Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
The Warszawa
Jun 6, 2005

Look at me. Look at me.

I am the captain now.
Every time someone brings up IQ testing and race, they should be forced to stare at that Tom the Dancing Bug cartoon for an hour, minimum.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Fulchrum
Apr 16, 2013

by R. Guyovich

Ho Chi Mint posted:

When did "The Muslims" attack Sweden?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars_Vilks_Muhammad_drawings_controversy

TerminalSaint
Apr 21, 2007


Where must we go...

we who wander this Wasteland in search of our better selves?

quote:

There are 60 Muslim enclaves around Paris, where no French man enters.
You know, other than all those Muslim Frenchmen.

Badger of Basra
Jul 26, 2007

TerminalSaint posted:

You know, other than all those Muslim Frenchmen.

No True Frenchman

woke wedding drone
Jun 1, 2003

by exmarx
Fun Shoe
Hahaha they're mad at Pat Buchanan for being too blunt. Like he's not their loving Dad.

Okuteru
Nov 10, 2007

Choose this life you're on your own

The Warszawa posted:

Every time someone brings up IQ testing and race, they should be forced to stare at that Tom the Dancing Bug cartoon for an hour, minimum.

Which one?

Van Kraken
Feb 13, 2012

Forceholy posted:

Which one?

This one, I think.

LP97S
Apr 25, 2008

Van Kraken posted:

This one, I think.



Just to make people's lives worse, there's some racist parody of that which basically ends with "I guess blacks really are subhuman". Never underestimate hate.

Pththya-lyi
Nov 8, 2009

THUNDERDOME LOSER 2020

Van Kraken posted:

This one, I think.



I love Step 4. The black man with his hand on the white man's shoulder, his kindly smile. He's taken up the Black Man's Burden to educate those "sullen people / Half devil and half child."

Eggplant Squire
Aug 14, 2003


Nick_326 posted:

This reminded me of some small controversy that went down last year, when some news site published a story that included a photo of a an 8-year-old with an iPad on the steps of his public housing development. I like the point the author made here:



Back on topic, with some context courtesy of this post in a thread on miscarriages of justice:


PBS recently aired a documentary on the case, and some guy started a petition to get Elizabeth Lederer (the case's prosecutor who, to my knowledge, has never apologized for her role) fired from Columbia Law School. Sounds understandable, right?

Jim Dwyer, a Pulitzer-winning journalist who appeared in the documentary and had written about how Lederer misrepresented evidence, somehow has the loving gall to make this staggering false equivalency:


Yes, convicting a group of people for a crime they didn't commit is the same as trying to hold a public official accountable for poo poo she actually did.


There are people who are in prison solely for marijuana possession. Countless people in prison are there because they were judged on single moments.


This is true. Just last month I got several people convicted for rape by misleading everyone, which allowed the real rapist to continue going around raping other people. WHOOPSY DAISY.


And that means nobody should face any consequences for this travesty. Got it.

Ta-Nehisi Coates responds to this, and is golden:

This sort of thing makes me wonder just how many sociopaths become prosecuting authorities since it seems we constantly hear these stories where they get people convicted knowing full well or at least have to reasonably suspect that they are getting the wrong person. As in this case then going off to a career of teaching others with no ramifications, legal or otherwise for egregiously unethical behavior.

TheGreyGhost
Feb 14, 2012

“Go win the Heimlich Trophy!”
Oh, look. National Review is already defending Richwine and calling out Heritage for firing his racist rear end.

Amarkov
Jun 21, 2010

National Review posted:

Conservative think tanks emerged as a parallel institution — they were intended to provide a safe haven for right-leaning academics in light of the fact that academia itself was hostile to politically incorrect thought. In this context Richwine’s dismissal seems like a scene out of Bizarro World: The dissertation earned its author a doctorate, and it bore the signatures of Harvard professors Christopher Jencks, a social-policy researcher who sits on the board of The American Prospect; George Borjas, a labor economist; and Richard J. Zeckhauser, a political economist. And yet years after its publication it caused the resignation of its author from a conservative think tank.

