ask me anything!
Every now and then, I like to give people an opportunity to ask me anything they want, anonymously, if they'd prefer. (Whether or not anyone takes me up on my offer is another matter, but beside the point.)
So... ip address logging has been turned off and I'm making this a public post. If there's anything you'd like to ask me, go ahead. Feel ( Read more... )
So... ip address logging has been turned off and I'm making this a public post. If there's anything you'd like to ask me, go ahead. Feel ( Read more... )
Comments 25
Reply
That's actually hard to answer. Based strictly on looks, I'm torn between Angelina Jolie and Halle Berry (which, I'm sure, makes this a less interesting answer, since those are two popular answers to that question).
Angelina Jolie has this raw sexiness to her. Her physical appearance is bold and aggressive. Sexy women are intimidating, but she seems like she'd have fun with it and go after what she wants... which only makes her sexier. She looks like she can make you hurt and scream out of pleasure at the same time!
Halle Berry has this soft, subtle, natural beauty to her. If she's every had any work done, I certainly can't tell! There's nothing imposing or aggressive about her, but she looks very genuine and honest and that makes her even more beautiful.
Reply
and halle's face is perfection. like it's perfectly symmetrical: i read that somewhere.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
"The Wall Street Journal quotes wildlife expert Richard Thomas as calculating that the average groundhog moves approximately 1 m3 (35 cubic feet), or 320 kg (700 pounds), of dirt when digging a burrow."
So I would guess that a woodchuck would chuck as much as 700 pounds of wood if a woodchuck could chuck wood. But that's not as fun to say as my previous answer. ;)
Reply
Reply
No, really you don't have to answer anything of these. :)
Reply
I want to say some cross between red and purple. I'm pretty sure I know the color better than I know how to describe it, though.
Reply
Reply
Reply
The short answer, which would be sure to send the overly politically correct into a tizzy, is yes, I do think there are some inherent, biological differences in people in regards to skills depending on gender and other traits. (I have a very hard time saying race because race is such an arbitrary social construct that it's practically useless when it comes to things like this.)
Now for the long answer and explanation...
We know that the brains of men and women (and transsexuals, too!) have distinct structural differences, for instance. It seems quite likely to me that these structural differences have an impact on how the brains function. Of course, there's far more to thinking and learning and becoming good at something than how your brain's structure predisposes you to being good or not as good at certain things. It's a factor, not the determinant. And, even when there are differences in the way two people - say, a man and a ( ... )
Reply
Anyway, I think that there needs to be a distinction between race and ethnicity in this discussion. Race is a social construct, which actually varies from place to place (e. g. Argentina has no less than 15 distinct "black" races). Ethnicity has to do with ancestry and which part of the world a person is descended from.
With that said, there are certainly biological differences between ethnicities. The environment that your ancestors lived in certainly are a determinant in physical features and such.
However, races in the United States have been so diluted by the voluntary and involuntary mixture of ethnicities that your race has little-to-no bearing from a biological standpoint. There are certain predispositions, diseases and etc. that are race specific, but I believe that has to with environmental and social factors and not with biology.
That's just my $0.02. Feel free to argue about the minutia, as you are so apt to do. :)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment