|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On April 23 2015 22:35 puerk wrote:
A person who believes in his own classification of human races, tells someone can not be racist because he stereotypes people of a skintone that is only 3 shades darker than his own when racism clearly and unequivocaly stars at 5 shades. (proven by some austrian on first principles)
Hey dufus, the point of words are to convey meaning. A German supposing the PIGS term as racist because it puts those nations into a negative connotation is hilarious because a German and the PIGS citizens are the same race. Are they self-hating? The word here is PREJUDICED, not racist. Also, I could use more fans. Could you get more people to follow all my posts please?  Thank you.
|
On April 23 2015 22:51 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2015 22:35 puerk wrote:
A person who believes in his own classification of human races, tells someone can not be racist because he stereotypes people of a skintone that is only 3 shades darker than his own when racism clearly and unequivocaly stars at 5 shades. (proven by some austrian on first principles) Hey dufus, the point of words are to convey meaning. A German supposing the PIGS term as racist because it puts those nations into a negative connotation is hilarious because a German and the PIGS citizens are the same race. Are they self-hating? The word here is PREJUDICED, not racist. Also, I could use more fans. Could you get more people to follow all my posts please? Thank you.
They are not the same race, as there are no universally accepted human races.
In the eye of a racist any phenotypical expression of some haplogroup can and will be used to draw the line of imaginary races.
|
On April 23 2015 22:56 puerk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2015 22:51 Wegandi wrote:On April 23 2015 22:35 puerk wrote:
A person who believes in his own classification of human races, tells someone can not be racist because he stereotypes people of a skintone that is only 3 shades darker than his own when racism clearly and unequivocaly stars at 5 shades. (proven by some austrian on first principles) Hey dufus, the point of words are to convey meaning. A German supposing the PIGS term as racist because it puts those nations into a negative connotation is hilarious because a German and the PIGS citizens are the same race. Are they self-hating? The word here is PREJUDICED, not racist. Also, I could use more fans. Could you get more people to follow all my posts please? Thank you. They are not the same race, as there are no universally accepted human races. In the eye of a racist any phenotypical expression of some haplogroup can and will be used to draw the line of imaginary races.
If there are no races, how do you propose to identify things such as sickle cell which is not a trait of European peoples? There are differences amongst different people - that doesn't mean anyone is better or worse than anyone else. To deny that there exist these differences is pretty silly, but goes beyond the point I made.
|
On April 23 2015 23:02 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2015 22:56 puerk wrote:On April 23 2015 22:51 Wegandi wrote:On April 23 2015 22:35 puerk wrote:
A person who believes in his own classification of human races, tells someone can not be racist because he stereotypes people of a skintone that is only 3 shades darker than his own when racism clearly and unequivocaly stars at 5 shades. (proven by some austrian on first principles) Hey dufus, the point of words are to convey meaning. A German supposing the PIGS term as racist because it puts those nations into a negative connotation is hilarious because a German and the PIGS citizens are the same race. Are they self-hating? The word here is PREJUDICED, not racist. Also, I could use more fans. Could you get more people to follow all my posts please? Thank you. They are not the same race, as there are no universally accepted human races. In the eye of a racist any phenotypical expression of some haplogroup can and will be used to draw the line of imaginary races. If there are no races, how do you propose to identify things such as sickle cell which is not a trait of European peoples? There are differences amongst different people - that doesn't mean anyone is better or worse than anyone else. To deny that there exist these differences is pretty silly, but goes beyond the point I made.
Are you seriously really this stupidly ignorant of human biology?
I mean seriously?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
yea people knew genetics way before they formed the idea of races
|
On April 23 2015 23:08 oneofthem wrote:
yea people knew genetics way before they formed the idea of races
That's not what I was saying - you both missed the point. Puerk is simply denying that different peoples have different traits and characteristics and anyone who expresses what is plain in front of them scientifically and observationally, is a 'racist' with all the negative characteristics that applies. Which is silly. The example I gave is one. I wasn't saying that we know about sickle cell because of races, I was saying that sickle cell is a by product of our differences (which is expressed as race). Beyond all this, the point of matter is, it is silly that someone from Southern Europe is calling a German racist for using PIGS to describe this bloc of countries because *gasp* they're all caucasians (natively anyways...). The proper term is prejudice.
|
I'm cool with the term PIGS if we all accept to call central Europe's alpine nations the FAGS (France, Austria, Germany, Switzerland).