It doesn't seem like a scene out of Bizarro world. It seems like a clear illustration of the actual dynamic here; academia is open to considering all viewpoints, even if the consensus strongly rejects them, while conservative think tanks require uniformly correct views. I don't see how you could avoid reaching this conclusion, unless you had some ulterior motive that prevents you from recognizing the obvious.

Oh wait

Pththya-lyi
Nov 8, 2009

THUNDERDOME LOSER 2020

Amarkov posted:

It doesn't seem like a scene out of Bizarro world. It seems like a clear illustration of the actual dynamic here; academia is open to considering all viewpoints, even if the consensus strongly rejects them, while conservative think tanks require uniformly correct views. I don't see how you could avoid reaching this conclusion, unless you had some ulterior motive that prevents you from recognizing the obvious.

Oh wait

Here's the thing: you know how conservative Christians think that their way of life is under siege, despite the fact that all challenges to that way of life are trivial? Conservative academics feel the same way. Because so many of their students and colleagues are liberals, they feel they're being repressed by the people around them. There's a lot of :qq:ing about "political correctness run amok."

Emden
Oct 5, 2012

by angerbeet

Pththya-lyi posted:

Here's the thing: you know how conservative Christians think that their way of life is under siege, despite the fact that all challenges to that way of life are trivial? Conservative academics feel the same way. Because so many of their students and colleagues are liberals, they feel they're being repressed by the people around them. There's a lot of :qq:ing about "political correctness run amok."

To be fair, there are a lot of taboo subjects which one could easily see as "political correctness". I won't go into details but try to critique a minority -- racial, religious, etc. -- on any subject and you'll see what I mean. Of course if it's white, Christian, or anything `mainstream` you can say whatever you want. Academia could do with some conservative voices imo.

Amarkov
Jun 21, 2010

Emden posted:

To be fair, there are a lot of taboo subjects which one could easily see as "political correctness". I won't go into details but try to critique a minority -- racial, religious, etc. -- on any subject and you'll see what I mean. Of course if it's white, Christian, or anything `mainstream` you can say whatever you want. Academia could do with some conservative voices imo.

Which sounds good, except that you are literally responding to evidence against it. A guy got a Ph.D from Harvard with a dissertation about how immigrants are stupid.

Kugyou no Tenshi
Nov 8, 2005

We can't keep the crowd waiting, can we?

Emden posted:

To be fair, there are a lot of taboo subjects which one could easily see as "political correctness".
You really can't say this without examples. Go for it. I'd love to see what even-handed studies or rational academic opinions have been declared taboo solely because they're about minority groups, and not because they're biased trash that masquerades as academic work to push a regressive social agenda. I've heard this argument talking point a hundred times and so far no one's been able to show me anything that didn't border on "[minority] is inherently inferior because [poorly-supported reason]".

Kugyou no Tenshi fucked around with this message at 19:49 on May 13, 2013

Isentropy
Dec 12, 2010

Emden posted:

To be fair, there are a lot of taboo subjects which one could easily see as "political correctness". I won't go into details but try to critique a minority -- racial, religious, etc. -- on any subject and you'll see what I mean. Of course if it's white, Christian, or anything `mainstream` you can say whatever you want. Academia could do with some conservative voices imo.

What sort of subjects are we talking about here?

woke wedding drone
Jun 1, 2003

by exmarx
Fun Shoe
You endorse one genocide and suddenly you're persona non grata.

Gynocentric Regime
Jun 9, 2010

by Cyrano4747

Isentropy posted:

What sort of subjects are we talking about here?

You know, say anything about how maybe nigge African-Americans aren't as smart as "native" Americans and people start calling for your job.

Amarkov posted:

Which sounds good, except that you are literally responding to evidence against it. A guy got a Ph.D from Harvard with a dissertation about how immigrants are stupid.


Exactly. Academic research is not the modern American mainstream media, both sides are not equal nor do they deserve equal airing.

Gynocentric Regime fucked around with this message at 19:57 on May 13, 2013

Gourd of Taste
Sep 11, 2006

by Ralp
That's weird because I have criticized individual minorities with no problem. Maybe I should focus more on how they reflect on their subhuman races.

