What is race?

  1. Pro Virili Parte
    JudoJosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    30
    Posts
    9,066
    Rep Power
    2762303
    Level
    81
    Lv. Percent
    35.49%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    What is race?


    Is it real? Is race just a social construct that we created to justify the feeling of superiority or something else? I mean it obvious holds meaning in todays society but what defines race? Is their a biological foundation or genetic reasoning to how people are separated or categorized?Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S™II using Tapatalk 2
    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates

  2. Pro Virili Parte
    JudoJosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    30
    Posts
    9,066
    Rep Power
    2762303
    Level
    81
    Lv. Percent
    35.49%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Re: What is race?


    Some interesting readings on the concept of race

    http://db.tt/bxMuOOCs

    http://db.tt/wNwsbI4H

    and a pretty cool website too

    The Race Project website of the American Anthropological Association

    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S™II using Tapatalk 2
    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates
  3. Senior Member
    mikeg313's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,310
    Rep Power
    460196
    Level
    43
    Lv. Percent
    20.1%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    That article is crap. While it holds some facts it's insulting to insinuate that racism is a product of white colonial America bringing on slavery in the US towards blacks. Bull****, black slavery in America is a small drop in the bucket of the history of slavery. Yes it may be the most recent example to reference but its as old as any "civilized" ancient culture with proof of it dating as far if not further back as the ancient Egyptians (dark skinned people) and ancient Persians (also dark skinned people). Cultures much older then the Romans (a light skinned culture) who also enslaved but not based on color but social standing and captures from foreign wars and concurs. Writings like that are irresponsible. Yes slavery in this country was a dispicable act but buy very few and mostly buy the very rich. Not the whole damn country! This article reads as if it was written by a bitterly biased "African American". How often to you hear about the 100s of thousands of Asians enslaved to build the railroads In this country? Yeah it was horrible act brought on buy the 1% of the country that could afford slaves and you also don't hear any blame towards those of their own African descent that sold them to the colonialist into slavery. The writer of that needs a reality bitch smack. To say People of different cultures always embraced eachother and inner mingled is idiotic and far from it. Concur and take their land claim it and enslave is more true of most ancient organizes cultures and for waaaaay longer periods then our countries short history.
    •   
       

  4. Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,505
    Rep Power
    1097383
    Level
    74
    Lv. Percent
    53.49%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by mikeg313 View Post
    That article is crap. While it holds some facts it's insulting to insinuate that racism is a product of white colonial America bringing on slavery in the US towards blacks. Bull****, black slavery in America is a small drop in the bucket of the history of slavery. Yes it may be the most recent example to reference but its as old as any "civilized" ancient culture with proof of it dating as far if not further back as the ancient Egyptians (dark skinned people) and ancient Persians (also dark skinned people). Cultures much older then the Romans (a light skinned culture) who also enslaved but not based on color but social standing and captures from foreign wars and concurs. Writings like that are irresponsible. Yes slavery in this country was a dispicable act but buy very few and mostly buy the very rich. Not the whole damn country! This article reads as if it was written by a bitterly biased "African American". How often to you hear about the 100s of thousands of Asians enslaved to build the railroads In this country? Yeah it was horrible act brought on buy the 1% of the country that could afford slaves and you also don't hear any blame towards those of their own African descent that sold them to the colonialist into slavery. The writer of that needs a reality bitch smack. To say People of different cultures always embraced eachother and inner mingled is idiotic and far from it. Concur and take their land claim it and enslave is more true of most ancient organizes cultures and for waaaaay longer periods then our countries short history.
    Interesting points and accurate about American role in slavery.


    However, Not sure what you mean by the Egyptians and Persians being dark skinned. Based on historical record, they are not African American and far more middle eastern in appearance. The Egyptians made it quite clear of their skin tone in their art work, specifically in battles v. the Nubians.
    Controlled Labs Head Board Rep
    adam @ ControlledLabs.com
    CONTROLLED LABS products are produced in a GMP for Sport certified facility
  5. Pro Virili Parte
    JudoJosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    30
    Posts
    9,066
    Rep Power
    2762303
    Level
    81
    Lv. Percent
    35.49%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Re: What is race?


    The categorization of people (race) first appeared in Spain. Razza was used to describe the breeds of dogs and horses and then used to describe wines. Then razza started to be used to describe people but it was based off what religion they were and where they were from.

    The idea of race is a fairly new concept in human history. Lets remember that the term race does not necessarily equal ethnicity and/or culture. So what is race? What separates a white man from a black man?

    Fun fact, oddly ethnicity used to be a negative term. It was synonymous for "heathens" and today the term is used casually without the original negative connotations. Perhaps we will see the same with the word "race"?

    Personally I don't really have an opinion, or haven't formed one really yet. Just thought it was interesting that from a biological perspective there is a signifficent lack of evidence that differentiates one race from another.

    AE what is your take? I am extremely interested to hear your thoughts on this

    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S™II using Tapatalk 2
    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates
  6. Senior Member
    mikeg313's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,310
    Rep Power
    460196
    Level
    43
    Lv. Percent
    20.1%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by AE14 View Post

    Interesting points and accurate about American role in slavery.

    However, Not sure what you mean by the Egyptians and Persians being dark skinned. Based on historical record, they are not African American and far more middle eastern in appearance. The Egyptians made it quite clear of their skin tone in their art work, specifically in battles v. the Nubians.
    It was a point to relay the fact that slavery is not just or only a product of white colonial culture. Sorry if my examples are as detailed as I'd end up spending a whole day typing histories specifics on an iPhone. I'm sure my example is good enough to get an idea where in coming from
  7. Pro Virili Parte
    JudoJosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    30
    Posts
    9,066
    Rep Power
    2762303
    Level
    81
    Lv. Percent
    35.49%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Note, the question is what defines race?

    If you want to talk what defines racism check these out

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/ujw4ek6cei...S%2CSTEVEN.pdf
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/11fx10q2it...c%20Racism.PDF
    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates
  8. Pro Virili Parte
    JudoJosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    30
    Posts
    9,066
    Rep Power
    2762303
    Level
    81
    Lv. Percent
    35.49%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by mikeg313 View Post
    That article is crap. While it holds some facts it's insulting to insinuate that racism is a product of white colonial America bringing on slavery in the US towards blacks. Bull****, black slavery in America is a small drop in the bucket of the history of slavery. Yes it may be the most recent example to reference but its as old as any "civilized" ancient culture with proof of it dating as far if not further back as the ancient Egyptians (dark skinned people) and ancient Persians (also dark skinned people). Cultures much older then the Romans (a light skinned culture) who also enslaved but not based on color but social standing and captures from foreign wars and concurs. Writings like that are irresponsible. Yes slavery in this country was a dispicable act but buy very few and mostly buy the very rich. Not the whole damn country! This article reads as if it was written by a bitterly biased "African American". How often to you hear about the 100s of thousands of Asians enslaved to build the railroads In this country? Yeah it was horrible act brought on buy the 1% of the country that could afford slaves and you also don't hear any blame towards those of their own African descent that sold them to the colonialist into slavery. The writer of that needs a reality bitch smack. To say People of different cultures always embraced eachother and inner mingled is idiotic and far from it. Concur and take their land claim it and enslave is more true of most ancient organizes cultures and for waaaaay longer periods then our countries short history.
    Do you feel that the trans atlantic slave trade had an impact on more then just the Americas but on the whole world?
    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates
  9. Senior Member
    mikeg313's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,310
    Rep Power
    460196
    Level
    43
    Lv. Percent
    20.1%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    The categorization of people (race) first appeared in Spain. Razza was used to describe the breeds of dogs and horses and then used to describe wines. Then razza started to be used to describe people but it was based off what religion they were and where they were from.

    The idea of race is a fairly new concept in human history. I think you are mixing up race, ethnicity and culture as one word. Fun fact, oddly ethnicity used to be a negative term. It was synonymous for "heathens" and today the term is used casually without the original negative connotations. Perhaps we will see the same with the word "race"?

    Personally I don't really have an opinion, or haven't formed one really yet. Just thought it was interesting that from a biological perspective there is a signifficent lack of evidence that differentiates one race from another.

