India (and the rest of the world) is racist; liberals who hold whites to a higher standard are white supremacists

Those who single out white people for “racism” are practicing white supremacy; by expecting whites to different and “morally better” (by their standards) than the other 92% of the planet, they are assuming whites have the ability to be morally superior to the rest of the world and are just not living up to their liberal standards.

A friend of mine married an Asian woman, much to my dismay. I tried to tell him that his mixed kids won’t be able to get bone marrow donations, but he wasn’t worried about it. Anyway, come to find out that his dragon lady is a real Archie Bunker. She hates everyone except whites and her particular brand of Asian. Hates them. She considers Pakistanis evil, she says blacks smell bad, and she says Chinese are crooks. Archie Bunker in a petit brown package. And they pretty much are all Archie Bunkers.

Now in the New York Times we find out that India is very racist.

A racist turn in India

We’ll be like these Indians in our racial attitudes again soon enough, as the fossil fuel economic growth blowout runs its course.

The Opinion Pages

A Racist Turn in India
JAN. 24, 2014

NEW DELHI — The Africans — Nigerians, Ghanaians, Ugandans — began leaving my neighborhood in New Delhi around December. Each week, more and more families exited. Some went to parts of Delhi considered more accepting of Africans; others to areas where the residents were thought to be less interfering in general. I have heard that some of the Ghanaian families had gone back to Africa, but I don’t know that for sure.

For years, they had been a part of the swirl of cultures, languages and races that makes up this part of the capital. The Nigerian women in their bright dresses out for evening strolls and the Cameroonian family with the curious-eyed baby at the ice-cream van had made a life for themselves alongside the Afghans, Tamils and Iranians.

On Oct. 31, about a month before the departures started, a Nigerian national, rumored to have been in the drug trade, was found dead in Goa. Nigerians in the coastal state protested his murder as an act of racism, while posters read: “We want peace in Goa. Say no to Nigerians. Say no to drugs.” One state minister threatened to throw out Nigerians living illegally. Another equated them with a cancer. He later apologized, adding that he hadn’t imagined there would be a “problem” with his statement.

The controversy has reverberated across the country, including in Delhi, 1,200 miles away, where the tolerance of African neighbors has turned into suspicion and even hostility.

One night, a police constable rang my doorbell. “Have you seen any man from the Congo entering and leaving the building?” he asked. “African man,” he clarified. He said he had received a report that a local resident was friendly with Africans, and he wanted to know, was this true? The question surprised me; neighborhood battles here are waged over water and parking spaces, not over ethnicity. Now neighbors had become nervous of neighbors.

Once the African communities had been singled out, complaints against them bubbled up like filthy water, in Jangpura, in Khirki Extension, in the alleyways off Paharganj, anywhere in Delhi they lived.

The fragile hospitality gave way to a familiar litany of intolerance: They were too loud, exuberant and dirty; the women were loose, the men looked you directly in the eye, they were drug takers and traffickers, and worse.

Residents of Khirki Extension, whose rambling lanes had seen an influx of artists, journalists and migrants, conducted their own investigation of their African neighbors, which they called the “black beauty” sting.

Coinciding with the city’s darkening mood, the newly elected Aam Aadmi Party in Delhi started a wave of cleanups as part of its mission to control “lawlessness.” The city’s law minister, Somnath Bharti, led a raid into Khirki Extension, claiming to be acting on residents’ complaints that Nigerians and Ugandans were involved in prostitution and drug trafficking. Media reports suggest that on the night of Jan. 15, he entered Africans’ homes with a group of vigilantes, without a warrant. In the fracas, a Ugandan woman was allegedly forced to give a urine sample, on the street, in the middle of the crowd. After she filed a complaint, Delhi’s court ordered the Police Department to pursue her case against Mr. Bharti.

These recent events have awakened dormant prejudices against Africans in India, aggravated by our tendency to prize fair skin over dark. “Habshi,” derived from the word “Abyssinian,” has become a common epithet for people of African descent.

So, on one hand, the racist turn in Delhi and Goa is unsurprising. On the other hand, we have a long, and neglected, history of cross-migration with Africa. While Indians have been settling on that continent since at least the 15th century, African roots in India run even deeper. Africans were brought over in numbers around the 13th century as slaves, but also as generals, guards, merchants, bodyguards and craftsmen. Many never went back. Now tens of thousands are here to study, and others work as chefs and in the garment and textile businesses, among other industries.

