News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

So why can't she be black?

Started by aitm, June 16, 2015, 09:25:00 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

SGOS

Quote from: PickelledEggs on June 17, 2015, 03:08:15 AM
Eh tribe can easily be substituted from country, culture, family, nationality. It's just something you belong to and identify with or as...  But that's beside the point. People that divide others because of where they're from can suck it, because it doesn't matter. We're all on the same planet and need to work together.

Oh, I agree it's the cause of discord, tribes more so than race, even.

Atheon

The answer is simple: you can't choose who your biological parents are.
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." - Seneca

Mike Cl

Quote from: SGOS on June 17, 2015, 01:07:21 AM
I agree that racial differences are superficial.  And I agree that the word race has become charged.  Even though many biologists like to use the word race as equivalent of species, I see it as more politically correct than descriptive.  I tried to think of another word that describes physical variations common to subgroups, as minor as they may be (such as skin color), and ethnicity comes closest, but still misses, because it is heavily weighted by cultural differences, which are not physical and no genetic component has been identified. 

And even though skin color is physically superficial, it is still a genetic variation.  The word race in my mind is not charged, although I realize that it is in society, so I understand the desire to minimize racial differences by eliminating that usage, especially when it leads to erroneous ideas about variations in intelligence, propensity towards lazyiness, and other foolish sociological stereotypes.  But I don't consider such stereotypes as valid, so I'm fine with race as a word that can be used to describe genetic variations such as skin color or bone structures in subgroups.  I'm not fine with using race to describe imaginary differences or to create a false hierarchy of subgroups.

Yes, like you, I'd be OK with wiping the word race from the dictionary, but it's kind of awkward to talk about genetic differences under discussion in a case like this, without using the word race.  And it's even more awkward to pretend that genetic differences don't exist.  Furthermore, the controversy (which I think has been blown out of proportion) that has been generated by this woman's actions speaks directly to the issue of what everyone defines as an issue of race, and while it's probably more cultural than anything else, race is clearly a part of the cultures involved under the microscope.
I stopped using race in the classroom to combat the racism I dealt with on a daily basis.  I taught in a juvenile hall and which had a large population of hispanics and blacks.  It was not uncommon for the hispanics to talk of the Mexican Race--and it was not uncommon for the blacks to, well, race-bait the hispanics, as well.  So, I used biology to explain that everybody was an African.  The racists hated that!  So, for me dropping the use of the term 'race' was a tool.  I think I can quite easily use the word 'species' instead of race.  I think it is better understood what that means and is more accurate than 'race'. We are all from this planet--we are all human with minor variations.  The term 'race' divides us.  The term species, not so much.  And as you pointed out, 'race', 'ethnic', culture and tribe are not really terms used in this area of biology.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

aitm

I'm surprised the FB hasn't exploded with "reverse discrimination" screams.
A humans desire to live is exceeded only by their willingness to die for another. Even god cannot equal this magnificent sacrifice. No god has the right to judge them.-first tenant of the Panotheust

SGOS

Quote from: Mike Cl on June 17, 2015, 08:47:33 AM
I stopped using race in the classroom to combat the racism I dealt with on a daily basis.  I taught in a juvenile hall and which had a large population of hispanics and blacks.  It was not uncommon for the hispanics to talk of the Mexican Race--and it was not uncommon for the blacks to, well, race-bait the hispanics, as well.  So, I used biology to explain that everybody was an African.  The racists hated that!

LOL  I'll bet they did.  And I don't think there is any doubt among anthropologists that that our human origins were in Africa.  Well, I have heard a few dissenting opinions, but they were mostly of the nature of "We've found but a scant few fossils.  So beware of surprises."  If forced to bet, I'm guessing these types would bet on Africa also.  Pointing out common origins, I think is a good tool too.

