Take the blinders off. Notice things. Think. :D

lol Naaaw ur cool bro. Welcome back. Unless this was posted earlier than I thought so it would be...welcome...front? ;-) Anyway I'm already going back and forth with the one guy and that can get confusing enough as certain parts of it show. lol. And too much repetition would clog things up so...I hope you don't mind if I sit this one out and leave you to read or not read stuff here according to your discretion. :D

What the problem is the culture, not the actual physical race, why do you think Asians who are taught to try and are expected be the best in every way are the most prosperous race in America? And in contrast, people who adopt the culture of the ghetto don't do as well? And this is statistically validated. This isn't going to make everyone think, this makes you look like a racist.

I can think of one legitimate definition of racism and it doesn't apply because there's no race based hatred. The word "racist" is mostly used as a club to beat ppl down when it's convenient for the aggrieved to do so. And how do cultural norms come about? Utterly apart from genetics? I think not. And as a white guy I'm not gonna throw a hissy fit at the very thought of Asians having a particular genetic advantage. Or Jews for that matter. It just is what it is. For the longest time I wished I was taller and I'm not short! But finally I had the sense to figure I'd bump my head more while still acknowledging that being taller would have some advantages along with challenges. And I certainly didn't indicate that I thought *everyone* would have an intelligent thoughtful response nor necessarily a majority. But if even one person etc etc :D

To suggest that someone has a genetic advantage is to suggest superiority, which is racism, I don't like the "You're racist" card either, but to completely disarm it because some people abuse it is not okay, racism is the idea that one race is superior in comparison to the other. If you believe that certain races have higher IQ's or are more athletic which gives them an advantage by default, you are racist.

Love the last part especially. The NBA is waaaaaay black because white folks dramatically lost interest in playing in the NBA then? Wow. smh Having a superior ability in math or athletics doesn't make one a superior person. To notice things and be realistic and rational does not make one racist even if ppl at times react to such in an unfortunate way.

YESSS!!! It is a cultural thing, I've lived in the American ghetto and I can tell you for a fact that Basketball is marketed as an African American. Racial determinism is one of the core aspects of racism which you are proposing. If I say "Arabs have different mannerism, they are more aggressive and violent." doesn't that suggested that Arabs are inferior? Racial determinism is racist, period.

And people are only as good as their qualities if I look at a person who is intelligent and is contributing to society, they are obviously superior to someone who is lazy and doesn't contribute. BTW, I love how you are ok with racial determinism, but when someone says that positive qualities make certain people better than others is where you draw the line.

I don't believe in "racial determinism". I just acknowledge that genetics have a signicant impact on how ppl are. And you could market basketball to the Asian community all you want that's not going to make anyone jump higher or run faster. There may well bemore Asian players as a result because there are those who can play at that level but do you think all else being equal Asians would have the same proportional representation in the NBA as blacks? Ifso please oh pleasr oh please tell that to every black person you know and at least s few

...least a few random strangers. [accidentally hit post comment button too soon]

In the ghetto, people are groomed to be athletes, to say that doesn't affect it is stupid. What you do determines what you become, in the same way, if an Asian studies medicine they become a doctor.

I never said that stuff isn't a factor.

So you admit, that culture shapes the individual, not race? Because this would explain why a lot more black people are in the NBA as you stated, it's because a disproportionate amount of black people live in the ghetto, which means that a disproportionate amount of black people will be in the NBA.

I said *a* factor. Obviously there has to be interest in basketball and culture comes into play there. But culture doesn't make ppl able to jump higher, run fasterb be taller etc. That's genetic. What kind of kook goes into denial about that?

It's genetics, but confuse genetics with racial physical differences. Christ almighty, show me some scientific proof, not something that is arbitrary like the NBA.

So you have to live in the ghetto to be in the nba? Sounds logical :/

It is because it is their culture, that is what they do, they practice Basketball, and become NBA players. You completely leave out the reasoning behind my argument to try to make it look ridiculous, which is dishonest.

My argument -

Basketball is advertised and played more in the ghetto, so people who live in the ghetto, ( the majority of which is black), are going to play and practice more. Thus the black people make up the majority of the NBA.

