Is this racist?

[The Sage of Main Street]

Every word in every language is an arbitrary construct; however, that doesn't mean that the words don't communicate reality.

The Netrix Is a Blank Shadow of Reality

Words are disguises.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

"Nobody is saying race is the same species. Race is a sub classification of species."

You sure about that?

Here is the OFFICIAL Science Classification for Humans,

Wikipedia:

Kingdom:	Animalia
Phylum:	Chordata
Class:	Mammalia
Order:	Primates
Suborder:	Haplorhini
Infraorder:	Simiiformes
Family:	Hominidae
Subfamily:	Homininae
Tribe:	Hominini
Genus:	Homo
Species:	H. sapiens

Nope Race isn't listed at all because it is a social/political construct.

Actually, races would be analogous to sub species in other animals. The binomial nomenclature you referenced lists down to the level of species, but it is common in taxonomy to list sets within a species with localized traits consistent among the smaller group, but not the species as a whole.

You do realize the very notion of taxonomy is a human construct, right?

In any case, those who deny the existence of race should not indulge in all the formulaic idedentity polits as they do. It just makes then look like foolish hypocrites.

 

[JoeMoma]

You do realize the very notion of taxonomy is a human construct, right?

Right! Thank you

 

[Sunsettommy]

Actually, races would be analogous to sub species in other animals. The binomial nomenclature you referenced lists down to the level of species, but it is common in taxonomy to list sets within a species with localized traits consistent among the smaller grpu, but not the species as a whole.

You do realize the very notion of taxonomy is a human construct, right?

In any case, those who deny the existence of race should not indulge in all the formulaic idedentity polits as they do. It just makes then look like foolish hypocrites.

The only people who use the word race is always about those with trivial differences in appearance wonder you don't talk about the "races" of house CATS since they also have differences in color too but are of one Species too but somehow the rest of the mammal world never gets treated that way as race doesn't exist among them at all.

WIKIPEDIA

Scientific classification
Kingdom:	Animalia
Phylum:	Chordata
Class:	Mammalia
Order:	Carnivora
Suborder:	Feliformia
Family:	Felidae
Subfamily:	Felinae
Genus:	Felis
Species:	F. catus[1]

The real problem is that people are so hung up on the word that they don't realize they are actually CREATING artificial divisions between people with it.

Let it go.

 

[Circe]

I wrote this as a response to someone who said there was no such thing as race, and then the whole thread got deported to the Badlands. Could someone help me understand why this happened? I don’t see it as racist.

Is this racist?

“What is this for you guys? Is this some kind of religion?. The father's of the scientific revolution would be disappointed with people like you. You are definitely not a scientist; things are not true because you want them to be true. They thought they were putting an end to superstition and ignorance; they didn't realize it would just transform. It doesn't matter what the motivation is for denying the truth is still the truth. If we ever forget that we're on our way back to holding witch trials and burning witches.

Races are a fact, they can be observed, and predictions can be made: have you ever heard of Derrick Todd Lee (November 5, 1968 – January 21, 2016), also known as The Baton Rouge Serial Killer. He escaped detection because the FBI and local police were looking for a white man based on an FBI profile and a faulty witness description. When DNA gathered at a crime scene was analyzed, it showed that the suspect was a black man. Most were unwilling to accept that DNA could identify an individual's race. However, they were looking for a man that didn't exist. After police accepted that fact, Lee was identified and captured. His DNA matched the collected DNA evidence.

Have you ever heard of forensic anthropology? These people can take a skull of an unidentified person and reconstruct the face based on racial differences with a rather good accuracy. They couldn't do that if there were no racial differences.

It appears that the left only believes in science only when it tells them what they want to hear, but that's not the way it works. The truth is the truth, whether you like it or not. I have to say that perhaps the right can be just as bad in some ways and even us moderates. I believe René Descartes said something like; perception often deceives us. I am wrong sometimes, but I try very hard to see the world, not as I want to see it but as it is.”

I see no problem with your post. It may just have been deported to the Badlands because race is a controversial subject. The Badlands is a fun place, IMO! I check in there every once in awhile.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

The only people who use the word race is always about those with trivial differences in appearance wonder you don't talk about the "races" of house CATS since they also have differences in color too but are of one Species too but somehow the rest of the mammal world never gets treated that way as race doesn't exist among them at all.

