Each Thursday I have a session with clients who I have known for many years now, which means we get to have some very interesting discussions - with no holes barred. It is refreshing to be able to talk about things openly, with curiosity and humor, without having to worry about anyone getting offended, It is so rare these days, as taking offence is a sport now, where people look to make themselves the victim, because being a victim means not having to add anything of value to the discussion.
One of the several topics today was a strange one - inbreeding. Where we were talking about some of the genetic effects, but also what might lead to it. For instance, even though the vast majority of people have zero attraction to their relatives (unlike in Game of Thrones), when the conditions are right, some will cross that line.
In Finland, it is still legal to marry first cousins. And I assume that because back in the day families would live around family farms, it was very cold most of the year, distances were long, there were no roads and, Finns like a drink - it happened.
If it is good enough for the royals...
But this led into a discussion about "opposites attract", where science suggests that we are more likely to be attracted to people who are genetically dissimilar to us. I have long thought this, because it makes sense that there is more chance of there being strengths coming from the mother and the father to create a stronger progeny, mitigating risk through diversity.
However, I brought up that this doesn't work at the cultural level, where people tend to make decisions and are attracted to people who think similarly and have similar hobbies, but most importantly, similar major beliefs. Even if they are genetically different, if two people have opposing world views, they are unlikely to be attracted to each other - at least long term. For instance, there probably aren't that many couples where one person is very liberal, and the other is highly bigoted, even if they share other social similarities. This is probably because they will find the potentially repulsive as a trait, which makes a long-term relationship difficult to maintain. Or for the short-term.
Then we started talking about eugenics and creating a superior race, and it got me thinking about what people mean by superior. Is it physical superiority? Mental acumen? Looks?
At least from a glance, a "superior" race would have to have all three at least, as well as probably many other traits. Yet, no race actually has all three, or even one of the three, but individuals within those groups might. So if there was going to be a "master race", it would have to be one that is a combination of the best of the best from all races mixed together.
So what race is that?
I am half Indian background, my daughter a quarter Indian - at what point is it irrelevant? An eighth, a sixteenth, a thirty second, a sixty forth?
1/4 - my daughter
1/8 - my grandchild
1/16 - my great grandchild
1/32 - my great, great grandchild
That is what, 200 years covered? Doesn't a lot change in that time, especially culturally? Even without outside intervention, things would change, but in a world that is so globalized, so mixed, with so many interdependencies, so many crossover influences...
What is "cultural appropriation"?
Can my white-skinned, blue-eyed daughter wear a saree?
We live in a world where people are having to publicly apologize for their hairstyles.
Am I allowed to make tortillas and tacos?
As far as I know, I have no Mexican ancestry. But I do have Spanish, does that count?
Strange discussions.
But what I found interesting is that what people tend to think is the "superior" form of something, is pretty much just whatever they happen to be attracted to at the time. Most people listen to the music that they like, because at that point in their lives, it is superior to other forms. Someone can argue that Mozart is better than Bieber, but what does that matter for preference to the individual? If you like listening to Bieber and don't like listening to Mozart, Bieber is superior.
The thought makes me feel ill.
It is weird how people will say that diversity makes us stronger, and then look to section themselves off from one another along lines that are largely arbitrary, putting up barriers to protect their slices of identity at ever decreasing thinness, until all that is left to divide, are the atoms within our bodies.
In nature, diversity gives strength through risk mitigation, where for instance, if there is a disease that targets one gene, there will be others without that gene that will survive. Location diversity also reduces risks, as well as the ability to eat from different food sources.
Diversity is risk distribution.
Decentralizing across multiple nodes, with multiple components used, multiple setups and configurations, multiple power sources and multiple failsafes - just makes sense. But, strength is also built through those diverse configurations mixing together and potentially creating new strengths, ne attributes that increase risk mitigation, by adding another mutation onto the board. However, there are also the chances for negative mutations, that can make us weaker, but which is more common?
And then, when it comes to "culture" what does that actually mean?
Culture:
the ideas, customs, and social behavior of a particular people or society.
