African-American Appreciation Thread - Not Actually an Appreciation Thread

  • Twórca wątku Twórca wątku ???
  • Data rozpoczęcia Data rozpoczęcia
  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
You will never guess what the context for this was.
chattel slavery.PNG
chattel slavery 2.PNG
Fun fact: they already did genetic studies in 'generational trauma' and found that it was bunk. That doesn't stop them from arguing that 400 years a slave makes them poor and dumb for things like Kool-Aid pineapple.
 
From pages 43 and 44 of the FBI's 2006 report. There's your "primary source", dumbass. Due to your lack of decent reading comprehension skills, I'll also explicitly state I trust them over Carolyn Bryant, if for no other reason than numbers and corroborating witnesses and/or listeners vs. Carolyn's army of...no one being the better logical bet. You'll just have to chud-rage about that. Additionally, that "flippantly dismiss" clause in my previous post was anticipation of you coping and claiming they're all automatically liars because they're niggers and/or one or more other reasons.
lmfao this nigga thinks Till was whistling at a bad move by a checkers player. Do you know that you are retarded or nah? An FBI document that affirms people outside the store can't corroborate something happening inside the store is not evidence in your favor. LOL, Emmett was just whistling a catcall at a bad checkers move, of course.
Everyone else who was in or around the store saw and/or heard no such thing.
There was nobody else in the store when it happened. Blacks playing checkers outside didn't hear him grab a woman's hand is your ace in the hole. You are a retarded faggot. Final answer.

Your entire argument is destroyed by the fact she didn't tell her husband and swore Juanita not to tell hers. Your evidence against Juanita being there does not actually state that, using bits of sentences to tell the reader what she's implying.

Regardless, a woman who invents a story of assault for her own selfish motives has a blank canvas to invent with. And if that's why she did this, there would be evidence of her using it to her advantage because that's the stated purpose, right? Why would she invent Juanita being in the back and her yelling if she knew 100% there's going to be zero corroboration of that? That's retarded, man. It's way more likely Juanita was there, didn't hear her, and 50 years later a snippet of her interview gets turned into "she denies being there!"

You don't find it odd that, 1) her story is so modest (and also conveniently is aimed at the one black in this story who absolutely did something more-than-whistling), and 2) by your own admission, it wasn't even her who told her husband? If she wants the "nigger beast rapist" tale or whatever you claim, she could've had it! But all she said was he put his hands on her and made lewd comments, rattling her.

So she went out to grab the pistol to sell the idea of something scaring her about her and Till's interaction, in hopes that word would eventually get around to her husband? And also coincidentally, the same black who she is inventing this story for then cat-called her as she frantically ran off? And then what? She could lean into the idea that Till got fresh with her and indicated he'd fucked white women before, which would help her in what way? She's a white woman in 1955 in the deep south, dipshit, she doesn't need to concoct a plausible story and also hedge for her own morality.

Again, the most likely explanation that involves none of your retarded leaps is exactly what she said happened: Till groped her, she was rattled to all hell, and grabbed her pistol for protection. Till and them realized something bad happened and dipped. The blacks around also realized it and told Roy about it; probably the one who advised her to go inside and lock-up. She didn't want a huge commotion about this with Roy because he would be violent to Emmett and angry with her, too, so she never told Roy, hopping it all went away. Women tend to do that when they get assaulted, same as men. Her grabbing her pistol in case Emmett came back !== she wants her husband to find him and murder him.

Your version of events doesn't require Till, doesn't require a pistol, doesn't require her yelling to Juanita, doesn't require anything at all that her actual version had. She can just lie because liars have a blank canvas and the odds are in her favor in this era. There's no need to fit it all into a realistic scenario that makes sense. "A nigger assaulted me tonight, Roy. I don't want to work in the store anymore, even though it's our business and we live here." Done.

The most likely version of events still allows you to say, "Man, that was fucked up he died for being retarded." But you won't take it. You need the evil white woman to have lied to kill a dindu. Pathetic.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
You will never guess what the context for this was.
Wyświetl załącznik 9187233
Wyświetl załącznik 9187232
Fun fact: they already did genetic studies in 'generational trauma' and found that it was bunk. That doesn't stop them from arguing that 400 years a slave makes them poor and dumb for things like Kool-Aid pineapple.

Can you post the study? I live with Canadian natives and they also make this argument. I would like to keep some studies debunking it.
 
Can you post the study? I live with Canadian natives and they also make this argument. I would like to keep some studies debunking it.
Believe it or not, Wikipedia's article on it doubts it. From there I got this study. I do remember the HBD sphere being skeptical of it so maybe Cremieux/Jordan Lasker has some stuff on it.

From the Wikipedia page:
A 2026 review examining the transgenerational inheritance of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and war-related trauma confirmed these methodological limitations in the human literature. While some studies report DNA methylation variations in stress-related genes (such as FKBP5, NR3C1, NR3C2, and BDNF) among parents or offspring exposed to combat or genocide, the results across the field remain highly inconsistent. The reviewers concluded that genuine epigenetic inheritance and causality cannot be definitively established, as the majority of existing human studies are heavily limited by small sample sizes, cross-sectional designs, and an inability to adequately control for environmental and psychosocial confounding variables.

To address the ongoing controversy and methodological bottlenecks in mammalian models, recent literature has proposed stringent validation frameworks. A 2025 review examining the transgenerational transmission of acquired nervous system phenotypes emphasized that establishing true epigenetic inheritance of trauma requires overcoming severe confounding factors, including postnatal care, the maternal uterine environment, and the global epigenetic reprogramming that naturally erases most DNA methylation during embryonic development. The authors critique the frequent misapplication of the term "transgenerational" in trauma literature, noting that many studies erroneously conflate it with "intergenerational" inheritance—where the F1 fetus or F2 germ cells are directly exposed to the maternal stressor in utero. To definitively prove that behavioral or stress-related traits are inherited epigenetically rather than socially or genetically, it has been proposed that researchers meet strict criteria: the phenotype and corresponding molecular marks must persist into unexposed generations (the F2 generation for paternal exposure, or F3 for maternal), transmission must be isolated to the germ cells, and study designs must utilize absolute controls like cross-fostering and in vitro fertilization to exclude environmental transmission.

Furthermore, human observational cohorts are inevitably confounded by socioeconomic status, culture, and parenting practices, which can easily mimic or obscure epigenetic inheritance. The review also cautions against the ethical and societal risks of attributing psychiatric or cognitive vulnerabilities to ancestral epigenetic trauma; doing so without solid mechanistic proof risks stigmatizing families or inappropriately blaming prior generations.
 
You will never guess what the context for this was.
Wyświetl załącznik 9187233
Wyświetl załącznik 9187232
Fun fact: they already did genetic studies in 'generational trauma' and found that it was bunk. That doesn't stop them from arguing that 400 years a slave makes them poor and dumb for things like Kool-Aid pineapple.
I am not at all implying this isn't true, I just want to have sources. Can you link those studies? I want to rub some smug liberal faces in them.
 
Fun fact: they already did genetic studies in 'generational trauma' and found that it was bunk. That doesn't stop them from arguing that 400 years a slave makes them poor and dumb for things like Kool-Aid pineapple.
According to generational trauma, my bloodline is forever scarred from the war drums beaten and the scalps taken by the savage Indians during King Philip's War.
 
"Excuse me, sir; where is the fish section?"
"It's all the fish section now, mate."

Loving the other Africans clearly disgusted by them lmao
Wyświetl załącznik 9188057Wyświetl załącznik 9188058
Seriously, if you want to run around naked hunting your dinner on the savannah, fine!

And if you want to shop at a modern grocery store, don some pants, for fuck's sake.
 
Why would he be angry at his wife being a victim? Had something happened before?
I'm unsure. She indicated he would be upset with her. I'm assuming he just had anger issues and might not have been the greatest husband. Nothing indicates anything has happened before or he had reason to suspect anything. 20260624_130927.jpg
20260624_131016.jpg 20260624_131028.jpg
Reading this again, it might be that she's saying Roy would be mad if he ever found out later, meaning because she kept it from him. That actually makes more sense.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole