I love it when the enemies of Truth comment on this blog; they tend to demonstrate what is wrong with the racial-denialist Left. For example, a commentator who calls herself Eliza, replied to Aoirthoir recently with this gem:
Aoirthoir your distaste for people who fight for the rights of the opressed is pathetic. Your arrogance in equating a strong woman with a mosquito is a demonstration of your intellectual deficiency. You know they say the dog with the loudest bark has the smallest dick.
When Aoirthoir replied that the Irish do, in fact, have the smallest penises on average, she had nothing more to say and has not been seen since. This is because the end-all and be-all of existence is, for them, to have a large penis. Once they realized that the secret to happiness – and to always being right – is a large penis, the Left was faced with a problem: What about women? I’m pretty sure feminism, and its shrill hysterics, has something to do with the answer.
Speaking of shrill hysterics, I came across an article by the notorious hate-monger Tim Wise recently. He loves to imagine himself debunking the science of race-realism. Among other things he writes:
Rushton, of course, says little or nothing about this most recent evidence of black IQ gains; rather, he merely repeats the same arguments he has made for two decades: arguments that, in the end, are barely more scientifically sound than when he used to go into Toronto shopping malls and ask passersby how far they could ejaculate because he believed ejaculatory distance (and for that matter, penis size) to be inversely related to intelligence. Since one can only assume Phil Rushton considers himself quite intelligent, one can then glean fairly easily what he has told us about his manhood, given his own quackish theories.
One could only imagine what a court of law, run by race-denialist officials, would look like. No testimony, nor evidence, would be needed. The judge would merely have each party drop his pants and the one with the largest penis would win. The other one would be sent to… a penal colony?
A while back, I wrote about a blogger named Zek Evets and his feeble attempt to debunk HBD. Sure enough, when reading the comments on his blog post against HBD, one of them stated:
@ brothawolf: I do believe they’re self absorbed. It’s the small penis syndrome, methinks. I took the time (yuckily) to peruse some of the links Zets provided and came up brain fried, thus empty!.
Zek responded by agreeing “yes, I wouldn’t be surprised if these race-realists exhibit Napoleon/Small-Penis complexes, haha!” Well, I don’t think we have a good argument against that kind of reasoning so we might as well concede!
Even non race-realists have noticed the liberal tendency to whip out the “small-penis” accusation, and fling it at every opportunity. On the web, we find questions such as: “Why do liberals say you must be overcompensating for a small penis if you do/own masculine things?” Or links to images such as this:
Now that we understand the leftist mentality (and no, I’m not talking about you, Robert Lindsay) about truth and falsehood, good and bad, virtue and evil – that it all comes down to penis size, it is not difficult to understand their infatuation with blacks. The leftist establishment is dominated by women and feminized men – so they admire what they believe is the most naturally masculine man: The black man. Their reasoning is:
Big penis = good
Black man = big penis
Therefore black man = good
I’ll grant them that, even though it is not possible to think with one’s penis, it is a fact that “I.P.” comes before “I.Q.” – but only by one letter. The difference is not statistically significant.
What would they say if they found out that some race-realists actually do have large penises? Would they then bow down to us? Who would volunteer – and would it stand up in a court of law?