WIKIPEDIA

Scientific classification
Kingdom:	Animalia
Phylum:	Chordata
Class:	Mammalia
Order:	Carnivora
Suborder:	Feliformia
Family:	Felidae
Subfamily:	Felinae
Genus:	Felis
Species:	F. catus[1]

The real problem is that people are so hung up on the word that they don't realize they are actually CREATING artificial divisions between people with it.

Let it go.

One of us actually has a background in taxonomy.

One of us most obviously doesn't.

 

[Circe]

Actually, races would be analogous to sub species in other animals. The binomial nomenclature you referenced lists down to the level of species, but it is common in taxonomy to list sets within a species with localized traits consistent among the smaller grpu, but not the species as a whole.

Yes, of course our "races" are sub-species, at least in 2022. In 1914 people loosely referred to races of Germans versus the French, versus Italians --- all these were races. We are not doing race as much as a cultural thing now, but as physical differences.

HUGE confusion over this subject because it has changed so much. When I was young we were taught that species could not cross-reproduce. Sometimes they COULD, but there wouldn't be fertile offspring. Mules and hinnies (hinnies are produced with stallions on jennies, they used to be popular: and smaller) were the most obvious examples, but I can sadly tell you that regular ducks and Muscovy ducks cross very well --- but the "mule" does not reproduce at all. Boy, was I confused for a couple years there.

But humans all produce fertile offspring, unfortunately, so that definition of species is not applicable to us.

In the last thirty years or so the definition of species has changed to a physically different looking variety that is geographically limited, like dwarf rhinoceroses. It doesn't matter anymore if they can cross-reproduce fertilely. Of course humans fit that definition of more than one species very well: we just call those differences races,

 

[flacaltenn]

The only people who use the word race is always about those with trivial differences in appearance wonder you don't talk about the "races" of house CATS since they also have differences in color too but are of one Species too but somehow the rest of the mammal world never gets treated that way as race doesn't exist among them at all.

Good to point that out. Although it's a more a matter of BREEDS for dogs/cats since MOST of their genetic origin is HUMAN engineered and fairly RECENT. And they dont have the linkage between geneaology/origin/race and CULTURE in the way that humans identify themselves.

We ARE ONE SPECIES in the terms of taxonomy. But race accounts for the ORIGIN and some traits of different peoples. A lot of "peoples" do the same thing because the roots of their tree in history were isolated and static for long periods of ancient time. Like Arabs or Jews or Gypsies, Those convenient shorthands for culture and origin are useful and scientifically meaningful WITHOUT CALLING THEMSELVES "a race" and have SOME of the same genealogical type of separation that a "race" would have.

And note that all those "peoples" have seen discrimination and violent attacks WITHOUT a racial label. Just as dogs show breed fear and discrimination based largely on physical differences or learned suspicion.

 

[flacaltenn]

Yes, of course our "races" are sub-species, at least in 2022. In 1914 people loosely referred to races of Germans versus the French, versus Italians --- all these were races. We are not doing race as much as a cultural thing now, but as physical differences.

HUGE confusion over this subject because it has changed so much. When I was young we were taught that species could not cross-reproduce. Sometimes they COULD, but there wouldn't be fertile offspring. Mules and hinnies (hinnies are produced with stallions on jennies, they used to be popular: and smaller) were the most obvious examples, but I can sadly tell you that regular ducks and Muscovy ducks cross very well --- but the "mule" does not reproduce at all. Boy, was I confused for a couple years there.

But humans all produce fertile offspring, unfortunately, so that definition of species is not applicable to us.

In the last thirty years or so the definition of species has changed to a physically different looking variety that is geographically limited, like dwarf rhinoceroses. It doesn't matter anymore if they can cross-reproduce fertilely. Of course humans fit that definition of more than one species very well: we just call those differences races,

Recommend you simply drop the "triggering" term "sub-species". Really no need for that. Humans make the rules for the minutiae of the Homo Sapien specie. And there's no need to go further than that. Because the ADDITIONAL science to go DEEPER - really hasn't been available except in the past 30 years or so.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Recommend you simply drop the "triggering" term "sub-species". Really no need for that. Humans make the rules for the minutiae of the Homo Sapien specie. And there's no need to go further than that. Because the ADDITIONAL science to go DEEPER - really hasn't been available except in the past 30 years or so.

