I have to wonder just how many of these so-called "race scientists" have actually observed/engaged in livestock breeding, especially performance horses (horses are what I know, not other species). Even when you breed the best to the best, it's still a crapshoot--and it's usually focused on physical athleticism, physical traits rather than mental (some of those top performance bloodlines also are...well, they have mental issues, big time).
Plus performance breeders engage in inbreeding--the old joke amongst equestrians is "if it works, it's line breeding, if it doesn't, it's inbreeding." The concentration of bloodlines in certain horse breeds for specific desirable traits also brings out a host of problematic genetic syndromes. Talk to any equestrian, especially in the Quarter Horse world, about the HYPP syndrome (traced to the stallion Impressive, who was heavily used in halter show horses), HERDA (particularly awful because it leads to skin sluffing off and is tied to top cowhorse performance bloodlines), or PSSM syndrome (across many breeds). Or issues with small hooves and hoof diseases in top performance lines. Or certain Thoroughbred stallions with dangerous temperaments who threw that temperament on their descendants.
The concept of "race" focuses on phenotypes and...as any equestrian will tell you, phenotype doesn't mean the brains go along with the body. Which these so-called "race scientists" magically seem to overlook. Add in the degree to which nurture can affect performance in later life--also a concept that "race scientists" overlook--and eugenics is simply bunkum.
oh that's so interesting! i remember reading about leland stanford getting into eugenics *because* of his experiences with horse-breeding in malcolm harris's palo alto, though it's been a while since i've read it and i may be misremembering
in any case, i agree that eugenics is complete nonsense, and yet we're seeing it back in a pretty major way among some on the right. i suspect it'll only become more overt and more prevalent in the coming years
I love your Substack SO much. This is such quality writing and you have a brilliant mind. Thank you.
thank YOU!!! <3 it truly means so much
I have to wonder just how many of these so-called "race scientists" have actually observed/engaged in livestock breeding, especially performance horses (horses are what I know, not other species). Even when you breed the best to the best, it's still a crapshoot--and it's usually focused on physical athleticism, physical traits rather than mental (some of those top performance bloodlines also are...well, they have mental issues, big time).
Plus performance breeders engage in inbreeding--the old joke amongst equestrians is "if it works, it's line breeding, if it doesn't, it's inbreeding." The concentration of bloodlines in certain horse breeds for specific desirable traits also brings out a host of problematic genetic syndromes. Talk to any equestrian, especially in the Quarter Horse world, about the HYPP syndrome (traced to the stallion Impressive, who was heavily used in halter show horses), HERDA (particularly awful because it leads to skin sluffing off and is tied to top cowhorse performance bloodlines), or PSSM syndrome (across many breeds). Or issues with small hooves and hoof diseases in top performance lines. Or certain Thoroughbred stallions with dangerous temperaments who threw that temperament on their descendants.
The concept of "race" focuses on phenotypes and...as any equestrian will tell you, phenotype doesn't mean the brains go along with the body. Which these so-called "race scientists" magically seem to overlook. Add in the degree to which nurture can affect performance in later life--also a concept that "race scientists" overlook--and eugenics is simply bunkum.
oh that's so interesting! i remember reading about leland stanford getting into eugenics *because* of his experiences with horse-breeding in malcolm harris's palo alto, though it's been a while since i've read it and i may be misremembering
in any case, i agree that eugenics is complete nonsense, and yet we're seeing it back in a pretty major way among some on the right. i suspect it'll only become more overt and more prevalent in the coming years
I wonder if any of the DEI opponents understand that DEI is not affirmative action.