Despite our close ties and the shared history of colonialism, Africa doesn’t figure on the Indian map of curiosity and desire. Our admiration of China’s economic prowess is commonplace and unabashed; we are obsessed with the West, in terms of education, ideals of beauty and economic might. But Africa is invisible. Racist views can be spouted without consequence. Africa simply doesn’t matter.

There will be few repercussions for the Aam Aadmi Party if it continues with blanket policies against Africans. The party won on the promise of change, yet here it is, proving that it shares the same blindness as other, older parties.

These days, the Afghans and Indians stroll in my neighborhood park, enjoying the winter breeze. The Ghanaian and Cameroonian families moved away when their landlords doubled the rent only for them; the young Nigerian women left after one police visit too many.

Delhi’s residents say that the city belongs to everybody, because it belongs to nobody. As Bangalore and Mumbai became insular possessions, with political parties often driving out anyone who was from elsewhere, the capital claimed that it had room for all kinds of migrants, expats and outsiders. If the Aam Aadmi Party continues the divisiveness that older parties have excelled at, we’ll soon find reasons to go after all the people who live differently from “us,” who don’t belong here, who should go back to the places they came from.

Nilanjana S. Roy is an essayist and critic, and author of the novel “The Wildings.”

Advertisements

About mindweapon

A mind weapon riding along with Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.https://en.gravatar.com/profiles/edit/#
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

47 Responses to India (and the rest of the world) is racist; liberals who hold whites to a higher standard are white supremacists

  1. Denise says:

    Well done Delhi!

  2. Stary Wylk says:

    How bad must Nigeria be that they would go to India?

    • Anon says:

      by the end of the century there will be 700M Nigerians in Nigeria, atleast assuming a naive projection for growth. There will, needless to say, be plenty to go around.

  3. Berk says:

    The leftists must believe that they are superior to the coloureds and get some missionary kick from prostrating themselves to their inferiors.
    The whole idea of perpetual foreign aid (government and charities) that whites have to save the coloured races is inherently racist as leftists don’t think they can do it with out their help.

  4. Robot Sam says:

    LWhen he said now neighbors had become nervous of neighbors I couldn’t go on. These liberal faggots think the world is one bug Richard Scary’s busy town books. And they always blame the non protected minority victim when egregious harm is done to them by one of their pets. They don’t care about your suffering only about their image and place on the social totem pole. Bunch of preening little homos with temporary power is all they are.

  5. Paladin Justice says:

    Gee whiz. Is there anyplace on the planet free of the black cockroaches? I would have thought that there’s no reason for them to be in India and so a visit to the Maharishee would provide welcome relief from the presence of these creatures. But no. They say that cockroaches would be the only survivors of a massive nuclear way. OK, but I get the feeling that blacks would survive too.

  6. clytemnestra57 says:

    What White Nationalists don’t get is that they may just be the outliers. In a nutshell, normal Whites just love Black people for reasons that are mysterious only to us. Maybe, like Indians, Asians, and Arabs, White Nationalists are less evolved people … if there is a point where a species can evolve beyond any natural self-preservation instincts at all.

    Whites were telescopic philanthropists almost two hundred years ago with Charles Dickens fictionalizing their attitude in Bleak House with Mrs. Jellyby. This woman was obsessed with helping Africans when her own countrymen were starving and dying on the streets not blocks away from her own front door. Albert Schweitzer could have done so much for Europe, but where did he expend his efforts? Africa. Go figure.

    Another insightful piece of fiction is Shakespeare’s The Tempest. Prospero’s “adopts” this deformed island native who used to rule, Caliban, but when Caliban tries to ravish Prospero’s daughter, Miranda, Prospero then enslaves him. Though Miranda repeatedly approaches Prospero about her discomfort with having Caliban around, Prospero scoffs at her, confident that he can keep Caliban under his control. Why do I get the notion that any Man of Color would not have chanced Caliban overcoming him and just killed Caliban the moment he tried to ravish Miranda? Keeping Caliban a live slave rather than ensuring he is a dead would-be rapist is the kind of bone-headed thing that only a White man would do.

    The bloodletting, the White man has unleashed on other White men is too extensive to catalogue, but in 1492, the White man sails the ocean blue to the New World, discovers the Red Man and basically genocides him. BUT the White man sails the ocean blue to Africa, discovers the Black man, but instead of genociding him and taking over Africa, the White man takes the Black man home to the bosom of his family (albeit the family plantation), emancipates and enfranchises him, sends medicos and missionaries to save his hide and minister to his soul and does everything possible to make sure he proliferates.

    • Adit says:

      Don’t forget about the Spanish and the Mission System which did do for Indians what was done for the Africans, although most Americans tend to forget about the Spanish in the Americas. The reason I think the Africans were ‘spared’ and prospered was because they made for better slaves since the Indians died like flies under the same conditions.

      What most people forget is that Whites were used as slaves in the Americas (esp. the Irish) but PC History likes to forget about that and fixates on the non-whites. Here is a brief tidbit of History. In the early days of the colonization of the Caribbean, Irish slaves were primarily used on the plantations. NOT Indentured servants, but slaves. Of course there were some African slaves, but they were expensive in comparison to the Irish Slaves. So, someone got the idea that to increase the supply of Black slaves (which were more profitable to sell) they would ‘marry’ Irish women (some as young as 12) to Blacks to increase the supply. No White women (esp. in those days) would have voluntarily gone along with this so you can well imagine what was done to these women. Basically, they deliberately turned White people into mulattos. Does this sound familiar to what they are trying to do to us now?

      In any case, I do agree that Whites have some kind of unhealthy obsession with non-whites (the darker they are, the more they seem to be obsessed with them.) For some reason Whites don’t take them seriously as competitors and that has proven deadly more than once (think Haiti – Whites were slaughtered there twice.) As far as many Whites evolving beyond natural self-protection instincts, I have had this thought myself, especially about the Scandinavians. They used to be the tough guys on the block, running around conquering everyone at will, now look at them. Could a couple hundred years of dysgenic breeding have turned them into an evolutionary dead end? If a people no longer have self-protection instincts they are doomed and nothing will save them because the threat is from within.

      • Mr. Rational says:

        For some reason Whites don’t take them seriously as competitors and that has proven deadly more than once (think Haiti – Whites were slaughtered there twice.)

        Tropical diseases had a great deal to do with that.  Today we have vaccines for yellow fever, and decent anti-malarials.  And in most of the USA, the European is both in the majority and his climactic element.

    • Cly, the phenomenon you’re describing isn’t a “white” thing, but the behavior of a small number of whites. They do it as a matter of status competition. The way I see it, the English merchant class wanted to overthrow the rule of the land-owning class, and they did it by promoting the idea that they were morally superior- through adopting non-conformist Protestant Christianity, and then various moral crusades against the established order.

      Slavery was not an idea of the landed aristocracy of England, because they already had land farmed by tenants providing them with a nice living. Plantation slavery was the only way to produce commodities like cotton and sugar to be sold by merchants, to become rich and thus have more political power than the gentry. Once they had made a lot of money and the Africans were trapped on Caribbean islands and hostage agricultural workers, they were suddenly against slavery.

      The English made morality pretty much 100% a matter of power and status competition. The morality conveniently changes as often as necessary to advantage the people in power.

    • ben tillman says:

      The bloodletting, the White man has unleashed on other White men is too extensive to catalogue, but in 1492, the White man sails the ocean blue to the New World, discovers the Red Man and basically genocides him.

      This was largely a Jewish project.

      BUT the White man sails the ocean blue to Africa, discovers the Black man, but instead of genociding him and taking over Africa, the White man takes the Black man home to the bosom of his family (albeit the family plantation)

      This was also largely a Jewish project. And Europeans couldn’t live in Black Africa because of the tropical diseases to which they lacked resistance.

  7. X says:

    “The Ghanaian and Cameroonian families moved away when their landlords doubled the rent only for them.”

    Simple.

  8. Jon says:

    Almost any time a liberal decries “racism” in non-Whites, he focues on the deplorable and unfortunate attitude or beliefs and attempt to contextualise and understand whereas a White guy is just a disgusting and despicable racist, even if the non-White’s prescriptions and attitudes are much harsher (say, end affirmative action opposed to mass-exterminate Whitey).

    Supremacist wants to rule over. Period. Attitude of superiority is not sufficient and separatists cannot be supremacists by definition.

  9. Berk says:

    I think the “west” is suffering from a few hundred years of christianity becoming a religion almost completely obsessed with the idea of suffering and sacrifice to help the poor or downtrodden. To follow that path of “Jesus” is a status raising act for the whites that do it. When they criticise people that don’t follow their unselfish path it further enhances their “saint-liness” to themselves and their peer group.

