nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Olivia Mitchell "We should expand our gene pool"

RDM_83 again

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/celtic-tiger-gene-pool-expansion-made-us-better-looking-says-mitchell-1.1969516

Basically Olivia Mitchell has said that the tiger era was a good thing because we need 'mobility of races' and that we have better looking and taller children because of it.

This is a weird enough thing to say for a politician as it already has a hint of Eugenics.
Where it gets shocking is that she also says

" I think it’s a good thing to keep
our IQs up there; it’s not just about
appearance.”

Which seems to indicate that she believes either, Irish IQ rates were at risk due to inbreeding or that there is a racial component to IQ which Ireland can benefit from due to migration. Both views are very weird things to say and not backed up by science.

posting this here rather than politics cafe as its more about the genetics thing than FG.

Find more posts tagged with

hail hitler

blonde moment

demented old bat

Quick Links

Comments

sbsquarepants

Satriale wrote: »

I predict an inbox full of pms in your near future... :pac:

P.M.S

You forgot the full stops.
How dare you call me beautiful you sexist pig, I'm not a merely a thing for your enjoyment!:D

One eyed Jack

“You can even see the better-looking and taller children now as a result of the Celtic Tiger years. I think it’s a good thing to keep our IQs up there; it’s not just about appearance.”

Is this woman on the right planet at all? Does she even realise her use of the phrase Celtic tiger is a link to the origins of our genetically diverse population and an indication of how mobile we always have been? The Celts were originally from Central Europe!

A mere handful of immigrants from Eastern Europe, Asia or Africa doesn't change the genetic pool of a population in the blink of an eye so to speak, like what, ten years? Her comments are as assinine as the idiot young one in her constituency who talks about 'beautiful mocha babies' :rolleyes:

The deputy for Dublin South, warned of the dangers of reducing the diversity of the population’s genetic stock during a Dáil debate on the new requirement to register father’s names on children’s birth certificates.

“It is unacceptable that even as recently as last year, 2,675 children were born and registered without a father’s name on their birth certificate. I presume the number is roughly the same every year,” she said.

Ahh, utter shìte talk really, no polite way to say that.

Ms Mitchell said if fathers remained living in the same area over a number of years and had more children it was quite likely two of those children might meet without being aware of their shared parentage.

“[This] raises the possibility of relationships outside the permitted degree and certainly outside what would be wise. As a small island country we should be expanding our gene pool, not reducing it,” she said.

Irish people haven't done half bad as a nation where most people married within their own local community for centuries, plenty of genetic diversity there already, unless Ms. Mitchell has an issue with Celtic traits like ginger haired people? Doesn't seem to have done Ed Sheeran any harm, and Irish models are celebrated and in high demand in the fashion world for their red hair and pale skin looks! I think it's actually the reverse of the inward mobility Ms. Mitchell was talking about.

Contacted by The Irish Times about her comments , Ms Mitchell said she believed that the “mobilty of races” had had a positive impact on Ireland.

The poor woman has some upwardly mobile ideas alright, but as for racial mobility, I honestly don't think she has a clue what she's talking about. Perhaps she should have a word with her party colleague Michael Noonan and ask him for his opinions on children, specifically third children, as he quite famously seems to have issues with them and all!

These are the sort of clangers that make me laugh, as bad as Mary O' Rourke and her praise for "my staff have worked like blacks the last couple of weeks..."

*gasps of horror*, *tumbleweed* :pac:

Wibbs

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Is this woman on the right planet at all? Does she even realise her use of the phrase Celtic tiger is a link to the origins of our genetically diverse population and an indication of how mobile we always have been? The Celts were originally from Central Europe!

Slight problem there. We're not Celts. As for their origins, they're hard enough to pin down. The Classical writers had the Keltoi living in all sorts of places beyond their borders, north, east in gaul and iberia. In any event the Irish aren't Celts, neither are the Scots or Welsh. Celtic cultural influences reached us alright, but it seems their genetics didn't. Any DNA in the Irish population that has any links to central Europe of the Celts, is of a much more ancient origin if present at all.

