On the topic of race - Page 3 - Rape Board

snarkopo · 02-04-2010, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RapeKarenX

Sorry Batffink. We American dumb. Watch movies get info and believe all. We all need spanking by Masta.

I will spank you. Not a problem. Anything to save America.

superdeathbeam · 02-04-2010, 06:02 PM

I heard it multiple times I just don't remember more reliable sources.

what were we testing? And I'm sorry I'm not a journalist, but I would like to know more about the issue.

I thought it was a disease that was from chimps. So please enlighten me.

Lil-Mac · 02-04-2010, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RapeKarenX

Dude- we (AMERICANS) brought HIV to Africa through animal testing that mutated. So what if a HIV positive drug addicted male had sex with this "normal" hottie after the club. And then you met hottie and got it? The proliferation of HIV is more rampant in the the straight community and the highest risk group now are "Black" AMERICAN women because of all this DL stuff.

Source of info: Amazing. DO NOT GO TO JOURNALISM SCHOOL.

Hun where are you getting this?? AIDS is a desease that originated in chimps and then jumped to humans... kind of like swine or bird flu. From Africa it spread first into Europe and the US, and then across the globe.

America had nothing to do with causeing aids... that's just a myth. A really nasty one at that.

http://www.aegis.com/topics/timeline/

http://www.avert.org/origin-aids-hiv.htm

FuckingRotter · 02-06-2010, 03:21 AM

If this were true then every American would know Morgan Freeman was their first black President. Or was it that bloke in that Bruce Wosname film?

Quote:

Originally Posted by RapeKarenX

Sorry Batffink. We American dumb. Watch movies get info and believe all. We all need spanking by Masta.

RapeKarenX · 02-08-2010, 07:04 AM

Lil-Mac,

I was rather affected by HBO's multi-part documentary "Pandemic" that critically analyzed HIV theories and convinced me (after HBO surveying scientists in the field and comprehensive research) about the human made HIV strain. Although unintentional, it's consequenses are far reaching. I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but either through human causes or species mutation, this is an awful blight to human kind.

The documentary series produced by HBO are very detailed and covers the many aspects of AIDS and HIV, hot beds of contamination, origins, sociology, etc...

I am not trying to appear ignorant, but I have been haunted by that Documentary as well as seeing different articles that embrace this alternate theory.

K

The Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV) theory

Some other rather controversial theories have contended that HIV was transferred iatrogenically (i.e. via medical interventions). One particularly well-publicised idea is that polio vaccines played a role in the transfer.
In his book, The River, the journalist Edward Hooper suggests that HIV can be traced to the testing of an oral polio vaccine called Chat, given to about a million people in the Belgian Congo, Ruanda and Urundi in the late 1950s. To be reproduced, live polio vaccine needs to be cultivated in living tissue, and Hooper's belief is that Chat was grown in kidney cells taken from local chimps infected with SIVcmz. This, he claims, would have resulted in the contamination of the vaccine with chimp SIV, and a large number of people subsequently becoming infected with HIV-1.
Many people have contested Hooper's theories and insist that local chimps were not infected with a strain of SIVcmz that is closely linked to HIV. Furthermore, the oral administration of the vaccine would seem insufficient to cause infection in most people (SIV/HIV needs to get directly into the bloodstream to cause infection - the lining of the mouth and throat generally act as good barriers to the virus).4
In February 2000 the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia (one of the original manufacturers of the Chat vaccine) announced that it had discovered in its stores a phial of polio vaccine that had been used as part of the program. The vaccine was subsequently analysed and in April 2001 it was announced that no trace had been found of either HIV or chimpanzee SIV.5 A second analysis confirmed that only macaque monkey kidney cells, which cannot be infected with SIV or HIV, were used to make Chat.6 While this is just one phial of many, it means that the OPV theory remains unproven.
The fact that the OPV theory accounts for just one (group M) of several different groups of HIV also suggests that transferral must have happened in other ways too, as does the fact that HIV seems to have existed in humans before the vaccine trials were ever carried out. More about when HIV came into being can be found below.
The Contaminated Needle Theory

