tea time with Linda!
I drew Razputin!
Thank you for your submission!
but what if raz went to drink a glass of water and it literally punched him in the face
R. M. Young (1987). Racist society, racist science. In D. Gill & L. Levidow (Eds.) Anti-racist science teaching(pp. 16-42). London: Free Association Books. (via homoarigato)
remember when i posted about how science can be oppressive and i got hate mail and hundreds of notes of people calling me stupid
yeah that was fun
Remember that time when they made up a disease for black ppl when we didnt wanna be stuck as slaves?
Remember when they operated on black women with no anesthesia to get modern gynecological surgical procedures?
Remember when they sterilized poor woc without consent to keep us from ‘creating more undesirables’?
Remember when the government allowed Black men to go untreated with Syphilis even after a cure was discovered?
Remember when minority heavy areas in cities were sprayed with radioactive material to ‘test’ how America could handle a nuclear fallout?
Oh, you dont? Because I do…
Go look it up. Every single one was done by a white supremacist nation called America.
Don’t forget that in 1975 about 35% of Puerto Rican Women were sterilized without their consent by the US government
1. A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History by Nicholas Wade (Published 2014)
"Right now, it’s undeniable that Wade’s work is the most influential work of scientific racism circulating today. His argument is that racial groups have genetic predispositions to certain kinds of mental skills, some of which evolved only over the past few hundred years. As a result, some races are more creative or intelligent than others. The Chinese, he argues, are more prone to obedience, while people from tribal societies in Africa are impulsive and quick to consume everything they have. Meanwhile, Europeans are good at becoming prosperous due to their thoughtful, forward-thinking natures.
2. The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life, by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray (Published 1994)
"In this incredibly influential work of economics and sociology, researchers Herrnstein and Murray argue that class differences between whites and blacks in America can be traced back to differences in IQ. Blacks, they write, are simply not as intelligent as whites (and, to a certain extent, Asians — though mostly they’re talking just about blacks and whites). Because many studies show that IQ is a very strong indicator of economic success, they believe that IQ differences are at the root of racial differences. They use "scientific" data about IQ scores to dismiss the idea that political inequalities and the history of slavery in the U.S. are causes of racial inequality."
3. “Why Are Black Women Less Physically Attractive Than Other Women?” By: Satoshi Kanazawa (Published 2011)
"Dr Kanazawa, a lecturer at the London School of Economics, has published findings based on a survey of white, Asian, black and native American men and women who were asked to rate each other’s attractiveness based on photographs.
Nor does he explore the fact that the research on which he bases his conclusion was conducted in America where European ideals of beauty dominate.”
***Satoshi Kanazawa has been the only recipient on this list dismissed for his work, could it be because he is an Asian man?***
In response to ongoing controversy over views such as that African countries suffer chronic poverty and illness because their people have lower IQs and that black women are “objectively less attractive” than other races, he was dismissed from writing for Psychology Today.
I need the source but I wouldn’t hold it past them…corrupt ass pigs.
These cops are sicki heard about this story too.
And yet no source.
bruh I read the story in the paper a few months back. i remember this. chill on the condescending attitude.
All I asked was a source on the story not just words on a photo. How is that condescending?
Tuesday afternoon, Ferguson protesters march in downtown St. Louis, from City Hall to the US Courthouse.
This is super important
Dear STFU-Moffat and associates,
From now on, I insist you describe Steven Moffat as “Emmy-award winning writer…
is that you hobby lobby
Am I the only one that’s a just a tiny bit pissed off that this is still an issue?
The Original Series wasn’t even in the general VICINITY of fucking around yo
OKAY, so you know I care about reboot and all, despite its problems, because that shit got me into Star Trek in the first place. But you wanna know its major problem? It’s not good science fiction. It’s an action movie in space. GOOD science fiction is the original fucking series, right here.
They took a social issue that was HIGHLY TABOO and made a show about it because you can get away with that kind of thing by putting it on another planet and just having the Enterprise point the bullshit out. It’s 2014 and this argument is sadly still relevant. And do you know why it’s still relevant? Because the average person isn’t well-educated in social issues. They’re well-educated in summer blockbusters. We need more science fiction that broadens the mind and just doesn’t pit good vs. evil. Star Wars is where you go for great action adventure, good vs. evil. Star Trek was wholly separate because it was concerned with the human condition and the state of the future.
In short, I will roundhouse kick anyone in the face that calls the original series a silly 60s camp show with no entertainment value. It made me contemplate my very existence and it did so on the budget of a bologna sandwich.