Alice Roberts, cont.
a BBC page
describing her program, is a smaller yet more complete version of the same photo of Alice Roberts and her Bushmen companions that is linked as a huge pop-up in the earlier entry
on her today:
And here again is Alice and the “first European”:
Alice Roberts contemplating the bust of Homo … europeansis
- end of initial entry -
By the way, I wouldn’t have recognized the woman in these two photos as the same person.
Ben W. writes:
VFR readers may be interested in Dr. Alice Roberts’ presentation of the male penis and the phenomenon of “erection” at YouTube. However I don’t think this is related to her visit with the bushmen…
Here is Wikipedia’s article on her.
In the YouTube presentation of the male tube, the look on Alice’s face when the mock penis blows up to full size is one of amazement and joy. She truly enjoys her work. Once again, this is not related to the bushmen…
John Hagan writes:
When I went to VFR this afternoon and saw the picture of Alice Roberts and the bushmen my first thought was that this women was hyper-sexual. Then of course the whole youtube video, and the obvious physical excitement I sensed from her facial features confirmed my intuition that this is not a serious scientist, but a women who does not quite have control over her personal desires. I bet she’s a big fan of Margaret Mead.
John B. writes:
Have you ever seen a scientific explanation bungled as thoroughly as Roberts bungled the explanation of an erection? I’d say I pity the young girls who will conclude that that’s the manner in which a penis changes as it becomes erect—but I think it might be scarier for the boys.
By the way, isn’t anyone going to get the play of words in my caption under the second photo of Roberts?
Paul T. writes:
Rembrandt’s “Aristotle contemplating the bust of Homer,” yes?
Here is the Rembrandt, which is at the Metropolitan Museum of Art.When it was sold to the Met, in the Sixties, for a seven figure sum, that was the highest price ever paid for a painting up to that time.
I asked Adela G. what her thoughts were on Alice Roberts, and she writes:
Where to begin?!
In the entry on that (other) clueless white woman who was raped by a black man, Mark E. wrote:
On the subject of which group is the greatest threat to society, in my view it is not black males but white females and their subordinate, subservient lick-spittle white male lackeys. It is white females who are destroying America, not blacks. I feel vastly more threatened by white females than by black males. I would rather risk walking down a dark inner-city street than risk going to a white cocktail party in suburbia. The chances of an unpleasant incident in the first case are much lower than the chances in the second case, which are approximately 100 percent.
I agree and think it was one of the best comments I’ve read at VFR, though I would argue that Sweden and England are about as female-dominated as America is—and you see where that’s gotten them.
I know you don’t like Roissy in DC, but he is right-on about the wide-ranging social destruction driven by white American females. Health care, “anti-war,” anti-smoking, same-sex “marriage,” you name it. Even open borders and multiculti-ism are driven by, or enabled by, white females and their moral narcissism.
America today is the most female-dominated society in history, and hence is headed for the ash-heap.
[end of Mark E. quote]
Liberal white women have done their best to emasculate white men. So now in increasing numbers, they “hook up” with black men. I know that’s an inexpressibly vulgar phrase but it’s an inexpressibly vulgar practice—the only romance in these relationships is the white woman’s view of the dark exotic Other. I lived in a liberal college town where I saw it over and over again. Without exception, the white woman had to provide all the material benefits (money, food, shelter) and sex on demand. In return, she got sex when the black man decided she would. She also often, but not always, got hit, slapped, punched or kicked when he so decided. And she was seldom his only sex partner. These women were usually abrasively outspoken in dealing with white men yet submissive to their black men.
And because these relationships are routinely dysfunctional, white relatives often end up raising the biracial products of them. Again, we need only look at the current occupant of the White House to appreciate the benefits of raising a biracial child in a white home.
What irks me no end is that this type of white woman insists on politicizing her personal sexual preference and imposing the consequences of that preference on the rest of white society. If a white woman chooses to consort with a black man or if she chooses to have a child by that man, whites should shun her. (Frankly, I think blacks would be well within their rights to shun such a woman, too, but as my concern is with white culture, I don’t think I should speak to or for black culture.) As it is now, white women who have black partners “cherry pick” the parts of black culture they like (sex with black men, some music, etc.) and go back to white culture for the rest.
As to Roberts specifically, she reminds me of Stanley Ann Dunham. She’d probably like to be the mother of the first “black” Prime Minister, except that that would mean there wouldn’t be one for 30 or 40 years and I’m sure she thinks Britain should have one much sooner than that.
On a personal level, I despise such women as I despise all traitors.
I’m sure you found my language emphatic and probably overly harsh, given your sunny nature. But I wonder exactly how you would expect me to respond to the notion of Western women going to Africa to cozy up to the natives in order to persuade the rest of the West to “connect” since we are all part of “one world.”
But there is one thing I should make very plain. No one in this world knows better than I do that choices have consequences. It is precisely because I realize that we are all connected because we are all part of one world (a solipsism if ever I saw one) that I find the Stanley Anns and Stanley Alices of this worlds so objectionable.
“Though boys throw stones at frogs in sport, the frogs do not die in sport, but in earnest.” Bion
These clueless left-wing white females, having demanded the cultural emasculation of the white men who would have been their natural mates, now find it endlessly gratifying to romp with men of color in ways that can only be described as unnecessary, perverse, decadent and destructive. I resent terribly their making their personal sexual choices into a political, even moral, issue.
And people say that I am anti-woman!
I most certainly am not anti-woman (though a case could be made that I am specifically anti-Western woman.) Indeed, most of the people I revere (as opposed to admire or respect) are women, such as Willa Cather and Irene Dunne. I would never adore, say, Richard Dix or even John Ford the way I adore these two exemplary women.
Frankly, I blame Western men for spoiling their women and making this lamentable current state of affairs (!) possible.
Paul T. writes:
I can just see little kids on a school trip to the Met saying, “But that doesn’t look like Homer Simpson at all!”. O tempora!…
Posted by Lawrence Auster at May 09, 2009 04:15 PM | Send