Remove concept of human "races"

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Yes, the "we're all one race" thing, but this one is a bit more detailed (you know my posts )

 

Before the Europeans "discovered" Africa, the Americas and Australia, blond people with blue eyes were regarded as one race, while brown-haired people with green and brown eyes were two other races. The "minorities" of the "races" in Europe were stereotyped, discriminated, and looked down upon.

Then the descendants of the Chinese explorers, the native Americans, were "discovered" in the Americas, the Asians were "discovered" in East Asia, the Africans were discovered in Africa. And suddenly all the "races" of Europe weren't races anymore: Yes, they had different appearances and origins (majority of "dark" people were from Southern Europe and the "light" people were from Northern and Central Europe) and habits/cultures and languages, but why keep them from each others? Why draw lines like that? At the bottom, we were all humans, right? Suddenly the blondes weren't a minority group.

 

Then why would we draw lines between races? I looked up "races" in the dictionary and it read that a "race" was a group of people that shared the same heritate and culture. Huh? I mean, Americans have a different culture than Germans; the people of France states have a totally different culture than the Russians. Then why don't we call the Americans a race and the Russians a race?

 

Dividing people into races only promotes stereotypes. Case of point, US schools list drop-out rates by total drop-out rate and drop-out rates by.. race instead of nationality. Then they say this way of doing it has to be right because "the Hispanics indeed does have a higher drop-out rate than the whites". Did anyone consider that this might be because Mexican schools are worse than American schools? Instead of saying that "Mexican immigrants have a higher drop-out rate than American-born students", they insists on saying that people with brown skin, dark hair, and South and Central American ancestry have a higher drop-out rate than people with pink skin and brown hair. Which means people will start saying "boy, these Chicanos need help", instead of saying "wow, let's help these Mexicans immigrants". Can't they just handle each case individually?

 

Give me one good reason why we still keep dividing people into races. I have yet to hear a single good one.

 

Good reasons why not to, summarized:

 

• It's obselete: In Socialist countries like the former USSR, and in semi-socialist nations like the Nordic countries, the terms High, Middle, and Low class are not part of everyday speech (only in geography books reffering to classes in other countries). As a result, kids don't get to hear these words, and while an American or British kid would look at a friend's small house and go "okay, he's in the low class so he's like this and that", a Swedish kid would go "okay, he's house is smaller than mine". But he wouldn't take more notice of it than a blonde guy noticing that a friend's hair is brown. He'd just see it and that's it. During my childhood, I never heard anyone talk about a single kid's economy. If drawing lines based on economic levels is obselete, why isn't drawing lines based on races obselete?
  
• It promotes stereotypes and racism: As a child, we put new things into three groups: 1. Stuff that is familiar 2. Stuff that is "different, but not confirmed different", and 3. Stuff that has been confirmed to be different. Different house sizes in Scandinavia are in group 2, races are in group 3. Which means that we sterotype races, but not econ. levels. As long as we draw lines, one side is always going to come out as superior. If we don't draw lines, people won't stereotype and hate the other "group". it's as simple as that, and I think that's more like a fact than opinion.
  

 

Any thoughts on that;)?

[Jatt13]

you and your debate threads...

 

anyway (i said it again! i can't stop! i'm addicted!!), i think we should still be different races. stereotypeing isn't good, but with different races, you can help visuallize people better. if someone says "male hispanic" you think of one type of person, and a different one if they say "female caucasean". it might lead to stereotypeing, but just getting rid of races won't solve that. there will still be sexism, ageism, sizeism, nationallityism, and any other -ism for other sub categories. (yes, i know some of those aren't actuall words, but you know what i mean). there will still be people who discriminate just because of skin color. ok, so you get rid of races. well, there would still be people who discriminate against african americans. sure, they won't be called african americans, but they'll still be hated by some people just like they were.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

But I like posting debate threads!

I'm not sure if you understand what I mean.

I'm saying that we still use descriptive terms like 'dark-skinned', 'light-skinned', black-haired, etc. but that we don't put it into a race.

 

Saying "light-skinned" solely as a descriptive term, like USSR house sizes, doesn't promote stereotyping -at least not nearly as much as saying that they are a race.

 

Light-skinned: Person with light skin.

White: Person with light skin, brown/blonde hair, European Heritage, <insert stereotype here>.

 

And well, if these people of African heritage want to be proud of their heritage, well, they shouldn't say they're proud (not to tell them what to think) of being that their skin color defeated the other skin color, but that "the people of African heritage ruined the Apartheid regime". Sounds better than "black* beat white**".

 

* Makes people think ALL Africans or -heritaged people in the world were discriminated.

** Makes people think ALL European or -controlled countries enforced Apartheid.

[Zygomaticus]

I wont read all that, cuz i got homework to do..but lemme tell you.

 

In my mind, humans are a race...if there'e any racial prejudice in me, it's against animals

 

I do believe that all humans are equal, and when i sit in a bus full of "whites" (i'm asian indian) i feel like i'm one of them, i don't feel any different, cuz luckily for me, my community is open minded enough to recognize everyone as equal.

