SJW’s paint heritability as something ugly, but project they do.
About a month ago, there was a discussion about heritability under the post, The Morphing Ethical System in the U.S. (2020 June 26). This post digs this up again.
The Cognitive Dissonance of Liberals
A while back, liberals made a big squawk about how sexual orientation was genetically determined. The argument claimed that sexual orientation and gender orientation are heritable traits, and that these are all admissible as qualifications to jump up (or down, depending on your perspective) the totem pole of intersectional feminism.
Their purpose for backing this argument was to assert that it is impossible to convert or reeducate gays.
But ever since the “gay gene” was debunked, they have been waffling and backtracking. Now, saying anything is heritable is rayciss. Oh, by the way, race is heritable too. So I guess heritability is indeed racist.*
Of particular note, feminists think that certain children can somehow be rainbow trannies needing hormone therapy and “gender reassignment”, even though both their parents are totally straight. Of course, the “gay gene” argument won’t work in this case. But even so, liberal educators are in on the racket, and even the courts go along with this rubbish. The cognitive dissonance and mental backflips here are more hilarious than a prime-time sitcom. These people obviously don’t come from a pedigree of scientists.
Our in house psychologist Scott gets into it a little deeper.
“…this debate [on heritability] is absolutely batty, in light of the overwhelming evidence that generalized (g) intelligence and its two subtypes (fluid and crystallized) are mostly heritable traits. Intelligence is the most studied construct/trait there is. It is part of a cluster of traits in what most people know as “personality.” it is relatively stable over the lifetime and very difficult to dislodge or move in one direction or another within subjects.
The culturally neutral tests have done nothing but CONFIRM this stubborn bit of reality. Tests like that are known to be impervious to all sorts of outside influence, (that’s why they were developed) like all the usual bogey men: SES, diet, “systemic racism” and even serious brain injury.
Of course, in the context of the current dilemma, the blank slate must be adhered to because it is the version that most closely resembles “anti-racism” — the secular religion in America. If personality traits (like intelligence) are heritable, then gas chambers are surely next. It’s crazy.
Bo and Ben Weinguard as well as the guy who runs “A New Radical Centrism” and others are in trouble with the mob. Steve Hsu, and others have already fallen. And those guys are LIBERAL! So is Jonathan Haigt and he is in the crosshairs. It’s the wild west and as [Derek] pointed out, this time everyone is about 1 standard deviation below where they were back then.”
Scott goes on to list many other things that are highly heritable (besides raw brain power and attractiveness).
- Propensity towards anxiety or depression
- Propensity toward aggression and aggressive forms of problem solving
- Internal vs external locus of control
- Frustration tolerance
- Time horizon/delayed gratification
- “Clannishness” vs out group tolerance
- Openness to novel experiences
- …and many others!
In his post, All Human Behavioral Traits are Heritable (2012 December 31), Jay Man notes that political and religious attitudes are also heritable.**
“…some of these [traits] hang together in factors. These factors tend to hang together in ethnic groups/races.”
Upon further inspection of the feminist argument, we notice that any mention of race, intelligence, or attractiveness is verboten. Race has been constructed into THE hot button issue, simply because it does so quite nicely, and for no other reason. So don’t fall for it. But why not include the last two traits in the stack (intelligence and attractiveness)? Why are these necessarily omitted from their discussion?
For all the talk we hear about equality (e.g. fatty tattooed women claiming to have a place on the cover of Sports Illustrated), we’ll never hear SJW’s demand that women should treat unattractive men as well as they treat attractive men. Why is no one going on the warpath to defend the rights of geeks to be awkward? Why is there no equal opportunity employment missive for stupid ugly people?
Maybe it’s because if there was, then it would become obvious how absurd, unreasonable, and inefficient the demand for equality has become.
For example, equal opportunity is no longer intended to prevent the discrimination of equally qualified minorities or to help disabled veterans with PTSD land a sustenance income. Now, it’s intended to give the less qualified purple people eaters a safe haven and to discriminate against the overeducated but duly qualified ethnic majority.
Furthermore, a cursory look at the SMP proves that race, intelligence, and attractiveness are perhaps the most influential factors in choosing a mate. You know, why does everyone prefer to f*ck intelligent, attractive, white people, and swipe left on the fugly dumb@sses? Yet in spite of this natural preference, the lowest common denominators of society multiply like the crackers that belonged to Elijah’s widow.
Of course, the real reason these arguments are omitted is because these narratives are not useful towards demolishing the backbone of the traditional Christian culture. And make no mistake, it is Christ Himself who is being targeted. All of this is a manifestation of the dystopian dream of social equality, mind you. It is the anathema of a natural social hierarchy, an evil hearkening back to the Tower of Babel debacle.
“I would like to live in a world where it’s ok to notice these things. Also to live in a world where we notice the outliers. And then go have a sandwich.
But here’s where it matters.
Know yourself. Know the group you came from. Be willing to dispassionately ask yourself “do any of those stereotypes apply to me? Do I care? Am I unique in some other ways? If I have goal I have set for myself, will it be harder or easier to accomplish because of it?”
Then make your plans. Move out and fail or succeed on your own. But don’t pretend like you inherited absolutely nothing from your ancestors.”
Scott’s advice about introspection is solid. Don’t count on gleaning this kind of self-awareness from liberal educators or from watching the nooz.
In sum, SJW’s can’t wrap their heads around the concept of heritability, and even the scientific community is rolling over in deference. “Post truth” strikes yet again! The general populace of sheeple are even worse. If CNN had a regular program showcasing the special abilities of autistic individuals and defending their rights to be president, I’m sure 60% of the population would agree after a few years and elect a cretin just to prove their altruistic wokeness.
There’s been a long running rule of thumb in the Manosphere, “Don’t f*ck feminists!” But based on our study of heritability, we could expand this axiom to say, “Don’t f*ck any women who have traits that you wouldn’t want more people in the world to have (namely, your children).”
I expect this topic to boil over and create further schisms. But to a level-headed person, it’s all fluffy nonsense and a waste of time, to put it gently. The bottom line here is that all human characteristics are heritable to some degree, both desirable traits and undesirable.
* I’m being humorous. This argument is known as racism.
** H/T: Deep Strength.
- Chateau Heartiste: Older Moms And Divorced Moms Raising Generation Of Psychopaths? (2012 December 17)
- Jay Man’s Blog: All Human Behavioral Traits are Heritable (2012 December 31)**
- Chateau Heartiste: Racist Babies (2017 April 14)
- Chateau Heartiste: Fake It Till You Make It Really Works (2018 May 30)
- v5k2c2 (Derek Ramsey): Beyond Nature vs Nurture (2019 December 16)