MaxxBot
Oct 6, 2003

you could have clapped

you should have clapped!!
I love how when talking about real white Americans literally anyone can become a billionaire business owner if they work hard because that's the American dream but when talking about immigrants it's totally fine to categorically write people off for life as failures because of a low IQ :psyduck:.

Emden
Oct 5, 2012

by angerbeet

MaxxBot posted:

I love how when talking about real white Americans literally anyone can become a billionaire business owner if they work hard because that's the American dream but when talking about immigrants it's totally fine to categorically write people off for life as failures because of a low IQ :psyduck:.

No one is trying to write off all immigrants as failures. It's just that the hispanic immigrants that want to settle in our country have lower IQs as an entire group. This doesn't mean they are automatically failures, but rather that they will probably not be as successful as other groups.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

woke wedding drone
Jun 1, 2003

by exmarx
Fun Shoe

Emden posted:

No one is trying to write off all immigrants as failures. It's just that the hispanic immigrants that want to settle in our country have lower IQs as an entire group. This doesn't mean they are automatically failures, but rather that they will probably not be as successful as other groups.

Oh, oh, OK. *nods* Yeah that sounds valid.

The Warszawa
Jun 6, 2005

Look at me. Look at me.

I am the captain now.

Emden posted:

No one is trying to write off all immigrants as failures. It's just that the hispanic immigrants that want to settle in our country have lower IQs as an entire group. This doesn't mean they are automatically failures, but rather that they will probably not be as successful as other groups.

Here's the thing, again: for all the "political correctness gone mad, Stu," poo poo, this is an example of someone literally getting a Harvard PhD for this poo poo, which is the antithesis of political correctness having anything to do with it.

Emden posted:

To be fair, there are a lot of taboo subjects which one could easily see as "political correctness". I won't go into details but try to critique a minority -- racial, religious, etc. -- on any subject and you'll see what I mean. Of course if it's white, Christian, or anything `mainstream` you can say whatever you want. Academia could do with some conservative voices imo.

When white people are systematically oppressed for the color of their skin as opposed to possessing nearly all of the structural power and wealth in the American political correctness, we should probably start worrying about how what we say enforces that oppression.

It is funny though, considering how overwhelmingly white, male, and "mainstream" academia is by demographic, that we're so worried about it.

Konec Hry
Jul 13, 2005

too much love will kill you

Grimey Drawer
Ah, "IQ". The universal end-all, be-all resource to decide Intelligence. Yes, I'm intrigued, do go on about those dumb Hispanics. Actually don't.

Acrophyte
Sep 5, 2012

Respect me like Pesci
and if rap was hockey
I be Gretzky

The Warszawa posted:

Here's the thing, again: for all the "political correctness gone mad, Stu," poo poo, this is an example of someone literally getting a Harvard PhD for this poo poo, which is the antithesis of political correctness having anything to do with it.


When white people are systematically oppressed for the color of their skin as opposed to possessing nearly all of the structural power and wealth in the American political correctness, we should probably start worrying about how what we say enforces that oppression.

It is funny though, considering how overwhelmingly white, male, and "mainstream" academia is by demographic, that we're so worried about it.

This whole post x1,000. Nothing is so infuriating in contemporary American political discourse as the invocation of empty phrases like "political correctness," or worse, the "race card."

So long as conservatives react to poo poo like this with their wah-wah masturbatory persecution delusions they will learn nothing.

This is a bit old but it gets to the heart of what I'm talking about. Kevin Drum linked to this piece a while back but the sheer awfulness of it stuck with me. It's actually bad for two reasons, for the ignorant dipshit the author writes about, and the cluelessness of the author, who thinks she knows better. To recap: the self-described liberal author of this piece gets into a disagreement with her Tea Party neighbor and basically decides "yep, we just see the world differently, we need to separate :downs:" Look at how she paints politics as opinion:

quote:

As the husband sat down in our living room with his drink, he announced, "The tea party is not racist." We just looked at him. "The tea party is not racist," he continued, "because I am a member of the tea party."
Could this be the launchpad for a thoughtful dissection of conservatism? Ha, nope.

quote:

We argued about healthcare and welfare, President Obama's nationality and religion, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. We did not agree on anything. But honestly, the issues were not important. What matters is how personal it quickly became, how vitriolic, how filled with hate. He said I was sucking the country dry with my support of food stamps and public education. He said I needed to get off my butt and take care of myself. I suggested he sign his kids up to die in Iran, the next place he thinks we should attack. He called me a spoiled idiot and worse. I called him selfish, shortsighted and worse. It was awful, and it went on until after 3 a.m.
Because the president's nationality is merely a matter for agreement or disagreement.

