-
“Designer Vivienne Westwood says too few of the big glossies are prepared to feature black models on their covers. But should there be a quota on the number of black and ethnic-minority models who feature on the front pages?”
-
“The Independent catalogued a series of controversial statements from Watson, including one in which he reportedly suggested women should have the right to have abortions if tests could determine their children would be homosexual.”
-
“A spokesman for Mr Obama made the wry observation that “every family has a black sheep”.
-
Wow. Read through the comments to this Wired blog post. These supposedly enlightened tech/science types are awfully eager to justify their racist-ass beliefs. Amazing.
-
Great article. “What’s significant, she argues, is how little Americans — as individuals or in communities — have examined the ways in which the estimated 5,000 lynchings that mar our history also shape the world we live in today.”
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of 
jayjay wrote:
didn’t watson rip off a female co-worker as part of his nobel prize winning work? not a nice guy it seems…
Posted 19 Oct 2007 at 11:26 am ¶
EvilAngelfish wrote:
Re: Watson debacle -
The message boards over at WSJ.com’s health blog are just as bad. It really makes me sick. And it really makes me wonder how many of those guys who rubber-stamped Watson’s remarks are back-pedalling now that he’s issued an apology…
Posted 19 Oct 2007 at 12:57 pm ¶
ugochi wrote:
Re: Waston Attitude
Watson’s commments are unforgiveable as far as I’m concerned. It’s very disheartening to hear someone so compolished in a field such as genetics.
I was just in the middle of a rewakening of interest in science specifically genetics, and though I’m very receptive to sociology and social issues, I would like to someday combine both fields of study together without it turning into something retarded like eugenetics, or completely assuming that all behavior is determined by our genes as Watson along with many others in the field would have us believe, maybe I’m just a doe-eyed gullible person thinking I could somehow prove that nature, nurture, structure and agency play an equal role in who any of us are.
Hearing the controversy on CNN now and his long-winded apology, I’m curious about the need to belittle a whole group of people to make other more important. The comments on wired.com doesn’t reassure me that so called “majority” is any better than anyother group of people.
It seems that this “majority” has to state over and over and over and over and over and over andover and over and over and over, again and again, how great they are, implictly and explictly. I would think it would make one wonder if they really were that “great,” cause if they were, wouldn’t they only have to state it only once? What are they trying to cover up or hide with all their self-praising that basically has to trample on other groups in the process. What is it about blacks throughout the world that seems to bring the worse in other people of other groups to the point of treating them in inhumane ways and have disregard, apathy, in their overall situation?
Posted 19 Oct 2007 at 6:01 pm ¶
Anonymous wrote:
FYI, the last comment on the Wired post is:
“In case you guys were wondering this page got linked on neo-nazi hate sites like Stormfront which is why there are so many racist idiots posting.”
… Which I found helpful and informative.
Posted 19 Oct 2007 at 9:05 pm ¶
Christopher wrote:
I wonder how many of those commenters on wsj.com are in the position to hire in corporate America but will still argue that affirmative action is a quaint and outdated policy…
Posted 22 Oct 2007 at 4:24 pm ¶