Changing Races , Changing Religions?

[Shadow Wolf]

Sex change is not genetic.

The problem with that thinking is there are many variants to XY/XX. An AIS woman, for example, has XY chromosomes, but she appears and behaves as any other female. It even requires certain tests to be conducted to discover this condition. If those tests are not performed, she is just as normal and regular as any other woman in appearance and no one would ever consider, for a moment, that she has a Y chromosome and is "genetically a man."

 

[JoStories]

''White'', and ''black'', are colors, lol. Are fair Africans, ''white"? You aren't using labels that mean anything besides to a segment of the population that is wildly one ''color'', hence, it has very little actual meaning in reality. Are all fairish people ''white''?
Btw, genetic markers do not necessarily match a color, neither do more obvious things like physical morphology. I think you mean ''european'', but are using a term 'white'. doesn't work that way in reality

You're right of course. Mixing of races has led to a melding of all these genetics. I hope, someday, that we will all just be called 'humans' and race won't mean a darned thing. Maybe then racism will become as extinct as the doodo bird.

 

[JoStories]

Sex change is not genetic. I would likely find that your nephew has xx chromosomes unless he had some chromosomal abnormality. This is in fact, much easier to tell than "race" as skin tone consists of at least 30 different genes on different chromosomes, that doesn't even touch on other phenotypic attributes associated with race. Bottom line is that it would be very hard to categorize "race" by looking at one's DNA. (Not impossible mind you, but it would be likely that you would come out with a very different racial categorization than the one's different societies have)

Yes, my nephew has XX but honestly, does it really matter all that much? I mean, if he is not comfortable as a woman and doesn't identify as a woman, what difference does it make to anyone other than him and his wife?

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Dude if I could change my race I would have been Japanese 10 years ago.

 

[Curious George]

Yes, my nephew has XX but honestly, does it really matter all that much? I mean, if he is not comfortable as a woman and doesn't identify as a woman, what difference does it make to anyone other than him and his wife?

No difference, but were you not just making statements about race and "blood?" What difference does that make to anyone?

 

[Curious George]

The problem with that thinking is there are many variants to XY/XX. An AIS woman, for example, has XY chromosomes, but she appears and behaves as any other female. It even requires certain tests to be conducted to discover this condition. If those tests are not performed, she is just as normal and regular as any other woman in appearance and no one would ever consider, for a moment, that she has a Y chromosome and is "genetically a man."

Sex change is not genetic...when you change your sex you do not change your genes...nothing, absolutely nothing you have said demonstrates any "problem" with this thinking or how this statement is even slightly erroneous.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Sex change is not genetic...when you change your sex you do not change your genes...nothing, absolutely nothing you have said demonstrates any "problem" with this thinking or how this statement is even slightly erroneous.

And that does not, at all, address the variants of XX/XY, or AIS women, who have XY chromosomes.

 

[Curious George]

And that does not, at all, address the variants of XX/XY, or AIS women, who have XY chromosomes.

No, but the original quote which you quoted spoke of chromosomal abnormalities as well. Which did address those as a side note. The point in the discussion was about the process of sex change. It is not genetic, I am glad you have acknowledged your mistake and concluded that there is no "problem" with that. I did not address variants of xx/xy nor did I address the variations of sex expression as complicated by environmental factors. I am well aware of this. However, the logical point I was making did not require the addressing of these factors...are we in a field? Is that why you are seeing strawmen?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Biologically, everyone, no matter where they are from, is modern homo sapiens sapien, and everyone has the genetic capacity to be as black as the darkest Africans alive.

Race isn't species. Of course we're the same species. Just as all domesticated dogs are the same species but you wouldn't say they're the same breed, would you? A Poodle is obviously not a Great Dane and neither is obviously a Chihuahua.

Now, domesticated dogs have more of a variation within their species due to controlled breeding, however the basic principle still applies. As with dogs and cats, there's physiological and genetic variation within the human species, between various populations due to environmental factors.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I am glad you have acknowledged your mistake and concluded that there is no "problem" with that.

I never stated such a thing

However, the logical point I was making did not require the addressing of these factors...are we in a field? Is that why you are seeing strawmen?

I was bringing up a hole in your logic, in that a sex change isn't a chromosome change, but there are those in which the question of chromosomes is not called into question. In other words, what do chromosomes matter when they are not so "clear-cut" in nature?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Race isn't species. Of course we're the same species. Just as all domesticated dogs are the same species but you wouldn't say they're the same breed, would you? A Poodle is obviously not a Great Dane and neither is obviously a Chihuahua.

You word was "race." Of course their are variances in phenotypes based on location, but that is to be expected from natural selection.
Beyond that, everything else of significance is entirely socially defined.

 

[JoStories]

No difference, but were you not just making statements about race and "blood?" What difference does that make to anyone?

The thread kind of got derailed and I was just making a comment about that topic. And. Ow I answered your comment which was also off topic. I think we can now let this go or at least I will.

 

[JoStories]

You word was "race." Of course their are variances in phenotypes based on location, but that is to be expected from natural selection.
Beyond that, everything else of significance is entirely socially defined.

I don't think it's that simple shadow. It think biology and genetics play a role as well but to a much less degree now as many years ago.

 

[Sundance]

You can change one, the other you can't.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

You word was "race." Of course their are variances in phenotypes based on location, but that is to be expected from natural selection.
Beyond that, everything else of significance is entirely socially defined.

Yes, I said race, not species. You're the one who brought up us all being Homo sapiens sapiens, which is irrelevent. We do know that there's physiological differences between different populations and that results in some general differences in ability and perhaps even behavior. We know that physiology does have an impact on ability and behavior (such as that Kenyan tribe, the Kalenjin, that dominates much of the world's long distance running competitions). The only real question that remains is how much of an impact it actually has and how much of it is determined by other things.