American views on race can be quite absurd. My brother has a much clearer skin than me and looks like an Irish boy, I look like a mix between a Mexican and an Arab. In the US, however, he's treated as a Caucasian and I'm treated as a Hispanic. I usually have no idea what to fill in in questionnaires when asked about race (I've been advised to fill in as Hispanic which is kind of insulting for a Portuguese).
|
Zurich15358 Posts
This is awfully derailing. Wegandi, the original mention of racism by Simberto was a jab at WhiteDog in reference to a discussion a number of pages back. Taken out of context here and more seriously than it was meant. No one here thinks that using a term like "Southern Europe" is racist (I hope).
|
There are questionnaires that ask about race?
Go on.. I don't get the rage about words like "Fag" or any of this stuff anyway.
Itally has also alps, so make it Fagits
|
On April 23 2015 23:30 Velr wrote:
There are questionnaires that ask about race?
Go on.. I don't get the rage about words like "Fag" or any of this stuff anyway.
Itally has also alps, so make it Fagits
Yes. They ask you to fill it out in school applications. Stuff like this:
+ Show Spoiler +
It's also common in the UK.
|
On April 23 2015 23:17 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2015 23:08 oneofthem wrote:
yea people knew genetics way before they formed the idea of races That's not what I was saying - you both missed the point. Puerk is simply denying that different peoples have different traits and characteristics and anyone who expresses what is plain in front of them scientifically and observationally, is a 'racist' with all the negative characteristics that applies.
Oh please quote me on this.
Humans have huge phenotypic and genotypic variability, and are one of the best studied species in their variances. It would be silly to deny that, and rightfully i never did.
What i laughed at, and still do is your bullshit understanding of biology believing in something called "caucasians", which is an actually racist term.
„A) Kaukasische Varietät.
Von weißer Farbe, mit rothen Wangen (§.43.) schwärzlichem oder nußbraunem Haar (§.52.), gerundetem Köpf (§. 62.).
Mit ovalem regelmäßigerem Gesicht, in welchem die einzelnen Theile nicht zu stark ausgezeichnet, flacher Stirn, engerer, leicht gebogner Nase, kleinem Munde (§.56.).
Mit senkrecht unter einanderstehenden Vorderzähnen des obern und untern Kieferes (§.62.).
Mit sanft hervorstehenden Lippen (vorzüglich der Unterlippe), vollem runden Kinn (§.56.)
Überhaupt von jener, nach unsern Begriffen von Ebenmaas, reizenden und schönen Gesichtsform.
Zu dieser ersten Varietät gehören die Europäer (mit Ausnahme der Lappen und übrigen Finnen) die westlichern Asiaten bis zum Fluß Obi, dem kaspischen Meere und Ganges. Endlich die Einwohner des nördlichen Afrika.“
Which is silly. The example I gave is one.
the example you gave has nothing to do with races. being black does not make you have sickle cells, and having sickle cells does not make you black.
living in cohabitation with malaria carrying insects, makes you fitter when you develop or sustain the sickle cell mutation, no fucking matter what "race" of people an 18th century german guy sorted you in.
we are over this bullshit and have actual scientific data about human genes and how they act.
I wasn't saying that we know about sickle cell because of races, I was saying that sickle cell is a by product of our differences (which is expressed as race).
No sickle cells have nothing to do with race, but with living in hot tropics with malaria carrying insects. live there 20 generations as a white person and you will have a good chance to get sickle cells faster than changeing your skin colour permanently since we have invented clothing that reduces selection pressure on skin colour but our medical treatment of malaria in tropical africa is still comparatively shit.
Beyond all this, the point of matter is, it is silly that someone from Southern Europe is calling a German racist for using PIGS to describe this bloc of countries because *gasp* they're all caucasians (natively anyways...). The proper term is prejudice.
they are not "caucasians" they are "caucasians" to actual racists believing in this arbitrary unscientific categorization of humans from the 18th century
|
On April 23 2015 23:19 warding wrote:
I'm cool with the term PIGS if we all accept to call central Europe's alpine nations the FAGS (France, Austria, Germany, Switzerland).
LOl That's hillarious.
|
lets dive right into it: http://edoc.hu-berlin.de/ebind/hdok2/h211_blumenbach_1798/pdf/h211_blumenbach_1798.pdf
"Der kaukasischen habe ich den ersten Platz gegeben, weil man sie aus später aufzuführenden Gründen, für die ursprüngliche Rasse halten muß."
+ Show Spoiler +I assigned to the caucasic race the first place, because it has to be considered the original race, as will be explained later.
"Diese Rasse erhielt ihren Namen von dem Berge
Kaukasus, weil die ihm benachbarten, Länder, und
zwar vorzüglich der Strich nach Süden, von dem
schönsten Menschenstamme, dem georgischen bewohnt
sind."
+ Show Spoiler +This race derives its name from the mountain [range] Kaukasus, because the countries around it and especially in a strip southward are inhabited by the most beautiful of human kinds, the Georgians.
und weil alle physiologischen Gründe darin
zusammenkommen, dass man das Vaterland der
ersten Menschen, nirgends anderswo suchen könne,
als hier.
