Why I Wont Ever Be A Pro Fighter

I really want to fight, I believe I that I could gain a lot of money and great life experiences.

I went to my local gym, asking about training and fighting. They told me that it was £60 an hour for a trainer and they don't set up fights.

I've heard famous fighters speaking about how they paid hundreds of dollars to have their first fight. You definitely won't lose then... If you do, will you pay more money again?

I'm told that this is not a poor man's sport. Yet, I know that there are ways to get a fight path for free. It's just that I can't see myself finding one. Conor McGregor says "the power's in visualisation". Well, I can't see any way into the game, bar an underground fight club situation that involves a fight to get in the door and an abrupt stabbing.

Also, I'm not an alcoholic - I hate the stuff. So, I need other methods of inebriation. Weed, namely. That's illegal. How can I go through a war without getting mashup afterwards. Besides, in a physical context, weed is the opposite of a Performance-Enhancing Drug.

Of course I'm fine having my head smashed in. That realisation should come before any willingness to fight.

It's just a joke that the only way in seems to be years of slavery under a poor and greedy fighter that you call master, who will set you free when you lose - and you're paying for it. That's messed up.

Without 'White' People We Wouldnt Have These Things (Syc)

These are most/all of the things that moronic racists, even unknowing ones (most people), believe that we would all be without if ‘white’ people didn’t exist.

                                    Agree Y/N

Chemistry                                                       Advanced Math / Physics + Algorithms

Civilisation                                                     Photography

Processed Food                                               Peace

Toilet paper                                                     Psychology

Electromagnetism                                           International Events

Technology + Nano iterations (Fridges, Planes, Microwaves, Washing Machines, Internet. Etc.)

Democracy                                                      Space (in general) ;)

The more reasonable deduction is that all of these areas of understanding and other things above are inevitable developments. Their experimental discovery and progressive utilisation is a result of an industrial-academic culture being undisturbed and henceforth allowed to evolve. This academic / intellectual culture is one that can be employed to great benefit all over the world, that’s why it seems like such a gift.

The fact that ‘whites’ were the ‘leading’ bearers of technological development between the 15^th and 20^th centuries does not mean that they were the only ones who would have been able to do what was done. Besides, they weren’t. People of all nationalities contributed to the impressive technological and scientific developments of the past few centuries. Honestly, the highly applauded work of the great mathematicians, such as Euler, Euclid, Gauss, Archimedes, Fermat and Newton, could have been (and was) done by anyone with enough interest, resources, focus and self-belief. Ramanujan (1887) is surely proof enough.

Involved in this equation of person-based development were (and are) things other than a fantastical superiority gene in ‘whites’... too many to mention here. Any ‘people type’ that was able to industrialise their society, those without wars and without carelessness for academia, were working on advanced scientific conjecturing of some sort. This is proven by artifacts of many eras.

The argument can be made that ‘whites’ were the catalyst for increased development, but it would have to account for cultural, political and ecological differences which would self-defeat the ulterior argument of intrinsic superiority. 

Another argument seems more revealing; The development of anything logical is incremental and exponential until completion so - at later points in time, the rate of growth grows to dwarf previous rates, there is no way to argue against the citing that ‘whites’ came 'on top' at a good time in the road of human understanding. 

Documented discoveries, in an old-historical context, should not be relied on to determine the true time of discovery, just the documented time. Of course, our records are better today. Yet, there were many times before, which we know nothing of. So, how can we judge.

I’ll end there… Get on top of things. Understand what is untold. Like they did...

Are We All Confused About Beauty? A Clarification

Annoyed about the forgotten wanker Japanese guy and his "a specific race of women are the least attractive" science detour, racist imagery in music videos such as "no light, no light" and “I am a proud coon, proud coon, proud coon” plus a general moonwalk back in race relations since Obama's symbolic inauguration, I feel to put some self-clarifications on such matters up here on the sheep-share interweb.

I previously wrote a super long article titled "Racism, Media and Beauty" which got deleted when my phone got wet, it had pretty much everything I might say on those said subjects so I'm not sure whether or not this simplified and incomplete replacement will have to be finished up in the comments section (not a chance, with subjects like this one) but here goes...

Let's get this out of the way first off - 'Attraction' is different from 'Practical Choice of Companionship'.

I am not doing this out of hate (as many others would), I do this because I love women, their beautiful minds and tender hearts. Each and every one deserves to be comfortable with themselves. I intensely dislike the hating of others but even more, I hate self-loathing. My whole existence is geared against that disease. Of course, society is a crude system, opposition to community, in which there are always organic dynamics and, as a result, groups of disadvantage.