 

But i am aware that there are many communities out there that aren't as open minded or tolerant as mine. And i feel sorry for those discriminated, and if there's anything i could do right now to make their lives better, i would do it...if there's anything i can do eventually in life, i will do it...but until then, i'll do my homework...

[Tie Guy]

I think we should still have "races." Why, because it naturally falls that way.

 

Ok, my definition of a "race" is a group of people with the same culture. I think we can all agree that "American" could never be a "race" or even a description of a person because of the wide variety of people here. However, "white" people do have a distinct culture in America, as do "black" people. Thats not being stereotypical, its just true. Different "races" have different cultures that, except for a small number of excetions, have little deviation. Is it fair to say that [/i]all[/i] blacks like rap, of course not, but in a general sense most black teens do.

 

What i'm saying is that race is a good distinction between different cultures that is true most, if not all, of the time.

 

 

Also, i think that a "race" is not established by those on the outside judging them, but by those in the race. People always group with others like them, and i don't just mean in terms of race or culture. Don't your friends generally share the same interests as you? In the same way, people of similar cultures gather together with each other, thus forming a "race."

 

Because it happens naturally, you couldn't do anything about it even if you wanted to. Sure, you could change the name, but it would still be the same.

 

 

But if you really want to see it as stereotypical, then saying all "Mexicans" are alike is just as much a stereotype. Why is that, because people of "Hispanic" culture have all gathered in Mexico, so its really the same thing with a different name. All you are doing is adding a few other countries with the same culture in to it.

 

 

 

"Racism" will always exist. Why? Because there will always be people who disagree with other's cultures and customs. They don't neccessarily hate the person, just what he does because of his culture. For example, i don't like rap, or cursing, so i stay away from most black people i meet. Does that mean there aren't any black people i like? No, i know a few that are perfectly fine and nice. Does that make me a racist? I don't think so, because i stay away from everyone who likes rap and curses alot, it just happens that is most blacks i meet. The same generalizations are made by blacks towards whites, and i'm sure most of them are prefectly legitamate. "Racism", as you call it, actually can be a good tool to better assess people who may have similar interests as you. I really don't see a problem with generalizations as long as they are based on fact and do not lead to hatred of the person himself, just his actions.

 

Its much the same for religious sects. Is every Christian the same, no, but they are generally alike, at least more so than Christians and Muslims. So, if your a Christian wouldn't you naturally shy away from Muslims in favor of Christians, or vice versa?

 

 

Leave "race" as it is, its more to categorize ourselves than to judge others.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Interesting views, TIE Guy. However, I think we can say a guy has a major cultural background without calling him or her a race. I mean, races reffer to different types of animals, like telling a big and muscular Retriever from a tiny Chihuahua. These also act completely different, instinctively. I mean, an English Setter growing up with 10 German Shepherds wil, unless told to do otherwise, still have a major interest in birds.

 

However, a girl from Nigeria being raised in a family in Copenhagen, Denmark all her life won't nessesarily care for a second about swearing. Why? Because if nobody around her does, she won't. Okay, a lot of Danes swear, I admit that, and you don't have to move a girl into Europe to get her away from sweaing, but you know what I mean. Just wanted to give an example of different races.

 

The term "race" reffers more to specimens of physical differences (more than just skin colour and eye shape), and pre-programmed behaviour (ie. a setter loving birds, a shepherd loving sticks). Humans have genes too, off course, but nothing as major as with animals -humans adapt easily, overriding most "scripts" that contradicts their surroundings and make them different. Animals don't. As you said, it's all about culture, which we already have a name for: Culture. So when you refer to Nigerian art, say "african" or Nigerian art.. not "Black art.

[idiot00001]

I think they should remove races from all scolarship appliations, collage admishion applications, and other government applications. They should not remove it from things like the U.S. Census.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Agreed. Having a 4th-grader having to put his race to have him realise he's "different" just sucks. To put it bluntly.

 

Also, saying you "feel white" just reminds me of how stupid the system is, unless you actually feel white instead of using that as a description or something.

 

You're not supposed to "feel white", you're supposed to fell like an American.

 

We just don't need to refer to stuff as Black this and that and white this and that. If you think of all Europeans as the same kind of people, you're missing out on something. All Europeans are different just as much as all Americans are different.

 

I say you shouldn't put your race on sencus. Your heritage, sure, but not your race.

[Zygomaticus]

You're not supposed to "feel white", you're supposed to fell like an American.

 

it's basically the same thing...you feel like one of them...they're one of you, or you are one of them

 

I was just trying to draw the contrast between where i live and elsewhere, where racial difference makes no difference to how you are treated or who your friends are or what grades you get....everyone belongs...

[Tie Guy]

Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle

As you said, it's all about culture, which we already have a name for: Culture. So when you refer to Nigerian art, say "african" or Nigerian art.. not "Black art.

 

Exactly, thats what i said. Culture and race are two words for the same thing, so what is the problem with race, or do you have a problem with culture, too?

 

The fact is, that "African" art is black art, but notice we don't say "african music" (unless referring to some tribal thing or something), we say "black music." And we don't say "african television" we say "black television" (or BET). The words are used interchangeably, so why bother taking on away?

