By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Delaware students can now choose their own race (Yes, RACE!) under new regulations.

MDMAlliance said:
CosmicSex said:

Look.  We don't have enough difference among us to be different biological races. I think that's where your argument falls through.  We can all have sex with any colored person and you are only mixing minor genetic details. You still produce a kid and that child isn't another biological race.  The fact that we can all cross breed would defeat the purpose of this entire thread... oh wait.

I'm trying to figure out what you're trying to say here.  My argument is that humans do not have a biological race.  The only race that humans have are made up, a social construct.

I think I thought thought you were arguing something different.   My apologies.  But I will say that your abbreviated comments are much clearer and to the point.  It is self evident that the race is a social construct.  I will share an interesting story later.



Around the Network

At this point I'm just like, f*ck it, let them do their stupid sh*t, it's a trend, they'll realize one day that they are acting like a bunch of morons.



I am a Dolphin man.. in Delaware



 

You're telling me I can't be black because of the colour of my skin?
That's just racist! =)



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

MDMAlliance said:
fatslob-:O said:

Nope, the fact that we can track geographic "populations" means that there is a biological basis for race ... 

If race is to be defined with respect to allele frequencies in combination to the geographic population then race DOES exist!

If I didn't know any better, I'd suspect you're trolling me.

I really feel for you. I don´t know how you had the power to keep on replying...

You are right!

There could be biological human races, but there isn´t. Differences are bigger between individuals than different populations and what people consider as "races" don´t really add up if allele frequencies etc. are being look at. If the differences between human populations would become greater the new forming human races would not be "black", "white" and "asian", they would be something else that doesn´t really match with the social definition of race.

The point is that there are differences between people, but the social race definition doesn´t even match to those differences. From a biological view we humans are too similar to have spesific races (for example like ones that dogs or some other species have).



Around the Network
John2290 said:
CosmicSex said:
You guys still afraid some dark skin kid is going to identify with something you don't agree with? I think you have to question yourself for caring so much... Race is not even a real thing as their is only one human race. Genetics are interchangeable, you can mix any people of opposite sex and make a new human being... and therefore you are obsessed with skin color in most cases.

This fact that we have to pick a 'race' in the beginning is the real problem. Also Black Panther was a great movie.

Way to put words in everyones mouth. The people who don't see no sense in this is that it ignores reality and allows peoples beliefs to take reign over the reality of the matter and other people are forced to play along in their fantasy. It can easily be abused for say a white student to identify as black and get into college with a far higher probability than students who worked harder him or her. People like you who label everyone racist just because they disagree with a racial issue are like sheep, you are playing into exactly the role the government wants you to. Also, what the fuck does Black Panther have to do with any of this? Are you just looking to provoke and cause an argument for the sake of it or something? You are born the way you are born and just because you say otherwise doesn't change the reality of it, it's not racist to call a white man who identifies as black, as he is, a white man. 

People like me.  Okay buddy.  I already posted a comment explaining how this makes sense for a friend of mine who is mixed race.  I will let him know that you have unilaterally decided that he is a system abuser.  While I understand that their are nuts out there,  I don't buy the 'the sky is falling' act.  While I do disagree with your assessment, I didn't call you a racist.  I have no problem identify them, and although I didn't think you were one at first, you are getting there buddy by bringing up something no one accused you of.  Thats a sign.

I saw the Black Panther, liked it and posted about it.  You are now afraid that I was trying to provoke you?  Stop being stupid.   I said it because it was on my mind and I'm sorry I didn't get your permission first.  Fortunately, I'm not a scared little bitch and I know I can think without you defining my thoughts.  Its a really good movie and I want to see it again.  I might start a post on it.

My friend was born the way he was born and I responded with him in mind.  Get the fuck off my case and engage me in a way that shows that you actually read my comment.  I made the mistake yesterday by not reading everyone's posts and doing a rough guess on their last posts.  I apologized for that.  But not you.  Black Panther was a great movie.  

I also insinuated that people my entire life have tried to tell me that I am Asian/Indian when I call myself black.   I am not going to let them tell me what I am.   You aren't that powerful.  You can't control the way I see myself.  However, if I did identify at Indian, I should have the right to mark that as my race.  For most people it is cut and dry.  In reality, there are 7 billion people.  Those makeups can't be encapsulated into a simple 5 race survey in the first place so granting people the option to define themselves (as long as they are not flat out lying) is more than okay.

