conflict and violence. Here we analyze how peaceful stability is maintained. Our analysis shows that peace does not depend on integrated coexistence, but rather on well-defined topographical and political boundaries separating groups. Mountains and lakes are an important part of the boundaries between sharply defined linguistic areas. Political canton and circle (sub-canton) boundaries often separate religious groups.

    Where such boundaries do not appear to be sufficient, we find that specific aspects of the population distribution either guarantee sufficient separation or sufficient mixing to inhibit intergroup violence according to the quantitative theory of conflict. In exactly one region, a porous mountain range does not adequately separate linguistic groups and violent conflict has led to the recent creation of the canton of Jura. Our analysis supports the hypothesis that violence between groups can be inhibited by physical and political boundaries. A similar analysis of the area of the former Yugoslavia shows that during widespread ethnic violence, existing political boundaries did not coincide with the boundaries of distinct groups, but the peace prevailed in specific areas where they did coincide. The success of peace in Switzerland may serve as a model to resolve conflict in other ethnically diverse countries and regions of the world.

    Report #: NECSI 2011-10-01

    Cite as: arXiv:1110.1409v1

    More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion.
    http://www.citylab.com/housing/2013/11/paradox-diverse-communities/7614/

    Diversity increases psychotic experiences.
    http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

    Diversity increases social adversity.
    http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

    A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes.
    http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

    Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships.
    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

    Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life.
    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

    Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health.
    http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

    Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin.
    http://www.pnas.org/content/108/4/1262.abstract

    Ethnic diversity harms health for hispanics and blacks.
    http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300787

    Babies demostrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-whites.
    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01138.x/full

    Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin.
    http://www-personal.umich.edu/~axe/research/AxHamm_Ethno.pdf

    Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group.
    http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

    Ethnic diversity reduces concern for the environment.
    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10640-012-9619-6

    Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust.
    http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/130251172/Dinesen_S_nderskov_Ethnic_Diversity_and_Social_Trust_Forthcoming_ASR.pdf

    Ethnic diversity directly reduces strong communities.
    https://www.msu.edu/~zpneal/publications/neal-diversitysoc.pdf

    Ethnically homogenous neighborhoods are beneficial for health.
    https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/living-ethnically-homogenous-area-boosts-health-minority-seniors

    Diversity in American cities correlates with segregation.
    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-most-diverse-cities-are-often-the-most-segregated/

    Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational.
    http://www.amazon.com/The-Ethnic-Phenomenon-Pierre-Berghe/dp/0275927091

    It is evolutionary rational to be friends with someone genetically similar to you.
    http://www.livescience.com/46791-friends-share-genes.html

    Racism and nationalism are rational and evolutionary advantageous strategies.
    http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

    Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism.
    http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

    States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality.
    http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

    There is extensive evidence people prefer others who are genetically similar.
    http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/n&n 2005-1.pdf

    >”Because I have posted fact, and you can't refute fact" - What cold hard facts were those again?

    They’re elsewhere in the thread, reposted here now.

    >My feelings definitely aren’t hurt by you in the least!

    Of course they are. That’s why you lash out at unquestionable fact.

    >I am actually over here sharing everything with my coworkers who think your freaking crazy!

    Then they’re as ignorant as you. Have them read the above and see if they’re still laughing.

    >How am I a coward again?

    You’re running away without substantiating your claims. You think that “NUH UH YOU RACIST I SAY SO LOL I WIN NOW” is an argument.

    FREE YOURSELF FROM YOUR MADNESS. Read what I have posted. Ask ANY questions you like. Give it to your coworkers; repost any of THEIR questions.

    You MUST see this. You will see it or you will be MADE to see it, and I don’t want you to be MADE to see it. You should come to it of your own volition.
u/IslamCritic · 0 pointsr/CriticismOfIslam

here is my compilation. rate pls:

Statistics show how violent crimes have skyrocketed in Sweden because of mass immigration.

In the year 1950: 190 robberies. [1]

In the year 2011: 9700 robberies. [2]

In the year 1975: 421 rapes. [3]

In the year 2014: 6294 rapes. [4]

In the year 1993 immigrants/foreigners committed 56% of all rapes in Sweden. At the time immigrants made up around 12% of Swedens population. Source: Von Hofer, Sarnecki & Tham (1996)

Immigrants from North African countries over-representation when it comes to rape is 2300% (Compared to Swedish males, a north african immigrant is 23 times more likely to commit a rape) Source: BRÅ Report (1996).

Sources for the crime statistics above:

[1]: Brott och straff i Sverige: Historisk kriminalstatistik 1750–2005. Hanns Von Hofer.

[2]: Brottsförebyggande rådets rapport: Brottsutvecklingen i Sverige år 2008-2011.

