It's sad that this kind of racism gets reported in this half-approving "sparks debate..." kind of way, instead of simply reported for what it is. No serious social theorist would be stupid/racist enough to explain the massive over-representation of non-European peoples of so many DIFFERENT genetic backgrounds (Maori, Australian aboriginal, native American, African American, etc., etc.) in their European invaders' prisons as due to "warrior genes". This kind of pseudo-science has been produced for centuries to justify racist policies, and I suppose it will continue to be produced so long as the media lap it up so uncritically. Even if the ridiculous idea of a gene for violence (as though violence were a kind of chemical secretion rather than a complex social and political activity) were psychologically and socially plausible (what happened in Nazi Germany: a sudden outbreak of "warrior DNA"?), by far the most obvious candidate for "warrior genes" would be the race that has invaded and conquered most of the rest of the world over hundreds of bloody years of conquest, slavery and rape of resources. For a member of that race to ascribe "warrior genes" to one of the peoples they have caged in their prisons, and for journalists (probably also European) to lap it up as "science", is just sad.