What Race are You?

[The Sum of Awe]

I agree that Sum's intention probably wasn't to be offensive or racist; however, his choice is labels was a bad choice. His refusal to actually deal with the issues that have appeared in this thread, I think is even a worst choice.

To me, it seems that Sum is purposely remaining ignorant on this subject though. And at the same time, supporting the misused terms, which have now taken upon racist or derogatory definitions. The same is happening in South Africa, and all it does is continue the vicious cycle of racism.

I'm not ignorant that these labels are used in racism, but you're not considering that they aren't only used in racism

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I'm not ignorant that these labels are used in racism, but you're not considering that they aren't only used in racism

But it is important to understand how the labels you have chosen are being used and why they were created in the first place. Negroid, Caucasoid and Mongoloid were created for anthropology studies when it was believed that man originated from three different sources and then migrated to different locations, overlapping and merging with members of the other groups. This theory has been modified over the years but the labels still get used by that particular scientific communty. However, these labels are not very useful in discussion racial differences today as the three groups are far to intermingled to still be used as distinctive categories.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'm not ignorant that these labels are used in racism, but you're not considering that they aren't only used in racism

Sum, why have you ignored my question (twice now) of which site you got these labels from?

 

[Sunstone]

As I understand it, according to the best science on this issue, race is not a legitimate category when applied to humans. That is, race does not make sense in light of genetic variations within humanity. I'll go with the science on this one.

 

[fallingblood]

I'm not ignorant that these labels are used in racism, but you're not considering that they aren't only used in racism

It is true that they may not be used only in regards to racism. However, that has been their primary use, especially the term mongoloid. It has come down now to primarily refer to those with down syndrome, or people of lesser intelligence.

Now, that may not be the intended use; however, words are only as good as the definitions and ideas that are attached to them. Whether or not it was used in a primarily inoffensive in the past really is not relevant today, when the terms have sunk to primarily offensive labels.

The labels really don't help now though. Even classifying individuals by skin color really is not helpful as at what point does one become white or black? Most consider me white, even though my skin complexion is just as dark as some Native Americans or Asians (which I have been mistaken for when I grew my hair out, which is black). Even some African Americans have fairly light skin complexions. So the question has to be asked, at what point does one become a certain color, or even race?

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

What is Race

Biological Construction

By . . ."biological race," I mean the view of race espoused by Judge Tucker, and still popular today, that there exist natural, physical divisions among humans that are hereditary, reflected in morphology, and roughly but correctly captured by terms like Black, White, and Asian (or Negroid, Caucasoid, and Mongoloid). Under this view, one's ancestors and epidermis ineluctably determine membership in a genetically defined racial group. The connection between human physiognomy and racial status is concrete; in Judge Tucker's words, every individual's race has been "stampt" by nature. . . .[D]espite the prevalent belief in biological races, overwhelming evidence proves that race is not biological. Biological races like Negroid and Caucasoid simply do not exist. [A]. . . newly popular [argument] among several scholars, [is] that races are wholly illusory, whether as a biological or social concept. Under this thinking, if there is no natural link between faces and races, then no connection exists.

There are no genetic characteristics possessed by all Blacks but not by non- Blacks; similarly, there is no gene or cluster of genes common to all Whites but not to non-Whites. One's race is not determined by a single gene or gene cluster, as is, for example, sickle cell anemia. Nor are races marked by important differences in gene frequencies, the rates of appearance of certain gene types. The data compiled by various scientists demonstrates, contrary to popular opinion, that intra-group differences exceed inter-group differences. That is, greater genetic variation exists within the populations typically labeled Black and White than between these populations. This finding refutes the supposition that racial divisions reflect fundamental genetic differences.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Sum, why have you ignored my question (twice now) of which site you got these labels from?

Finding the source will reply when

 

[Sunstone]

I think we should divide people into two races -- according to whether they have soft ear wax or hard ear wax. You know some people have soft ear wax. And some have hard ear wax. The softness or hardness of your ear wax depends on your genes. And ear wax is just as every bit as important as skin color. So let's admit there are two races, and be done with it!

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I think we should divide people into two races -- according to whether they have soft ear wax or hard ear wax. You know some people have soft ear wax. And some have hard ear wax. The softness or hardness of your ear wax depends on your genes. And ear wax is just as every bit as important as skin color. So let's admit there are two races, and be done with it!

What about those of mixed ear wax? If your father has hard wax and your mother has soft, you will have one ear of each. People with this condition will be persecuted endlessly unless we protect their wax, er, I mean rights.

 

[ChristineES]

I'm not ignorant that these labels are used in racism, but you're not considering that they aren't only used in racism

The terms you used are offensive to a lot of people. There are more modern and more acceptable terms to use. I know, as others do, that you did not mean to be offensive, but others won't be so understanding.

 

[uu_sage]

There is only race and that is humanity. My ethnic background is a Heinz 57 European (Italian, German, British, Dutch) with Cherokee. So I'm European and indigenous.

 

[garrydons]

What race label do you belong to?

Please if you're going to say "there is no race, just love" or something like that, keep it to yourself, you know what I'm talking about when I say race...

Why? Does race really matter? We are all one the eyes of God regardless of race But just the same I will answer your question. I am brown race and I ask why do you ask such a question?

 

[Kerr]

What race label do you belong to?

Please if you're going to say "there is no race, just love" or something like that, keep it to yourself, you know what I'm talking about when I say race...

Im white. And ignorant. So ignorant I cannot even spell my own race (cau-something) .

 

[Caladan]

Caucasian. European and North African.

 

[Kerr]

As I understand it, according to the best science on this issue, race is not a legitimate category when applied to humans. That is, race does not make sense in light of genetic variations within humanity. I'll go with the science on this one.

Yeah, I am with you on that. But I dont think the OP actually meant anything special about the term "race", just the skincolor. Or perhaps I am naive, lol.