I get why you don't like differentiating between people, but it sort of sounds a little like the folks who deny sex is real. What's important is not that we come in a lot of colours that are sure, yeah, really mixed but you look black and i look white and Dave's wife looks Asian. Isn't that interesting, but not a good argument for enslav…
I get why you don't like differentiating between people, but it sort of sounds a little like the folks who deny sex is real. What's important is not that we come in a lot of colours that are sure, yeah, really mixed but you look black and i look white and Dave's wife looks Asian. Isn't that interesting, but not a good argument for enslaving, bombing, or genociding anyone. I say the differences are there and you can call it race or not, but the diffs are there, the groups are there, and why is it such a clusterfuck to find the language for that?
I mean yeah, we can talk about the diversity within what we 'look' like - hey, let's have a 23andMe Reveal Party where we all get together, open our envelopes and reveal our genetic ancestry for the first time. We'll have some laughs, esp about what we 'think' we are or what we 'think' others look like, and then we'll go home and watch Netflix. The diffs are visual, and all I'm arguing for is saying that we're going to classify people in groups (just like we classify birds as flying, swimming, flying/swimming, strictly land/useless wings, etc. Ostriches aren't 'better' than songbirds, they're both different but but they're still birds. It's what we *do*. We sort stuff, critters and people. 'Race' differences aren't as obvious as sex differences but they're still there and we can talk about 'race' stuff, but we can't call it anything? How about 'The Concept Formerly Known As Race'?
"I get why you don't like differentiating between people"
This is so crazy!! 😅 My whole point is that we *need* to differentiate between people more precisely. And that race does a horrible job of this. I must be doing a horrible job of explaining myself and I'm not sure why.
I'm saying that calling everybody with black skin or white skin or whatever skin a particular "race" is the failure to differentiate. It's like saying that everybody with blond or brown hair is the same race. No! They're not! It would be incredibly simplistic to claim this.
I have ancestry form Sierra Leone. If you lumped me in with all other Sierra Leoninans, I'd understand where you were coming from. It still wouldn't quite be accurate, but much more sensibly differentiated than simply saying, "oh, his skin is black, so we can just lump him in with every other human being on the entire continent of Africa and anywhere in the Caribbean and the Aboriginies in Australia."
Again, I have no issue with the notion of differences Of course there are differences. But "race" is far too blunt a concept to understand these differences.
Speaking of 23andMe, I just shared this link with Chris. Maybe it will do a better job of explaining than I have.😅
Thanks for the article, good one. I've saved it for future reference. I understand why scientists think 'race' is just a social construct and it surely is; when I was a little kid we didn't even come from 'five' different races; it was down to three: Negroid, Caucasoid, and Mongoloid (that last was particularly contentious as mentally retarded people were sometimes called 'mongoloids' due to having slanted eyes similar to Asians).
So yes, we know all about how genetically diverse we are, but then how do you want to refer to the problems we have in America and elsewhere? Because 'black' and 'white' in America really mean more than just what you look like; they come with a lot of cultural baggage too, about slave legacy and responsibility, experiences, worries, concerns. My black friend a few years ago used to worry about taking out the garbage while black when some poor schmuck somewhere in America got shot by police for doing exactly that.
What language do *you* propose we use to distinguish between the surficial differences that are oh-so-important in identity-infested America?
As to what to call "the concept formerly know as race" other than "wrong" or "simplistic" I'm not really sure. It's not easy being a race writer and knowing that the concept of race is completely wrong.😄
It's such a commonly understood term that I just say "race" usually with scare quotes. But whenever possible, I avoid it. I talk about skin colour because really, that's what people usually mean when they mention it.
Then maybe it's time to start thinking about a better way of referring to it. Because the problem associated with skin differences isn't going away soon, and we *do* discriminate between (not necessarily against, although we can do that too) based on what we look like. "Look for Steve, he's the black guy with the Mets cap on." "Nicole's a white woman with blonde hair."
'Color' maybe? Since that's what it really comes down to. Black, white, brown, olive?