    Unfortunately we don’t have several hundred years to reverse the trend of christianity, HOWEVER the reality of our dispossession to the innumerable “poor” and “innocent” non-whites is turning many people around fast!

  10. ascomanni says:

    I got a chuckle when I saw the title of this post. I was just thinking this morning that the real “white supremacist” are all those people who have isolated us and are pointing the finger at us blaming us for everything they don’t like. They are the ones who seem to thing that European peoples are different and in some way more powerful than them. They are the real “white supremacist.”

  11. New England Millenial says:

    Don’t want to revive an old topic but it’s about White Nationalism and dance.

    In Wien, Austria every year they have an akademikerball. It’s a nice dance where couples perform the waltz. Every year, the far-left antifa-marxist-turkic groups riot and destroy property to protest this “fascist” event. Here’s a video of the chaos from this weekend. If you just search “akademiker ball” on youtube you’ll find more.

    In this video at 2:50, you see the antifa protest with a my little pony sign, “Rainbow Dash hasst maennerbuende” (Rainbow Dash hates maennerbuendes).

    The akademiker ball haven’t made the video for this year yet, obviously, but here it is from 2013.

    • New England Millenial says:

      Oesterreich is in much better financial shape than Greece, but just look at how much chaos and destruction a simple dance creates!

      • New England Millenial says:

        Oh in case anyone is wondering I didn’t translate “maennerbuend” because it doesn’t really translate that well. The closest thing in English is a secret society.

    • mindweapon says:

      Great stuff! I’m all for that kind of dancing!

  12. Stary Wylk says:

    Christianity is bad for whites because it urges us to turn our attention away from reality toward an imaginary world where renunciation of thriving is considered moral. What’s really right is to live well and preserve your lineage and race. The other ethnies don’t seem to have forgotten this. In that respect, we should be more like them.

  13. One Who Sees says:

    A lot of folks here have a distorted view of upper class liberals. They are not self-sacrificing. They just want to sacrifice you and yours. A lot of these people’s offspring have serious substance abuse problems and/or serious motivation problems. The parents know that their children cannot compete with smart and motivated middle class white children so they promote less competitive non-whites instead.

    • mindweapon says:

      Makes sense, One who sees. I’ve certainly observed dysfunctional upper class children. So upper class people have “parenting envy” of middle class families who actually raise functional kids! Very interesting theory!

    • This explanation of yours makes sense, but when the Republic was still new, the elite understood the long-term dysgenic effects of not having to struggle for anything on their young. It was common for some very smart guy to found a company, but in the next generation, instead of his son running things, his son-in-law was. And it was standard operating procedure for an ambitious upwardly mobile young man of high intelligence and competence to marry the boss’s daughter. The founder’s son was just given a large amount of stock and allowed to be a dilettante.

      But it seems like, after WWII, the same elites who could once dispassionately look at their sons, weigh them in the balance, find them lacking and then put them in positions where they could do no harm are saddling them with responsibilities beyond their capabilities. Two that very much come to my mind are John “The Songbird” McCain who should have washed out of the Navy, but his Admiral father’ retained a lot of pull to keep him in even though his third crash resulted in a fire that killed 134 of his crewmates on the USS Forrestal. Then there is George Dubya Bush. And you can see the shitty condition the country is in.

      • mindweapon says:

        Very good point, Cly. Damn, I got smart commenters. You and Tillman and Eurybates, just in the past 12 hours, have put incredible insights and pattern matching in the comments here.

  14. Ryu says:

    The liberals believe in white supremacy much more than we do. They don’t want us to descend into tribalism. We are above such concepts to them.

  15. New England Millenial says:

    BTW I didn’t see you post this on your blog this week, but I know how much you’re interested in ‘waycist millenials’

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/21/frat-mlk-day-arizona-state-racist_n_4638224.html

    Arizona State University announced Thursday evening a fraternity was kicked off campus following a racist party the Greek organization held in conjunction with the national holiday honoring Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

    Tau Kappa Epsilon was notified this week its recognition as a fraternity at the university was permanently revoked by ASU, spokeswoman Sharon Keeler said. TKE was suspended Monday for holding an “MLK Black Party” where attendees were encouraged to wear jerseys, drink from watermelon cups and guests posted photos on Instagram with the hashtags #blackoutformlk and #hood.