I get your 'concern', I just think its over blown.  Everyone isn't out to get you.  There isn't a huge group of white men out there trying to take advantage of this.  Fears inside of your head can warp your perspective.  Stop tying to create victims out of this.



Aeolus451 said:
sundin13 said:

There is virtually nothing in the way of criteria to naturally delineate the borders between geographical races. Definitions are vague and lacking a true taxonomic backbone allowing classification. As such, it seems like depending on who you ask, there may be three geographical races or nine geographical races or any amount in between.

This lends it the appearance of an artificial distinction, or in other words, a social construct.

A social construct is basically something made up and people just go by it. Geographical race just describes something tangible that exists regardless of the name or belief in it.

Humans have existed and lived on different continents, they adapted to their separate environments resulting in geographical races with biological differences. Again, races have different health issues and advantages from each other. Meds affect certain races differently on average. That doesn't sound like a social construct to me.

Geographical raceA distinct population that is isolated in a particular area from other populations of a species,[9] and consistently distinguishable from the others,[9] e.g. morphology (or even only genetically[3]). Geographic races are allopatric.[7]

So where do the borders of geographical race lie? That is the problem with this definition. The breaking points are not clear, populations are blended and racial groups largely overlap (especially in a globalized world). As such, could you posit that the Finns are a different race from the French? They are isolated by distance and they have distinctions from each other, be it in morphology or genetic characteristics, so they fit the characteristics. The Finnish also have different health issues and advantages when compared to the French. 

The problem is that these "races" are not natural breaks, these are human groupings. It is humanity's way of jamming a square peg into a round hole. To simply describe a complex phenomenon. That is what humans do. 

fatslob-:O said: 
MDMAlliance said: 

Are you reading that line wrong?  "Most human genetic VARIATION is found within populations" meaning that there's more variation within the populations.  The point of that line is to state that despite the fact of those variations, it's possible to trace ancestry to locations with enough data.  That's not really all that surprising.

Nope, the fact that we can track geographic "populations" means that there is a biological basis for race ... 

If race is to be defined with respect to allele frequencies in combination to the geographic population then race DOES exist!

I ask you too. If we can successfully trace ancestry between France and Finnland, does that mean the French and the Finnish are of different races?



Here is a study about finnish people: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0003519

Here are few things that can be found from it:

"once again illustrating how most of the human genetic variation is found between individuals instead of populations"

" In fact, the differences between Eastern and Western Finns were of the same magnitude as the differences between Swedes and British, and much stronger than those between British and Germans. Thus, relevant units of genetic variation often do not correspond to preconceived political, linguistic or even cultural borders."

"Our results warn against a priori assumptions of homogeneity among Finns and other seemingly isolated populations."



"I ask you too. If we can successfully trace ancestry between France and Finnland, does that mean the French and the Finnish are of different races?"

Maybe finnish people can be divided into two races and german/british/french can all be part of the same race ;D



PSintend0 said:
Here is a study about finnish people: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0003519

Here are few things that can be found from it:

"once again illustrating how most of the human genetic variation is found between individuals instead of populations"

" In fact, the differences between Eastern and Western Finns were of the same magnitude as the differences between Swedes and British, and much stronger than those between British and Germans. Thus, relevant units of genetic variation often do not correspond to preconceived political, linguistic or even cultural borders."

"Our results warn against a priori assumptions of homogeneity among Finns and other seemingly isolated populations."

Could you state what argument you are trying to support utilizing that study?

By my reading, it echoes the same trends that are found within more geographically distinct populations. More variation between individuals than populations. Often, two individuals within separate populations are more similar than two individuals within the same populations. And to support the distinction between Finns and other populations, there is a " strong population structure within Finland, and a small but significant differentiation between all the populations." 

PSintend0 said: 
"I ask you too. If we can successfully trace ancestry between France and Finnland, does that mean the French and the Finnish are of different races?"

Maybe finnish people can be divided into two races and german/british/french can all be part of the same race ;D

 

Sounds good to me. Now, we only need to break apart every other groups which I estimate will leave our number of "geographical races" at around 500 (give or take). Now, the SAT may have to be made a bit larger to include all of those options, but I'm sure it will all be worth it in the end.