 

As for classifying things by nation, i'd say that nationality is very close to race, only slightly less broad, except in the case of America, but that only proves that Nationality is the inferior description.

 

 

As for not putting race on the census, what do you want on it, nationality? Heritage is race, so whats the matter?

[Jatt13]

i see where your going, and i agree with you on some of it, but i still think that races are a good thing. i stereotype, it's not something i mean to do, but it happens. everyone does, you, me, kkrode, tie guy, and everyone else. it's natural. but it's not because of race. in the black/white thing, i have friends who are black, and i have friends who are white. some black people i know i don't like, because of the way they act. they act pretty much in the stereotypical way of how a lot of people view blacks. but there are plenty of white people i don't like for the same reasons. they act the same way. race has nothing to do about it. it's just that certain races have been aplied certain characteristics. sure it's stereotypical, but it's true, and there's nothing we can do about it.

 

on a completely different track than races, just think about some other categories. i don't like most romance movies. "chick flicks", if you will. i think they're boring, and get old. i mean, it's the same thing. guy/girl likes person of opposite gender, falls in love, has to overcome family/friends/other person's fiance/ect., finally gets other person to love them, and gets married. the end. sure, that's stereotypical of me, but it's usually true. but it turns out some chick flicks are actually pretty interesting. no, i don't sit on the edge of my seat waiting to see if they guy and girl get together, but some are pretty funny. take the movie serendipity for example. it is pretty sappy, but it's got it's moments. it's funny, and it plays the plot just right to keep you interested. the romance part gets a little old, but it's got a funny cast to make up for that. ok, so off my movie review mode, you can see that stereotypes aren't always true, but most of the time they are.

 

I think they should remove races from all scolarship appliations, collage admishion applications, and other government applications.

 

i don't think so. they use it to get more detail about you. sure, some people may use it stereotypically, but that's a stereotype in itself. you're implying that everyone who looks at that will think "oh, he/she's a different race then me. i better give him/her a lower scholarship/turn him down for this college/give him a low salary." not all people are like that. plus, w/ the scholarship thing, you can get minority scholarships and the like, so that's just helping them out.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

i don't think so. they use it to get more detail about you. sure, some people may use it stereotypically, but that's a stereotype in itself. you're implying that everyone who looks at that will think "oh, he/she's a different race then me. i better give him/her a lower scholarship/turn him down for this college/give him a low salary." not all people are like that.

 

That's not what I meant.

What I meant was that people are going to look at it and say "hmmm... these Oriental immigrants score higher than the Europeans on math tests". That leads to stereotypes.

 

I don't think anyone's going to look at the test and change grades, simply because the tests are on scantrons and read by computers .

 

plus, w/ the scholarship thing, you can get minority scholarships and the like, so that's just helping them out.

 

I don't understand, so if I make mistaken conclusions, bear with me and correct me. Well, personally I call that racism. Let's say a bunch of immigrants from Mexico are doing poorly in English (I'm saying some of them are, not all of them). Now, why don't you offer these people help simply as people who don't speak english very well, not as a minority.

 

Why don't you say "scholarships for people with limited English skills", or something like that? I mean, you can be part of a majority group and still be bad at English, can't you? Heck, even native English people struggle sometimes.

 

I think there shouldn't be such a thing as a "minority scholarship" and a "normal" scholarship, but just giving everyone the same chance. If some people do worse, well... pay attention to that.

 

You could, for example, make a grading system for skills like having the students take tests in the beginning of the year if they want to, helping them find their English level. This level might be measured in Years ahead of/behind average US students. 0 would be equal to, negative would be a handicap which you could put on the test and the people will pay attention to that.

 

Putting Race, religion, and stuff like that on scantrons is just plain silly.

[Redwing]

Races and racial stereotypes aren't quite the same thing. Of course we can celebrate our differences.

 

But...

 

"Different "races" have different cultures that, except for a small number of excetions, have little deviation."

 

What? That's not true. That's what you see on the media. I would have thought everyone in America would know by now that what you see on the media isn't necessarily accurate.

 

"Ok, my definition of a "race" is a group of people with the same culture."

 

That doesn't make any sense. Race refers to physical differences in humans. Culture refers to the way of life of a certain group of people.

 

"Also, i think that a "race" is not established by those on the outside judging them, but by those in the race. People always group with others like them, and i don't just mean in terms of race or culture. Don't your friends generally share the same interests as you? In the same way, people of similar cultures gather together with each other, thus forming a "race." "

 

Again, that doesn't make sense. Race means physical differences, and you're indeed using it and culture interchangeably. What? What does skin color have to do with interests?

 

""Racism" will always exist. Why? Because there will always be people who disagree with other's cultures and customs."

 

See above. If you see a black guy walking down the street, and think "I'd better get away from him, because he's black", then you are racist whether you feel bad about it or not. How would you think he would feel if he knew what you were thinking? I know what I would think...

 

That is what racism is. Sure stereotypes may hold true for some of the stereotyped. But to automatically assume that everyone stereotyped fits the stereotype is unfair and racist.