+ Show Spoiler +.. and because all physiological reasons come together in them, one could look no where else for the origin country of the first men
Denn erstlich hat dieser Stamm, wie
wir gesehen haben (§. 62.) die schönste Schädelform,
aus welcher, gleichsam als aus ihrer ursprünglichen
Mittelform, die übrigen, bis zu den zwey äußersten
Extremen hin (der mongolischen auf einer Seite und
- - - der der äthiopischen auf der andern) durch ganz einfache
stufenweise Abweichungen entsprungen sind.
+ Show Spoiler +This strain has as we have seen (§62) the most beautiful form of the skull from which, like being the original middle of forms, the others up to the two outermost extremes the mongolic and aethiopic could be derived by simple stepp like modifications
Dann ist dieser Stamm von weißer Farbe, welche
wir ebenfalls für die ursprüngliche, echte Farbe
des Menschengeschlechts halten können, da aus ihr,
wie wir oben dargetan haben (§. 45.) eine Verartung
in Schwarz leicht ist, weit schwerer hingegen
aus Schwarz in Weiß (wenn nämlich die Sekretion
und Präcipitation dieses Kohlenpigments(§. 44.)
durch Länge der Zeit Wurzel gefaßt hat).
+ Show Spoiler +Furthermore is this strain of white colour, which we have to consider to be the original true colour of the humankind, because as we have explained above (§ 45) a change of kind into black is easy, and much harder from black to white (if and when the secretion and precipitation of the coal pigment (§44) has rooted itself during passage of time.
how could i as a "dufus" ever deny your glorious understanding of the most beautiful of true coloured humans
|
Austria328 Posts
To add to puerk's post (if i may):
It's also interesting to know that in german the word "Rasse" isn't used for humans at all, only far far far right wing people would use it. I always found it curious how all the rest of the world seems to throw around the word "race" so freely without thinking about it.
|
And to actually make the main point very clear:
For there to be "races" of humans, they would need to be well quantisized. There needs to be a distinct step between one race and another, not a fluid continuum. This does not exist.
What does exist is a multidimensional continuous spectrum of phenotypical characteristica. So, skin colour goes from very light to nearly completely black. Nose size and form changes from x to y, but in a fluid way in which all things in between also exist. Eye position and form. And any number of other similar observables exist.
But since this distribution is continuous, it is not very useful to randomly pick one volume in that multidimensional spectrum and declare "These people are race x, and exactly here is the cutoff!"
|
i find it shocking that you have to fill out a field called "race" on some forms in america
what purpose does this have?
also: its obvious that with the abbreviation PIGS, the intention was to insult, i hope everyone gets that. it shouldnt be used.
|
On April 24 2015 01:23 phil.ipp wrote:
i find it shocking that you have to fill out a field called "race" on some forms in america
what purpose does this have?
also: its obvious that with the abbreviation PIGS, the intention was to insult, i hope everyone gets that. it shouldnt be used.
I can off the top of my head give you something along the lines of 100+ medical reasons, but for the school example it is usually in the name of multiculturalism and the good old affirmative action - how would you be able to claim preferential treatment if they didn't queried if you have Navajo great-great-great-great-great grandparents?!
EDIT: Also I find it deplorable to be as intellectual dishonest as puerk. Portraying it as if Wegandi was stating anything remotely close to those quotes by Blumenbach is reprehensible and completely lacking of common decency and respect.
|
On April 24 2015 01:23 phil.ipp wrote:
i find it shocking that you have to fill out a field called "race" on some forms in america
what purpose does this have?
also: its obvious that with the abbreviation PIGS, the intention was to insult, i hope everyone gets that. it shouldnt be used.
The purpose is so certain people can intentionally discriminate on the basis of race. Its called "affirmative action" and its used to "prove" employment discrimination, housing discrimination, and to "encourage diversity in higher education."
In practice, in a colorblind process Asians are highly overrepresented in competitive fields, while Blacks and Hispanics are underrepresented (when compared to the population as a whole). So certain places (mostly the federal government and higher ed) enact policies that try to benefit the latter two. There have been many cases about this, and many of the policies were ruled unconstitutional. For instance, University of Michigan gave preferable admissions to blacks wherein being Black was worth more than having a perfect score (then 1600) on the SAT (a standardized college admittance exam). That policy was ruled unconstitutional in 2003, but they have similar, less obvious, and less strong policies still in place.
|
ah ok i get it, like with women and man, where they try to reach certain quotas in institutions.
|
Zurich15358 Posts
Can we get back on topic please?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.mixedracestudies.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/AQEverystreamlined.jpg)