[3] and [4]: https://www.bra.se/download/18.22a7170813a0d141d21800052648/05+Sexualbrott.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whites will be a minority in their country before the end of this century.

White Britons may be a minority by 2066. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10032296/White-Britons-will-be-minority-by-2066-says-professor.html

Native Irish projected to become a minority in Ireland by 2050. http://nonalignedmedia.com/2016/02/demographic-replacement-native-irish-projected-to-become-minorities-in-ireland-by-2050/

Germany will have a nonwhite majority in one generation. http://newobserveronline.com/germany-nonwhites-majority-in-one-generation/

Whites in America will be a minority a decade sooner than thought earlier.http://whitegenocideproject.com/us-latest-census-predicts-whites-minority-a-decade-earlier-than-expected/

Native Swedish will be a minority by 2050. http://whitegenocideproject.com/white-genocide-swedish-minority-by-2050/

Native Danes will be a minority by the turn of this century. http://www.b.dk/viden/danskere-bliver-en-minoritet-i-danmark
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Race mixing is unhealthy.

Mixed race people are more likely to have psychological problems than single race people. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1448064/

Mixed race people are completely screwed for transplantations. http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/29/match4lara-mixed-race-marrow-search-thats-going-viral/?_r=0

Mixed race people are more likely to be obese. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5495312_The_Prevalence_of_Obesity_in_Ethnic_Admixture_Adults

Mixed race are more likely to die at birth. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2867623/?report=classic

Race mixing only benefits the inferior race. Black-White mixed have a higher IQ than Blacks, but lower IQ than Whites. http://alternative-right.blogspot.com/2016/03/race-and-iq-mixed-populations.html

Racial admixture leads to less healthy human beings overall. https://www.reddit.com/r/HBD/comments/4g3z11/racial_admixture_leads_to_less_healthy_human/

Alon Ziv and his book have been completely debunked. https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/alon_ziv_on_race_mixing/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multiculturalism is impractical.

Examples of multiculturalism not working: Kosovo, Lebanon, Palestine, Yugoslavia, Cyprus, Haiti, Nagorno-Karabakh, Haiti, Sudan, Belgium.

More diverse neighborhoods have lower social cohesion. http://www.citylab.com/housing/2013/11/paradox-diverse-communities/7614/

Diversity increases psychotic experiences. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity increases social adversity. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

A 10% increase in diversity doubles the chance of psychotic episodes. http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/201/4/282.abstract?etoc

Diversity reduces voter registration, political efficacy, charity, and number of friendships. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Ethnic diversity reduces happiness and quality of life. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x/abstract;jsessionid=279C92A7EB0946BBA63D62937FC832A9.f04t03

Diversity reduces trust, civic participation, and civic health. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/?page=full

Ethnocentrism is rational, biological, and genetic in origin. http://www.pnas.org/content/108/4/1262.abstract

Ethnic diversity harms health for hispanics and blacks. http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300787

Babies demostrate ethnocentrism before exposure to non-whites. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01138.x/full

Ethnocentrism is universal and likely evolved in origin. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~axe/research/AxHamm_Ethno.pdf

Diversity primarily hurts the dominant ethnic group. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

Ethnic diversity reduces concern for the environment. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10640-012-9619-6

Ethnic diversity within 80 meters of a person reduces social trust. http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/130251172/Dinesen_S_nderskov_Ethnic_Diversity_and_Social_Trust_Forthcoming_ASR.pdf

Ethnic diversity directly reduces strong communities. https://www.msu.edu/~zpneal/publications/neal-diversitysoc.pdf

Ethnically homogenous neighborhoods are beneficial for health. https://www.mailman.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/living-ethnically-homogenous-area-boosts-health-minority-seniors

Diversity in American cities correlates with segregation. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-most-diverse-cities-are-often-the-most-segregated/

Races are extended families. Ethnocentrism is genetically rational. http://www.amazon.com/The-Ethnic-Phenomenon-Pierre-Berghe/dp/0275927091

It is evolutionary rational to be friends with someone genetically similar to you. http://www.livescience.com/46791-friends-share-genes.html

Racism and nationalism are rational and evolutionary advantageous strategies. http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html

Homogeneous polities have less crime, less civil war, and more altruism. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

States with little diversity have more democracy, less corruption, and less inequality. http://www.theindependentaustralian.com.au/node/57

There is extensive evidence people prefer others who are genetically similar. http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/n&n%202005-1.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Nazis had incredibly high IQ and where the intellectual elite of the time.

proof:
https://www.quora.com/How-accurate-were-the-IQ-scores-of-the-high-ranking-Third-Reich-officials-tried-at-Nuremberg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_trials#Intelligence_tests_and_psychiatric_assessments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trump voters are more intelligent than other Republicans.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-better-educated-republican-voters-may-come-as-a-surprise-2016-03-11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Women with high partner counts are more likely to have problems in marriage and being unhappy/depressed.
http://i.imgur.com/LUiiIvo.jpg
Sources: CDC National Center of Health Statistics, National Survey of Family Growth, 1995 onwards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Angela merkel was a communist and secretary of propaganda for the communist youth.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2328536/Angela-Merkel-Communist-links-new-image-uniform-released.html

u/kanuk877 · 0 pointsr/business

Yes and no.