[Surfnshannon]

down with dog "breeds"

 

oh...

 

 

Well what I mean is....its just a way of identifying ethenicity. I think a lot of people are proud of their "race" and I think taking that concept away from the people will cause an identity crisis. Not to mention a lot of people want to be distinguished from other groups.

[Kryllith]

There's a strong trend in certain academic circles that argue that by changing the language you can change thought. It follows the basis that people think in terms of their language, so as long as you have racist terminology you're going to have racists. While I'm inclined to agree that language affects thought, I'm also inclined to agree with the opposite camp in such debates. Simply changing the language will not change the prejudicious outlooks of people as a whole.

 

So we get rid of racial categories, is this suppose to stop racists people from raising racist children and fostering malevolent feelings towards people who are physically different? Changing the words (or even completely removing them) does not change the condition. Even if racists called everyone, regardless of the the color of their skin, the same thing, they would still be racists. You don't need to label someone with a racial name to harbor animosity towards them...

 

Kryllith

[Tie Guy]

Race: A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution

 

Maybe that clears things up, Redwing. Sure, race can describe a group of people with similar physical traits, but it also, a shown above, it is also a group of people with a "common history, nationality, or geographic distribution", or in other words, culture. People of the same history, nationality, and geographic location have the same genetic physical characteristics, therefore culture and race are the same.

 

 

""Different "races" have different cultures that, except for a small number of excetions, have little deviation."

 

What? That's not true. That's what you see on the media. I would have thought everyone in America would know by now that what you see on the media isn't necessarily accurate."

 

I don't know how you came up with assumption, but its not true, i didn't see that in the media. In fact, as far as i've seen, the media attempts desparately to blur our differences, though its not always effective. The media tries be "fair" to all races and make them "equal" when it should just be accurate.

 

No, my statement was not gotten from the media, it was gotten from the world, as in the one i live in. I go to a public school and it has all different races there. As far as i can tell, stereotypes, while not a good thing, generally do hold true for most people. After all, if most people didn't do it then the stereotype would not have happened. The problem comes in when people make unfair judgements on people based solely on the stereotype. But i really wasn't even talking about stereotypes, i was talking about culture. We can all admit that africans have a different culture than hispanics, and both have a different culture than caucaseans. Now, that doesn't mean that we should judge people solely by their culture, but it also doesn't mean it isn't true about most people of that group. Think about any cultural things that deal with white people and i probably fit most of them, while the average black person will probably fit most african-american culture descriptions. Is that a bad thing, no. It can be a good way to predict the actions of people you don't know, or have never met, but it certainly cannot, and should not, be used as the lone basis of your decision.

 

 

I think we need to accept that skin color is a major difference between us. Sure, the physical quality means absolutely nothing, it is simply an indication of a different culture and background, and its the same for asians, and whites. The problem, as stated numerous times, is when we see skin color and assume a certain thing without ever taking the time to confirm it. I'm not a racist, but it is true that i normally don't associates with blacks. Why not? Its certainly not because of their skin, its because i don't agree with their habits or interests or other things about them, have i given them a chance, yes, i certainly have no mental block against them. However, the vast majority that i have met or observed do follow the things i oppose, so they are not my friends. That being said, i do have a friend who is black, and thats fine, shee's very nice. And of course, there are many whites who things i oppose, and they are not my friends either.

 

Skin color really means nothing, but let's face it, there are fundamental differences between blacks and whites and hispanics and asians that cannot be simply overlooked. Anyone who cannot see this is blind, anyone who cannot accept it, stupid. But before you take that the wrong way, examine yourself. When you think of hispanics, you think of a certain type of people, and likewise when you think of blacks or whites or asians, and i'm not talking about skin color. You can't possibly say that you think of the exact same person for each one. That demonstrates the differences between us, and they are inherent. Again, that doesn't mean that judging on that basis is right, i'm just saying it exists, and it always will.

 

 

Think about this. What if someone said all of one race was very nice and generous, so therefore they judged all of that race as very nice and generous without exception. In principal, you would be a racist, since you are making a decision based solely on a stereotype that isn't completely true. But would you be very upset at that. No, you wouldn't, because its positive, and its a good thing, right? By your standards no. Still, my point is that not all differences between us are negative, but there are differences that apply to different groups of people. You can't possibly deal with everyone on earth only by personal experience, there are too many people and you can't meet them all.

 

 

You can't possibly tell me you don't have at least some intimation of a negative stereotype of Muslims in the Middle East. Not that i'm condemning you or anything, i certainly don't trust all the people over there who will celebrate American deaths in the streets. But even so, all i 'm saying is that there are differences, and those differences are, in general, decent classifications of cultural groups, otherwise known as races.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Well what I mean is....its just a way of identifying ethenicity.

 

I think a lot of people are proud of their "race" and I think taking that concept away from the people will cause an identity crisis.