This is an extension of the original 'hunter' theory. In the 1950s, the use of disposable plastic syringes became commonplace around the world as a cheap, sterile way to administer medicines. However, to African healthcare professionals working on inoculation and other medical programmes, the huge quantities of syringes needed would have been very costly. It is therefore likely that one single syringe would have been used to inject multiple patients without any sterilisation in between. This would rapidly have transferred any viral particles (within a hunter's blood for example) from one person to another, creating huge potential for the virus to mutate and replicate in each new individual it entered, even if the SIV within the original person infected had not yet converted to HIV.
The Colonialism Theory

The colonialism or 'Heart of Darkness' theory, is one of the more recent theories to have entered into the debate. It is again based on the basic 'hunter' premise, but more thoroughly explains how this original infection could have led to an epidemic. It was first proposed in 2000 by Jim Moore, an American specialist in primate behaviour, who published his findings in the journal AIDS Research and Human Retroviruses.7
During the late 19th and early 20th century, much of Africa was ruled by colonial forces. In areas such as French Equatorial Africa and the Belgian Congo, colonial rule was particularly harsh and many Africans were forced into labour camps where sanitation was poor, food was scarce and physical demands were extreme. These factors alone would have been sufficient to create poor health in anyone, so SIV could easily have infiltrated the labour force and taken advantage of their weakened immune systems to become HIV. A stray and perhaps sick chimpanzee with SIV would have made a welcome extra source of food for the workers.
Moore also believes that many of the labourers would have been inoculated with unsterile needles against diseases such as smallpox (to keep them alive and working), and that many of the camps actively employed prostitutes to keep the workers happy, creating numerous possibilities for onward transmission. A large number of labourers would have died before they even developed the first symptoms of AIDS, and those that did get sick would not have stood out as any different in an already disease-ridden population. Even if they had been identified, all evidence (including medical records) that the camps existed was destroyed to cover up the fact that a staggering 50% of the local population were wiped out there.
One final factor Moore uses to support his theory, is the fact that the labour camps were set up around the time that HIV was first believed to have passed into humans - the early part of the 20th century.
The Conspiracy Theory

Some say that HIV is a 'conspiracy theory' or that it is 'man-made'. A recent survey carried out in the US for example, identified a significant number of African Americans who believe HIV was manufactured as part of a biological warfare programme, designed to wipe out large numbers of black and homosexual people.8 Many say this was done under the auspices of the US federal 'Special Cancer Virus Program' (SCVP), possibly with the help of the CIA. Linked in to this theory is the belief that the virus was spread (either deliberately or inadvertently) to thousands of people all over the world through the smallpox inoculation programme, or to gay men through Hepatitis B vaccine trials. While none of these theories can be definitively disproved, the evidence given to back them up is usually based upon supposition and speculation, and ignores the clear link between SIV and HIV or the fact that the virus has been identified in people as far back as 1959.

It is likely that we will never know who the first person was to be infected with HIV, or exactly how it spread from that initial person. Scientists investigating the possibilities often become very attached to their individual 'pet' theories and insist that theirs is the only true answer, but the spread of AIDS could quite conceivably have been induced by a combination of many different events. Whether through injections, travel, wars, colonial practices or genetic engineering, the realities of the 20th Century have undoubtedly had a major role to play. Nevertheless, perhaps a more pressing concern for scientists today should not be how the AIDS epidemic originated, but how those it affects can be treated, how the further spread of HIV can be prevented and how the world can change to ensure a similar pandemic never occurs again.

http://www.avert.org/origin-aids-hiv.htm

ChiTownHoney · 02-08-2010, 10:24 AM

So anyways... while all this AIDS talk makes me want to be air lifted to the nearest clinic, I have a question.

Do white guys get upset when you see white girls with non-white men?? I never thought so. I know a guy who's Mexican, his ex wife is white, and he said it was terrible how white men treated him because she was with him even though he said she was kind of a more chubby girl. They went as far as telling him that she shouldnt be with him, etc.

