3 ms·
The book in the post explicitly makes that point. It shows multiple people who might be labeled different races with the exact same skin color, for instance. I
by SamBam 5y ago
The book in the post explicitly makes that point. It shows multiple people who might be labeled different races with the exact same skin color, for instance.
It's making the point that skin color is far more diverse than simplistic ideas of race, and far less-correlated to race than one might think.
I think seeing everyone in a multi-dimensional spectrum, in which the viewer occupies one point and is not simply on one side of some line, like they might simplistically imagine, does a lot to show our commonality.
- Grustaf 5y ago> It's making the point that skin color is far more diverse than simplistic ideas of race, and far less-correlated to race than one might think. My point is that very few actual racists (outside the US, at least) think in terms of skin colour, so if that is the purpose of the book it seems to miss the target. I would say that it is the skin colour concept that is simplistic and meaningless though, it is race that is a diverse and interesting concept, related to biology, geography, migrations etc. Skin colour is just one out of hundreds of characteristics, and arguably one of the least interesting and meaningful ones.