 

1. Not to mention a lot of people want to be distinguished from other groups.

 

2. Two words to use instead: Culture, nationality, heritage. If someone took away my "race ID", I'd still get around fine. You want to be proud of your race? I understand the African-heritaged people, who's culture was 99% occupied and enslaved by Europeans. However, you still can reffer to them as the people of the African culture,

 

3. Now my question is: If we force the Chinese to call themselves Chinese instead of Asian; if we force the Nigerians to call themselves Nigerians instead of Black, would that mean they nessesarily have to be equal in all terms to the majority?

 

I mean, look at the Europeans arriving in the USA and setting up Scandinavian and German and French neighbourhoods. Are we called a different race than the white Americans? No. We're both white. Does that mean that I, as a Norse immigrant, am unable to distinguish myself from my US-born friends, just because I don't have a different race name? Off course not.

 

I don't think Africans would stop rapping if they didn't get to call themselves a different kind of evolutionary stage and be different that way.

 

4. Yes, racist parents would still raise racist kids. Does that have to mean we shouldn't at least try to keep them from doing that? Look at hair/eye discrimination in Europe.

 

You may say that "hey, that doesn't hold true, because Norsemen and Spanish have several common traits.." Well, before we discovered the other continents outside of Europe and Russia, these differences were really different. It's all on a smaller scale. I mean, if we're invaded by aliens we'd expand the scale and say "okay, all humans are like this and all ETs are like this". Does that mean that after Africa was discovered, we should still call the Germanic nationals one race and the Romantic nationals another race? Off course we shouldn't, off course we didn't. And yes, a lot of people argued and blonds were disciminated a long time after that (I mean, we've still got blonde jokes, don't we, even though they are harmless today;)?). Classification on basis of national culture = classification on basis of continental culture: It's wrong.

[Artoo]

First of all I hate these threads with a passion. So I'm only gonna make one post.

 

There's a difference and it needs to be recognized.

 

It's like saying what STTCT said,

 

"down with dog 'breads'"

 

There is a difference and it needs to be recognized, I know some black people who are proud to be black, I know some hispanics who are proud to be Hispanic, and I know some white people who are proud to be white, but do we think lesser of each other because we are these things? No.

 

Also think of how the crime suspect reports would go:

 

We've determined the suspect is male, 6' tall, and between the ages of 21 and 35. Be on the look out for this person

 

People need to be identified for who they are, just not stereotyped.

 

Wanted

 

F seeks M

call 555-555-5555

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Think about this. What if someone said all of one race was very nice and generous, so therefore they judged all of that race as very nice and generous without exception. In principal, you would be a racist, since you are making a decision based solely on a stereotype that isn't completely true. But would you be very upset at that. No, you wouldn't, because its positive, and its a good thing, right? By your standards no.

 

Still, my point is that not all differences between us are negative, but there are differences that apply to different groups of people. You can't possibly deal with everyone on earth only by personal experience, there are too many people and you can't meet them all.

 

Well, most every Asian-heritaged kid I know hate the "Asians are good at math"-sterotype.

 

I didn't say you should deal with everyone based on personal experience. However, just that you don't know a thing about a country doesn't have to mean you have to stereotype the people from that country. Otherwise, we'd be studying Europe as a single country, wouldn't we?

 

Yes, we're different. No, we shouldn't classify. Blondes can love being blonde without calling themselves a different race, for the 1000th time. Yes, blonde is a descriptive term; doesn't that about cover it? Do we have to say that blondes are also off the Scandinavian/Germanic race or does just the adjective "blonde" cover a brown-haired person?

 

Also think of how the crime suspect reports would go:

 

We've determined the suspect is male, 6' tall, and between the ages of 21 and 35. Be on the look out for this person

 

I never said anything else. I said you have to be allowed to say a person's skin is this color or that. But that's the same as that eye color thing. Fine, my eyes are blue. Does that make me a different race than this brown-eyed guy? No. However, my skin is white, so I'm a different race after all because this brown-eyed person is slightly darker than me... huh?

 

Ok, my definition of a "race" is a group of people with the same culture. I think we can all agree that "American" could never be a "race" or even a description of a person because of the wide variety of people here.

 

Yes, there is a clearly distinct unique culture in the USA that a ton of Americans call their culture.

[Redwing]

race

n.

1. A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics.

2. A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: the German race.

3. A genealogical line; a lineage.

4. Humans considered as a group.

5. Biology.

a. An interbreeding, usually geographically isolated population of organisms differing from other populations of the same species in the frequency of hereditary traits. A race that has been given formal taxonomic recognition is known as a subspecies.

b. A breed or strain, as of domestic animals.

6. A distinguishing or characteristic quality, such as the flavor of a wine.

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[French, from Old French, from Old Italian razza, race, lineage.]

Usage Note: The notion of race is nearly as problematic from a scientific point of view as it is from a social one. European physical anthropologists of the 17th and 18th centuries proposed various systems of racial classifications based on such observable characteristics as skin color, hair type, body proportions, and skull measurements, essentially codifying the perceived differences among broad geographic populations of humans. The traditional terms for these populations Caucasoid (or Caucasian), Mongoloid, Negroid, and in some systems Australoidare now controversial in both technical and nontechnical usage, and in some cases they may well be considered offensive. (Caucasian does retain a certain currency in American English, but it is used almost exclusively to mean “white” or “European” rather than “belonging to the Caucasian race,” a group that includes a variety of peoples generally categorized as nonwhite.) The biological aspect of race is described today not in observable physical features but rather in such genetic characteristics as blood groups and metabolic processes, and the groupings indicated by these factors seldom coincide very neatly with those put forward by earlier physical anthropologists. Citing this and other points such as the fact that a person who is considered black in one society might be nonblack in another many cultural anthropologists now consider race to be more a social or mental construct than an objective biological fact.

 

I use the first definition, you were using the second definition, Tie Guy. While it may work for both, I'm referring to judging on physical characteristics - I hold to what I said earlier.

 

I think the note attached also bears importance to this discussion.

 

No, my statement was not gotten from the media, it was gotten from the world, as in the one i live in. I go to a public school and it has all different races there. As far as i can tell, stereotypes, while not a good thing, generally do hold true for most people. After all, if most people didn't do it then the stereotype would not have happened. The problem comes in when people make unfair judgements on people based solely on the stereotype. But i really wasn't even talking about stereotypes, i was talking about culture. We can all admit that africans have a different culture than hispanics, and both have a different culture than caucaseans. Now, that doesn't mean that we should judge people solely by their culture, but it also doesn't mean it isn't true about most people of that group. Think about any cultural things that deal with white people and i probably fit most of them, while the average black person will probably fit most african-american culture descriptions. Is that a bad thing, no. It can be a good way to predict the actions of people you don't know, or have never met, but it certainly cannot, and should not, be used as the lone basis of your decision.

 

Odd, the world I live in has many different races intermingled, especially at my school. Being in California, there's a tendency for cultural cliques like Hispanics grouping together - but an interesting thing is that it isn't determined at all by skin color. It's clearly based on culture, but the Hispanic kids here have many different skin colors and physical characteristics.

 

I think we need to accept that skin color is a major difference between us. Sure, the physical quality means absolutely nothing, it is simply an indication of a different culture and background, and its the same for asians, and whites. The problem, as stated numerous times, is when we see skin color and assume a certain thing without ever taking the time to confirm it. I'm not a racist, but it is true that i normally don't associates with blacks. Why not? Its certainly not because of their skin, its because i don't agree with their habits or interests or other things about them, have i given them a chance, yes, i certainly have no mental block against them. However, the vast majority that i have met or observed do follow the things i oppose, so they are not my friends. That being said, i do have a friend who is black, and thats fine, shee's very nice. And of course, there are many whites who things i oppose, and they are not my friends either.

 

Like I said above, physical appearance does not always work as an indication of different culture and background. I would think that would be obvious, but maybe it's just me.

 

Skin color really means nothing, but let's face it, there are fundamental differences between blacks and whites and hispanics and asians that cannot be simply overlooked. Anyone who cannot see this is blind, anyone who cannot accept it, stupid. But before you take that the wrong way, examine yourself. When you think of hispanics, you think of a certain type of people, and likewise when you think of blacks or whites or asians, and i'm not talking about skin color. You can't possibly say that you think of the exact same person for each one. That demonstrates the differences between us, and they are inherent. Again, that doesn't mean that judging on that basis is right, i'm just saying it exists, and it always will.

 

Fundamental differences? Huh? Elaborate.

 

No, I don't. When I think "Hispanic" I think "maybe speaks Spanish, probably from South/Central America or Mexico, or has relatives there" because that's generally what "Hispanic" entails. As for black, white and asian, I think of certain facial features and skin color. I do not, NOT, NOT assume they will act a certain way. That's extremely unfair to them, especially if I'm wrong. Of course PHYSICAL differences are inherent. Everything else is NOT.

 

Think about this. What if someone said all of one race was very nice and generous, so therefore they judged all of that race as very nice and generous without exception. In principal, you would be a racist, since you are making a decision based solely on a stereotype that isn't completely true. But would you be very upset at that. No, you wouldn't, because its positive, and its a good thing, right? By your standards no. Still, my point is that not all differences between us are negative, but there are differences that apply to different groups of people. You can't possibly deal with everyone on earth only by personal experience, there are too many people and you can't meet them all.

 

I agree with what Dagobahn Eagle said. While what you say may sound positive, in the end it's still unfair.

 

 

You can't possibly tell me you don't have at least some intimation of a negative stereotype of Muslims in the Middle East. Not that i'm condemning you or anything, i certainly don't trust all the people over there who will celebrate American deaths in the streets. But even so, all i 'm saying is that there are differences, and those differences are, in general, decent classifications of cultural groups, otherwise known as races.

 

You are very wrong, and I resent the assumption. I couldn't afford to have a negative stereotype like that, especially considering one of my best friends is Muslim, from Lebanon! -.-

 

(By the way, I'm firmly Christian, not Muslim. In case you were wondering.)

[Surfnshannon]

[Kryllith]

Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle

. Yes, racist parents would still raise racist kids. Does that have to mean we shouldn't at least try to keep them from doing that? Look at hair/eye discrimination in Europe.

