As far as our "defense mechanism," have you considered the idea that maybe reproduction for every individual is no longer a necessity?
It will always be a necessity. If another Black Plaque came and this time wiped 2/3 of the earth away and we didn't have the desire and/or will to reproduce then we would become extinct.
Our short term problems would be solved, but nature doesn't care about that. It's only long terms problems that prompt change. Racism that is taught, is a long term problem. A social problem, but nonetheless one that needs correcting.
When we find a vaccine for the common cold should we try and make our immune systems extinct?
there are 5.8 billion people on the planet right now, according to the UN (and you know they didn't count everybody). Experts are projecting that by the year 2050 there will be roughly 7.9 billion. In a world that currently wrestles with global warming, increasing crime rates, starvation in developing countries, thinning ozone layer, do we need that many people?
Nope, your right we don't. However, nature will always win. We are sprinting on a treadmill and soon we will run out of breathe and trust me when we smack down on our face, it will hurt.
Man has already found ways to fend off natural selection through processes like sterilization, vaccination, and antibiotics, along with countless other methods for the sustainment of human life past natural departure. These are only a few of the basic natural conditions that man has transcended.
We're cheaters. We don't want to live the way we were intended. However, that doesn't mean we can change ourselves physically. We still are able to reproduce at a very young age and always have been.
Also, think about how much of a negative impact that "defense mechanism" has made. In 2006, the Annie E. Casey Foundation reported that approximately 32% of children in America are being raised in single-parent family structures. I would argue (based on scientific evidence and personal experience) that a single parent household is not a proper environment to raise a fully developed individual.
Was it the "defensive mechanism"? Or is it what society (man) teaches? Look back 50-70 years. Were divorce rates the same as they are today? What is the only thing that has changed?
At the very least I'd say a child raised in a single-parent household is much less likely to be offered the same opportunity as a child with two parents at home.
They don't have to the same opportunities physically? What did one of their legs didn't fully develope?
If this isn't the case, then this isn't natures fault. This is mans fault. This is what man has caused by living in a society that doesn't promote hard work ethic and solving your problems rationally.
For example: "What you don't like that girl? Well, don't worry just move on, afterall there are other fish in the sea."
Women aren't special anymore and treated as toys. Society promotes this, not nature. Nature doesn't tell you how to act or what choices to make other than protecting yourself and assuring the survival of your genes.
Why does this happen? I posit that a lot of the time people become emotionally attached to one another
Emotional attachment is a apart of human instinct, correct. Nature intended this. The why is below.
have children too early, and find out after the fact that they don't like the person with which they were bumping uglies. This is just cases in America. And I'm not even talking about children in foster care, orphanages, or adoption agencies.
Early compared to what? Our life expectancy? We are cheaters. We were never intended to be able to double our life expectancy. This isn't natural. We created these problems, not nature. What do you want, more cake and the ability to lose weight at the sametime?
I have no idea why you asked me if whites have a mechanism solely for black people tho, man simply has a defense mechanism for those different than himself.
It was to show that being prejudice and is not what moderns refer to as "rascism" because it doesn't single out one group of people.
It serves as a wider range of functions than solely thinking black people are evil
We have already come to the conclusion that this is not true. However isn't this what society thinks thats what the typical "racist" is comprised of.
There is something "wrong" with you if you think now a days differently. Everyone is the same now. Isn't this what is taught?
Example: Billy doesn't believe in the Holocaust. He doesn't think it happened the way it is taught. He doesn't think he is racist or "anti-semetic" because his best friend actually happens to be Jewish, but honestly, what will his classmates think of him if he expressed his views?
This is what society teaches. It doesn't teach to tolerate differences, it teaches to think
the same because they think
are the same when we aren't.
And men like women with supple breasts and wide hips because those are the prime conditions for reproduction. The feminine physique is also a beautiful compliment to the masculine physique. However, everyone's personality develops differently
Are traits and personality differ? If so, is the differ extreme?
and a relationship must delve deeper than the simple physical compliment into the personal compliment in order to truly prosper as a couple. I assert that the problem is that our actions are misguided by this primordial instinct that I still assert must be transcended if we are to truly prosper as a species.
I have explained this before as why this is not nature's fault. This is mans fault. We are not teaching that we should solve problems and work them out. "There are other fish in the sea" is example of this.
You never answered my question about whether blacks are the same as whites now. Why did you avoid this?