I've sometimes jokingly referred to 'flavours'...chocolate, vanilla, caramel, and teriyaki (can't think of a good sweet colour for Asians...open to suggestions :) )
I get why you don't like differentiating between people, but it sort of sounds a little like the folks who deny sex is real. What's important is not that we come in a lot of colours that are sure, yeah, really mixed but you look black and i look white and Dave's wife looks Asian. Isn't that interesting, but not a good argument for enslaving, bombing, or genociding anyone. I say the differences are there and you can call it race or not, but the diffs are there, the groups are there, and why is it such a clusterfuck to find the language for that?
I mean yeah, we can talk about the diversity within what we 'look' like - hey, let's have a 23andMe Reveal Party where we all get together, open our envelopes and reveal our genetic ancestry for the first time. We'll have some laughs, esp about what we 'think' we are or what we 'think' others look like, and then we'll go home and watch Netflix. The diffs are visual, and all I'm arguing for is saying that we're going to classify people in groups (just like we classify birds as flying, swimming, flying/swimming, strictly land/useless wings, etc. Ostriches aren't 'better' than songbirds, they're both different but but they're still birds. It's what we *do*. We sort stuff, critters and people. 'Race' differences aren't as obvious as sex differences but they're still there and we can talk about 'race' stuff, but we can't call it anything? How about 'The Concept Formerly Known As Race'?
"I get why you don't like differentiating between people"
This is so crazy!! 😅 My whole point is that we *need* to differentiate between people more precisely. And that race does a horrible job of this. I must be doing a horrible job of explaining myself and I'm not sure why.
I'm saying that calling everybody with black skin or white skin or whatever skin a particular "race" is the failure to differentiate. It's like saying that everybody with blond or brown hair is the same race. No! They're not! It would be incredibly simplistic to claim this.
I have ancestry form Sierra Leone. If you lumped me in with all other Sierra Leoninans, I'd understand where you were coming from. It still wouldn't quite be accurate, but much more sensibly differentiated than simply saying, "oh, his skin is black, so we can just lump him in with every other human being on the entire continent of Africa and anywhere in the Caribbean and the Aboriginies in Australia."
Again, I have no issue with the notion of differences Of course there are differences. But "race" is far too blunt a concept to understand these differences.
Speaking of 23andMe, I just shared this link with Chris. Maybe it will do a better job of explaining than I have.😅
https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/science-genetics-reshaping-race-debate-21st-century/
Thanks for the article, good one. I've saved it for future reference. I understand why scientists think 'race' is just a social construct and it surely is; when I was a little kid we didn't even come from 'five' different races; it was down to three: Negroid, Caucasoid, and Mongoloid (that last was particularly contentious as mentally retarded people were sometimes called 'mongoloids' due to having slanted eyes similar to Asians).
So yes, we know all about how genetically diverse we are, but then how do you want to refer to the problems we have in America and elsewhere? Because 'black' and 'white' in America really mean more than just what you look like; they come with a lot of cultural baggage too, about slave legacy and responsibility, experiences, worries, concerns. My black friend a few years ago used to worry about taking out the garbage while black when some poor schmuck somewhere in America got shot by police for doing exactly that.
What language do *you* propose we use to distinguish between the surficial differences that are oh-so-important in identity-infested America?
"The Concept Formerly Known As Race"
As to what to call "the concept formerly know as race" other than "wrong" or "simplistic" I'm not really sure. It's not easy being a race writer and knowing that the concept of race is completely wrong.😄
It's such a commonly understood term that I just say "race" usually with scare quotes. But whenever possible, I avoid it. I talk about skin colour because really, that's what people usually mean when they mention it.
Then maybe it's time to start thinking about a better way of referring to it. Because the problem associated with skin differences isn't going away soon, and we *do* discriminate between (not necessarily against, although we can do that too) based on what we look like. "Look for Steve, he's the black guy with the Mets cap on." "Nicole's a white woman with blonde hair."
'Color' maybe? Since that's what it really comes down to. Black, white, brown, olive?
I've sometimes jokingly referred to 'flavours'...chocolate, vanilla, caramel, and teriyaki (can't think of a good sweet colour for Asians...open to suggestions :) )