Certainly, but simply calling someone "light skinned" as opposed to "white" isn't going to do it any more than calling someone "Native American" rather than indian. So long as we're describing people by the relative color of their skin rather than the stereotypical "white", "black", "asian", what would you suggest calling Indians? "Red skinned"? I think you'd find a much stronger negative reaction if that were the case.

 

The point is that simply using "light skinned" as opposed to "white" or "dark skinned" as opposed to "black" will not serve to reverse the flow of racism. If "white" and "black" carry negative connotations, then those connotations will simply be applied to whatever descriptive terms, even if the term is designed to be neutral. So instead of "blacks" being stereotyped (either negatively or positively) you'd have "dark skinned" people carrying the same stereotypes.

 

Now in regards to re-educating people so that they'll learn to accept (or reject) people on the basis of an individual's merits, I'm all for that. But for that to happen people have to be willing to accept that re-education. You can drive home ideas as hard as you want, but people will still resist because you're talking about revising their belief system. Those that are more flexible may change, some that are flexible may end up seeing things that will simply reaffirm their stereotypical beliefs. The simple fact is that if we're wanting to give everyone the education and the freedom to make their own decisions, then we have to be willing to accept whatever decision they commit to.

 

Kryllith

[Havoc Stryphe]

Let's just look at this objectively for a moment, shall we.

 

The truth of the matter is this. Whether your opinion be that it's impossible, impropable or quite possible do eliminate racial profiling, racial classification, racial stereotypes, or racial prejudices from our global society as a whole, it still comes down to this.

 

Mark my words. We will never rid ourselves, globaly, of our petty classifications, racial or otherwise, until Star Trek or Star Wars realities become our own realities. Specifically, where Humans are introduced to a "federation" or "Conglomerate" of sentient alien species, at which time blacks, indians, hispanics, asians, and caucasions will be known simply as humans, both to other alien races and amongst the human race itself. (I know the word there would technically be SPECIES, but for where I'm going with this, races works better, don't nit pick me!)

 

But therein, will be the new problem. Humans are petty, we are intricately aware of our differences and the differences around us. We fear the unknown, and let our ignorances rule our minds. After we are finally free of our own racial classifications, humans will simply move on to alien racial classifications and the stereotypes, profiling, and prejudices that accompany those classifications. It is human nature, and we shall never be freed from that yoke until we breathe our last, wether it be individually or as an entire species.

 

You are trying to eliminate a problem that can not be eliminated. Let us try to eliminate evil from the world. Sure, we can make laws, and enfore them, but evil still exists, wether we want it to or not, because it is inside each and every one of us, waiting for us to make a bad judgement call or to lower our moral compasses for one weak moment.

 

Likewise, racial classification stems from our flawed existences. From deep within the human psyche. Sure, you can eliminate it from government documents and textbooks, and all you've done is lulled yourself into naivete's great trap; Out of sight, out of mind. But in reality, the problem still exists, and many will still act on their fears and ignorances.

 

You can not seperate man from his soul, for if you could. Indeed, you'd find a world without evil and without prejudices, but likewise, you would be in a world of mindless zombies, devoid of life, thought, character, or uniqueness.

 

It is our fate to wrestle with our flaws, and at the end of life embrace it.

[Tie Guy]

Originally posted by Redwing

 

I use the first definition, you were using the second definition, Tie Guy. While it may work for both, I'm referring to judging on physical characteristics - I hold to what I said earlier.

 

I think the note attached also bears importance to this discussion.

 

As previously stated: Yes, technically race is only genetic characteristics, but those characteristics are passed down through one culture, therefore the people of that race inherit the culture of the race. There's no way around it, really, the word may technically have one definition that is different, but still in common terms and all reality it can be and is used to mean a cultural group, who also have the same genetic characteristics.

 

 

Odd, the world I live in has many different races intermingled, especially at my school. Being in California, there's a tendency for cultural cliques like Hispanics grouping together - but an interesting thing is that it isn't determined at all by skin color. It's clearly based on culture, but the Hispanic kids here have many different skin colors and physical characteristics.

 

You just contradicted yourself. The different groups do form cliques, as you said, and they do have the same skin color, for the most part. Obviously they aren't exactly the same, but overall they are similar. I have two examples just from today i can give you. At my school, 1300 people all have the same lunch period, and every single black person sits in the same corner of the cafeteria with incredibly little variation. Also, the asian people all sit at 3 tables by themselves, no white or black people at all. Do they all look exactly alike, no, but all have the same culture and basic physical appearance.

 

Another example, in my Math class today, there are mostly whites and few asians. My teacher told us to get into groups, immediately all the asians got into a single group, though they were scattered across the room by our seating chart.

 

Now, these things don't matter, thats fine if they get into groups, all i'm saying is that it happens. White people didn't make them get into the same group or sit in the same spot, they just did.

 

 

Like I said above, physical appearance does not always work as an indication of different culture and background. I would think that would be obvious, but maybe it's just me.

 

Like i said above, you are being nitpicky if you want everyone to look identical and for there never to be exceptions to anything. Basic cultural groups, or races, or people with the same general physical and genetic traits, do get into separate groups most of the time. Nothing is going to be true all the time, but i'm talking generally, thats the whole concept behind races.