If this advertising stuff was an isolated incident, then yeah you might call this article an overreaction.

But anti-male advertising is not an isolated incident.

Nathanson and Young have dedicated 1020 pages in two books (Spreading Misandry and Legalizing Misandry) listing and discussing misandry in our culture. Misandry is so pervasive in North America, most people don't even notice it.

But the anti-male advertising is so bad, people are noticing it. We only hear about it occasionally when someone bothers to ask around what people's sentiments are. Because getting upset when men are maligned... that's not PC.

How do you fight something like misandry? Part of the battle is calling people out when they cross the line. And you keep doing it until some semblance of balance is restored.

If you want to learn more about misandry, you can read the above mentioned books or Warren Farrell's "Women Can't Hear what Men Don't Say" or "The Myth of Male Power" are quite good. Farrell was a feminist and served on the board of the American National Organization for Women.

u/EternalDad · 0 pointsr/Libertarian

You are now getting closer to the real argument, I applaud you.

Getting rid of Medicare seems like a bad idea. In fact, society as a whole would likely be better off if everyone had healthcare (cost per person goes down, less health-induced poverty related crimes, etc) - but getting to that point is hard in a nice libertarian fashion. Charles Murray's idea to have a UBI coupled with a requirement to spend some on healthcare might be better than our status quo, but probably has some externalities that make it undesirable.

As for the other issues, I think many UBI advocates would handle the Social Security problem as an issue that will eventually phase out. You take anyone getting SS >1000/month and you give them their 1000/month in UBI plus the difference in SS. 1000 from UBI, 400 from SS. All people retiring after some cutoff don't get any SS top-up. Eventually phases out as an issue. Yes, if UBI stays at 1000/month and costs increase, this can be bad for the elderly. But it is also bad for the elderly to have an entire youth generation living in poverty, unable to get training. How do people retire? By purchasing the labor of the young with assets they acquired while young. One can't retire by hoarding assets unless there are people willing to do work to get those assets. Unless fully robotic retirement facilities pop up.

As for the gross price tag still being large, there are many arguments to be made on how to handle that issue, but I won't make them here as they typically require increased taxes of some kind and such discussions don't go far in this subreddit.

I would bring up the issue with treating money as a scarce resource. I like to look at money as valuable tool that helps facilitate market operations and allows a measuring of the value of a thing to a person. It measures a slice of goods owned to the holder. What does giving every adult 12k/year really mean? It means we think everyone deserves at least a small piece of the total goods produced; a base minimum before any productivity. No longer does anyone deserve 0%, even if they produce nothing. The real question is whether we want to move that direction as a society - and not whether X trillions of dollars is too costly.

Can society as a whole produce enough food, housing, and healthcare for all? Definitely. Many non-essential goods while doing it? Sure. We have a distribution problem, not a production problem.

u/Domhnal · 0 pointsr/funny

Ferguson's still pretty fresh for a book to be out. But maybe this can elucidate attitudes that blacks are keenly aware of. I think this is where it begins.

u/yaku9 · 0 pointsr/unpopularopinion

Black Africans kept more slaves for themselves than were ever exported to the US.

Source: Thomas Sowell - https://www.amazon.com/Black-Rednecks-Liberals-Thomas-Sowell/dp/1594031436

u/ctrlaltlama · -1 pointsr/europe

Black Rednecks and White Liberals Paperback – April 24, 2006
by Thomas Sowell
is a good book that goes into detail about the economic and cultural effects that create this sort of anti-government high crime areas. In it are an economic crime and education data that source it.

I think you can find a PDF version online somewhere if you don't want to buy it.

Edit: here is a Q&A where he covers some of the topics of the book if you just want to skip through it to the relevant section, to get a summary of the book.

here is a review that covers some of the content of the book if you want to look into the book before buying it.

u/FracturedAss · -1 pointsr/politics

Good, I think it's a good thing to do. People have been writing about suppression of free speech on American campuses for a while now.

