[ Rules ] [ ot / g / m ] [ pt / snow / w ] [ meta ] [ Server Status ]

/ot/ - off-topic

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File(20 MB max)
Video
Password
(For post deletion)

The site maintenance is completed but lingering issues are expected, please report any bugs here

File: 1460152280139.jpg (64.48 KB, 300x465, 6a01053625d752970c01156f8c943a…)

No. 85475

What is site's perception on the science of eugenics?
Not in the sense of destroying people on the basis of race or skin colour, but rather foetal abnormality, disease and severe handicap prior to birth?

I'm just watching Louis Theroux's Extreme Love: Autism and I can't help but be struck by the thought that for the children afflicted by the extreme variants of autism, they have very little purpose in their existence. It's an extremely controversial opinion, but I've seen and known humans in my lifetime already who exhibit such mental debilitation that they spend their entire lives in a wheelchair without the mental capacity to communicate let alone care for themselves and I can't help but think "Why?".

To a degree we already practice this in some countries such as in the UK in which where foetal abnormality is detected late-term termination is therefore permitted.

Do you believe that all human life is sacred regardless of its calibre?
If so, why do humans not apply this standard to all animals?
Why are humans regarded as being exceptional to the rule even when some of them are born into the world with the mental capacity of turnip?
Is it wasteful to redirect resources, time and energy towards caring for a human 24 hours of every day for decades when such a human will never have the possibility of contributing to a society in any way?

No. 85476

An example from the documentary.

No. 85477

Did you get tired of ranting about immigration policies?

No. 85479

>>85477

What? I'm a lolcow user Anon.

No. 85480

Tbh I'm not against eugenics, even in the case of some lesser disabilities.

No. 85481

>>85480

It's such an unbelievably controversial issue though and I have difficulty understanding why.

No. 85482

>>85481
I think it's because, where do you draw the line at? People with glasses have visual defects etc etc etc. It's too grey I think which makes people wary.

No. 85483

>>85482

I would imagine, at least for me, that the line is drawn at detectable foetal abnormality to the degree that the resulting person could never attain a reasonable quality of life i.e. the ability to walk, the ability to talk, measurable cognitive function etc.

No. 85485

Honest to god I support it 100%.

No. 85486

If we must support it all of us must die then. So no, I dont support it. I care about my fellow retards.
Source: /snow/, /g/, vent threads

No. 85495

>>85486

>if we must support it all of us must die then


How exactly did you manage to leap from terminating pregnancies in with the foetus has developed without most of its brain to exterminating the entirety of the human a race?

No. 85501

>>85495
My head hurts

No. 85504

Anti-race mixing here.
Seems like common sense.

No. 85522

File: 1460167852882.jpg (207.28 KB, 1013x768, samesmell.jpg)

>>85504
>anti-race mixing

As well as it being a matter of classism. Numbers show that that individuals below the poverty line are statistically more inclined to be sick or sad.

In regards to the effectiveness of human engineering, true it works towards a healthy, standardised future, but at what human cost?
Personally I think it's just the same old Nazi agenda wrapped up in a different coloured bow. Looking at all the signs, based on your class, or creed, life is about to get either really, really good, or turn to a complete shitstorm, very soon it seems.

>see A. Huxleys' 'Brave New World'

No. 85523

Wouldn't eugenics just narrow the gene pool, and potentially eliminate genetic combinations that prove to be more beneficial in the end?

No. 85528

>>85522

>labels it "Nazi propaganda"

>forgets that the Greeks and the Roman's were engaging in this shit way before the German's could even say "bratwurst"

No. 85529

>Do you believe that all human life is sacred regardless of its calibre?
Yes.

>If so, why do humans not apply this standard to all animals?

Cognitive dissonance.

>Why are humans regarded as being exceptional to the rule even when some of them are born into the world with the mental capacity of turnip?

Cognitive dissonance.