You need to study taxonomy, dude.

There are countless subspecies in both the plant and anal kingdoms. As I tried to explain to those unwilling to learn anything new, the term simply refers to localized populations of a species that display a trait consistent among the group but differing in some way from the species as a whole.

There is nothing the least bit triggering about using it. Now, YOU may be triggered by it due to your scientific ignorance, but that does not mean it is triggering by nature.

 

[flacaltenn]

You need to study taxonomy, dude.

There are countless subspecies in both the plant and anal kingdoms. As I tried to explain to those unwilling to learn anything new, the term simply refers to localized populations of a species that display a trait consistent among the group but differing in some way from the species as a whole.

There is nothing the least bit triggering about using it. Now, YOU may be triggered by it due to your scientific ignorance, but that does not mean it is triggering by nature.

So you dont get the possible connotation of sub-species suggesting sub-human to some? Because in little warped minds or even in scientific minds, (EDITED to add) SOME people are bound to play "favorites" with sub-species. And we know who they are.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

So you dont get the possible connotation of sub-species suggesting sub-human to some? Because in little warped minds or even in scientific minds, (EDITED to add) SOME people are bound to play "favorites" with sub-species. And we know who they are.

I figured you would go there due to your complete ignorance of the subject matter.

You could always try learning a little something - heck, all you need to do is Google up the meaning of the term sub-species - but you refuse to do so out of your arrogance and preconceptions.

 

[flacaltenn]

I figured you would go there due to your complete ignorance of the subject matter.

You could always try learning a little something - heck, all you need to do is Google up the meaning of the term sub-species - but you refuse to do so out of your arrogance and preconceptions.

Go tell black people the term is not offensive. Humans dont really need branches to sub-species. They only need to use the place markers for race.

It's slightly possible that my ignorance plays a part. It's also possible that you're fixated on taxonomy declarations that were DECLARED before DNA typing became "a thing" - and a little bit too ARROGANT to recalibrate your bearings on the topic accordingly.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Go tell black people the term is not offensive. Humans dont really need branches to sub-species. They only need to use the place markers for race.

It's slightly possible that my ignorance plays a part. It's also possible that you're fixated on taxonomy declarations that were DECLARED before DNA typing became "a thing" - and a little bit too ARROGANT to recalibrate your bearings on the topic accordingly.

There was no mention of BLACKS as a lone sub species. I simply mentioned that the notion of races in humans is analogous to sub species in the animal and plant kingdom. There is no inference of being lesser in any way, just different.


You would know that if you were educated on the subject.


You are just being dishonest here, as you always are.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Actually, races would be analogous to sub species in other animals. The binomial nomenclature you referenced lists down to the level of species, but it is common in taxonomy to list sets within a species with localized traits consistent among the smaller group, but not the species as a whole.



In any case, those who deny the existence of race should not indulge in all the formulaic identity politics as they do. It just makes then look like foolish hypocrites.

Whites Who Are Born Rich Deplore and Fear All Other White People

How is it hypocritical? The Whiteys Hating Whitey are protesting against the acceptance of what they preach are imaginary racial differences. These Preppy Progressives want us to think their way and not what realistic common sense tells us.

This race treason started with the Kennedys, who were nothing but spoiled and sheltered richkids, so this game plan has always been pure class warfare. The guillotine-fodder are winning because nobody will identify them as the enemy. The pseudo-Conservatives' adoption of JFK as the "last true Liberal, one we could work with" proves that all they care about is birth, not at all about worth.

Ignoring and insulting their White supporters and instead virtue-signaling to their prep-school classmates, the Rightists actually brag about how many Republicans voted for the 1964 Civil Rights for the Uncivilized Act.

 

[flacaltenn]

There was no mention of BLACKS as a lone sub species. I simply mentioned that the notion of races in humans is analogous to sub species in the animal and plant kingdom. There is no inference of being lesser in any way, just different.