There's also a companion piece written by a conservative on liberals that borders on self-parody.

The Warszawa
Jun 6, 2005

Look at me. Look at me.

I am the captain now.
Well, leave it to noted "race realist" Andrew Sullivan to defend Jason Richwine.

quote:

Race And IQ. Again.
MAY 14 2013 @ 9:19PM
[Re-posted from earlier today.]

I should know better than to bring this up again. But the effective firing of a researcher, Heritage’s Jason Richwine, because of his Harvard dissertation should immediately send up red flags about intellectual freedom. I am not defending the Heritage report on immigration because I think it’s a loaded piece of agitprop. And I am emphatically not defending everything that Richwine has said and done (not least his disturbing willingness to be published in white supremacist magazines).

What I do want to insist is that the premise behind almost all the attacks – that there is no empirical evidence of IQ differences between broad racial categories – is not true. It is true (pdf), if you accept the broad racial categories Americans use as shorthand for a bewilderingly complex DNA salad (a big if, of course). There’s no serious debate about that. The serious debate is about what importance to assign to the concept of “IQ” and about the possible reasons for the enduring discrepancies: environment, nurture, culture, or genes – or some variation of them all?

For my part, I’ve come to doubt the existence of something called “g” or general intelligence, as the research has gathered over the years. I believe IQ is an artificial construct created to predict how well a random person is likely to do in an advanced post-industrial society. And that’s all it is. It certainly shouldn’t be conflated with some Platonic idea of “intelligence.” I don’t think it carries any moral weight at all, either, and I don’t think it should be used in any way in immigration policy. In fact, any public policy that rests on this kind of data is anathema to me. It’s far too close to eugenics, and to the morally repugnant idea that smarter people are somehow better in any meaningful sense.

But Richwine’s dissertation was mainly a quant-job. He comes across in this Byron York interview as a bit clueless – suspiciously so, I’d say – in extrapolating policy conclusions from IQ data in the context of immigration. But the core point about any dissertation is a simple one: does it hold up under scholarly scrutiny? Richard Zeckhauser, the Frank P. Ramsey Professor of Political Economy at Harvard, is on record as saying that “Jason’s empirical work was careful. Moreover, my view is that none of his advisors would have accepted his thesis had he thought that his empirical work was tilted or in error.” One of those advisors was the very serious and very liberal scholar Christopher Jencks.

I haven’t had time to read the thing, and some have cast aspersions on it after a browse. But it is abhorrent to tar someone researching data as a racist and hound him out of a job simply because of his results, honestly discovered and analyzed. One particularly disturbing statement came from 23 separate student groups at Harvard:

Central to his claim is the idea that certain groups are genetically predisposed to be more intelligent than others. In his troubling worldview Asians are generally at the top, with whites in the middle, Hispanics follow, and African Americans at the bottom. To justify his assertions he cites largely discredited sources such as J. Philippe Rushton whose work enshrines the idea that there are genetically-rooted differences in cognitive ability between racial groups.
We condemn in unequivocal terms these racist claims as unfit for Harvard Kennedy School and Harvard University as a whole. Granting permission for such a dissertation to be published debases all of our degrees and hurts the University’s reputation … Even if such claims had merit, the Kennedy School cannot ethically stand by this dissertation whose end result can only be furthering discrimination under the guise of academic discourse.

My italics. They are, of course, caricaturing the argument – I know of no scholar who believes that genes are entirely responsible for the racial differences. Here’s another caricature of it:

Human beings have not existed long enough to be divided into separate and distinct racial “species.”