Oh and we're not Basques from Northern Spain either(though links are stronger). The English aren't Saxon(or precious few are), the Basques it turns out aren't particularly ancient genetically even though their language is very old. It's all sorts of confusing and not so neat for that largely late 19th century fashion for somewhat invented culture and belonging.

One eyed Jack

Wibbs wrote: »

Slight problem there. We're not Celts. As for their origins, they're hard enough to pin down. The Classical writers had the Keltoi living in all sorts of places beyond their borders, north, east in gaul and iberia. In any event the Irish aren't Celts, neither are the Scots or Welsh. Celtic cultural influences reached us alright, but it seems their genetics didn't. Any DNA in the Irish population that has any links to central Europe of the Celts, is of a much more ancient origin if present at all.

Oh and we're not Basques from Northern Spain either(though links are stronger). The English aren't Saxon(or precious few are), the Basques it turns out aren't particularly ancient genetically even though their language is very old. It's all sorts of confusing and not so neat for that largely late 19th century fashion for somewhat invented culture and belonging.

No I know we're not Celts, but my point was more that the use of the term Celtic', 'Celtic tiger', was a link to their influence on our genetic diversity.

Now you mention the mobility of other "tribes"(?), I'm reminded how growing up and learning history my old man used lament the fact that the Romans never came to Ireland, given their influence in terms of engineering and infrastructure on the rest of Europe!

(actually just googling it now and there seems to be some controversy over whether they did or they didn't!

http://www.historyireland.com/pre-norman-history/hibernia-romana-ireland-the-roman-empire/ )

RobertKK

Maybe we should have better breeding programs for humans, like there is in the cattle breeding where genomics is used to pick the best bulls for insemination and the genomics of the female cattle can be determined for certain traits..
You could breed humans for higher intelligence, better work ethic, better health, better creativity, less prone to addiction...

Olivia Mitchell is advocating hybrid vigour which is also used in cattle breeding as you get a stronger animal with better health and a more diverse gene pool which brings many natural advantages.

Fact is a lot of farm animals are better bred due to the use of science than humans are.
Coming from a science perspective rather than taking things like love into account.

conorhal

RobertKK wrote: »

Maybe we should have better breeding programs for humans, like there is in the cattle breeding where genomics is used to pick the best bulls for insemination and the genomics of the female cattle can be determined for certain traits..
You could breed humans for higher intelligence, better work ethic, better health, better creativity, less prone to addiction...

Olivia Mitchell is advocating hybrid vigour which is also used in cattle breeding as you get a stronger animal with better health and a more diverse gene pool which brings many natural advantages.

Fact is a lot of farm animals are better bred due to the use of science than humans are.
Coming from a science perspective rather than taking things like love into account.

I've seen GATTACA. Down that route lies facism, same as it did the last time we gave it a go.

Oh, and we're not effin' cattle BTW.

Uncle Ruckus

Kind of racist comment. Actually its a very racist comment. She's basically saying Irish people are physically and intellectually inferior to other races. Oh and she threw in a bit of heightism for bad measure.

reprazant

Half the treads in AH are about how foreigners are better looking that Irish yet a politician says something similar and you have the same people foaming at the mouth.

Ranchu

biko wrote: »

Inbredness is a problem for Iceland and Greenland and such places, not for Ireland. Particularly not with so many Brits moving over here to live and work. Think there is well over 100.000 Brits here.

She's from Offaly though. How many Brits have moved there?

Manach

So a liberal minister begins to spout out nonsense about "expanding gene pools" and will likely be given a pass on this behaviour as the usual PC lobbying groups perceive she is one of theirs.

RobYourBuilder

Uncle Ruckus wrote: »

Oh and she threw in a bit of heightism for bad measure.

If you ironed her out she would be ten feet tall.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Manach wrote: »

So a liberal minister begins to spout out nonsense about "expanding gene pools" and will likely be given a pass on this behaviour as the usual PC lobbying groups perceive she is one of theirs.

We don't have any liberal ministers in Ireland.

