Is this racism?

[Repat Van]

Aug 6, 2023 8:43:38 GMT mids said:

It seems odd to believe that you can change sex but not race.

I don’t think anybody believes they can “change sex”.

[mids]

The work of but a minute.

news.berkeley.edu/2021/06/14/qa-with-grace-lavery

[Repat Van]

Aug 6, 2023 11:09:03 GMT mids said:

The work of but a minute.

news.berkeley.edu/2021/06/14/qa-with-grace-lavery

Fairy muff although it does not seem as black and white as “changing sex”

“ There is a kind of conservative feminist position that argues that sex is set in stone, is assigned at birth. And I don’t agree with that. Most scientists I’ve spoken to seem pretty comfortable with the idea that sex, like any other biological category, is not a cast-iron law, but rather a sort of set of contingencies that can be played with and culturally reinforced or not culturally reinforced.”

And many trans people seem to view their gender identity as not “changing”. People transitioning their outer appearance to match.

That said It doesn’t even seem weird to me that people would believe that sex is changeable but race is not:

Race (or rather racial identity) is an inheritance. Sex isn’t.

[perrykneeham]

Aug 6, 2023 11:00:37 GMT Repat Van said:

Aug 6, 2023 5:45:34 GMT perrykneeham said:

Go on then. Knock yourself out. Racial identity =/= race.

Which I why used the words that I did.

(But it can also be argued that the parameters of race are socially constructed. While Science recognises the concept of population groups. They do not coincide with how we understand “race” and how we have constructed the barriers around racial identity.)

So you've chosen to take a position outside the actually discussion? Well done. As I said, knock yourself out.

[Repat Van]

Aug 6, 2023 11:15:22 GMT perrykneeham said:

Aug 6, 2023 11:00:37 GMT Repat Van said:

Which I why used the words that I did.

(But it can also be argued that the parameters of race are socially constructed. While Science recognises the concept of population groups. They do not coincide with how we understand “race” and how we have constructed the barriers around racial identity.)

So you've chosen to take a position outside the actually discussion? Well done. As I said, knock yourself out.

Nope it supports what Voice says. Population groups =\= race.

[perrykneeham]

Different argument altogether. Silly sophistry. Your favourite.

[voice]

Aug 6, 2023 6:38:38 GMT perrykneeham said:

That's a very subjective approach. You accept that species is one thing, but race definitely exists. There is a case to say that you can be of one race, but feel that you belong to another, but that doesn't negate the accepted definition.

Racial features are not recent adaptations, but evolutionary changes which can be transfered from generation to generation.

I accepted and stated what we call racial characteristics evolved, but the idea of different races has changed, and continues to do so, in fact a lot of so called different races have few if any outward differences, for example the Slavic people where considered a subhuman "race" as were the Jews, yet in all ways they differed little, sometimes nit at all, from the "race" who wanted to smexterminatw them

While yes we accept for practical purposes different races, the idea this is based on is assigned and subjective, changes sometimes, and as such is a human construct.

[perrykneeham]

It all seems to have been drowned by political sophistry. Race exists, and that's only contested when it's politically awkward: several sentences in the wiki article make that very clear. The suggestion is that the concept of race only existed in order to justify racist theories, which is definitely putting the cart in front of the horse.

We can all agree that we understand what is meant by race. Maybe this is about the evolution of language: it's certainly worth reflection on the alternative etymology.e.g. dogs are a species, dogs with a definitive set of features are categorised as a breed.

[Repat Van]

Aug 6, 2023 15:59:28 GMT voice said:

Aug 6, 2023 6:38:38 GMT perrykneeham said:

That's a very subjective approach. You accept that species is one thing, but race definitely exists. There is a case to say that you can be of one race, but feel that you belong to another, but that doesn't negate the accepted definition.

Racial features are not recent adaptations, but evolutionary changes which can be transfered from generation to generation.