Of course not. We remain the same species, just as a poodle and a beagle are of the same species. But poodles, in general, are smarter than beagles, and beagles have a much better sense of smell. We bred those traits into them, of course, fast-forwarding evolution. But the idea that natural selection and environmental adaptation stopped among human beings the minute we emerged in the planet 200,000 years ago – and that there are no genetic markers for geographical origin or destination – is bizarre. It would be deeply strange if Homo sapiens were the only species on earth that did not adapt to different climates, diseases, landscapes, and experiences over hundreds of millennia. We see such adaptation happening very quickly in the animal kingdom. Our skin color alone – clearly a genetic adaptation to climate – is, well, right in front of one’s nose.

But what the Harvard students are saying is worse than creating a straw man. They are saying that even if it is true that there are resilient differences in IQ in broad racial groupings, such things should not be studied at Harvard because their “end result can only be furthering discrimination.” You can’t have a more explicit attack on intellectual freedom than that. They even seem to want the PhD to be withdrawn.

Freddie deBoer and Reihan Salam have two good posts about this. Freddie:

Racism thrives on conspiratorial thinking and the self-definition of racists as an oppressed group. When you say things that are true aren’t, and especially when you do so in a way that treats the other point of view as forbidden, you play directly into their hands. I cannot imagine an easier way to give them fuel for their argument than to say that certain test results don’t exist when they do.

That’s my view in a nutshell. What on earth are these “liberals” so terrified of, if not the truth? Instead of going on racist witch-hunts, why don’t they question what IQ means, how great the cultural and environmental impact can be (very considerable), whether such tests should guide public policy at all, or examine how “race” as a social construct does not always correlate to specific variations in human DNA. Note how the terms “race” and “historical ethnicity” are not the same things, as Reihan does. Or do what the scholar Dana Goldstein has done – criticize Richwine’s dismissal of education and poverty as factors affecting IQ in his dissertation.

But please don’t say truly stupid things like race has no biological element to it or that there is no data on racial differences in IQ (even though those differences are mild compared with overwhelming similarity). Denying empirical reality is not a good thing in any circumstance. In a university context, it is an embrace of illiberalism at its most pernicious and seductive: because its motives are good.

"What are liberals afraid of?" Uh, I don't know, Sully, drawing specious conclusions to justify racist policy by cloaking them in "Yeah Mr. White, yeah Science!"? See, e.g., the last 200 years or so.

Vorpal Cat
Mar 19, 2009

Oh god what did I just post?
So what are the odds Mr Richwine even bothered trying to correct his data for poverty, cultural differences, systematic discrimination or any of the other dozens of variables which could effect IQ scores in minority populations before trying to to tie it to racial "differences". I know I wouldn't bet on it.

The Warszawa
Jun 6, 2005

Look at me. Look at me.

I am the captain now.

Vorpal Cat posted:

So what are the odds Mr Richwine even bothered trying to correct his data for poverty, cultural differences, systematic discrimination or any of the other dozens of variables which could effect IQ scores in minority populations before trying to to tie it to racial "differences". I know I wouldn't bet on it.

Oh, it gets better: trying to segregate "Hispanic immigrants" as a separate "race" is loving hilarious, considering that the Hispanic "race" dates to around the time white America realized that Mexican light-skinned mestizos, criollos, and peninsulares might attend white schools.

Acrophyte
Sep 5, 2012

Respect me like Pesci
and if rap was hockey
I be Gretzky

The Warszawa posted:

Oh, it gets better: trying to segregate "Hispanic immigrants" as a separate "race" is loving hilarious, considering that the Hispanic "race" dates to around the time white America realized that Mexican light-skinned mestizos, criollos, and peninsulares might attend white schools.

I'll never forget when I took a course on colonial Mexico/South America and our professor gave us a sheet detailing the racial hierarchy in Mexico. It had about 25-30 terms laid out like arithmetic, e.g. criollo + mestizo= ... Most of the terms I had never seen used to describe racial differences (coyote :confused:) not to mention, how the hell do you even keep track of all those terms?

Never underestimate humans' desire to feel superior, I guess :(

Acrophyte fucked around with this message at 01:40 on May 16, 2013

The Warszawa
Jun 6, 2005

Look at me. Look at me.

I am the captain now.

Acrophyte posted:

I'll never forget when I took a course on colonial Mexico/South America and our professor gave us a sheet detailing the racial hierarchy in Mexico. It had about 25-30 terms laid out like arithmetic, e.g. criollo + mestizo= ... Most of the terms I had never seen used to describe racial differences (coyote :confused:) not to mention, how the hell do you even keep track of all those terms?