Worth protecting?
But, new cultures can form, right? New mutations, like the shift in music from banging a piece of wood with a stick, to Mozart, to Nirvana. They are building on each other, yet they aren't necessarily better or worse, they are suited to the conditions.
Culture:
maintain (tissue cells, bacteria, etc.) in conditions suitable for growth.
If the conditions change, the culture has to change in order to survive. If it doesn't it dies. And, as conditions are always going to change, the easiest way for culture to adapt is by mixing traits with other cultures, using components from one and components from another, to fuse into something new, something suitable for the time.
It is ridiculous to limit cultural growth by limiting who is able to be part of it.
We should be welcoming the change, especially from the people who we are spending the most time with locally, because as new people come in, our conditions are going to change too, and if we don't change with them, we become irrelevant. It isn't about giving up who we are, it is about learning who we are in the current conditions. What is needed from us? Where are we most valuable to ourselves, our families and our communities?
It is an interesting thing to consider, because in each group and each population, there is a large range of diversity, even if genetically people might be more similar. For instance, who would you rather have over to your place for dinner;
Me, or the violent addict in the local park, that is genetically similar to you?
And this is why so many of the "identity" definitions that people find so important are stupid, because they look at them from an individual perspective, as if one trait lives in a vacuum, independent and unaffected by the rest of the person, the conditions of the moment, the whole.
And it is this dividing up of the whole that is tearing us apart as a society, because we are putting so much emphasis on some aspects, without recognizing that we are generally better off with diversity and difference. The real danger isn't in the homogenization of people, it is in the homogenization of conditions, because if conditions were unchanging, then we would align to the conditions and all start to become the same, and then, one mutation wipes us all out, because all of us would be resistant to change ourselves.
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
I think it's interesting how the US used to be touted as a cultural melting pot. There were essays and all kinds of other prose written about it. Yet now we are seeing these cultures pulling back and putting up barriers to that amalgamation. Which I think is fine, but you can't have it both ways. The whole cultural appropriation thing confounds me. I believe you should be able to respect and admire another culture without being called out for it.
Inclusion through inclusion. Makes total sense!
I completely agree. If there is no intention to ridicule, what is the problem?
Yeah, it's gotten out of hand. It makes you wonder how the majority of these cultures actually feel about it. I have a feeling most of them could care less one way or the other.
My mother would wear sarees (dresses) given to her by my grandma. My grandma felt good about it, respected, honored. Perhaps others in the same community or culture might not, but do they speak for everyone in the culture? It is the height of self-centeredness to believe an individual or a small group or even a large group, speak for everyone else-
I know that the way “diversity” and “culture” are forced on us today does not help the processes in the long term future. Forcing things down peoples throats doesn’t end well, particularly if you are trying to force a change that’s not spontaneous and natural.
The annoying thing as well these days is a lot of people are so thin skinned and fragile. I think it’s improving but fuck it’s pathetic to watch a lot of these people yell, scream and be petulant children instead of adults.
Thursday’s sound like a wild time with your clients hahaha
It is engineered to create conflict. Divide and conquer.
I think there is a growing gap. It is improving in a smaller percentage, worsening in the rest. At the end of the day, those who are able to collaborate and build together will generate the most value.
It is always fun :)
The people most obsessed with "racial superiority" in my experience have usually been people who fall short aesthetically, physically and mentally. The lack of personal excellence combined with the desire to perceive themselves in a better light seems to result in being drawn to some form of collective association (racial, national, or otherwise) as a substitute for self-improvement and self-reflection.
A few years back, they did a "looks comparison" between political candidates. It was clear who were the racists - and it had nothing to do with skin color.
I also think that it comes down to jealousy. Other groups can have traits that are desirable, but not held. Who wouldn't want to, look better, run faster, jump higher, or think better?
Excellent post.
Unfortunately even if you want to claim that you're a pure breed blah blah blah that's not how it works. In fact all of those white supremacist idiots that went through genealogical records ended up in a lot of trouble.