I just dont believe people have such a problem with it...my white/brown background, never once did I see a white man stare at us or say something to my mother. I always thought people were very tolerant, so this is news to me.

ChiTownHoney · 02-08-2010, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sternenlied

Well, on the verge of being called a racist once again:

It's background again. In many black/latin subcultures - who often are considered 2nd degree citizens or at least feel they are - white women can still be some sort of trophy. Leading to a hightened interest of course.

Why would you be called a racist? Its a simply a cultural fact. Or at least in Central Amer./Mexico..The more "elite" sector of society has always been white. The "indio" (an almost derogatory term in Latino America) have always been cast down since the Europeans claimed the land. In Guatemala, the natives were cast down and made to work for pennies a day by Ladinos, the mixed Spanish descendants.

There are plenty of caucasions in some of these regions, in others, not at all. But American television and everything does increase the interest...and sometimes, they dont even see white women, except for the Americans who work for a Peace Corp or something, delivering supplies like toothpaste, etc...even then, those women are seen as the ultimate higher cast. So for the men who migrate here, those blonde haired blue eyed American girls are like a dream...for real. If they get one of those, they are REALLY living the American dream.

I think those cultures bring that mentality here, but its not so much of a thing here not for Americans..girls want to go tanning to be as brown as can be..nobody wants to be pale. And its like exotic is the thing to be as well...I just dont think the minority sub-cultures here in the states seek out white anymore. They are proud to be black/brown now and go to extreme lengths to prove it. Some Mexicans denounce the terms "Latino/Hispanic". Ok that I understand, but why do they denounce it? Many reasons, but the one I want to make a point on is that "Hispanics" are people of Spanish descent. White Europeans. The enemy of "their" people...the Indians. Blah blah blah. The want to denounce their white lineage. You will almost always find that mentality here in the states from Americans...not in Mexico. SO why do they still like white girls?

Personally, I think the lighter the better)...just in my opinion. I dont find darker men very attractive.

RapeKarenX · 02-09-2010, 08:29 PM

Snark saving the US again!

Lil-Mac · 02-13-2010, 02:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiTownHoney

So anyways... while all this AIDS talk makes me want to be air lifted to the nearest clinic, I have a question.

Do white guys get upset when you see white girls with non-white men?? I never thought so. I know a guy who's Mexican, his ex wife is white, and he said it was terrible how white men treated him because she was with him even though he said she was kind of a more chubby girl. They went as far as telling him that she shouldnt be with him, etc.

I just dont believe people have such a problem with it...my white/brown background, never once did I see a white man stare at us or say something to my mother. I always thought people were very tolerant, so this is news to me.

Cant speak for all white guys Chi, but I dont. I have dated girls from every race (yes dated, not just slept with). So why should it bother me if a white girl does the same. To me skin color the the least important part of what a person is. As long as two people like each other there is no reason why they shouldnt be together.

To take it a step further.. my sister's first husband was a black guy. She met him in Gambia while doing research for her Doctorate. I was in the Airforce at the time. I remember mom called one day and told me my sister was getting married... then after a little more time went by she just asked out of the blue, are you prejudiced. The question struck me as odd because I never was growing up, I had lots of ethnic friends. Anyway to make a long story short the told me who Dee was marrying and I didnt have a problem with it. She was my big sister and I trusted her judgement.

To complete the picture it was only a few years later that I got married. To a beautiful black girl from Panama. We arent together anymore but thats another story.

RapeKarenX · 02-16-2010, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lil-Mac

To complete the picture it was only a few years later that I got married. To a beautiful black girl from Panama. We arent together anymore but thats another story.

Woman

dashrendar44 · 02-17-2010, 10:16 AM

Just because someone is legal doesn't make them from girl to woman.

