2 ms·

> It depends on your definition of racism racism - dictionary 1.The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that

> It depends on your definition of racism racism - dictionary 1.The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, esp. so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races. 2.Prejudice or discrimination directed against someone of a different race based on such a belief. This is the original definition of the word - 1 year ago, 10 years ago, 100 years ago, 500 years ago. The redefinition of racism is merely a fabrication meant to suit someone elses particular agenda, or to get you to submit to their particular argument or point-of-view.

shantanubala 14y ago
> The redefinition of racism is merely a fabrication meant to suit someone elses particular agenda, or to get you to submit to their particular argument or point-of-view. A dictionary only outlines common usage (it does not provide context), and I indicated the common usage in my comment as well. If you ever want to make a nuanced argument, you must clearly define (and sometimes re-define) the words you are using! Otherwise, someone with a dictionary or a thesaurus can quickly distort your intentions by distorting the original meaning outside of its original context. Take a look at my other response below -- it may clear things up a little, but my point still stands: Adria was not using "racism" the same way you are defining "racism," and just because she did a poor job of explaining her position on Twitter does not automatically invalidate her opinions (it just means her opinions were not adequately explained). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism#Definitions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism#Definitions Or do you accept this definition as superior to one in a Physics textbook? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gravity?s=t http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gravity?s=t
- javert 14y ago
  Mucking up the language is a crime against understanding. Redefining established words is not acceptable. Anyway, this discussion is a red herring. Adria just wants an excuse to be racist, and you're defending her.
- psionski 14y ago
  If twitter isn't suited for "nuanced arguments", well then you shouldn't be using twitter in the first place! Write a blog post and only share the link (and title). It's that simple. It doesn't matter how good something sounds in your head if you can't voice it correctly.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
xshoppyx 14y ago
I was drinking with an Asian co-worker at work today and something somewhat relevant came up. A 3rd coworker asked my Asian coworker "Are you ok? Your face is red and puffy". And then he stated that Asians (saying all Asians is probably a generalization, but for this example let's assume it is true) lack an enzyme to process alcohol and that Asians are essentially allergic to alcohol. Under this definition, would it be racist to say that all other races except for Asians are inferior at processing alcohol? Even if the following is true: alcohol was less prevalent in Asian cultures and that is probably why they never evolved to possess the same enzyme, which was stated by the other coworker.
- devilshaircut 14y ago
  "they never evolved to possess the same enzyme" ... what? Asians are the same species as every other race. The idea that Asians somehow did not evolve this particular thing has nothing to do with the genetic change over time that causes speciation/evolution. I think you grossly misunderstand evolution and that your remarks are ignorant (and I think many people would claim racist).
  - penrod 14y ago
    Nice use of the R-bomb there. And adroit use of weasel words ("some would claim") to give plausible deniability. Unfortunately your objections make no sense. It's well established that some human subgroups have different physical adaptations (eg. lactase production) that have been naturally selected in the presence of local food sources or production methods. How is that unrelated to evolution?
  - newsoundwave 14y ago
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_flush_reaction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_flush_reaction I think you're the one proving ignorant here.
    - penrod 14y ago
      What is your point exactly? The article you link to states that the flush reaction is genetic, "appears to have been positively selected in the past" and has been hypothesized to "have conferred protection agains certain parasitic infections."

shantanubala 14y ago

> The redefinition of racism is merely a fabrication meant to suit someone elses particular agenda, or to get you to submit to their particular argument or point-of-view. A dictionary only outlines common usage (it does not provide context), and I indicated the common usage in my comment as well. If you ever want to make a nuanced argument, you must clearly define (and sometimes re-define) the words you are using! Otherwise, someone with a dictionary or a thesaurus can quickly distort your intentions by distorting the original meaning outside of its original context. Take a look at my other response below -- it may clear things up a little, but my point still stands: Adria was not using "racism" the same way you are defining "racism," and just because she did a poor job of explaining her position on Twitter does not automatically invalidate her opinions (it just means her opinions were not adequately explained). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism#Definitions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism#Definitions Or do you accept this definition as superior to one in a Physics textbook? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gravity?s=t http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gravity?s=t

javert 14y ago
Mucking up the language is a crime against understanding. Redefining established words is not acceptable. Anyway, this discussion is a red herring. Adria just wants an excuse to be racist, and you're defending her.
psionski 14y ago
If twitter isn't suited for "nuanced arguments", well then you shouldn't be using twitter in the first place! Write a blog post and only share the link (and title). It's that simple. It doesn't matter how good something sounds in your head if you can't voice it correctly.
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]

xshoppyx 14y ago

I was drinking with an Asian co-worker at work today and something somewhat relevant came up. A 3rd coworker asked my Asian coworker "Are you ok? Your face is red and puffy". And then he stated that Asians (saying all Asians is probably a generalization, but for this example let's assume it is true) lack an enzyme to process alcohol and that Asians are essentially allergic to alcohol. Under this definition, would it be racist to say that all other races except for Asians are inferior at processing alcohol? Even if the following is true: alcohol was less prevalent in Asian cultures and that is probably why they never evolved to possess the same enzyme, which was stated by the other coworker.

devilshaircut 14y ago
"they never evolved to possess the same enzyme" ... what? Asians are the same species as every other race. The idea that Asians somehow did not evolve this particular thing has nothing to do with the genetic change over time that causes speciation/evolution. I think you grossly misunderstand evolution and that your remarks are ignorant (and I think many people would claim racist).
- penrod 14y ago
  Nice use of the R-bomb there. And adroit use of weasel words ("some would claim") to give plausible deniability. Unfortunately your objections make no sense. It's well established that some human subgroups have different physical adaptations (eg. lactase production) that have been naturally selected in the presence of local food sources or production methods. How is that unrelated to evolution?
- newsoundwave 14y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_flush_reaction http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_flush_reaction I think you're the one proving ignorant here.
  - penrod 14y ago
    What is your point exactly? The article you link to states that the flush reaction is genetic, "appears to have been positively selected in the past" and has been hypothesized to "have conferred protection agains certain parasitic infections."