    Oh noes! White girlz wid waddymelons! ZOMG IT”S THE NEW KKK!!!!!!!111

  16. Indians and Chinese are the most racist people on the planet, after maybe Jews. It’s only Whites that are ever called “racist.”

  17. eurybates says:

    This is interesting that the New York Times decided it was time to enlighten their readers that India is ‘racist’.

    This ‘story’ is getting press, from the unofficial voice of the USG no less, fresh on the heels of a little international incident that happened in . . . . New York! The USG (whichever arm) strip searched an Indian consular or diplomat or whatever and threw her in jail after accusing her of abusing her maid or slave or whatever and not paying her legitimately or something like that.

    The Indians retaliated by removing cement barricades that were placed in front of the US Embassy in Mumbai – making it easier for terrorists to drive a truck up to the front gates.

    This story couldn’t have been timed better. Khrushchev would be proud.

  18. @eurybates

    I wonder if this is an example of a ritual humiliation done to the Indian diplomat just to show who is in charge?

    Wait. Wait. Think about that again.

    Ladies,

    Honestly I never really did the “yellow fever” thing. These guys talk about Asian women and how hot they are – um, sorry, no. I never did get it. Oh sure, whatever this Asian girl is pretty or whatever. But really.

    I will agree with the feminists on this one. White men are far worse at miscegenation than white women are. This is one of those basic truths – like something out of the Bible – it’s all complicated to talk about. I love love love bitching about women, but you can never honestly say this about white women – white women 99.99% of the time would rather have a white man more than anything else.

    Remember when “Lucy Lui” was popular? Some Asian chick in the movies? Everyone said how hot she was. I never bought it. She wasn’t “hot” at all. Just some Asian chick. I mean, whatever. Who could care less?

    Oh, sorry, I’m racist against Asians too.

    • Hipster Racist, I think you will agree with me that the degree of investment one has to do in a project has a great deal to do with one’s commitment to it.

      When it comes to a viable baby, a man’s job is pretty much done when he rolls off of a woman. But a woman must carry that baby for nine months, labor to bring that baby into the world and then there’s feeding and changing so that baby will continue to thrive.

      I pretty much bought the whole “all things equal” dogma of liberalism and “had no problem with the idea of race-mixing” except for the fact that I wasn’t remotely attractive to Non-White men. But I would have been highly indignant if you had called me a racist! Maybe, on some level, I thought if “Mr. Right” came along and he happened to be Black that it would have made no difference to me.

      When I was going through my militantly anti-marriage stage, I still liked the idea of a being a mother, but not enough to go the route of anonymous sperm donation, so I investigated adoption. There was no shortage of adoptable babies, but they were all Black or Biracial. Now, I think all babies and toddlers have a certain sweet and innocent appeal, but I lost all interest, because it just didn’t feel right for me for reasons I couldn’t explain even to myself.

      It was only after children started being born into my family and I could see one child’s resemblance to a grandparent and another’s resemblance to a beloved uncle that it all came together for me. If I had adopted a Black child or gone “there” with a Black guy and had a Black child, I would have been investing my body, my soul, and all my efforts into nurturing someone else’s racial legacy rather than my own. Legacy was and is very important to me and it keeps growing in importance to me with every passing day.

      I think on some subconscious level, everyone is aware of this investment-commitment paradigm, so if we all see a White guy with say, an Asian woman, we don’t think much of it, because there is this sense that he can not only father children until the day he dies, but his job is done after he rolls off the woman. So if you go to an AmRen convention, there is very little to no irony involved when you see many of the White male attendees with their Asian and Mestiza wives and girlfriends in tow.

      But we all (not just the men, but the women, too) have a visceral Race Traitor Reaction and it really sticks in our collective craw when we see a White woman with say, a Black guy, because we know all the investment and commitment that a woman has to put into producing and maintaining a healthy baby that will thrive. That’s why we really notice these women and that’s why it seems like there are more White women race-mixing than White men even though the reverse is true.

      • Rita Rabbit says:

        Cly I disagree with your assesment about men and their commitment to their children. I can’t tell you how many times I have seen White fathers high investment parenting their brown children. They coach their sports teams, tell them stories and so on. It breaks my heart to see OUR stories, lessons and secrets being shared with THEM instead of a beautiful European child.. It is SO wrong!

      • Denise says:

        I find that Yellow Fever Victim males justify their Race Treachery by regarding their non-White wives as “White”. Almost.