02-04-2010, 06:02 PM	#42
superdeathbeam Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 60 Reputation: 153	I heard it multiple times I just don't remember more reliable sources. what were we testing? And I'm sorry I'm not a journalist, but I would like to know more about the issue. I thought it was a disease that was from chimps. So please enlighten me. Last edited by superdeathbeam; 02-04-2010 at 06:06 PM.

02-08-2010, 07:04 AM	#45
RapeKarenX Chinky Kinky Empress Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: hiding... Posts: 678 Reputation: 31552	pandemic Lil-Mac, I was rather affected by HBO's multi-part documentary "Pandemic" that critically analyzed HIV theories and convinced me (after HBO surveying scientists in the field and comprehensive research) about the human made HIV strain. Although unintentional, it's consequenses are far reaching. I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but either through human causes or species mutation, this is an awful blight to human kind. The documentary series produced by HBO are very detailed and covers the many aspects of AIDS and HIV, hot beds of contamination, origins, sociology, etc... I am not trying to appear ignorant, but I have been haunted by that Documentary as well as seeing different articles that embrace this alternate theory. K The Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV) theory Some other rather controversial theories have contended that HIV was transferred iatrogenically (i.e. via medical interventions). One particularly well-publicised idea is that polio vaccines played a role in the transfer. In his book, The River, the journalist Edward Hooper suggests that HIV can be traced to the testing of an oral polio vaccine called Chat, given to about a million people in the Belgian Congo, Ruanda and Urundi in the late 1950s. To be reproduced, live polio vaccine needs to be cultivated in living tissue, and Hooper's belief is that Chat was grown in kidney cells taken from local chimps infected with SIVcmz. This, he claims, would have resulted in the contamination of the vaccine with chimp SIV, and a large number of people subsequently becoming infected with HIV-1. Many people have contested Hooper's theories and insist that local chimps were not infected with a strain of SIVcmz that is closely linked to HIV. Furthermore, the oral administration of the vaccine would seem insufficient to cause infection in most people (SIV/HIV needs to get directly into the bloodstream to cause infection - the lining of the mouth and throat generally act as good barriers to the virus).4 In February 2000 the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia (one of the original manufacturers of the Chat vaccine) announced that it had discovered in its stores a phial of polio vaccine that had been used as part of the program. The vaccine was subsequently analysed and in April 2001 it was announced that no trace had been found of either HIV or chimpanzee SIV.5 A second analysis confirmed that only macaque monkey kidney cells, which cannot be infected with SIV or HIV, were used to make Chat.6 While this is just one phial of many, it means that the OPV theory remains unproven. The fact that the OPV theory accounts for just one (group M) of several different groups of HIV also suggests that transferral must have happened in other ways too, as does the fact that HIV seems to have existed in humans before the vaccine trials were ever carried out. More about when HIV came into being can be found below. The Contaminated Needle Theory This is an extension of the original 'hunter' theory. In the 1950s, the use of disposable plastic syringes became commonplace around the world as a cheap, sterile way to administer medicines. However, to African healthcare professionals working on inoculation and other medical programmes, the huge quantities of syringes needed would have been very costly. It is therefore likely that one single syringe would have been used to inject multiple patients without any sterilisation in between. This would rapidly have transferred any viral particles (within a hunter's blood for example) from one person to another, creating huge potential for the virus to mutate and replicate in each new individual it entered, even if the SIV within the original person infected had not yet converted to HIV. The Colonialism Theory The colonialism or 'Heart of Darkness' theory, is one of the more recent theories to have entered into the debate. It is again based on the basic 'hunter' premise, but more thoroughly explains how this original infection could have led to an epidemic. It was first proposed in 2000 by Jim Moore, an American specialist in primate behaviour, who published his findings in the journal AIDS Research and Human Retroviruses.7 During the late 19th and early 20th century, much of Africa was ruled by colonial forces. In areas such as French Equatorial Africa and the Belgian Congo, colonial rule was particularly harsh and many Africans were forced into labour camps where sanitation was poor, food was scarce and physical demands were extreme. These factors alone would have been sufficient to create poor health in anyone, so SIV could easily have infiltrated the labour force and taken advantage of their weakened immune systems to become HIV. A stray and perhaps sick chimpanzee with SIV would have made a welcome extra source of food for the workers. Moore also believes that many of the labourers would have been inoculated with unsterile needles against diseases such as smallpox (to keep them alive and working), and that many of the camps actively employed prostitutes to keep the workers happy, creating numerous possibilities for onward transmission. A large number of labourers would have died before they even developed the first symptoms of AIDS, and those that did get sick would not have stood out as any different in an already disease-ridden population. Even if they had been identified, all evidence (including medical records) that the camps existed was destroyed to cover up the fact that a staggering 50% of the local population were wiped out there. One final factor Moore uses to support his theory, is the fact that the labour camps were set up around the time that HIV was first believed to have passed into humans - the early part of the 20th century. The Conspiracy Theory Some say that HIV is a 'conspiracy theory' or that it is 'man-made'. A recent survey carried out in the US for example, identified a significant number of African Americans who believe HIV was manufactured as part of a biological warfare programme, designed to wipe out large numbers of black and homosexual people.8 Many say this was done under the auspices of the US federal 'Special Cancer Virus Program' (SCVP), possibly with the help of the CIA. Linked in to this theory is the belief that the virus was spread (either deliberately or inadvertently) to thousands of people all over the world through the smallpox inoculation programme, or to gay men through Hepatitis B vaccine trials. While none of these theories can be definitively disproved, the evidence given to back them up is usually based upon supposition and speculation, and ignores the clear link between SIV and HIV or the fact that the virus has been identified in people as far back as 1959. It is likely that we will never know who the first person was to be infected with HIV, or exactly how it spread from that initial person. Scientists investigating the possibilities often become very attached to their individual 'pet' theories and insist that theirs is the only true answer, but the spread of AIDS could quite conceivably have been induced by a combination of many different events. Whether through injections, travel, wars, colonial practices or genetic engineering, the realities of the 20th Century have undoubtedly had a major role to play. Nevertheless, perhaps a more pressing concern for scientists today should not be how the AIDS epidemic originated, but how those it affects can be treated, how the further spread of HIV can be prevented and how the world can change to ensure a similar pandemic never occurs again. http://www.avert.org/origin-aids-hiv.htm __________________ Purr...

