I don’t know what you mean here. Do your really mean “Intension”? Not intention?
And since either one seems to be something that happens in the mind of an individual, are you really suggesting that sexual moores are best explained by some significant proportion of society consciously having it out for white males? That seems unlikely on several levels, not least of which is that most people aren’t living their lives to maximize any particular effect on white males (I’d be shocked if even most white males think a whole lot about how their actions affect white males as a group).
Yeah, sorry … not paying attention to my intensions.
I am not “suggesting” it. I am confidently stating it as a certainty and fact. If you are not aware of it, you are asleep.
It doesn’t take “most people”. It takes understanding how to use Media and Hypnosis - basically the news, film, and advertising industry. Now are you going to claim in this age of hyper-intellectual analyzing of everything under the sun for sake of profit, those arenas haven’t been addressed and utilized (not to mention that such happens to be the prime core of a certain religion)? Give it a break.
I don’t follow what you’re trying to claim. When a guy goes to a bar and buys a girl a drink, that girl decides whether or not to sleep with him based on how that choice will affect white males? Is she doing this consciously (e.g. “I would sleep with him, but that would raise the status of white men”)? Or has she been programmed by the media to use some heuristic that has the same effect (e.g. “what would dad think?”, where making dad happy and hurting white men are isomorphic)?
People choose what they do based upon their previously accepted notions of hope vs threat in combination with their concurrent perceptions of hope and threat, PHT. By hypnotizing a populous with the general idea that, for empirical example, one race has a larger and thus more pleasurable penis, the actions of the populous will be biased with that notion. Of course, it is not merely the excessively advertised Blacks on Blonds hypnotic promotion (or Arabs on Germaids), but political and more specifically socialistic promotion are also literally hypnotized into the population before your very eyes. Medical influences are then used to enhance and bring physical reality to the perception (peyronie’s disease). The problem is simply that you are still asleep and thus not noticing - one of the preferred states for getting hypnotized (along with the hypnotized belief that you cannot be hypnotized without your permission).Such was the whole point in making the Media, the “Fourth Branch of the Government”.
It’s call “Mass Programming”. ref, ref, ref,… just picking a few off the top.
It has been deemed “appropriate behavior” for black men to be predators to white women, just as it has for Arab men to be predators of German women, just for examples.
Lovely theory, but not born out by facts. Racially assortative mating is still the rule.
What in the world? No one is claiming that that’s appropriate. If anything, that’s treated (e.g. by the criminal justice system) as less appropriate than white men being predators to white women.
And start being far more careful of who might be the good or bad guys and who might not be. Become seriously humble, not merely superficially so. And in that process, you learn of exactly how influence is really working, not merely the theory, but the practice, such as the old “product placement” advertising that went political into social engineering.
If you examine most Hollywood films from 1980-2010 (as well as news broadcasts and commercials), for social engineering “product placement” (such as always having a black man in view just over the shoulder of the star white woman in as many scenes as possible), you could easily become overwhelmed with the extreme of it. It is blatant, and supported by the concept of “Political Correctness”.
Stop attempting to be anything, PC or not. And start watching ACTUAL behaviors, results, and the influences that led to them. Stop being BIASED.
The global, liberal agenda is race mixing until there are no distinct races. Black man/white woman swirls are so popular on television, in movies to keep the progressive agenda progressing. Most racial swirls always involve a white woman which leaves white men out in the cold. Racial swirls with white women may hypnotize many white women towards birthing swirl babies, which significantly hinders the number of available white women for white men, now and in the future, as less and less children are white.
White women prefer black men because of the size of their penises.
White women do not in general prefer black men.
When I watch “actual behaviors”, like who people actually end up having sexual relationships with, I see that white women tend to partner much more frequently with white men than with black men. I conclude (2) is the better hypothesis.
The rise in bi-racial children has increased by 50% since 2000. That’s a huge jump. White women are tending to pair with white men less and less which is the reality you prefer to overlook.
What about the 20% of them who do, up from 5% in 2000?
How many actual sexual encounters have you been watching over the past 20 years? Notice any changing at all?
I have had the privileged of over-viewing a great deal of social and private behaviors. I have a list of Black men who could not get white women off their minds. One even expressed that he would go so far as to even join the Christian Church if they would set him up with a white woman (I imagine that any would do). Just watch any Sports channel.
But I an not going to debate THIS one with you Carleas. This isn’t Relativity. This is blatant social engineering right in front of your eyes (with the exception that you have already noticed that your news is being filtered).
This is one where you merely have to start looking for yourself. Debating it will not change your mind a bit. GO LOOK at the Media for real, not with your biases.
Carleas, you and most accept it all because you were first hypnotized into the notion that it is a good thing (those evil injustices of the past)and that it is necessary and good to do sneaky and bad things as long as you get good from it. Thus you overlook it quite willingly.
Total interracial marriage went from ~9% to ~17% in that that time, so “increased by 50%” could certainly be true, but hides the fact that a 50% increase on small percentage of marriages is still a small percentage of marriages.
Here’s some data on that trend, noting that the rise of online dating plays a role, and pointing out that each interracial couple tends to create a community that fosters more interracial pairings, by bringing together racially diverse communities. The best-fit story seems to be that as people have the opportunity to meet and socialize with people of other races, more interracial coupling happens. No need for hypnosis etc. to explain it.
Unless you’ve been hypnotized, in which case you need to give up, start being more careful, etc.
Couplings that produce offspring have little to do with marriage in this day and age, so no one but you is talking about marriage. Black/white swirls who reproduce don’t tend to marry…multiple babies from multiple daddies is a newer trend.
I believe what is being talked about is that under global neo liberalism where multiculturalism is tantamount that is anti white to its core in ideology there is a phenomenon of social engineering taking place that revolves around encouragingly disrupting all cultural, racial, or ethnic cohesion where white men are at the brunt of this. As an ideology that is anti white the best possible means of getting rid of white males is by assaulting or disrupting the sexual selection of white women that are the reproducers.
An increase of interracial relationships by 50% of the population illustrates the success of this campaign of social engineering in eliminating cultural, racial, and ethnic cohesion of said host population. The hypnosis of a massive social engineering campaign one would look at the controlled influence of mass media in particular television broadcast which in itself is a very powerful influencer of the human mind publicly. In this way popular media can be used subversively.
Most kids are still born in marriages (40% are born out of wedlock, and less than 30% of kids born to white mothers; see here), so the statistics about marriage still give us some insight.
Trends in marriage are likely to mirror trends in other coupling, especially if the indoctrination that’s being claimed in this thread is happening.
James’ claims here are about attractiveness, and again I propose that marriage is a fair proxy to tell us what people find attractive.
As we’ve discussed before, saying some data isn’t good enough does not support your position. If you have better data, present better data. Until then, the best data we have shows that…
Just to clarify, because I feel like this is being overstated, we’re talking about 50% of the population of interracial relationships, which was low to begin with. If X is true of 10% of relationships, and it increases by 50%, it’s still the case the X is not true for 85% of relationships.
As for “eliminating…cohesion”, I think the cohesion was always more familial than racial or ethnic, and in the past family was pretty strongly correlated with race and ethnicity. So the decoupling of family from race looks like a breakdown of that cohesion, but the cohesion was never actually racial, it was just incidentally racial.
Culture I think is different, because people from different racial backgrounds can be part of the same culture. Black and white college graduates are likely to be more culturally similar than a white college graduate and a white high school dropout, and even more so than a white urban American and a white rural Russian.
All of this is a bit off topic though, no? This thread used to be about what’s appropriate sexual behavior, does any of this tie back? How did this get to be another thread about white genocide?