But racial differences are politically incorrect to admit to existing, especially if you're a scientist. For example:

"The Role Of Genetics

Scientists and sports gurus have proposed all sorts of explanations over the years forKalenjin prowess on the track: from their high-starch diet, to the altitude, to socioeconomics.

All those factors are important, but none of them explain why this particular tribe is so dominant. That left Epstein when he was writing his book exploring a more controversial line of inquiry: Is there something genetically different about the Kalenjin that makes them superior runners?

i
Kenya's Wilson Kipsang set a world marathon record when he won the Berlin Marathon on Sept. 29 in 2 hours, 3 minutes and 23 seconds. He is Kalenjin, a group that has produced many of the world's best distance runners.

John MacDougall/AFP/Getty Images
Asking that question almost convinced Epstein to back out of his book contract. He realized he'd have to address sensitive questions of ethnic and racial differences. Academics told him they had evidence of genetic advantage but wouldn't share their research with him for fear they'd lose their jobs. "And these were professors with tenure," he says.

But some scientists did talk to him; and they explained one aspect of innate biology that clearly helps Kalenjin: the shape of their bodies.

Kalenjin have particularly thin ankles and calves, a body build common to Nilotic tribes who grow up near the equator. Epstein says this is particularly important in running because your leg is like a pendulum. The more weight you have farther away from your center of gravity, the more difficult it is to swing.

If you take a runner and put 8 pounds of weight around his waist, he can still run reasonably well. But if you put those same 8 pounds in the form of two 4-pound weights around his ankles, that will take much more energy and slow him down considerably.

Epstein says body type confers its greatest advantage among elite athletes, where other differences — in training, in aerobic capacity — are minimal. In fact, he says if you were to go to the Olympic starting line and measure everyone's ankles and calves before the race, you could predict, statistically, who's likely to win."

I mean, seriously. That "blank slate" crap has been disproved decades ago. But certain political ideologies are founded upon it, so they must keep living in la-la land to keep their failed ideology going. It's gotten so stupid that professors feel that they can't talk about a Kenyan tribe having thinner ankles and calves? Wtf?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I don't think it's that simple shadow. It think biology and genetics play a role as well but to a much less degree now as many years ago.

It is that simple. Biologically there are varying phenotypes, which is to be expected.
But "race," as we have come to know it, is entirely dependent upon culture.

All those factors are important, but none of them explain why this particular tribe is so dominant. That left Epstein when he was writing his book exploring a more controversial line of inquiry: Is there something genetically different about the Kalenjin that makes them superior runners?

Those would be different phenotypes. Different phenotypes can allow for different things, but in the context of common discourse it's irrelevant. Being taller has some advantages, but it's really not that big of a deal to most people. Different foot sizes can make certain things harder or easier, but hardly anyone ever asks someone what their shoe size is. Certain body types are better for dancing and certain voices sound better on TV. But how often do we actually really care about such things?

 

[Curious George]

I never stated such a thing

I was bringing up a hole in your logic, in that a sex change isn't a chromosome change, but there are those in which the question of chromosomes is not called into question. In other words, what do chromosomes matter when they are not so "clear-cut" in nature?

Lol, so let me get this right...

Someone says that one cannot change race because they could still test blood.

I suggest that the same is true of sex and qualify this with excepting chromosomal abnormalities.

You say the problem with saying sex changes do not involve chromosomes changes (which they do not) is that it doesn't account for chromosomal and environmental abnormalities?

Shadow, reread and try again...then perhaps you will admit that there is no "problem" with my statement.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Lol, so let me get this right...

Someone says that one cannot change race because they could still test blood.

I suggest that the same is true of sex and qualify this with excepting chromosomal abnormalities.

You say the problem with saying sex changes do not involve chromosomes changes (which they do not) is that it doesn't account for chromosomal and environmental abnormalities?

Shadow, reread and try again...then perhaps you will admit that there is no "problem" with my statement.

Sex and Gender are no the same thing. And as far as "male female" sex goes it still is legal with what your chromosomes are. For example a man who gets a sex change into a woman cannot legally go into the Olympics as a woman.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

It is that simple. Biologically there are varying phenotypes, which is to be expected.
But "race," as we have come to know it, is entirely dependent upon culture.

Those would be different phenotypes. Different phenotypes can allow for different things, but in the context of common discourse it's irrelevant. Being taller has some advantages, but it's really not that big of a deal to most people. Different foot sizes can make certain things harder or easier, but hardly anyone ever asks someone what their shoe size is. Certain body types are better for dancing and certain voices sound better on TV. But how often do we actually really care about such things?

The question is whether race is biological or purely a social construction. If it's just a social construction, then the odd woman in the OP can call herself whatever she wants. But if it's biological, then we have good reason to denounce her charade as delusional.

Now, my point is that physical differences result in differences of ability and behavior, such as with the Kenyan runners. And that's just one phyiological difference. All I'm saying is that race, or whatever word you prefer, exists. We're not all the same. There are differences between populations.

 

[JoStories]

It is that simple. Biologically there are varying phenotypes, which is to be expected.
But "race," as we have come to know it, is entirely dependent upon culture.

Those would be different phenotypes. Different phenotypes can allow for different things, but in the context of common discourse it's irrelevant. Being taller has some advantages, but it's really not that big of a deal to most people. Different foot sizes can make certain things harder or easier, but hardly anyone ever asks someone what their shoe size is. Certain body types are better for dancing and certain voices sound better on TV. But how often do we actually really care about such things?

I continue to disagree. There a significant differences in health issues related to race. That is not cultural by any means. One can learn culture through upbringing. But if someone adopts an African child and that someone is white. The child will,still be African. They may learn the culture of the white but African traits will still run true.