02-08-2010, 10:24 AM	#46
ChiTownHoney Pa'l Mundo Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: ObamaNation Posts: 2,460 Reputation: 33436	So anyways... while all this AIDS talk makes me want to be air lifted to the nearest clinic, I have a question. Do white guys get upset when you see white girls with non-white men?? I never thought so. I know a guy who's Mexican, his ex wife is white, and he said it was terrible how white men treated him because she was with him even though he said she was kind of a more chubby girl. They went as far as telling him that she shouldnt be with him, etc. I just dont believe people have such a problem with it...my white/brown background, never once did I see a white man stare at us or say something to my mother. I always thought people were very tolerant, so this is news to me. Last edited by ChiTownHoney; 02-08-2010 at 11:17 AM.

02-09-2010, 08:29 PM	#48
RapeKarenX Chinky Kinky Empress Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: hiding... Posts: 678 Reputation: 31552	Snark saving the US again! __________________ Purr...

02-17-2010, 10:16 AM	#51
dashrendar44 Kamina Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Deep In The African Jungles Of China Posts: 2,733 Reputation: 12819	Just because someone is legal doesn't make them from girl to woman. __________________ "Go beyond the impossible and kick reason to the curb!" ~ Kamina, Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann "I've been thinking with my gut since I was 14, and I've come to the conclusion that my guts have shit for brains." ~ Rob Gordon, High Fidelity "All men are potential rapists. ALL MEN. Even the pope!" ~ Shirley Valentine "When you're pushed, killing's as easy as breathing." ~ John Rambo, Rambo IV "I don't think I'm easy to talk about. I've got a very irregular head. And I'm not anything that you think I am anyway." ~ Syd Barrett, Rolling Stone, December 1971

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode