3 ms·
I salute your tilting at windmills against Political Correctness. But it’s a waste of effort. I mean that it is pseudo-science in the sense that there is no sc
by avgcorrection 4y ago
I salute your tilting at windmills against Political Correctness. But it’s a waste of effort.
I mean that it is pseudo-science in the sense that there is no scientific substance to it. I mean that every time someone has tried to make a science of race—and there have been plenty of attempts—it’s just turned out to be a crock of shit.
There is an everyday meaning of “race”, yes. mostly about skin pigmentation, eye shape, bone shape. Things like that. So why do I mention the pseudo-scientific connection? Because “race-mixing” implies that different “races” breeding is bad, which must mean—beyond the completely shallow like the appearance of people who are “mixed”—that there is something substantive to the notion of races which makes mixed-race people inferior in some way. Or that non-<race> are inferior. But there isn’t.
One can easily imagine a parallel universe where what we call races correspondend with completely wildly different traits, like a completely different level of intelligence (a recurring racist trope). Or we could just look at the differences in other biological species in our own (non-parallel) universe. But it just so happens to be the apparent fact that human races (in the everyday sense) are not substantially different.
Certainly not different enough to worry about race-mixing.
If you raise a child born in Indonesia in Sweden, they will speak Swedish and be like other Swedes. But if you put a 20-year-old Swede in the middle of a jungle of in Papua, they will probably just die. The point is how plastic young children are and how inconsequential the fact that your genes came from the other side of the planet really are.
Your allusion to examples of differences between people illustrates this:
> Human beings are a single species with a large number of branches allowing them to survive localised environmental niches.
Human beings are a tropical primate who use technology to survive permanently in climates ranging from the tundra to the desert. The know-how of an Inuit is much more relevant for their survival compared to the fact that they are probably more adapted as an organism to living in eight-month-winter climate compared to a Spaniard.
> But to pretend that races aren't real just because of an interlink between the study of race and racist ideologies is fucking ridiculous.
Nowhere did I say or imply that I think that “race” is pseudo-science because of racist ideologies.
Stop making shit up!
- yarg 4y ago> There is an everyday meaning of “race”, yes. mostly about skin pigmentation, eye shape, bone shape. Things like that. So why do I mention the pseudo-scientific connection? Because “race-mixing” implies that different “races” breeding is bad, which must mean—beyond the completely shallow like the appearance of people who are “mixed”—that there is something substantive to the notion of races which makes mixed-race people inferior in some way. Or that non-<race> are inferior. But there isn’t. I'm going to try in good faith to follow what you just said. Or get so far as the part that makes me stop reading. > Because “race-mixing” implies that different “races” breeding is bad Why? Because a bunch of racist bullshit about the mud people? You're confusing the manifestation of an event with the social stigma around it. And there is no doubt at all that that stigma was abhorrent to its core (shout out to Dolphus Raymond), but that's got fuck all to do with what you are asserting. And by the way, mixed race people (unimaginary as they are) are sexy as hell.
- avgcorrection 4y ago> I'm going to try in good faith to follow what you just said. Or get so far as the part that makes me stop reading. A for effort. > > Because “race-mixing” implies that different “races” breeding is bad > Why? Because a bunch of racist bullshit about the mud people? “Anti-race-mixing ideologies”. “Anti” means bad, i.e. different races breeding is bad. How could it be more straightforward? > > Not to over-charge this conversation, but it reminds me of anti-race-mixing ideologies.
- yarg 4y agoAnti does not mean, never has meant and never will mean bad. It means against. Dys means bad.