I found this piece of idiocy on Facebook:
This embodies the flawed logic of the race-denialist Left on several levels.
1) It mixes fads, religions, race, sexuality and ethnic groups in order to attack people who have certain ideas about race. The implication is that race is no more meaningful, to how your body is structured (the brain being part of your body) than which religion you choose to follow or which language your ancestors spoke. Let’s try this method on something else:
Now that makes a lot of sense, doesn’t it? By mixing in “punk”, “Hispanic” and “woman” with race and ethnicity, the intent is clearly to confuse.
2) I found it amusing that the standard profile chosen for this diagram was a European/Caucasian one. This affirms the “racism” of the author – who obviously saw Caucasian features as normal.
I’ve rendered a service to the creator of the above diagram, and cured it of its racism:
3) In fact, there are differences in average brain size between the races – but probably not between the various religions, artificial ethnic groups such as Hispanics, sexualities or social groups. This is to be expected, since the races have been evolving for tens of thousands of years while groups such as “punk” or “Islamic” have little genetic meaning.
4) It’s pretty clear that, since there is no category for “white” in the diagram, the implication is that the “racist” is white. A straight white male, to be more precise. Of course there is the other subliminal message as well: That straight white men have no right to identify as a cohesive group, that they have no group rights at all. We might even interpret it as saying that if white men form any sort of group consciousness at all, it is a sign that they are “racist”. The white man can be either “racist” or entirely invisible. There are no other options for him.
5) While scores of books, hundreds of in-depth essays and countless lectures have expounded on the biological reality of race, the only retort that the race-denialists can come up with is: “You have no brain.” The race-denialist books are merely long versions of the same retort.
Wicked, wicked wit.
Did you draw that silhouette yourself? It’s good–recognizably Congoid without being a caricature.
Actually I took it from a photo of a real African man.
This chart is just great. Any actual research would have told the creator that yes, those “racists” are right. Brains are different between races. Instead of actually looking for facts though, he apparently decided to go the usual rout and print what makes people feel good about themselves instead of the truth. An actual chart based on real science would be called racist, and there’s no way in hell you’d be able to hang it anywhere..
Jay : Please inject some thoughts about Dr. Samuel Morton and his “Crania Americana” into this delicious post. Also, don’t forget to mention the whole “Mismeasure of Man” sham, and the utter repudiation of Stephen Jay Gould and his anti-racism (anti-whiteism) by the good scientists from Stanford last summer (see: tinyurl.com/692t5kn).
To think that “Mismeasure” has been required college reading for three decades, when it is based on one big fat giant whopping lie.
Jay : From that study I linked to :
Our analysis of Gould’s claims reveals that most of Gould’s criticisms are poorly supported or falsified. It is doubtful that Morton equated cranial capacity and intelligence ,, calling into question his motivation for manipulating capacity averages. Morton did not consider the influence of sex or stature on cranial capacity, but it would have been impossible for him to use those parameters to bias the averages he reported (see Box 3). The grouped mean of Morton’s Native American sample is almost identical to the straight mean, rendering irrelevant Morton’s decision to use the latter. The changes in average cranial capacity from Morton’s seed-based measurements to shot-based measurements cannot be reconstructed with any certainty, incorporate erroneous seed measurements made by Morton’s assistant, yielded a broad range of changes (−10 to +12 in3) hidden by Gould’s mean, and are confounded by the shifts in sample composition (circa 50%) between the two rounds of measurement. Morton did not manipulate his samples to influence the average cranial capacities, at least not in a detectable manner. Morton did report subsample means for non-Caucasian groups (see Box 1). Of the approximately seven minor errors in Morton’s work identified by Gould , only two appear to be actual errors, and their overall impact confounds rather than supports Morton’s presumed a priori rankings.
Whoever made this is really stupid. Hindi is a language, not a person.