3 ms·

> I don't think anybody seriously considerd either "Indonesian" nor "Brazillian" to be racial categories or groupings. I hope not. That wasn’t the point I mea

> I don't think anybody seriously considerd either "Indonesian" nor "Brazillian" to be racial categories or groupings. I hope not. That wasn’t the point I meant to make. The thread I replied in started with trying to explain skin color differences to a child. I had to do that with my own kids, because kids notice that people look different. I stayed away from the concept of “race” and instead tried to explain heritage and adaptation. At first glance a child might very well think Indonesians and Brazilians belong to the same race — it would depend on what features they notice. Sadly too many adults have the same level of discrimination (in both senses).

defrost 2y ago
Sure, I'm further emphasising the point that much of what some regard as "race" is superficial or "familial". Reading older English books many years past I've seen the claim that Scottish families could be distinguished by features, I'd accept that having recognised people as being from one family or another growing, however I doubt anyone would claim the MacThoseOnes are a different race to the McThemOnes. I saw in this post some conflation of "Africans" and "(Australian) Aboriginals", both vey large groups with very many sub groups - it's worth a mention that of all the peoples on the planet these two are perhaps the furtherest apart on the family tree as it took a good while to walk (and boat a little) to Australia and arrive here some 70K+ years past - much of Europe is likely more closely related on the great human tree to modern Africans.
exitb 2y ago
I'm from central Europe, so maybe the fine details regarding this topic escape my attention, but I would understand heritage as a much more social concept than race. For example, a kid born to Japanese parents and growing up in Poland may very well feel connection to Polish heritage. This obviously doesn't make them Slavic, but that's not a requirement to be Polish. On the other hand, some people deliberately escape their countries and may find the idea of implicitly connecting them to that heritage offensive.

defrost 2y ago

Sure, I'm further emphasising the point that much of what some regard as "race" is superficial or "familial". Reading older English books many years past I've seen the claim that Scottish families could be distinguished by features, I'd accept that having recognised people as being from one family or another growing, however I doubt anyone would claim the MacThoseOnes are a different race to the McThemOnes. I saw in this post some conflation of "Africans" and "(Australian) Aboriginals", both vey large groups with very many sub groups - it's worth a mention that of all the peoples on the planet these two are perhaps the furtherest apart on the family tree as it took a good while to walk (and boat a little) to Australia and arrive here some 70K+ years past - much of Europe is likely more closely related on the great human tree to modern Africans.

exitb 2y ago

I'm from central Europe, so maybe the fine details regarding this topic escape my attention, but I would understand heritage as a much more social concept than race. For example, a kid born to Japanese parents and growing up in Poland may very well feel connection to Polish heritage. This obviously doesn't make them Slavic, but that's not a requirement to be Polish. On the other hand, some people deliberately escape their countries and may find the idea of implicitly connecting them to that heritage offensive.