You would know that if you were educated on the subject.


You are just being dishonest here, as you always are.

Analogous? Maybe. Necessary? Not at all. Because we can NOW provide the EXACT racial differences in quantitative genetic terms. And it's MINOR -- but it IS useful and DOES exist.

 

[flacaltenn]

Ignoring and insulting their White supporters and instead virtue-signaling to their prep-school classmates, the Rightists actually brag about how many Republicans voted for the 1964 Civil Rights for the Uncivilized Act.

"Civil Rights for the Uncivilized"? I guess you've taken your stand and lost some credibility to be objective about "what is racist".

Democrats also brag about the 64 CRAct. But they try to bury and revise history about the importance of Republicans who canceled out their LARGE #s of Southern segregationists and vestiges of the Civil War. South was still solid Democrat and blocking Civil Rights at the time. LBJ was screwed without that solid Repub support.

 

[LOIE]

No it isn't. It's an arbitrary construct. For example what do you mean by Caucasian? Do you specifically mean people from the Caucus region? Do you mean white Europeans in general? Do you mean it historically which included people from Europe, Asia and North Africa? Do you realize that there could be many genetic variations between people considered Asian, Caucasian or black, even amongst each other? There is as much if not more genetic variation between people from different parts of Africa than there is between people from Africa and Europe. That means two "black" people from different regions of Africa could have more genetic variation between each other as they do with someone considered "white". If we tried to categorize people by genetic variation rather than general skin color or region we would have several thousand different races, not a handful.

I found this article that applies, especially the next to last paragraph:

Arizona State University – Ask A Biologist
By a Anthropology PHD Student

Are different races subspecies?

No! Races are not subspecies of the human species. There is only one “race”—the human race. So why can’t we sort humans into subspecies like we can with other animals? The answer is that the human species doesn’t have much genetic variation. We are too alike to split into groups.

What’s the difference between race and subspecies?

A long time ago, the words race and subspecies were used to mean the same thing in biology. This was before we knew how much or how little genes could differ between animals. Now we only use subspecies to refer to living things that aren’t human. We only use race when we talk about humans. We often try to group humans by race based on how they look. While humans may look different on the outside, our DNA looks very similar. Because we are so similar, scientists say that we can't use race to sort humans either. Are humans really so alike?

Why are humans so similar?

Humans haven't been around as long as other animals. We haven't had enough time to develop much variation in our DNA. Humans also migrate and reproduce a lot. Different groups of humans are never apart long enough for genetic differences to add up. Human DNA is too similar to split us into subspecies or races. So we can't use biology to sort people into groups like we can with animals.

Can we define race based on physical appearance?

Even though our DNA is similar, humans look very different from each other. But the traits we use to guess someone's race don't always work well. Think about skin color. There aren't just a few colors: there are more shades than you can ever count. The traits we use are also independent of each other. For example, being tall doesn’t mean you’ll also have dark hair. No matter which traits we use, there is no good way to group humans using appearance or DNA.

Instead, everyone groups people into races based on the traits they think are most important. The way we categorize people into races changes over time, too. Think about people you know who are Irish or Italian. Today we might categorize them as white, like many people from Europe. But 100 years ago, they were not considered the same race as Americans with European origins. Humans love to organize things into groups. But when it comes to race, these groups tell us more about our culture than they do about our biology.

 

[longly]

Yes you are a racist. Any more questions?

I hope that makes you feel good because it does nothing for me, negative or positive. A cry of racism is a way to control people. I will not allow anyone to manipulate me. I know what I am; that is the only thing that matters. I do my own thinking and let no one think for me. Sometimes I am wrong; everyone is eventually, but it is an honest error. I try very hard to see the world as it is, not as I would like.

 

[Curried Goats]

I hope that makes you feel good because it does nothing for me, negative or positive. A cry of racism is a way to control people. I will not allow anyone to manipulate me. I know what I am; that is the only thing that matters. I do my own thinking and let no one think for me. Sometimes I am wrong; everyone is eventually, but it is an honest error. I try very hard to see the world as it is, not as I would like.

Sure thing you racist piece of shit.