"At this point, you're just arguing about semantics. 'Skin colour' IS race."
No, I'm really not. And this is really centrally important to understanding how stupid racism is. By the logic you're suggesting here, I'm the same "race" as everybody else on Earth who has brown skin. This is pretty silly on its face. But we can go further.
"At this point, you're just arguing about semantics. 'Skin colour' IS race."
No, I'm really not. And this is really centrally important to understanding how stupid racism is. By the logic you're suggesting here, I'm the same "race" as everybody else on Earth who has brown skin. This is pretty silly on its face. But we can go further.
What degree of skin tone variation do we need before somebody is a different race? Chocolate to Black Coffee? Cappuccino to caramel? Somewhere in between? If I have a child with an Asian woman, or even a black woman from a different part of the world (as my parents did) what "race" are they?
Are you the same race as everybody in the world with white skin? If so, what does that mean you have in common? Just melanin content? Or something else?
Do you believe you all have a common ancestor that is different to the common ancestor of all people with brown skin? If we adopt the "five race" model of races, do you believe that Asians and Africans and Europeans and Native Americans and Oceanian all came from different original human beings? And even if you *do* believe that, given the amount of "racial" mixing that's taken place since then, what does that mean for the concept of race today?
Please think about these questions seriously. I'm not being glib. It's not a gotcha. So many people have bought into the lie of race because we don't tease apart these ideas enough.
And all that aside, I'm still not sure why you are so fixated on who bought race into the conversation "first". Let's ignore the race/skin colour debate. Let's say I explicitly mentioned race first. So what? My problem isn't that she mentioned race, my problem is that her argument is *racist*.
Lastly, what is the argument to be made for Eve's version of womanhood? How can a woman (in the good old fashioned sense of the word) be stripped of her womanhood? What's the slippery slope? Because remember, Eve isn't arguing to defend womanhood as it's existed since time immemorial, she is one of the people arguing that womanhood is "a few hormone injections and a declaration."
"At this point, you're just arguing about semantics. 'Skin colour' IS race."
No, I'm really not. And this is really centrally important to understanding how stupid racism is. By the logic you're suggesting here, I'm the same "race" as everybody else on Earth who has brown skin. This is pretty silly on its face. But we can go further.
What degree of skin tone variation do we need before somebody is a different race? Chocolate to Black Coffee? Cappuccino to caramel? Somewhere in between? If I have a child with an Asian woman, or even a black woman from a different part of the world (as my parents did) what "race" are they?
Are you the same race as everybody in the world with white skin? If so, what does that mean you have in common? Just melanin content? Or something else?
Do you believe you all have a common ancestor that is different to the common ancestor of all people with brown skin? If we adopt the "five race" model of races, do you believe that Asians and Africans and Europeans and Native Americans and Oceanian all came from different original human beings? And even if you *do* believe that, given the amount of "racial" mixing that's taken place since then, what does that mean for the concept of race today?
Please think about these questions seriously. I'm not being glib. It's not a gotcha. So many people have bought into the lie of race because we don't tease apart these ideas enough.
And all that aside, I'm still not sure why you are so fixated on who bought race into the conversation "first". Let's ignore the race/skin colour debate. Let's say I explicitly mentioned race first. So what? My problem isn't that she mentioned race, my problem is that her argument is *racist*.
Lastly, what is the argument to be made for Eve's version of womanhood? How can a woman (in the good old fashioned sense of the word) be stripped of her womanhood? What's the slippery slope? Because remember, Eve isn't arguing to defend womanhood as it's existed since time immemorial, she is one of the people arguing that womanhood is "a few hormone injections and a declaration."