Mate, if you believe that people's race influences their character attributes you are a racial determinist, your original post and the fact that you are arguing that black people are in the NBA because black people are more athletic, shows that I don't care what you think you are your actions say different which is more important than words. Look, dude, if someone tells you to become an athlete all your life and you practice (in the ghetto) obviously that's what you will do, but if someone tells you to become a doctor your whole life and you study medicine, obviously you will become a doctor. (Asians) The reason people from the "hood" often become athletes is that they are groomed to be that.

And I don't care that you say that you are not for racial determinism if you believe that racial differences determine character traits which based on your arguments you do, then your actions speak louder than you, you are a racial determinist.

I rejrct that label. I am a racial realist. Realism is good in regard to life in general. Race need not be excludrd from realism.

There is nothing realistic about your views on race they've been debunked many years ago, you know what we call this type of stuff? Pseudoscience used to justify colonialism, which has been debunked to show that the colonists were a bunch of elitist assholes, who just wanted to control people.

So realism is denying that genetics largely plays into black dominance in the NBA?! I want you to tell that to ppl so they can laugh. And calling racism on anyone who disagrees? You sound like a closedminded echo for PC talking points.

Fallacy, ad-hominem, you called me close minded when I rightful call you a racist, you don't have to be hateful to be racist, you just have to believe in what you believe in, I'm just calling a spade a spade, mate.

Do you find this racist?

No, because that's a fact, but racial traits, like black people = more athletic, is racist. And this is supported by the definition of racism - the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
noun: racism. I'm just calling a spade a spade if the author of the meme believes this he is a racist and supports pseudoscience.

P.S Was that supposed to sting? Because I'm as pale and European as someone can get.

By the way would you point to an unrepentant serial child molesrer of whatever race and tell the world that the two of you are equal in every possible way?

What does that have to do with anything? Obviously, a non-pedophile is not equal to a pedophile, because of their actions.(Which is what I argue for, your race doesn't determine your character, your actions do) It doesn't prove your point this post is irrelevant

And by that, I mean - pedophile < non-pedophile

Answer put in wrong place cuz i'm tech lame.

[I know this is in the wrong place] Then you deny universal human equality. Good for you. You admit to having an advantage by not being at the low moral level of the molester? You are superior to him. Some ppl can't even manage that much and I was checking to see if you were one of them. Ok i know i the this in the wrong spot but for tech reasons as in me not knowing how to do something i'll leave it here.

It's completely ok to say that someone is a worst person according to what they do.
So if I support the idea that two babies of two different races are equal when they are born, I must also support that people who act criminally are equal to the people who don't? That's absurd.

How in the world did you get that out of what I wrote??? I said elsewhere I was checking if you were a certain way in your thinking and saw you were not. I put something in the wrong place but you can find it. Maybe that will clarify.

Then pardon me, my mistake (so you were just asking me if I had a ridiculous viewpoint?)

Yes. But that's okay. In a back and forth like this it happens and it doesn't help when I somehow miss part of what you said and post things in the wrong spot to boot. lol :D

I must have missed that last part or I wouldn't have bothered with the child molester question so my bad. Can aggression in animals have a strong genetic component? Why not in humans too?

I can't help your strange unfortunate inability to seperate having a superior advantageous ability partly based on genetics and being a better person. I wonder if the idea of an evil genius fries your mind. So a and b are fully of the saIQ race and are in fact fraternal twins. Due to genetics a has a much higher IQ than b. He is also a notorious scoundrel while b is one of the best ppl you could ever hope to meet. And so real life goes at times. But you can't see IQ as neutral when it comes to being a better or worse person. It may be that best person I will ever know in this world is a black person with a low IQ whose biological parent have a very high IQs. And the worst person may be a white with a super high IQ.

Fallacy, that's not what I'm saying at all if you are a genius at birth which happens across all races, (by the way, I thought we were talking about averages, not geniouses) then that doesn't mean you are a good person automatically. But to say that white people are intellectually superior is racist, no matter how you spin it.

You brought up geniuses not me and I responded. If one group as an objective fact has a higher average IQ then facts must be racist to you. You treat acknowledging reality as a vice. On what basis do you believe that all races have pretty much the same average IQ ie no notable difference between any two? The idea of Asians having a higher average IQ than whites doesn't upset me. I don't feel the need to insist that it could not possibly be so. But to you it's a problem. I have this whole time treated IQ difference as neutral as to who is a better person. You have not whatever you might be saying now.