RDM_83 again

Manach wrote: »

So a liberal minister begins to spout out nonsense about "expanding gene pools" and will likely be given a pass on this behaviour as the usual PC lobbying groups perceive she is one of theirs.

And by posters who would normally jump on any hint of racism, the thinking behind this statement is seriously weird, its actually taking 19th century eugenics and flipping on its head. And this isn't some internet blogger or random taxi driver she's a veteran td in the party of government.

Seanachai

RobertKK wrote: »

Maybe we should have better breeding programs for humans, like there is in the cattle breeding where genomics is used to pick the best bulls for insemination and the genomics of the female cattle can be determined for certain traits..
You could breed humans for higher intelligence, better work ethic, better health, better creativity, less prone to addiction...

Olivia Mitchell is advocating hybrid vigour which is also used in cattle breeding as you get a stronger animal with better health and a more diverse gene pool which brings many natural advantages.

Fact is a lot of farm animals are better bred due to the use of science than humans are.
Coming from a science perspective rather than taking things like love into account.

I think you'd like George Bernard Shaw's writings so,

http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Biology/Eugenics.htm

diomed

Way to go Fianna Gael.
Take the spotlight off Gerry Adams as he denies he ever heard, saw, or did anything ever.

the dark phantom

Ranchu wrote: »

She's from Offaly though. How many Brits have moved there?

Well Doh !! The first English plantations were placed there..

Nodin

Manach wrote: »

So a liberal minister begins to spout out nonsense about "expanding gene pools" and will likely be given a pass on this behaviour as the usual PC lobbying groups perceive she is one of theirs.

She's not one of mine.

If you read the full article it comes across more as sheer snobbery than anything else. Typical blueshirt.

Seanachai

One eyed Jack wrote: »

No I know we're not Celts, but my point was more that the use of the term Celtic', 'Celtic tiger', was a link to their influence on our genetic diversity.

Now you mention the mobility of other "tribes"(?), I'm reminded how growing up and learning history my old man used lament the fact that the Romans never came to Ireland, given their influence in terms of engineering and infrastructure on the rest of Europe!

(actually just googling it now and there seems to be some controversy over whether they did or they didn't!

http://www.historyireland.com/pre-norman-history/hibernia-romana-ireland-the-roman-empire/ )

There is evidence that there was some form of roads before the Romans in Ireland and the UK and they just expanded on them. Some of them were made of wood!. They may also have been trading on a limited scale with some of the Irish. If we had chariots they must have some form of straight tracks at least to travel on.

The One Doctor

RobertKK wrote: »

Maybe we should have better breeding programs for humans, like there is in the cattle breeding where genomics is used to pick the best bulls for insemination and the genomics of the female cattle can be determined for certain traits..
You could breed humans for higher intelligence, better work ethic, better health, better creativity, less prone to addiction...

Olivia Mitchell is advocating hybrid vigour which is also used in cattle breeding as you get a stronger animal with better health and a more diverse gene pool which brings many natural advantages.

Fact is a lot of farm animals are better bred due to the use of science than humans are.
Coming from a science perspective rather than taking things like love into account.

Did you shorten your username from RobertKKK?

Here's the problem with your theories: We're not farm animals.

Jesus H.

Armchair Nazis seem to be on the rise.

RobertKK

It is a wonder in science they test things on mammals that are intended for human use.
We have a lot in common with other mammals, which includes farm animals.
I am not advocating breeding programs for humans, however there is a case that could be made for women who want to use donated sperm to have a child, that the genomics of the donor influence the decision if the person is a suitable donor.

I said hybrid vigour brought advantages, yet I was referred to as RobertKKK, which was strange.
Hybrid Vigour would be something like breeding a human of lets say African origin with someone of lets say Irish origin. The resultant child would gain from the genetic diversity. Genetically superior to the parents. I don't think the Nazis would like...
Science seems to go over the heads of some people.

kneemos

reprazant wrote: »

Half the treads in AH are about how foreigners are better looking that Irish yet a politician says something similar and you have the same people foaming at the mouth.

That's an easy one...politicians trump immigrants.