In the native American world I have a bunch of people that say that they are purebred and blah blah blah.. yeah your grandma was a white chick. It is really amazing how diverse we actually are.
Thank you very much for your post and please do not listen to Bieber... At all. Ever.
#freecompliments
It is interesting how many people make claims to "what they are" without actually having much idea of what they actually are at all.
I absolutely have to agree! Before you start making stupid claims you might want to do your research before... Lol!
Also known as when keeping it real goes wrong!
Ever noticed how people who are just "saying it how it is" are so often wrong?
A lot of people they think they understand something most times don't... Sometimes I can see the same thing in me..
My dear bro @tarazkp !
I assumed you were discriminated against in Finland because you are Australian!
That is racism that commonly occurs in the world I live in as well!
I hope my awkward English sentences don't offend you!
I am discriminated against. I get better looking women interested ;D
I can’t trace. Where I heard the words we marry what we are.
I love the fact that you brought out that thought. patenting with an individual totally different from you is a solid gamble. However having common ground allows both of you a place you get together in thought and build out solutions for your problems or situations that arise along the way. Away from that point that partnership risks lasting, because there is no ground to solve issues.
Being similar in some aspects can help, but it can also raise issues where rather than discussing larger differences, it becomes picking on small differences.
This is profound. And a large barrier for development
I am one of those that believe that opposites attract, but I also know that they don't have to be fully opposite. They need to have a good amount of things that they are in common with for the relationship to work. I've seen a lot of introverts with extroverts. The extroverts take the introverts out of their shell and they go to a middle ground where they are both happy. I've seen a gamer guy and a non gamer girl be happy. The guy plays while the girl reads beside him and they are content. In this one, they are both homebodies, so it works out. It is finding a good balance that is necessary.
A lot of social things likely have to be similar to some degree - but genetically, different is good!
I agree. Cultural diversity in marriage could kill the genetic diseases rather than kin marriage.
There is a reason that the cultures that have increased diversity, have spread.
Have you ever considered staking, delegation or running a witness node? I heard rewards for those who run nodes and the witness are good? What is your knowledge on this so far?
I won't run a witness, as I am not technically proficient enough to manage it myself. So, I support those who are :)
Hm that's crazy. Why will someone even marry his cousin in the first place. That sounds weird. Well, I can't say it has never happened in my country because I don't know every history but trust me, it is very much prohibited here. It is not done.
Anyway, different countries with different tribes. Also, people are taking offense in any little thing that another person says and that is why it is quite difficult to advise someone now. We never can tell what they will do after taking the offense
It is very strange if it happens anywhere at all. I don't know why they don't change the law here - I don't think it is common now.
It's really not a nice thing to hear of marrying a close kin. We should try to avoid showing traits of racism ourselves. Thinking of oneself as a pure breed is not healthy, let's try to cohabit as one breed
Do you see racism of any kind in your area?
Yes! Very destructive in nature. Okay, what should we call the ethnic killings and religious killings if it's not another dimension of racism?
Yeah exactly. So, people who are in so many ways, so very close to each other genetically, yet are killing each other over thoughts.
Talking freely is indeed becoming scarce, just last week I was talking with my boss about fundraising campaign and doing a pregnancy picture contest and she said some people might say we are insensitive because some women are trying to conceive. It’s like walking on eggshells these days. Especially on social media.
Diversity is good. We can’t all be the same, however, knowing our differences and how best to support each other makes living better.
It is crazy, isn't it? I know someone who was upset about my wife saying that she fell pregnant in a couple weeks, because it took them a couple years of trying. It is all "me, me, me" - but they have no sensitivity to others, making my wife feel bad talking about being happy about being pregnant.
Sometimes I feel like telling people “ the world doesn’t revolve around you” but of course that will be too mean. There has to be a way to let people know that because someone is celebrating doesn’t mean they are mocking you. They are just happy and should not have to look sad to please you. Being happy for others when we are sad ourselves shows how mature we are.
Unfortunately, they will see it as an attack - because in their head, the world does revolve around them.
Truly appreciable words. Nice post👍