Ok when you say geniuses perhaps you were using it to refer to high IQ but one can have a high IQ and not be inthe genius range.

*sigh* why do i keep clicking the wrong "reply"?

No, it's just data if we ask ourselves, "We have the data, but what does it mean?" you say "Racial differences make black people dumber", I say "Maybe the culture they surround themselves in makes them lose interest in academia." Is there a difference in racial IQ's, maybe, does that mean that it directly correlates to physical differences in races. Absolutely not, especially when there is evidence to support that black people who don't grow up in the ghetto are extremely successful, this is an issue of culture, not race.

Ok when you say geniuses perhaps you were using it to refer to high IQ but one can have a high IQ and not be inthe genius range.

You know all races having geniuses does nothing to disprove average IQ differences right? Just checking.

the *same* race and are in fact...

Oh, and culture is shaped by your surroundings, not your race. This has been confirmed by most historians, professors, and is one of the first things you learn in a History class.

Perhaps in the modern West that is to be expected in the classroom but are you confident that no professor promulgates falsehoods? Shut up and believe your teachers or else! lol It might be nicey nicey PC to act like every race would have had the same kinds of achievements etc if they had all along had the same environment. But it's just plain silly baseless presumption. By the way is it bigotry to say the tall employee has an advantage in regard to stocking the higher shelves and the shorter employee has an advantage in regard to stocking the lower shelves? And are all races more or less equally tall? Differences! Advantages! Aaaaaaugh! Run away! Run away from the killer bigotry rabbit! :D

YOU SAID -

Perhaps in the modern West that is to be expected in the classroom but are you confident that no professor promulgates falsehoods? Shut up and believe your teachers or else! lol It might be nicey nicey PC to act like every race would have had the same kinds of achievements etc if they had all along had the same environment.

MY RESPONSE - I'm not saying that academia is always right, but teachers do have authority in their field, the reason some look like idiots when they talk about politics they don't know shit, but it's absurd to say that I shouldn't trust my history teacher in matters of history. If you don't respect academia, then why do you use, and trust the inventions that come out of it. And according to my AP Geo class, culture is based on surroundings. I'm not going to have an Elephant God to worship if I don't live in India that type of structure is culture and surrounding areas that influence it.

YOU SAID -

By the way is it bigotry to say the tall employee has an advantage in regard to stocking the higher shelves and the shorter employee has an advantage in regard to stocking the lower shelves? And are all races more or less equally tall? Differences! Advantages! Aaaaaaugh! Run away! Run away from the killer bigotry rabbit! :D

MY RESPONSE -

Your original argument was about race, not provable physical characteristics that are common in every race. And when looking at attributes, you have to look possibilities, right? So if I say, "Asians are smarter, and Black people are more athletic." I could easily go on to say "I argue that because intelligence is a lasting useful trait unlike strength, Asians are superior." Racial character traits have been used to justify racism, so they are racist.

P.S Having fun mocking me there I bet you wouldn't say what you preach in real life lol, I dare you to go up to a black person and tell them that you're smarter because you are white. I'm calling a spade a spade, I'm not preventing you from speaking I am criticizing your speech which is valid. You are a racist mate. (Also I'm not into PC, you can't use their stupidy, to mask yours.)

Well, if I may, I understood it a bit differently ...

The point, as I see it, is not in abusing the differences between races in those mentioned areas but rather to simply aknowledge them as they are. Today we are obsest with fearing anthropological honesty, just to protect ourselves from hypothetic nazism or fascism evolving out of it.

Isn't the point of a civilized society (or one of the points), to have honest discussions about such things while having VALUES to protect them from just such racist actions?

There are physical differences between people such as skull shape, eye shape, hair, lips, and of course melanin amounts, but that has nothing to do with intellectualism or athleticism. Minor differences, that don't mean anything shouldn't be taken to an extreme and racist degree.