Wompa1

conorhal wrote: »

Except she's wrong, couldn't be more wrong in her libtarded eugenical understanding of genetic diversity. If you have a pool of 4 million people you have a massive pool of genetic diversity and people that fail to understand that, probably belong writing tiresome op-ed column’s for the Times because they wouldn't be left near a science or education brief.
Clearly Mitchell buys into the 19th Century Punch magazine caricature of the Irish as simian, potato munching drunks in need of a good injection of ‘superior DNA’ and the paternal guiding hand of a colonial master. It's nice to see that the Blueshirts have outgrown their fondness eugenics and facisism.
I'd love to hear her suggest that people in Guinea or Korea need a good injection of immigrant blood so they can be smarter, taller and less black or slanty eyed. Silly cow.
What next? Will she be telling sobbing parents in the departures lounge to cheer up, their kids aren't being shunted out of the country in increesing numbers, they're just adding to the genetic diversity of Canada and Australia! Though by the sounds of it Mitchell probably believes that we'll be dragging them down.

This BS from Mitchell really serves to underline what a contemptuous and traitorous political class we serve. Time to kick them out

Do you reckon the famine would have any impact? Just an educated guess from crap I've read about it. Usually entire generations and families were wiped out. If there was no food source for the family, they died. Except for those who left the country... Which you'd think would mean that many of the survivors were either directly or indirectly related.

It seems like we've got a wide variety of illnesses, many which are not spread throughout Europe or other continents at the rate that it's seen in Ireland. e.g. Hemochromatosis which is genetic has a much higher rate in Ireland per capita than the likes of the US. It's speculated that it originated in Ireland and spread as people emigrated...but then that's all just ****e that I've read. Don't know anything for sure

Wibbs

RobertKK wrote: »

I said hybrid vigour brought advantages, yet I was referred to as RobertKKK, which was strange.
Hybrid Vigour would be something like breeding a human of lets say African origin with someone of lets say Irish origin. The resultant child would gain from the genetic diversity. Genetically superior to the parents. I don't think the Nazis would like...
Science seems to go over the heads of some people.

Hybrid vigour is only in play with sub species of animals. Humans are the same species with relatively little diversity compared to many species*. In the past we did get it on with other extinct subspecies of humans, but it seems it was a double edged sword. With Neandertal blood non Africans seem to have gotten enhanced immune systems in some areas of the DNA, on the other hand such "hybrids" had diminished fertility in male offspring.

Plus if you "cross" to populations it's a coin toos as to what results you may get. Yes you could get kids with the "best of both" or you could have kids with the worst, or an average. EG An African chap might bring sickle cell anemia to his kids, which is of no benefit to someone living outside an area where malaria is endemic. His Irish girlfriend may bring a higher chance of spinabifida and so on.

* you could argue that within the species of modern humans there are some broad sub sub species in different populations with a lot of overlap. A stance I would be behind TBH. There is quite the diff between a Swede, a Pgymy and an Inuit, both in local adaptations and a good bit of genetic heritage. Still I wouldn't be so sure of hybrid vigour.

Billy86

Manach wrote: »

So a liberal minister begins to spout out nonsense about "expanding gene pools" and will likely be given a pass on this behaviour as the usual PC lobbying groups perceive she is one of theirs.

Actually the backlash from some people about what she said is pretty much textbook "political correctness". It's kind of funny to see people who condemn political correctness over and over when it is non-Irish people being discussed, or who try to use it almost as a curse word or insult over things that have nothing to do with political correctness, take a completely different stance now. :pac:

Doesn't stop what she said from being downright stupid, though. If an Irish person has kids with another Irish person, good for them! If an Irish person has kids with a non Irish person, good for them!

RobertKK

Wibbs wrote: »

Hybrid vigour is only in play with sub species of animals. Humans are the same species with relatively little diversity compared to many species*. In the past we did get it on with other extinct subspecies of humans, but it seems it was a double edged sword. With Neandertal blood non Africans seem to have gotten enhanced immune systems in some areas of the DNA, on the other hand such "hybrids" had diminished fertility in male offspring.

Plus if you "cross" to populations it's a coin toos as to what results you may get. Yes you could get kids with the "best of both" or you could have kids with the worst, or an average. EG An African chap might bring sickle cell anemia to his kids, which is of no benefit to someone living outside an area where malaria is endemic. His Irish girlfriend may bring a higher chance of spinabifida and so on.

* you could argue that within the species of modern humans there are some broad sub sub species in different populations with a lot of overlap. A stance I would be behind TBH. There is quite the diff between a Swede, a Pgymy and an Inuit, both in local adaptations and a good bit of genetic heritage. Still I wouldn't be so sure of hybrid vigour.

Good post.
But we know different races have different advantages, we can see in various athletes that there are regional genetic advantages like Ethiopian/Kenyan runners over long distances or people of West African extraction who have a genetic advantage in running short distances incredibly fast.
There is a lot of overlap in most species, and we would share a lot of similar DNA to other species, which is why we can pick up certain diseases from different mammals to our self.
I am not a geneticist to be 100% on this so I won't pretend to be one, I just know what I know in regards to other species of mammals, where it was found to be an economic advantage to cross breed within the species for hybrid vigour.

But as I stated at the start of my post, you did a good post, found it thought provoking and informative.

RDM_83 again

Billy86 wrote: »

Actually the backlash from some people about what she said is pretty much textbook "political correctness". It's kind of funny to see people who condemn political correctness over and over when it is non-Irish people being discussed, or who try to use it almost as a curse word or insult over things that have nothing to do with political correctness, take a completely different stance now. :pac:

Doesn't stop what she said from being downright stupid, though. If an Irish person has kids with another Irish person, good for them! If an Irish person has kids with a non Irish person, good for them!

Whatever about the looks thing I can see her thoughts on that, i might not agree with her I think dark hair and pale skin looks savage personally, but its not that a big issue really. (though I don't see it flying the other way around)
She references IQ though and thats a really fcuking sinister mindset, I might not agree with some of the overly Right On stuff on boards but surely how you can see equating race or ethnicity to IQ is not what we want in our members of government.

ps biology rule of 5's
50 breeding population negates major inbreeding
500 negates genetic drift

_Kaiser_

Personally speaking, I'd take an Irish girl every time myself. We have some great looking "every day" women in this country - and most of them can hold a decent conversation, don't take themselves too seriously and can have a bit of craic as well.

I've worked in several multinationals over the years and went out with girls from various places but when it comes to things like cultural nuances, language, sense of humor, interests etc the Irish girls win every time

crockholm

I Think her comments were more Clueless in attempting to compliment immigrants/non Irish ancestry than being genuinely offensive to Irish people-a bit of a "some of my best friends are black (the housemaid)" kind of statement.

I really do hope that it is brought up again when she's looking for the vote,que all the "mis-spoke" "taken out of context" horseshyte.

lanos

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Perhaps she should have a word with her party colleague Michael Noonan and ask him for his opinions on children, specifically third children, as he quite famously seems to have issues with them and all!

Michael Noonan has no problem with 3rd children. He simply removed the bonus rate of children's allowance and the result was that 3rd children are now treated the same as 1st and 2nd children. it was a simple budget cost cutting measure
Michael martin thought he was very clever saying that Michael Noonan may have been bullied by a 3rd child.
it was a mildly funny opposition point scoring opportunity but not clever enough to be repeated here

Putinovsky

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Personally speaking, I'd take an Irish girl every time myself. We have some great looking "every day" women in this country - and most of them can hold a decent conversation, don't take themselves too seriously and can have a bit of craic as well.

I've worked in several multinationals over the years and went out with girls from various places but when it comes to things like cultural nuances, language, sense of humor, interests etc the Irish girls win every time

Just can't agree with the bolded. I think Irish women are quite behind on culture nuances and interests when it comes to other nations such as mainland europe and eastern europe. Same with interests, Irish women (like Irish men) seem to revolve mainly around getting drunk whereas take a trip any day to go hiking or a nature park and you'll hear mainly Polish people out being active.

'good looking every day women' = plain janes
'dont take themselves too seriously' = sloppy or gob****es
'can have a bit of craic' = can drink like a fish