I accepted and stated what we call racial characteristics evolved, but the idea of different races has changed, and continues to do so, in fact a lot of so called different races have few if any outward differences, for example the Slavic people where considered a subhuman "race" as were the Jews, yet in all ways they differed little, sometimes nit at all, from the "race" who wanted to smexterminatw them

While yes we accept for practical purposes different races, the idea this is based on is assigned and subjective, changes sometimes, and as such is a human construct.

Similarly to how Italians were not considered “white” in the USA. And the USA has the concept of “white passing, black people” but curiously not “black passing, white people.”

Also how in Oz Aborigines will be referred to as “black” but outside Oz few would see them as “black”.

Or even that people such as Obama are labelled “black” despite being as white as they are black.
Parameters of “race” have always been socially constructed.

[perrykneeham]

That's very weak sauce, to suggest that one use of racial categorisation is the same as all. Pathetic, really.

[perrykneeham]

"Also how in Oz Aborigines will be referred to as “black” but outside Oz few would see them as “black"."

Utter pish. That is exactly what most people outside Australia would consider them, I believe. Maybe you are thinking like an African or a Caribbean black person.

[perrykneeham]

Of course, "black" is not a race.

[voice]

For centuries the Irish were considered a different race by the Engkish, not so much these days.

Gross differences between people's are not the only basis for race

[Repat Van]

And many of those differences aren’t even specific to what we have constructed as a “racial category”.

[Repat Van]

Aug 6, 2023 16:29:55 GMT perrykneeham said:

Of course, "black" is not a race.

That’s why I was very clear to distinguish between “population groups” and “race”.

Many people would refer to “black” as a race which is why we say the parameters of race, as commonly understood are socially constructed.

[perrykneeham]

Gibberish. They are socially in a social context but that's only part of the range of uses. Race can be a social construct as Inhave said. It is ridiculous and demonstrably untrue to say that is all it is. QED.

[mids]

The left are all over the place of this (as usual). One of those ancient Roman era skeletons (might have been Beachy Head woman) was declared to be black based on the shape of her skull alone. Cue triumphant crowing from the left. Of course after dental and DNA analysis it turned out she had grown up in Britain and her ancestry was probably from Southern Europe.

[perrykneeham]

Aug 6, 2023 16:34:12 GMT voice said:

For centuries the Irish were considered a different race by the Engkish, not so much these days.

Gross differences between people's are not the only basis for race

Agreed, but that's not the same as race is a social construct. It can be, but not only. It's the same dishonest absolutism that plagues and undermines the gender debate.

[rick49]

Is NPR Trying To Start A Race War?

"The government-funded pundits at National Propaganda Radio (NPR) seem to have a toxic fixation with race.

On Tuesday, the outlet blamed the success of American country music on racial prejudice. In a podcast episode titled “How racism became a marketing tool for country music,” NPR brought on a historian to outline the myriad ways country music is a vehicle for white supremacy. Unfortunately, I think that these three very successful songs at the top of the charts only encourages the country music business to continue what it’s always done,” Martinez said, “which is making a product for a white conservative base.”

thefederalist.com/2023/08/05/is-npr-trying-to-start-a-race-war/

huh? country music is a product for a white conservative base? how about rap and the blues. they are ok because they have a black base? sounds racist to me.

"But let’s examine the obscenity that’s come to define rap music."

"F-cking this b-tchh like a perv, smack from the back, grab her perm. Ice the burr, sh-tin’ on all you lil’ turds."

[rick49]

ok cause it's black.

"In 2017, Jay-Z’s “Story of O.J.” played on Jewish stereotypes of financial dominance."

"You wanna know what’s more important than throwin’ away money at a strip club? Credit. You ever wonder why Jewish people own all the property in America? This how they did it."

"Rap music has also mocked Arabs and Asians. Ice Cube released “Black Korea” in 1991, deriding “funky little stores” run by Asian-Americans."

"Every time I wanna go get a f-ckin’ brew I gotta go down to the store with the two Oriental one penny countin’ motherf-ckers that make a n-gga mad enough to cause a little ruckus … Pay respect to the fist or we’ll burn your store, right down to a crisp."

but country music is bad.