Search Box

Saturday, November 1, 2014

Football strong!

Both the NY Times and the NY Post carried articles about the forfeiture of a football game today by the California University of Pennsylvania because five of their players were arrested for beating and then stomping a 30-year-old man outside a restaurant near campus. The man was left with severe brain injuries and is in the intensive care unit of Allegheny General Hospital in Pittsburgh.

The NY Times actually ran the mug shots of the five players, surprisingly enough:


As the five players ran off and got into their car after stomping their victim, they chanted, "Football strong!"

How exactly does a five-on-one beating prove machismo, or constitute grounds for pride, or in any way establish the superiority of football?

If anyone can explain this to me, please do; I'm at a complete loss.

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

They were just bonding.

Andrew

Anonymous said...

I hope they all end up in prison together. They're a bunch of bullies.

-birdie

John Craig said...

Birdie --
They're worse than run of the mill bullies. They could end up being murderers if their victim's brain damage proves fatal.

Steven said...

If I ever get serious brain damage, I hope it proves fatal!

Anonymous said...

These black football players are thugs. Their victim now has "severe brain injuries." Not good. Hopefully, the man survives (minus any brain damage which would be a miracle). I have no sympathy for these football players. I don't understand why these guys ganged up on their victim, beating the crap out of him. Now that they've committed a horrific crime, I hope that the thugs get a just punishment, spending years and years and years in prison. To me, it seems like society (the world over) is going to pot, being very discouraged by what we learn via the news.

-birdie

John Craig said...

Birdie --
Amen 

Glen Filthie said...

I would need to know more about the victim. It is not PC but I am a big fan of criminal-on-criminal violence - and if this is a case of feral baboons stomping one of their own...well...it's not like our liberals and social justice warriors are going to do anything serious about real crime....

Anonymous said...

"If anyone can explain this to me, please do; I'm at a complete loss."

Let me try. These guys each have an IQ of about 70. They are big, strong guys who attack people for a "living." They don't think before they act. Someone did something they don't like and they just did what they do on the field, attack without mercy. They just didn't have an official to call the whistle.

Does that make sense?

(I don't mean to sound so cold-hearted. I am horrified by this disgusting crime. I'm trying to answer your question.)

Coco

John Craig said...

Coco --
Thank you for that explanation, which I agree with, though I might raise that estimate of their average IQ's by 10 or so points.

But what I was really asking was not why they did the crime, but why they chanted "Football strong!" afterwards as if they had accomplished something they were really proud of.

Anonymous said...

Why did they chant? Apparently chanting improves brain function. Google this, it appears to be borne out by science.

Of course, if you are a thug, it improves the performance of bad behavior.

Coco

PS I don't think there was any significance to the actual chant except that they were football players, so they could hardly be expected to chant, "Zen Strong!" or "Ballet Strong!"

John Craig said...

Coco --
You made me laugh out loud (literally). Ballet strong!

I'll have to try chanting myself sometime: Blog strong! Blog strong.

I guess it must be a little like meditation, repeating "Om" over and over again to clear your mind.

Oh well, these guys will have plenty of time to chant where they're going.

Anonymous said...

You are at a complete loss for good reason. Their actions make no sense at all to rational human beings. They are animals--but do real animals actually do this to members of their own species? I suppose we can point to evolution. Man's origins can be traced back to Africa, and Black Africans were the last to leave. They stayed behind and, unlike Europeans, never even mated with Neanderthals. Instead, they stayed put and per the law of survival of the fittest became extremely violent and/or excellent runners. Meanwhile the descendants of their ancestors who left the dark continent moved to colder climates where violence wasn't as necessary but good planning to prepare for cold harsh winters was. Makes sense to me--the only problem is--and it's a big one: what to do about it?

Anonymous said...

I'm glad I made you laugh. Yes, I based my theory on work that has been done on the "om" chant but I think you can apply it to any word, spoken repetitively. It affects the mind. It's universal. Check out the video of the recent world series locker room celebration - they chanted & chanted while bathing in champagne. These guys were mostly white but they looked like primitive savages. (I like baseball.)

Actually, ballet (on a pro level) takes a lot of strength but the strength is directed to bodily self-control, rather than hurling your body towards an object with the intention of hitting it so hard it cannot move.

Yes, these guys are animals, but I think that even animals in human form are the products of environment. I don't buy this currently popular notion in the man-blog-world that we are just genes on two legs. They've been trained from day one to be violent. This is not an excuse, just saying.

Anonymous doesn't understand evolution. Modern day Africans aren't the literal descendants of the folks who stayed behind. There is a lot about early human evolution we don't understand but briefly, modern day Africans may be descended from people who left, and then back migrated, plus the archaic types in Africa. Eurasians also have archaic genes. It's complicated. Anyway. Here we are.

I hope these guys spend the rest of their lives in jail and get killed in a prison riot.

I like your blog. Most of the HBD bloggers are woman-hating petty guys. You just call 'em as you see 'em.

Coco

John Craig said...

Coco --
Thank you very much. (I assumed you were female because of your name, but I guess your last comment confirms it.) I must not be familiar with a lot of the HBD people. I read Steve Sailer daily, he's never struck me as a woman-hater. Maybe you're referring more to the man-blog-world you referenced earlier. Some of those guys definitely hate women. I read Heartiste, just because he's (A) basically right about everything he says, and (B) very entertaining. But while he's on target about gender differences, there's a certain visceral dislike of women that keeps emanating from his writings that goes beyond what is required for the sake of accuracy.

As far as the chanting goes, the same crowd that usually goes in for that (I'm not talking about the people who practice transcendental meditation) tend to go in for mindless rhymes too, and both often strike me as a substitute for thought. I wrote about that here:

http://justnotsaid.blogspot.com/2013/05/rhymes-for-low-iq-ed.html

No question about ballet. When I was in the process of getting my black belt my wife and I went to see "A Chorus Line." The male dancers were all decidedly un-macho types, but I remember watching them and thinking, any one of those guys, with about four weeks raining, could probably kick the crap out of any of us mildly macho Wall Street types in my karate class.

Anonymous was oversimplifying, but he has a point: for the most part, the humans who emigrated from Africa went to colder climates where the ability to plan for the future (and delay current gratification) was more stringently selected for. A lot of HBD-types see this as the main reason those who evolved in harsher climates are more intelligent. I think it's more complicated than that (all evolution has a certain random element to it), but if the proof of the pudding is in the eating, well, there is a negative correlation with having stayed in relatively close proximity to the equator and high IQ's.

Anonymous said...

Spartan said,

John, you're showing your cultural ignorance. Don't you know that in certain communities, a five on one fight is considered fair? If that lone person happens to be white, then it's also social justice.

With mongoloids like this running loose, the human population would be wise to exercise their constitutional right in owning a gun. Think about how great things could have turned out if the victim would have given each subhuman a bullet.

John Craig said...

Spartan --
I looked it up, their victim was a light-skinned black guy, so, no social justice.

It's possible they mistook him for white at first, though (I had to look twice).