>Is it wasteful to redirect resources, time and energy towards caring for a human 24 hours of every day for decades when such a human will never have the possibility of contributing to a society in any way?

Depends on how you define wasteful. If you are born without arms, you may be unable to contribute to others. However, being otherwise conscious and functional, you still want to live. If you are born a vegetable, or are an adult with an IQ of 10, it's a different story.

If you're talking about abandoning or killing such people, that's not directly related to eugenics at all; just a potential method of implementing some aspects of it.

If you mean sterilizing people with major disabilities… that's probably a good idea, but forced sterilization comes with many issues and infringements. Maybe some system where their disability payments are greatly increased if they accept sterilization could be a balanced alternative.

>>85504
An objective eugenics system may actually involve a lot of controlled race mixing, depending on what phenotypes you want to optimize for. It's likely a eugenics program would optimize for mental rather than physical characteristics, so you could very well see major amounts of race mixing and new kinds of appearances.

>>85523
No, that's a misunderstanding of what eugenics is. Eugenics is about propagating the best genotype possible over as many generations as possible. A eugenics program very much would try to avoid eliminating potentially beneficial genetic combinations. Eugenics is about quality, not merely purity.

No. 85537

File: 1460171231640.jpg (25.93 KB, 176x310, yeah.jpg)

>>85529
all good points anon
but there's always room for people to use applications like this to their own advantage (pic related)


>>85528
no labels involved, anon.
nothing has being forgotten, only disregarded due to it being literally ancient history.

The German youth in WW2 died with the same vigor and mindless sense of the motherland the Spartans had practiced. Many parallels can be drawn between the two societies. I mean, the Nazis converted classical greek artifacts during the war…unlike other social revolutions, (Maoist China etc), who were hell bent in burning the past to ashes.
Well known too that the swastika is symbol older than time, and has only recently come to represent the dark deeds of Hitlers reign.

No. 85546

wait.. im sure fellow canadians read a book called "The Chrysalids" back in tenth grade which is basically a world where people kill/burn/exclude any "Deviations" from their world bc they want to keep themselves pure and make sure they dont anger god again and basically they lived on farms and did shit all but obsesses over everything being perfect and they ended up being dumb as nails because "being a human with 5 fingers and 5 toes" were all they cared about

No. 85549

>>85546

That's a pretty extreme comparison.

No. 85570

>>85495
I thought most of us are severe handicapped though. Again, I care about my farmers so no I dont support this.

No. 85576

>>85477
Everyone with common sense is a poltard to you? I've got some bad news friend. ..

No. 85577

>>85523
Most of the retards we're talking about don't or can't reproduce tho

No. 85578

>>85570
Your grammar is pretty severly handicapped.

No. 85580

>>85578
You proved my point thank you very much dot

No. 85581

Kill all manlets and dicklets.

No. 85583

Even Helen Keller wrote an essay on it and why it could be considered moral to have as an option to parents in the case of preventing entire lifetimes of meaningless suffering. Some people can't function at all; they're not "there" mentally and often bring immense toil and sorrow to those around them as well as to themselves, like in >>85476 where this poor guy is clearly continually miserable and frustrated and so is his family, and there is no cure or treatment good enough to truly help them (or like the case of the Hartley Hooligans who are almost entirely immobile and unconscious of their surroundings). I think it's every parent's right to choose. If they know their child has an enormous disability and will never be able to think at a near-normal level or function whatsoever it's still their choice to bring that child into the world and take care of them for decades, since the child is theirs. But also no one should be forced to keep a severely disabled or deformed fetus and spend their whole life caring them when it would only create more human suffering in the world for one or both parties.

No. 85589

>>85476
That boy pisses me off and justifies abuse. I would whip him with my belt every day until he becomes normal. He is a fucking spoiled autistic child. If this boy was still living in my house at age 18 I would kick him out of my house ASAP. He has the worst parents, just because they treat him too good. Fucking autists. He should have not been born. But how can we know a fetus is autistic? Do they display autistic behaviour?

No. 85592

>>85589

>but how can we know a fetus is autistic? Do they display autistic behaviour?


Autism is not detectable in the womb, no.

No. 85595

>>85583
It's all well and good to offer the choice, but even given the choice, some parents will feel too guilty to abort their vegetables/autistic tards. We need a society that doesn't glorify and praise people for the "selfless" act of raising vegetables/autistic tards, rather, the opposite.

No. 85596

>>85529
>Maybe some system where their disability payments are greatly increased if they accept sterilization could be a balanced alternative.

I disagree that is a good idea. you can't pay human experiments, because it is unethical; if you did, you will disproportionately be testing on people who need the money, ie the poor, mentally ill, and so on. Same reason you can't do human experiments on prisoners, they're already a vulnerable population. Of course people would accept extra money for sterilization, because if they're already on disability they're already probably in poverty, and injured, or mentally ill, same principle still applies imo making it really unethical.

No. 85609

File: 1460216796171.jpg (217.89 KB, 1000x625, download.jpg)

>>85589
You are a fucking cunt. I hope this is bait.

Aren't some autistic supposed to have levels of intelligence in certain areas that are extremely above average?

I have an autistic relative and he seems to get upset whenever everyone else is engaged in conversation and he has nothing to distract him. He has fits because he feels he is unable to participate in the dull symbolic exchanges we all do everyday. It seems beyond him and all he wants to do is be active. If mentally handicapped people get upset you can't always just blame it on their handicap. There are bigger problems to address like the lack of options for everyday exciting experiences in the society we've built. This is especially so for people who are surrounded by private land and tiny back yards.

>>85476
The kid in the video is clearly extremely upset by something and all his mum can say is 'OWIE, YOU GOT SANTI CLAUSE ON TV?'. She's standing in the living room jittering about her material possessions. Her son didn't choose a life rotting in the same mundane suburban existence as she does, and sometimes it's overwhelming for him.

No. 85612

>>85609
Autistic savants are incredibly rare, and they're not geniuses because of their autism, but rather in spite of it.

No. 85622

>>85609
>offended when someone mocks autistic people
>not thinking he isn't better off dead
But just based on the fact you seem to be bothered when someone here mocked autistic people I just wonder…why even are you here? In general I just wonder why the tumblrinas come here? I know its probably because they came from PULL but after being triggered so much why are people like you still here?

No. 85624

>>85596
Yeah, it's certainly a very tricky subject. I'm not sure what incentive you could give to encourage self-sterilization without making it seem like a forced choice. At the very least, they should be offered free sterilization if they choose.

No. 85625

>>85578
>severly
b8?

No. 85626

>>85583
Well, abortion is legal in the US, and what you're describing is already a choice many people make.

I think OP was discussing the ethics of euthanizing such people after they've already been born.

No. 85627

I believe in the extreme version of eugenics, so also based on features, although not necessarily race. I want the best for humanity. No sick people, no psychos, no ugly people, no dumb people and thus no poor people that are struggling, ideally. But that's just assuming the outcome, maybe it wouldn't lessen the suffering of humanity. But it would at least make us healthy and pretty :^)

No. 85629

>>85476
Throw its head brutally against the wall until it's dead. He is the spawn of satan.

No. 85630

>>85627
>no ugly people
That wouldn't happen though. What counts as attractive changes all the time. Everybody would share similar features that are considered attractive now but at that point it would just be average or even ugly and we'd start idolising different features. We might think "oh what a hot bunch of people" but it'd eventually morph into "ew everybody here is so painfully plain"

No. 85632

>>85630
Makeup trends, fashion etc…change. But we always will agree about what we consider to be attractive features: /fit/, "average" height to tall and symmetrical features. The color of your lipstick might be considered ugly in a few years but thin lips will always be considered ugly. Big noses will always be considered ugly. The queen's chin will never be viewed as elegant. If fat ever becomes beautiful again the ones with symmetrical features can always have a burger or 30 at burger king. But the uglies will forever be struggling, to the point they have mental issues and are undergoing potentially life threatening surgeries.

No. 85635

>>85622
I'm not 'offended' by people mocking autists, I'm just not a total cunt and think they should die.

Why the fuck are you here? You've used the words 'tumblrina', 'triggered' and accused me of coming from PULL. Post something original for once in your life.

No. 85637

>>85635
Don't you want a better human race?

No. 85640


No. 85642

>>85637
bettering the human race would come from improving the physical realms in which we live, not from eugenics or sterilizing autists you cunt pirate

No. 85643

>>85632
We haven't always agreed on the same ugly features though. We don't even agree now. While symmetry might always be valued, things like ideal noses, lips and eyes change depending on person, place and time. Big butts were unfashionable only a few years ago, now they're great. High foreheads were prized once, now they're seen as weird-looking. Even the ideal lip shaped has changed. A small, pouty, rosebud mouth was considered feminine and perfect, now it's big lips all around. the shape of the perfect nose has changed throughout history. We can't know what will be attractive in ten years or fifty or a hundred.

Anyway, once "perfect" becomes the norm, it means nothing any more. People are considered beautiful when they're above average and are stunning. Nobody will be striking, everybody will have the same kind of features. Maybe we can pretend that that means everybody will be beautiful but it's more likely that people will start to be praised for rarer features and new ideals will be made, which is what has always happened. Nobody ever praises what everybody has because there's nothing special about it.

No. 85644

Would anybody actually trust their government with implementing a eugenics program? I feel like mine would most likely just sterilise people with little regard to actual health benefits

No. 85645

>>85637
>Don't you want a better human race?
This is what they'll say when all of us get sterilized for being assholes lmao

No. 85651

You guys need to watch this, from 10:28.
How many of you believe you could raise a child like that?

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2kbn0t

No. 85653

>>85609

>you are a fucking cunt. I hope this is bait.

>aren't some autistic supposed to have levels of intelligence in certain areas that are extremely above average?

You obviously don't understand enough about the autistic spectrum to be licensed to go around accusing others of being cunts.

Savant autism is extremely rare, and of course though that fall under that spectrum are typically high functioning and extremely capable of leading perfectly normal, happy, productive lives.

We're debating specifically, among others, the more extreme forms of autism, in which the affected human is barely cognitively functional, has no concept of their surroundings, is unable to communicate, is violent and aggressive, requires around the clock care and only a burden to their family and the people surrounding them. Case in point the kid in >>85651

No. 85655

>>85626

>I think OP was discussing the ethics of euthanizing such people after they've already been born.


I mean a bit of both really. I mean you have to draw a line somewhere, but say a child was born with it's face missing, no legs and and only a small proportion of its brain developed, I have to wonder what kind of life that human would go on to lead.

I would never approve of euthanising a person that it mentally competent regardless of their physical status.

No. 85656

>>85637
maybe they wouldn't behave this way if we weren't all executing domesticated performances 24/7 in our own lives and expecting them to do the same.

they should run free like wild autistic ponies

No. 85657

>>85481
Because it's not fair. People bitching are just insecure in their heritage.

No. 85659

>>85475
Just fuck the hot guys and ignore the losers, lol, it's Eugenics

No. 85662

>>85657

>because it's not fair


Was the world ever fair?
When has existence ever been fair?

No. 85667

>>85609
>Aren't some autistic supposed to have levels of intelligence in certain areas that are extremely above average?

Some, not all. Not even most in fact.
Not every autistic person is some kind of idiot genius, some of them are just autistic. A lot of high functioning autistics like to think they're secretly geniuses but they're not either. Playing along with and perpetuating this inaccurate misconception is stupid and damaging.

No. 85668

>>85627
So like the movie Gattaca?

No. 85669

File: 1460234174239.jpeg (68.27 KB, 455x640, image.jpeg)

>>85632
Head binding: practiced by numerous cultures in history. Considered attractive then, some Native American tribes even used it to distinguish themselves from the "lower class". Not so attractive to "us," is it?

No. 85670

File: 1460234473186.jpeg (136.95 KB, 768x651, image.jpeg)

>>85632
Chinese foot binding: a mark of beauty for thousands of years, performed on almost all women. Today, "we" are horrified by the practice and consider it "ugly." Beauty does indeed change.

No. 85671

>>85670
>>85669
If pixyteri did this they would still consider her ugly because of her assymetrical face but if angelina jolie did this (even if you dont find her pretty; she is still not ugly) she'd be considered very beautiful. My point is, trends like footbinding doesnt count. Symmetrical features are timeless and I guess I ruined my point by saying thin lips are ugly, because thin lips itself have nothing to do with having an assymetrical face.
>>85643
Yeah I worded my examples wrong my bad. I just meant an even symmetric face.

No. 85677

>>85632
>thin lips will always be considered ugly

thin lips were the ideal in the early 1900s, and early makeup trends, especially flapper style, have lips being under drawn. ideal features do change, we use makeup to help adhere to those ideal features.

No. 85695

File: 1460252472946.jpeg (312.66 KB, 776x968, image.jpeg)

>>85677
I already clarified myself but tbh if thin lips to you means pic related then that to me does not mean thin lips! Imo thin lips are kylie jenner lips before the surgery. No one can find that shit attractive it looks like an open wound jesus

No. 85697

File: 1460252589529.jpeg (23.25 KB, 600x325, image.jpeg)

>>85677
While I meant symmetric as in even features I still doubt anyone in any country would find these lips attractive.

No. 85699

>>85697
>>85695
But there's no way we can definitely say that they'll never be found attractive in any time period in any country in the future. This shit changes. Considering that there are people who preferred Kylie before her lip enhancements, there are obviously people who do find her thin lips attractive and we have no way of knowing whether more people will think that way in the future.

No. 85710

>>85699
It has been noted that thin lips appear to age a person, where as full or plump lips allow a person to appear more youthful (obviously not the exaggerated ones we're seeing people get done now a day in order to achieve this aesthetic).

Although trends change, some tend to linger and persevere. Influences from different cultures also tend to make there way to other areas, but there are certain preferences from each culture that will not be cast aside to make way for the new trend. For example, I highly doubt that in East Asia there will ever be a high preference for tanned skin (not going to mention Gyaru due to it be a sub culture and not whats common) just because Americans are obsessed with it. Or just because thin is in, Latinos will never go for non curvy bodies. You can be 5'7 and 90 lbs, as long as you have an hourglass looking figure you'd still be considered ok.

No. 85722

>>85589
You're an idiot. You can't "hit someone every day until they become normal". Please never have children.

No. 85733

File: 1460281395319.png (324.38 KB, 500x367, image.png)

>>85699
I'm the anon you replied to, yes, I too find Kylie Jenner before surgery prettier but I dont find the before surgery kylie prettier because of her lips but because her new lips just look obviously botox'd. And before her botox lips she looked like she ate bolognese sauce. Although I dont think she was ugly by any means but uhm her lips are the least attractive, her eyes are what people might make want to bang her (before surgery and perhaps after)

No. 85734

>>85722
Not that anon you replied but that greasy blob of cancer is not a child he is a grown man and deserves to be treated like the grown man he is.



Kill it with fire.

No. 85737

>>85734
He's a barely functioning autistic man who needs to watch Disney movies to calm down. Hitting him and treating him like he is mentally/cognitively able solves nothing.

No. 85738

>>85733
She looked like a cute, normal kid before, hardly "ugly" or "unattractive". People are fucking weird.