Black Chess Prodigy

http://atlantablackstar.com/2013/04/08/diamond-shakoor12-chess-prodigy-national-champion/

Asian Martial Artist
https://www.google.com/search?q=Bruce+Lee&tbm=isch&imgil=2U6tQL_v_hs0-M%253A%253BvDd8fduQa09xlM%253Bhttps%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.brucelee.com%25252F&source=iu&pf=m&fir=2U6tQL_v_hs0-M%253A%252CvDd8fduQa09xlM%252C_&usg=__3ynD_dPV2l0WtCY-2nPVXNKv_WQ%3D&biw=1440&bih=826&ved=0ahUKEwipp6qB7LnVAhVGlFQKHUnyAvUQyjcI1AE&ei=D3OCWenjC8ao0gLJ5IuoDw#imgrc=2U6tQL_v_hs0-M:

Spartans warriors that are known for their speed strength etc. These are pictures of the movie but the warriors and war were real.

https://www.google.com/search?biw=1440&bih=826&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=300&oq=300&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i67k1l3j0.19207.19207.0.19573.1.1.0.0.0.0.157.157.0j1.1.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..0.1.157.XutCQFjWE9M#imgrc=jCxvKnbsF5WDfM:

All of your racial determined qualities are completely destroyed in minutes, it only took me three to find these examples. If you want to be truthful and honest, concede.

Then why, my good sir, have many different races happened to evolve due to colonial "intervention"?
I don't know about the skull size or the melanin ... Perhaps they have nothing to do with psychology or physiology. But the fact is, that many third-world countries "suffer" lower average IQ rates. Why is that? Just due to society and arrested developement? Why is it arrested? Are you sure colonialism is the only one to blame, as you would most likely argue? Are you sure there isn't anything genetic or biological in the background?

I'm not saying, you can't succed if you come from a different race. Race is not the only factor, ofcourse. But - have you ever thought about how western society contributed to these people having the right circumstances for succes? Dare I say there have been inter-racial marriages that contributed to the gene pool as well?

I don't want people of other races murdered or in concentration camps or whatever. All I am suggesting is that there might be more to it than what we are "allowed" to discuss in todays society. Maybe there are other variables at play, that we do not allow ourselves to explore or proove. And we also have a value system, so that if we stick by it, we do not stray from a humane approach to the matter.

I really don't want to be "racist" about this matter. But if this makes me a racist, then screw it, I am.

The reason people in less developed countries have lower IQ's is that they don't have the resources to exist, there have been records showing people from less developed countries moving here, and they do extremely well in all fields of academia. As for the other points, I don't see how they matter or prove anything.

What do inter racials have to do with anything? Why does what we give other races matter in terms of racial given attributes? What do all of your questions do or change about the conversation?

P.S You don't have to argue for the lynching of other races to be racist, racism is the belief that certain races are better than others, surely if there are differences in character traits, they are not evened out, as even the original poster makes that distinction by saying that the world is not egalitarian, so if nature is not equal and egalitarian, by your viewpoints there must be a superior race. See how your arguments directly correlate to racism.

No one of any race is automatically better than anyone of a different race. I've never indicated otherwise. But differences between individuals remain when the consideration of groups including races comes into play. Real proven distinctions aren't chucked out of reality when large groups are being compared. No one is talking about mistreating ppl. It's a matter of intellectual integrity and honesty. And I'll ask you again: if genetics play a strong part in animal aggressiveness why couldn't it also be so in humans?

Yes, they do play a role in ALL people, not just one race alone, White, Hispanic, Black, and all colors of the rainbow. But genetically, certain people are more likely to experience anger issues because of a chemical imbalance that is genetic. But regardless of if you are Black or White, if you have anger issues, everyone turns red. XD

And when it comes to integrity, scientific studies found that the only differences between races were visual nothing more. And while YOU don't want to hurt, people have and will continue to use this thesis to defend racism and justify it.

You are confident that physical differences do not account in any signicant way for the difference in proportional representation in the NBA between blacks and non-blacks. Which is utterly absurd. Race is a matter of human genetics and genetics have more of an impact than you will admit. What can I do? I reject your use of the word racist against me. Now what in the world does a black chess prodigy prove? No one said NO black ppl have great intellectual prowess in various areas. We're talking about averages. And if whites and Asians had the exact same opportunites and interest in martial arts Asians may well prove to be markedly superior. What does that have to do with basketball? Minor differencrs? Height difference is a minor difference in basketball? Fast twitch muscles are irrelevant? Spartans in the NBA? A small group of white ppl long ago proves what? If the typical egalitarian is as far gone blind bizarro world as you seem to be then somehow I missed how bad things are now.

What my arguments try to prove is that people can be great in both areas, regardless of race, and these people are normal people, they are not prodigies or super-human, such as in my example of Bruce Lee, they studied and perfected their arts and passions and have in turn become great at what they do.

The definition of racism is the belief that one race is better than the other, knowing this you contradict yourself you say that certain people have a skill and a disadvantage based on race, therefore, as you state in the NBA about black people being there because they are more athletic, therefore by your criteria they must be intellectually disadvantaged (making the racial difference balanced according to you) But in the original post you that the world is not equal or egalitarian, so if the world is not equal there must be a race with less negative qualities or more positive qualities that would make it superior, at least by the conflicting logic you follow. Thus, this world-view is racist because it results in racism.

P.S We are not just talking about the NBA, when you talk about the world by saying it is not egalitarian, every example in the world showing otherwise is valid.

Frankly you are babbling. By egalitarian I'm talking about the denial of real diferences between ppl and their significance. If individuals can be superior and inferior in various ways what are groups made entitely of? Individuals. Do all groups do equally well any more than all individuals? Should actual history be trumped by PC propaganda? Call me racist all you want it's still bull.

You are arguing about the opposite of individuality, if people have racial character attributes, that doesn't make them an individual, that makes them part of a collective - If I say "All black people are athletic" then that is grouping them in, are you arguing for racial traits or acquired traits, because I am saying traits are acquired. Actual history is filled with people of your caliber trying to justify colonialism by using pseudoscience, and even if the SJW put out propaganda none one believes them. As far as I know, the only real differences between the races are in appearance show me scientific evidence to the contrary.

[Responding to something here because it didn't have a reply option] You want to homogenize ppl in a seemingly desperate way and I want to acknowledge and accept differences. I embrace the rainbow more than you. :D Your wildly laughable take on why blacks dominate the NBA (one could throw in the NFL to a somewhat lesser degree) is so discrediting and telling. *sigh* I mean you hear the movie title White Men Can't Jump and take it too literally as you list white olympic high jumpers and a white NBA slam dunk contest winner. Then try to start a protest outside the theater against the raaaacist film kifvit were nrw and stillbin theatets). Dude do you seriously think whitey doan wanna ball enuf to the point where he's as rare as he is now in the league? What are all those white ppl doing watching and attending the games if white culture is *that* much less into hoops than black culture? It doesn't add up. But don't let that stop you.

The NBA is completely arbitrary, white people dominate other sports (hockey and fencing being just two examples), so it's not that black people are physically superior because they, should dominate in every sport then, because the example you provided is arbitrary, you need to provide scientific evidence for your claim. You are taking satire "White men can't jump" and using it as an argument, are you insane?!? And the idea that you embrace "the rainbow", the fact that something exists and you realize it is embracing it, what you need to decide to do is how to interpret race, (just outward differences which are supported by science), or your view (which was used to support racism, and is categorized under pseudoscience today, people have dealt with your thesis, and it is the one that's laughable, my idea is that someone's culture and choices influence their character), if this was so laughable and idiotic, then why did you agree with me? That's like saying I'm insane for riding a motorcycle and then proceed to ride along with me.

Serious question.
Do you believe in evolution?
Do you believe in African American slavery?

Do you believe in evolution? It's a very strong theory, so although I am still examining it, the theory is pretty solid, so yeah for the moment.

Do you believe in African American slavery? Yes, why is that relevant to the debate?

It's a well known fact slave owners bred the strongest males with the strongest females. Over generations do you not believe Africans developed higher degrees of strength, agility, etc because of breeding? Therefore their genetic makeup was enhanced?

Humans aren't born strong, they acquire those abilities, and according to evolution, people can't inherit acquired traits. So if a strong black man, isn't going to lead to a strong black son.

You don't believe strength is genetic?
Lol. To say that is to deny science.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/genes-sports-talent/

You believe in transgenerism too don't you loo

Did you read your source? This article you sent me is unsure of itself, admits multiple contradictions, and disagrees with what its findings are and how to use them. With the multiple contradictions, that the article admits, it couldn't even pass on as a scientific theory, much less as scientific precedent,

"It’s a question of their motivation. This is a tool, not the tool," he says of consumers. "If they're relying on the genetic test as the only performance indicator to tell whether they will do good or bad in sports, they're going to be disappointed, because it's not for that purpose."

"The results do tell you whether you have this protein in your muscle. That is clear. We have no idea if it contributes to performing at anything but an elite level. Even there, there are contradictions. We have very little information that it affects kids' performance."