Never underestimate human's desire to feel superior, I guess :(

Welcome to casta. You have to give the Spanish credit, they did what the Anglo tradition never had the balls to do (even if it did it de facto): literally and explicitly turned race into a caste system.

Acrophyte
Sep 5, 2012

Respect me like Pesci
and if rap was hockey
I be Gretzky

The Warszawa posted:

Welcome to casta. You have to give the Spanish credit, they did what the Anglo tradition never had the balls to do (even if it did it de facto): literally and explicitly turned race into a caste system.

The arithmetic aspect got me thinking...

Juan's mother is a peninsulare, his father is mestizo. What race will Juan's wife have to be if he expects his offspring to be of equal or greater social rank to him?

A.) Criollo
B.) Mestizo
C.) Peninsulare
D.) Not possible, only peasants marry down


Spain: Our racism can be expressed by inequalities! :pseudo:

Acrophyte fucked around with this message at 01:55 on May 16, 2013

The Warszawa
Jun 6, 2005

Look at me. Look at me.

I am the captain now.

Acrophyte posted:

The arithmetic aspect got me thinking...

Juan's mother is a peninsulare, his father is mestizo. What race will Juan's wife have to be if he expects his offspring to be of equal or greater social rank to him?

A.) Criollo
B.) Mestizo
C.) Peninsulare
D.) Not possible, only peasants marry down


Spain: Our racism can be expressed by inequalities! :pseudo:

Ooh, ooh: Juan is a castizo, and by marrying a peninsular, his child will be considered a criollo.

JohnClark
Mar 24, 2005

Well that's less than ideal

Acrophyte posted:

There's also a companion piece written by a conservative on liberals that borders on self-parody.
When I first heard of Poe's law I scoffed, confident that surely I could tell real crazy from fake.

My faith in that particular ability has been completely obliterated. How on Earth was that article submitted with a straight face?

Acrophyte
Sep 5, 2012

Respect me like Pesci
and if rap was hockey
I be Gretzky

The Warszawa posted:

Ooh, ooh: Juan is a castizo, and by marrying a peninsular, his child will be considered a criollo.

:getin:

JohnClark posted:

When I first heard of Poe's law I scoffed, confident that surely I could tell real crazy from fake.

My faith in that particular ability has been completely obliterated. How on Earth was that article submitted with a straight face?

I've remembered it for a reason...

Acrophyte fucked around with this message at 05:11 on May 16, 2013

Kid Fenris
Jan 22, 2004

If someone is reading this...
I must have failed.

Acrophyte posted:

There's also a companion piece written by a conservative on liberals that borders on self-parody.

Ah yes, Charlotte Allen, best known for blaming the Newtown shooting on a lack of male teachers and buckets.

I AM GRANDO
Aug 20, 2006

Kid Fenris posted:

Ah yes, Charlotte Allen, best known for blaming the Newtown shooting on a lack of male teachers and buckets.

The one about the husky twelve-year-olds being too cowardly to rush the shooter?

Acrophyte
Sep 5, 2012

Respect me like Pesci
and if rap was hockey
I be Gretzky

Kid Fenris posted:

Ah yes, Charlotte Allen, best known for blaming the Newtown shooting on a lack of male teachers and buckets.


Oh god, you're right. Why does this woman have access to a national platform, again?

Mecca-Benghazi
Mar 31, 2012


The Warszawa posted:

Ooh, ooh: Juan is a castizo, and by marrying a peninsular, his child will be considered a criollo.
Is this the real answer? :stare:

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010

Nap Ghost

Kid Fenris posted:

Ah yes, Charlotte Allen, best known for blaming the Newtown shooting on a lack of male teachers and buckets.

Her articles actually make a lot of sense if you approach it from the perspective of a person who's incredibly myopic and can't comprehend anything that takes place outside of her sheltered world. "Why didn't the kids just charge?" is a question that can only be asked by someone who lacks anything approaching empathy and has never felt the Fight or Flight instinct kick in even once in their lives.

  • Locked thread