No. 85912

>>85632
Ugly people aren't a victim of their features, they're a victim of people's reaction to their features. They have 100 percent capacity to live a fulfilling and productive life, their 'shortcomings' are projected onto them by others.
Also half the shit you're saying like 'big noses will always be ugly' is purely from Eurocentric beauty standards, which have only spread so far across the world because of colonialism and media.
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/20/world/study-finds-tv-alters-fiji-girls-view-of-body.html

No. 85916

>>85912
Nah, they were just introduced to amazingly beutiful women they never saw before, ofcourse they would be insecure, before that they only had other doughy ugly islander women to compare to

No. 85921

>>85916

Anon you sound very young and not college/university educated. >>85912 is spot on.

No. 85922

File: 1460454712358.png (13.53 KB, 500x500, __(46).png)

>>85921
>you sound very young and not college/university educated
fuck off cretin

No. 85924

>>85922

K' now I know you're underageb&.
Debate is something you'll have to eventually confront in further education you know. You either stand by the strength of your conviction or you back down. Ad hominem doesn't fly in a seminar, kid.

No. 85928

>>85924
special snowflake thinks is speshul and intelligent because
>further education
>SEMINARS

>>85622
>>85921
true autism is coming on to an image board and posting descriptions of the what you think the identities of ANONYMOUS posters are like

No. 85930

Wish I was the one that got aborted instead of my so to be brother. Maybe he could have not been a genetic trash like me.

No. 85932

>>85930
huh? you autist?

No. 85937

>>85921
And you sound like an american. Your shitty universities don't count you know.

No. 85943

>>85912
>They have 100 percent capacity to live a fulfilling and productive life, their 'shortcomings' are projected onto them by others.
Are you seriously saying that possesing beautystandards is not a part of the natural human society? You can't just say "hurrr if humans weren't so mean to uglies they would function just like everyone else". That doesn't work. We have free will and we can react to how we find things however we want. And if it happens so that we caucasian faces attractive it is part of our evolution. It's like saying "if we didn't have to go to school and work the NEETs would function optimally like everyone else".

No offense but you have tumblr mentality.

No. 86120

>>85943
There's a difference between a culture possessing beauty standards in general and a culture perpetuating those standards though selectively representing those that are deemed 'attractive' in media such as TV, movies, models and advertising, celebrities (including singers whose profession is seemingly unrelated to their looks), and magazines telling us a billion different ways to achieve and emulate these looks despite the vast majority of the population not having these features.
Just take a look at the multitude of skin whitening creams, contouring techniques that make your nose look thinner, overdrawing lips etc. that's commonly accepted with no one even questioning why. I'd say women are more directly affected by these standards than men just because of increased pressure to be attractive, but it applies to everyone.

'Tumblr mentality' literally doesn't mean anything, it's a site composed of millions, including neo nazis and pedophiles.

No. 86123

>>85928

Only somebody who hadn't actually proceeded into HE would think that a seminar was anything special.

No. 86126

>>85943
>It's like saying "if we didn't have to go to school and work the NEETs would function optimally like everyone else".
Except in your analogy, if we didn't have school and work everyone would be negatively affected by it, whereas not imposing beauty standards on people means that more people who don't fit that mould are going to be content with the way they look. Unless you're admitting that the upholding of European features as the ideal directly puts down features that come into contrast with them (large noses, big lips etc), which is harmful to the self esteem of those people and is exactly the point I'm trying to make lol.

No. 86127

>>85937

I'm British and the university I attend is red brick and a member of the Russell Group.

No. 110830

>>85655
Ask the founder of H8chan, a smart man with the body of a 5 years old child. He is pro-eugenics, btw.

No. 110831

File: 1474554345184.jpeg (296.33 KB, 1206x1600, Ugly Thoughts Roald Dahl.jpeg)


No. 110833

All humans need to die.

No. 111307

>>110833
FINALLY someone says it

No. 115959

>>85475
We are all results of personal Eugenic and not state controlled
Try to prove me wrong



Delete Post [ ]
[Return] [Catalog]
[ Rules ] [ ot / g / m ] [ pt / snow / w ] [ meta ] [ Server Status ]