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

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

PSintend0 on 23 February 2018

"In 1950, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) issued a statement asserting that all humans belong to the same species and that “race” is not a biological reality but a myth. This was a summary of the findings of an international panel of anthropologists, geneticists, sociologists, and psychologists."

"Recent studies have shown us that humans have been migrating since Homo sapiens evolved some 200,000 years ago. This migration has not been in one direction but had happened back and forth. Our genes have been mixing since we evolved, and our genetic structure looks more like a complex, intermixed trellis than a simple candelabra. "

"If races do not exist as a biological reality, why do so many people still believe that they do? In fact, even though biological races do not exist, the concept of race obviously is still a reality, as is racism. These are prevalent and persistent elements of our everyday lives and generally accepted aspects of our culture."

"Thus, the concept of human races is real. It is not a biological reality, however, but a cultural one. Race is not a part of our biology, but it is definitely a part of our culture. Race and racism are deeply ingrained in our history. "

http://www.newsweek.com/there-no-such-thing-race-283123

Nice to know that some of you have had such a great and modern education and I´m very sad to know that a few believe the very recent political correctness that biological races don´t exist. Scientists are all just paid actors that lie that the earth is round and spread other false news to confuse people. Its all just leftist political correctness agenda to gain unlimited power... ;D

 

edit: and yes I used google and not the library and didn´t make up stuff or just ramble random things. This isn´t 1940 anymore...

Last edited by PSintend0 - on 23 February 2018

Around the Network
d21lewis on 23 February 2018

My blood type is A Positive but lately, I've been feeling like a type O. The more I think about it, the more "O" I feel. I mean blood types are just created by man anyway.



ArchangelMadzz on 23 February 2018

How is this anything new? Don't we all fill in our forms with our details like that ourselves?

Damn 300 replies, you guys sure love getting mad..



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

ghost_of_fazz on 23 February 2018

Ahhh... The so-called "political correctness", many gamers' boogeyman and greatest fear. Because it's common knowledge that things like these will lead to communism and will end western civilization, right?



PSintend0 on 23 February 2018

I find it funny that some racists try to cling on to biological races, the word itself, cultural differences and everything they can to seperate people and don´t realize that they don´t really need any reason to treat others like poop. They can do it anyway if they want. Its just an excuse to justify hate and feel that you are better than others.

How many fall into it and how easily politicians use it to gain more power etc. is also funny, thou still not a good thing.

Do schools often gather that kind of information (race) and if so, how else would they do it? Not that its any of their business to do so in the first place.



Around the Network
Flilix on 23 February 2018
John2290 said:
Peh said:
How did this thread turned from school shooting to penguins?

Yeah, I was kinda hoping a mod would ask for people to steer the conversation back on track but it's kind of entertaining watch these people argue like they are polymats of the highest degree of genius in all these fields. Screw it, let them makes fools of themselves when it is so cringingly obvious they are consulting google before answering every reply.

Highest degree? All of this is simple high school stuff. In the whole discussion, nothing but very basic biology was mentioned.



PSintend0 on 23 February 2018
Flilix said:
John2290 said:

Yeah, I was kinda hoping a mod would ask for people to steer the conversation back on track but it's kind of entertaining watch these people argue like they are polymats of the highest degree of genius in all these fields. Screw it, let them makes fools of themselves when it is so cringingly obvious they are consulting google before answering every reply.

Highest degree? All of this is simple high school stuff. In the whole discussion, nothing but very basic biology was mentioned.

Yes. And its sad, but somehow still entertaining.

Reminds me of discussions about religion or evolution.

edit: race is closely connected to evolution (as races are populations that are already far on their way to becoming different species through evolution, but not yet there) so its no wonder it reminded me of that :P

Last edited by PSintend0 - on 23 February 2018

sundin13 on 23 February 2018
o_O.Q said:
sundin13 said:

That isn't really true. Race (in the human context) has always been an assumption that the underlying genetics would mirror certain phenotypic patterns. As our knowledge of genetics has grown, we have learned that this assumption was false, and as such, the scientific community has taken some steps forwards in the way we speak about race. Unfortunately, such concepts have become reified through use, which makes correcting errors in a broad context difficult. 

This is evidenced by the fact that the field of biology is not "phasing out the term race". The term still applies within other species, where genetics indicate races do exist. However, it is attempting to correct the record on the use of the term in relation to humans, where such a term is inaccurate.

That is how science works. New knowledge replaces old assumptions and we move forwards to assimilate this new knowledge into the existing knowledge base, and reformulating hypothesis based on these changes. The issue has nothing to do with political correctness, it is simply science working correctly, and those outside of said science throwing up their hands because they don't want their worldview disrupted. 

To conclude, I will first ask, why would it be harmful to move away from skin color based classification systems?

1) "Race (in the human context) has always been an assumption that the underlying genetics would mirror certain phenotypic patterns"

the phenotype is the physical expression of your genetics

so by definition there is a connection, it sounds like you are saying that there is no connection here

 

2) " The issue has nothing to do with political correctness, it is simply science working correctly"

the fact that you are denying that the differences i can clearly identify between black people and asian people is why i'm saying this is political correctness

to say that such differences are not biological but socially constructed is to be frank insane

to quote pi guy 

"Modern scholarship views racial categories as socially constructed"


3) "and those outside of said science throwing up their hands because they don't want their worldview disrupted. "

how would anything you posted disrupt my worldview? well despite my assumption on the state of the field of biology?

you haven't posted anything that shows that the characteristics we use to identify different human races are not biological in nature which is the crux of this issue

if you could prove that the differences are really not biological but social then yes that would be earth shattering

 

4) "To conclude, I will first ask, why would it be harmful to move away from skin color based classification systems?"

you have to rather naive to think that simply because you discard a word that people won't continue to behave in accordance with what they see

1) If I've explained it once, I've explained it 100 times. I am not saying that there is no connection, but instead, that phenotypic variation does not necessarily speak to similar variation in genes not controlling for that small subset of characteristics. 

2/3) No, I think that is just you for some reason refusing to understand a point that I've explained 100 times. I have never claimed that skin color is not a genetic trait, only that such small genetic variation is not sufficient to separate the species into distinct races. I don't know why this is so hard to understand. 

4) That is pretty much by definition, a non-argument, which does not address my question.



o_O.Q on 23 February 2018
PSintend0 said:
I find it funny that some racists try to cling on to biological races, the word itself, cultural differences and everything they can to seperate people and don´t realize that they don´t really need any reason to treat others like poop. They can do it anyway if they want. Its just an excuse to justify hate and feel that you are better than others.

How many fall into it and how easily politicians use it to gain more power etc. is also funny, thou still not a good thing.

Do schools often gather that kind of information (race) and if so, how else would they do it? Not that its any of their business to do so in the first place.

 

"don´t realize that they don´t really need any reason to treat others like poop. "

how does acknowledging that, for example, black people have a different appearance to white people equate to treating anyone like poop?

are you fucking serious?

 

"Its just an excuse to justify hate and feel that you are better than others."

can you quote the post where anybody said anything about hating a particular race or being better than a particular race?



o_O.Q on 23 February 2018
sundin13 said:
o_O.Q said:

1) "Race (in the human context) has always been an assumption that the underlying genetics would mirror certain phenotypic patterns"

the phenotype is the physical expression of your genetics

so by definition there is a connection, it sounds like you are saying that there is no connection here

 

2) " The issue has nothing to do with political correctness, it is simply science working correctly"

the fact that you are denying that the differences i can clearly identify between black people and asian people is why i'm saying this is political correctness

to say that such differences are not biological but socially constructed is to be frank insane

to quote pi guy 

"Modern scholarship views racial categories as socially constructed"


3) "and those outside of said science throwing up their hands because they don't want their worldview disrupted. "

how would anything you posted disrupt my worldview? well despite my assumption on the state of the field of biology?

you haven't posted anything that shows that the characteristics we use to identify different human races are not biological in nature which is the crux of this issue

if you could prove that the differences are really not biological but social then yes that would be earth shattering

 

4) "To conclude, I will first ask, why would it be harmful to move away from skin color based classification systems?"

you have to rather naive to think that simply because you discard a word that people won't continue to behave in accordance with what they see

1) If I've explained it once, I've explained it 100 times. I am not saying that there is no connection, but instead, that phenotypic variation does not necessarily speak to similar variation in genes not controlling for that small subset of characteristics. 

2/3) No, I think that is just you for some reason refusing to understand a point that I've explained 100 times. I have never claimed that skin color is not a genetic trait, only that such small genetic variation is not sufficient to separate the species into distinct races. I don't know why this is so hard to understand. 

4) That is pretty much by definition, a non-argument, which does not address my question.

"that phenotypic variation does not necessarily speak to similar variation in genes not controlling for that small subset of characteristics. "

well we can safely say that 99% of the time a black person has dark skin because of their genetic makeup, that's the point

and again that's one of the factors (all of which are biological) people take into consideration when identifying races

 

" I have never claimed that skin color is not a genetic trait, only that such small genetic variation is not sufficient to separate the species into distinct races."

and yet we do, whenever someone says "black person" everyone understands what they are referring to, which is, a differentiation from a white person or an asian person

you can deny reality but the fact remains that this has happened, is happening and will continue to happen regardless of whether you close your eyes and stick you fingers in your ears

you can play this silly relativistic game with terms all you like but reality remains unchanged

 

" I don't know why this is so hard to understand. "

i understand your argument, i'm just saying that its dumb

me not agreeing with you does not mean that i don't understand what you are saying

 

" That is pretty much by definition, a non-argument, which does not address my question."

our interactions with each other are inexorably linked to appearance, we always take appearance into consideration when we interact with other people

your question relies on the assumption that we can just divorce our perception with regards to how we perceive each other from appearance 

so your question is nonsensical, it doesn't take reality into consideration

there's also other factors like people tending to have an in-group preference with regards to those who look like they do that are all linked right back into this, that you aren't even acknowledging but regardless they do play an integral role in how people interact