Some young liberals might consider it great that conservative or otherwise controversial opinions are being silenced, but those of us who have been around for a while know that you yourself will eventually fall prey to the censorship you promote.

u/rapefugees_must_go · -1 pointsr/CringeAnarchy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTROCGb5qj8

u/MeltzerDriver · -1 pointsr/SquaredCircle

Nah, guys with my mindset have been around for decades before that cringeworthy subreddit was created.

The Way of Men by Jack Donovan.

u/Krugmanite · -2 pointsr/law

Are you assuming that there haven't been large demographic shifts in the past 20-30 years where the American populace have sorted themselves along common areas of culture? Journalists and political science PhDs write books about this sort of thing (for example: https://www.amazon.com/Big-Sort-Clustering-Like-Minded-America/dp/0547237723).

The people of the Northern Rocky Mountain states are substantively different from Californians, with different value sets, economic ideas, etc. How do you guarantee that decisions that affect those states aren't afflicted with a California flavor that is distasteful to those non-Californians?

u/BlackbeltSteve · -2 pointsr/houston

no, this is the cost of an American (Southern Scots Irish influenced) culture that embraces and celebrates violence.

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.567.1720&rep=rep1&type=pdf

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jeea.12096

"The paper tests the popular hypothesis that the high prevalence of homicide in the South of the United States originates from the settlement by herders from the fringes of Britain in the 18th century. I find that historical Scots‐Irish presence is associated with higher contemporary homicide, particularly by white offenders, and that a culture of violence was transmitted to subsequent generations—but only in the South and, more generally, where historical institutional quality was low. The interpretation is that the Scots‐Irish culture of honor prevailed and persisted as an adaptive behavior to weak institutions. As institutional quality converged between the South and North over the last 200 years, the influence of the culture of honor has been fading over time. The results are robust to controlling for state fixed effects and for a large number of historical and contemporary factors, as well as to relying on instrumental variables for historical settlements. The results are also specific to a particular type of homicide and background of settlers."

Read Thomas Sowell's White Liberals and Black Rednecks to understand how that culture has poisoned much of the southern underclasses, both black and white...

https://www.amazon.com/Black-Rednecks-Liberals-Thomas-Sowell/dp/1594031436

u/reiduh · -3 pointsr/Austin

Here's an update:
racist ahole developer electrician

And an upvote.

u/ClockworkOnion · -11 pointsr/SubredditDrama

>The officers unloaded 16 rounds in the shadow of the Empire State Building at a disgruntled former apparel designer, killing him after he engaged in a gunbattle with police, authorities said.Three passersby sustained direct gunshot wounds, while the remaining six were hit by fragments, according to New York Police Commissioner Ray Kelly. All injuries were caused by police, he said Saturday.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/25/justice/new-york-empire-state-shooting/

>Detroit has experienced 37 percent fewer robberies than it did last year, and Police Chief James Craig is crediting armed citizens for the drop. “Criminals are getting the message that good Detroiters are armed and will use that weapon,” Chief Craig, who has been an open advocate for private gun ownership, told The Detroit News in an interview. “I don’t want to take away from the good work our investigators are doing, but I think part of the drop in crime, and robberies in particular, is because criminals are thinking twice that citizens could be armed.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/16/detroit-police-chief-says-armed-citizens-are-curbi/


> Newsweek has reported that law-abiding American citizens using guns in self-defense during 2003 shot and killed two and one-half times as many criminals as police did, and with fewer than one-fifth as many incidents as police where an innocent person mistakenly identified as a criminal (2% versus 11%).

http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/02/21/disarming-the-myths-promoted-by-the-gun-control-lobby/2/

> in 1993 approximately 700,000 police killed 330 innocent individuals, while approximately 250,000,000 private citizens only killed 30 innocent people. That's a per capita rate for the police, of almost 4000 times higher than the population in general.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0226493644/ref=pd_sxp_elt_l1/102-3993670-7898564 However, this dataset is 21 years old, but a good reference.



Armed Resistance to Crime:
The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun: http://www.guncite.com/gcdgklec.html
Northwestern University School of Law, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, vol. 86, issue 1, 1995.

TEN MYTHS ABOUT GUN CONTROL, Duke University
http://people.duke.edu/~gnsmith/articles/myths.htm


u/SolusOpes · -13 pointsr/philadelphia

Ok. You lose.

A Chicago University Study
 revealed that states which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%

The average number of people killed in mass shootings when stopped by police is 14.29 according to the FBI Crime Data.

The average number of people killed in a mass shooting when stopped by a civilian is 2.33. Which then do not "qualify" as a "mass shooting" so do not get reported by the media.

Another fun fact.

Conceal carry owners nationwide have a 3% error rate when correctly identifying and shooting the bad guy.

The police? 11%.

Facts hurt don't they?

You just got schooled son.

Your safe space is ---------> way