I am surprised about the recent attention given to Dr Kanazawa's article on the physical (un)attractiveness of black women.
Dr Kanazawa's blog (http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/news/uk-13452699) should be ridiculed for what was excluded.
First, he failed to define "physical attractiveness". Second, his blog failed also to provide the racial criteria on which his perception was based on. Third, his grand generalisation does nothing but questions his academic qualifications. Fourth, he failed to acknowledge the impact of this flawed study on his black female students.
This attention seeking lecturer, possibly devoid of informed academic research sought a foolish and racist, not controversial topic to highlight his academic existent.
My view below highlights this lecturer's 'intelligence' as it were.
First, there is a saying that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder", a saying which, somehow eluded this supposedly 'clever' man.
Second, who are black women supposed to be "physically attractive" to? As humans, majority of us date people from our own race because we find them physically very attractive. For an academic from a great institution like the LSE to conclude otherwise or to see physical attraction from a particular race's view is unfortunate.
Third, if black women are so unattractive, why all the fuss and expenses by other races on lips and buttocks enlargement and the year round suntan - physical attributes that come natural to black (wo)men.
From his picture, it is obvious that Dr Kanazawa is not Caucasian, it would have been helpful if his article had included the physical attractiveness of his own race on the 'attractive/beauty' ladder.
Finally, Dr Kanazawa's supporters stance and London School of Economics' claim that academics are free to express their views albeit racist because it enables a healthy debate is unacceptable. While we all agree on freedom of expression, certain topics under the guise of academic freedom (in this case blatant racism) should not be tolerated. I wondered what would have happened if Dr Kanazawa had written an article condemning Islam or suggesting that holocaust did not happen. I believe that the London School of Economics' would have relieved him from his post and his so called supporters would have distanced himself.
Possibly, London School of Economics' indifference is because this article is about the black race - a race that is often seen and used as the world's foot mat. This man must be released of his position. When questions arose about Gaddafi's son's time at LSE, the official responsible for his admission quickly resigned. I believe that to save the institution from further embarrassment, this bigoted individual must be SACKED. Controversy, like stress, is sometimes good. In the case of Dr Kanazawa's article, his attempt at attracting controversy is not healthy. This man is plainly racist!!!. Dr Kanazawa and LSE should part company for the good of the institution.