        It’s really weird.

        I have called Yellow Fever Victims “Race Traitor” to their faces. Complete strangers. Those Betas are SUCH pussies they never say one word back. NEVER.

      • Rita, all I know is that I asked a racially conscious White man how, in more racially conscious times, any White man could have sex with a Non-White woman. He just shrugged and said all the guy had to do was take a hot shower and wash her off.

        I’m not saying there are no high-investment White fathers where brown children are concerned. I’m saying that technically they don’t have to put as much into rearing a baby as the mothers do.

      • Craig says:

        The countries that practise polygamy, 1st and 2nd cousin marriage have a higher incidence of male infertility due to inbreeding…Colourism runs in Islam to apparently. So it wouldn’t surprise me if countries with smaller white populations may also have male infertility problems, look at the Royal family in centuries past for example, just extrapolated it on a larger population scale, like Mexico ect…

    • banned56 says:

      ME TOO!

      • banned56 says:

        — I meant ME TOO about being racist against Asians.

        “so if we all see a White guy with say, an Asian woman, we don’t think much of it, because there is this sense that he can not only father children until the day he dies, but his job is done after he rolls off the woman.”

        In fact, if there were a way to segregate from their spawn so our kids wouldn’t get the hots for theirs, we Whites, if we truly wanted to lift the White Man’s Burden, could give some genuine help to the untermenschen by artificially inseminating their women with White men’s sperm. Give their kids a boost in IQ without harming our own Race’s ability to procreate.

      • clytemnestra57 says:

        That may be already happening.

        Guess what is the hottest American export? White American male sperm. This has been going on for quite some time.

        I don’t believe there are that many infertile White couples or White lesbians in the world. I read a few articles about the color continuum and colorism in Mexico by Steve Sailer and he noticed how the elite of Mexico seems to be getting lighter and lighter. He theorizes that wealthy Mexicans acquire blonde wives. That may be true, but I suspect there is more to it than that. I think the upper classes are obtaining White male sperm so that they can bleach out.

        I have heard there is a way where doctors have come up with a way to separate sperm that makes girls from sperm that makes boys, so my theory is that the upper classes are trying to create lighter skinned wives for each other’s sons to marry.

      • Mr. Rational says:

        I have heard there is a way where doctors have come up with a way to separate sperm that makes girls from sperm that makes boys

        Not hard to do.  X chromosomes have more DNA than Y chromosomes.  If you label sperm with a DNA-marking fluorescent dye, the ones that make girls will glow a little brighter than the ones which make boys.  Cell-sorting machines do the rest.

  19. Ryu 26.01.14.1528: “The liberals believe in white supremacy much more than we do. They don’t want us to descend into tribalism. We are above such concepts to them.”

    I have begun to believe that “… We are above such concepts [as tribality]…” is the ideation of the last man of any culture. (Ironically, I am a man of the current decadence, and probably would be uncomfortable in the webwork of customary obligation that is any tribesman’s life.) Tribality, managed right, can promote group survival. But after it evaporates, what is left are deracinated fellaheen.

  20. banned56 says:

    “Guess what is the hottest American export? White American male sperm. This has been going on for quite some time.”
    No kidding? Fascinating. Obviously the non-Whites want our genetics; they’ve been stealing our women since they first laid eyes on them. With modern technologies like freezing sperm, there’s no longer any reason to predate upon us. They can create for themselves less-ugly wives.

    This subject is one of the taboo subjects I like to sit an ponder when I’ve leisure time.

    Consider if the Asians did this, donation of XX sperm of White men by artificial insemination into Asian women, in a really big way. That raises a huge question: Who would do the fathering of those girls, since the wife’s hubby is not genetically related? Sure, adoption happens, but it’s also a fact established beyond a shadow of a doubt from the rampant bastardy / single motherhood in the U.S., that mom’s boyfriend is far, far more likely to abuse / kill the baby than a biodad living with his biokids.

    So with sperm donation, a whole lotta abuse by Asian men living with these mixed girls would go on.

    So who would do the fathering? That’s easy — the woman’s father. Since the cute mixed girls would be so highly in demand, Grampa would have many incentives, including his own genetic investment through his own daughter the mother, to raise that hapa granddaughter.

  21. Cj aka Elderofzyklons Blog says:

    Reblogged this on ElderofZyklon's Blog!.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s