I also use the term human race.  I know it's not taxonomically correct, and everybody seems to understand, or at least doesn't care.  So I'll keep on using it along with "genetic similarities among various human populations," if I can keep reminding myself to go that from now on. :wink:  Unfortunately, most people will know what I mean, and the racists will make a big deal about it, add on all kinds of ridiculous baggage, and keep on doing what they do.

But I have reservations about ignoring differences, be they racial or cultural.  I think embracing them, respecting them, or celebrating them would be a better idea.  I don't think the goal should be one of building a sense of utopian sameness without diversity.  I think it would be boring and come out looking like episodes from the original Star Trek series.

aitm

Quote from: SGOS on June 17, 2015, 11:22:29 AM
  I think it would be boring and come out looking like episodes from the original Star Trek series.

don't you go bad mouthing Star Trek... :axe:
A humans desire to live is exceeded only by their willingness to die for another. Even god cannot equal this magnificent sacrifice. No god has the right to judge them.-first tenant of the Panotheust

SGOS

Quote from: aitm on June 17, 2015, 11:35:56 AM
don't you go bad mouthing Star Trek... :axe:
Oh, no.  I loved those episodes.

Mike Cl

Quote from: SGOS on June 17, 2015, 11:22:29 AM
LOL  I'll bet they did.  And I don't think there is any doubt among anthropologists that that our human origins were in Africa.  Well, I have heard a few dissenting opinions, but they were mostly of the nature of "We've found but a scant few fossils.  So beware of surprises."  If forced to bet, I'm guessing these types would bet on Africa also.  Pointing out common origins, I think is a good tool too.

I also use the term human race.  I know it's not taxonomically correct, and everybody seems to understand, or at least doesn't care.  So I'll keep on using it along with "genetic similarities among various human populations," if I can keep reminding myself to go that from now on. :wink:  Unfortunately, most people will know what I mean, and the racists will make a big deal about it, add on all kinds of ridiculous baggage, and keep on doing what they do.

But I have reservations about ignoring differences, be they racial or cultural.  I think embracing them, respecting them, or celebrating them would be a better idea.  I don't think the goal should be one of building a sense of utopian sameness without diversity.  I think it would be boring and come out looking like episodes from the original Star Trek series.
Yeah, I like 'human race', too.  I throw around 'species' as well.  I like to remind people that we are really African.  It's good to be humble. :))  Yes, I like differences.  They should be celebrated.  But too often, they are used as a put down.  Our oneness needs to be hammered home so that more people understand that message.  But differences are not bad--and they need to be celebrated as just as good, only different.  (Well, when that is true of course.) 
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?


aitm

Why it's another Obama distraction to keep the truth about Benghazi quiet! ....goddamn muslim terrorist sympathizer... yeah, that's next on FB you just wait... gotta love them whacky Illuminati whackadoodles..
A humans desire to live is exceeded only by their willingness to die for another. Even god cannot equal this magnificent sacrifice. No god has the right to judge them.-first tenant of the Panotheust

Dreamer

Life is short. Be black if you want to. I don't care if she wants to have the black identity, have the black experience, whatever that means to her.

But also it's important to be honest and authentic. Maybe it would be inauthentic to herself to identify as white, but that's no excuse to be dishonest.


This is a really weird case.
<br /><br />Individually, we are one drop.  Together, we are an ocean.<br /><br />

Solitary

There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action.

PickelledEggs


SGOS

Quote from: Dreamer on June 17, 2015, 10:22:59 PM
This is a really weird case.

It sure is, and I don't care about that other stuff either.  It's just weird.  Reading about it makes me feel like if I indulge myself too much in the bizarreness of it, I could risk going off the deep end, and find myself in an alternate universe ruled by a madman named Koopa and his army of pin headed goombas.

Reference: Super Mario Brothers Movie:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQy-eJALZI0

Mike Cl

Quote from: PickelledEggs on June 17, 2015, 10:38:28 PM
No. We are actually zorgonians.
I don't think you were supposed to divulge that!  I hope the Great One does not find out!
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?