 

Fundamental differences? Huh? Elaborate.

 

I'm, sorry, but if you can't see fundamental differences between us, then i don't know why i waste my breath. Its obvious that asians are not like whites, and that neither are like blacks. They don't have the same eating habits, the same religions, the same backgrounds, the same outlook on things from technology to school to sports. Do i really have to give individual examples, cause i really don't feel like wasting my time.

 

No, I don't. When I think "Hispanic" I think "maybe speaks Spanish, probably from South/Central America or Mexico, or has relatives there" because that's generally what "Hispanic" entails. As for black, white and asian, I think of certain facial features and skin color. I do not, NOT, NOT assume they will act a certain way. That's extremely unfair to them, especially if I'm wrong. Of course PHYSICAL differences are inherent. Everything else is NOT.

 

Well, you can tell that to yourself if you want, its certainly a good thing, but i know i'll never be that perfect. I know that in the middle of a debate or soemthing you aren't going to notice it because you don't want to notice it, but do you really not assume anything when you hear that someone you don't know is "black." I mean sure, you don't assume they are criminals or drugdealers, but i'm talking smaller things, like maybe they might be loud or really outgoing, or they might have this interest or that. Or they might think one thing about this issue or that one. You meet someone without having any previous expectations of what they might do or be like. If you do, great, but i seriously doubt you do, at least not all of the time. I certainly don't.

 

 

 

 

You are very wrong, and I resent the assumption. I couldn't afford to have a negative stereotype like that, especially considering one of my best friends is Muslim, from Lebanon! -.-

 

(By the way, I'm firmly Christian, not Muslim. In case you were wondering.)

 

Well, i gues thats not too bad if this is the only thing you took the wrong way, but i still stand by my assumption.

 

Of course i'm not you hate all Muslims! Or that you can't be friends with one, or even that you would ever say it, i'm just saying that, whether you realize it or not, you probably have a slight intimation that they aren't good news to americans. Or would you ber just fine and go around hugging everyone if i dropped you in the middle of Palestine, or Iraq? You wouldn't be the least bit nervous that something might happen? Go ahead, deny it if you want, i certainly won't, even though i certainly would never voice it or let it affect me while here in America. Just because its there, doesn't mean you always act on it or are racist, just that its there in the back of your mind.

 

Besides, assuming that all or most Muslims are good just because you have one good friend that is one is just as unfair as assuming they are all bad. Even if it is positive it is still unfair, you said so yourself.

 

 

Alright, before you start assuming i hate muslims or have something against your friend, let me say this. I do not hate all Muslims, i'm just admitting that i do have a stereotype in the back of my mind about terrorists, and it is true that most terrorists are Muslims, so isn't it at least a little fair to be wary, however so slightly, of people from countries where there are known terrorists. The problem comes, as i've said many times before, is when you simply close yourself off to those people solely because of that intimation.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

I would feel slightly nervous, yes. Well... I'm not really christian anymore, but well, I'm still clearly European.

 

The Iraqis might dislike me because Europe and the States maybe will go to war against them: I don't look at it as they being Muslim and me being what I am.

 

You just contradicted yourself. The different groups do form cliques, as you said, and they do have the same skin color, for the most part. Obviously they aren't exactly the same, but overall they are similar. I have two examples just from today i can give you. At my school, 1300 people all have the same lunch period, and every single black person sits in the same corner of the cafeteria with incredibly little variation. Also, the asian people all sit at 3 tables by themselves, no white or black people at all. Do they all look exactly alike, no, but all have the same culture and basic physical appearance.

 

That's obvious, but hey, it's because black people have one culture and whites another. It's the same as a Swede preffering to sit with another Nordic person.

 

I mean, if I could choose between hanging out with a colored person who was born in Norway, and a light person being a second-generation American. It's all about culture, not skin color.

 

Yes, they sit together, but it's because they believe they have their culture in common, not nessesarily because they want to be with people of their own skin color.

 

As previously stated: Yes, technically race is only genetic characteristics, but those characteristics are passed down through one culture, therefore the people of that race inherit the culture of the race. There's no way around it, really, the word may technically have one definition that is different, but still in common terms and all reality it can be and is used to mean a cultural group, who also have the same genetic characteristics.

 

My cousin is an adopted two-year old girl from China. You think that as she grows up she'll make dragon lanterns, sit on pillows on the floor instead of on chairs, as they "traditionally" do in Japan, and eat with chopsticks, just because her genes tell her to? No. Which proves that you don't inherit culture geneticall, but from doing what everyone around you does. Which means culture and race aren't nessesarily linked.

 

If you just thought "hey, she's Chinese, it's in Japan they sit on pillows (at least the traditional-minded people do;))", then you've proved my point. If you study both China and Japan, or better, China, Japan, Taiwan, North and South Korea, Thailand and Vietnam (forgive me if I missed one or two), that's better than if you study only the Asians as a race. That's just going to make you think that the Japanese are communists and that Japanese and Chinese writing is one and the same thing .