"It's very similar to gene therapy in medicine. It hasn’t been successful in medicine and never studied in sports performance. It’s a real ethical dark zone, because there are medical concerns even pursuing it and no evidence that it would really work. Anti-doping societies have come out against it. It is definitely a concern."

Data is data, interpreting data is totally different, my interpretation is what the article admits - this proves nothing, and the research is incomplete.

But let's say for the sake of argument that it is reliable, (which it's not), the original argument is genetic differences among races, how can you say that not every race has the genes in the article? You can't, but you need to prove it to prove your original point.

P.S - On your African American selective breeding argument I respond by saying, that even if it did affect anything, (which it doesn't), humans breed selectively on their own, it has been happening since the beginning of time (for humans), every human wanted to mate with the most muscular or physically built of their kind, that's why men are attracted to women with big breast and women are attracted to tall men (height being a genetic trait). It has only stopped being that way in some countries of today.

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/campus-corner/article304422/Son-of-former-MU-star-Booker-isnt-afraid-of-dads-large-footsteps.html

Here's one of many.
Grab a science book printed be for the Obama presidency and learn about genetics and how they are passed on in families.
This pc culture will eventually drive you insane.

This is another case of you not reading - The article just says that the boy is following in his father's footsteps, not that his father's past offered him a spot. The boy has his own achievements that allowed colleges to look at his record and offer scholarships.

"Melvin, who was named to Missouri’s Intercollegiate Athletics Hall of Fame in 1999, is regarded as one of his alma mater’s all-time greats. A 6-foot-1 point guard, he averaged almost 14 points per game"

To say that the article you sent me proves anything, is deceptive and insulting, to not only me who feels like you are trying to deceive me, but to the young man who got a scholarship solely because of skill. You see an outcome, and you fill in a causation completely out of the blue. You're projecting with all of the articles you are using, your arguments are complete leaps of faith to defend them you would have to make many assumptions because your articles don't say your arguments are valid or even imply that they are.

Also, I have read many science books regardless of what administrations provide it as long as it's accurate. What does Obama have to do with it? Strength is an acquired trait it can't be passed down, inherited traits like height

P.S - I'm not P.C, how come whenever someone disagrees with a Trump supporter they are called P.C, it's just as bad Eddo1 when he called everyone he was arguing with a bigot and Islamophobe. (And yeah I called the original poster racist because he followed the dictionary definition of it. Calling a spade a spade.)

The article have you several possibilities.
So your saying an inherently strong family over generations is not passing on traits that make their offspring possibley genetically superior, given they actually tap into that trait. Youre denying science. Lol.
You have to think a little deeper I guess.
Why do you think high school freshman get full ride scholorahips in football, unproven, only on the basis that their father's were superior athletes. Because chances are of they tap into that superior genetic they will most likely be just as fast, strong, and a over all great athlete.

"The article have you several possibilities."

First, is this your only defense for your article? Second, the article admits contradictory data, so in the scientific world, it doesn't even qualify as a theory.

"So your saying an inherently strong family over generations is not passing on traits that make their offspring possibley genetically superior, given they actually tap into that trait. Youre denying science. Lol."

You are changing your whole entire argument, I said that acquired traits like strength can't be passed down like what you said about the "slave master breeding strong slaves to create strong slave children." If the trait is inherited like eye color then it will be passed down. But strength is an acquired trait, (you are making deceptive arguments, there is no such thing as an inherently strong person) I have yet to see a muscular baby, lol. (I mean this is 6th-grade science, I can't believe you are denying what even a 12-year-old knows as scientific fact, and then have the nerve to say that I am denying science.)

"Why do you think high school freshman get full ride scholorahips in football, unproven, only on the basis that their father's were superior athletes. Because chances are of they tap into that superior genetic they will most likely be just as fast, strong, and a over all great athlete."

Simple press coverage, this is the same question as "Why do the president's kids get free scholarships to college." Because it's good press coverage to say that "Oh the president sent his kids here." or "Oh LeBron James sent his kids here."

Show me an actual case where someone thought that the father's ability in a sport must be followed by the son, and therefore they should get a college degree automatically. That is the argument you're making, do you realize how insane that sounds?
I guess not, but I must be the insane one for saying that a person's surroundings affect their life, right?