    AE what is your take? I am extremely interested to hear your thoughts on this

    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S(TM)II using Tapatalk 2
    I understand what you're saying but the idea of race or ethnicity has got to be older. Maybe they didn't have words for it until spaniards made it into one but biased treatment of others who are different in skin color, culture, etc. is much older then that.
  10. Pro Virili Parte
    JudoJosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    30
    Posts
    9,066
    Rep Power
    2762303
    Level
    81
    Lv. Percent
    35.49%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by mikeg313 View Post
    I understand what you're saying but the idea of race or ethnicity has got to be older. Maybe they didn't have words for it until spaniards made it into one but biased treatment of others who are different in skin color, culture, etc. is much older then that.
    So you view race as skin color and ethnic differences?

    What about South Africans who are white yet still African? If we define African as skin color and ethnicity than are (white) South Africans not Africans? Maybe we should define what ethnicity is? Are the terms "Ethnicity" and "Race" synonymous with each other?



    *NOTE - I understand this can be a sensitive topic to some and I am in no way intentionally looking to offend someone. Also Im not even looking to argue as I have just myself been asked this question and have yet to make a conclusion. I just found it interesting and was curious to know what others thought. As far as I am concerned there is no right or wrong answer and I am not really looking for any answers but instead looking to see what people think about the topic.
    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates
  11. Elite Member
    hvactech's Avatar
    Stats
    5'6"  165 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,789
    Rep Power
    2881265
    Level
    80
    Lv. Percent
    13.73%
    Achievements Activity ProActivity AuthorityActivity VeteranPosting ProPosting Authority

    ive always pondered this from time to time. unfortunately in this frame of time race seems to be based off skin color. the "white" south african reference is a perfect example of the social flaw in its meaning.
    LG Sciences forum representative
    www.lgsciences.com
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/company-promotions/249846-lg-sciences-would.html
  12. Senior Member
    mikeg313's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,310
    Rep Power
    460196
    Level
    43
    Lv. Percent
    20.1%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post

    So you view race as skin color and ethnic differences?

    What about South Africans who are white yet still African? If we define African as skin color and ethnicity than are (white) South Africans not Africans? Maybe we should define what ethnicity is? Are the terms "Ethnicity" and "Race" synonymous with each other?

    *NOTE - I understand this can be a sensitive topic to some and I am in no way intentionally looking to offend someone. Also Im not even looking to argue as I have just myself been asked this question and have yet to make a conclusion. I just found it interesting and was curious to know what others thought. As far as I am concerned there is no right or wrong answer and I am not really looking for any answers but instead looking to see what people think about the topic.
    I see race as the human race, were all the same animal with different stripes. Majority of the population see it the way you stated in your question. I have a much more open mind then that although ill admit to slipping from time to time with comments either out of spite/anger or humor but I'm human brought up in American culture. I've also been raised as a white male in an city that was %90 black at the time I grew up. So I've had my share of racism shot in my direction as I still do living/working in this city. Some call it "reverse discrimination" which USA bull**** term because discrimination is discrimination and doesn't change meaning based on your skin color. I still get accused of being racist based on my appearance. Isn't that funny? Being accused of racism based on your appearance by an outwardly prejudice and obviously racist person from another race?! Ignorance at its peak! My favorite response is "I'm not racist, I just don't like you!" Which is all an individual like that deserves back if anything other then a boot to the head, but then I would appear racist with tattoos, muscles, shaved head, and my club rags on while kickin some black dudes ass for talkin **** like that, so I think that phrase is best to settle the score In that scenario. Mind you I'm also in an interracial marriage and have a beautiful interracial son and we get the looks all the time from prejudice ugly people. Well all be the same color one day and I'm happy doing my part in the mixing bowl cus it's sooo sweet ;-)...
  13. Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,505
    Rep Power
    1097383
    Level
    74
    Lv. Percent
    53.49%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    The categorization of people (race) first appeared in Spain. Razza was used to describe the breeds of dogs and horses and then used to describe wines. Then razza started to be used to describe people but it was based off what religion they were and where they were from.

    The idea of race is a fairly new concept in human history. Lets remember that the term race does not necessarily equal ethnicity and/or culture. So what is race? What separates a white man from a black man?

    Fun fact, oddly ethnicity used to be a negative term. It was synonymous for "heathens" and today the term is used casually without the original negative connotations. Perhaps we will see the same with the word "race"?

    Personally I don't really have an opinion, or haven't formed one really yet. Just thought it was interesting that from a biological perspective there is a signifficent lack of evidence that differentiates one race from another.

    AE what is your take? I am extremely interested to hear your thoughts on this

    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S™II using Tapatalk 2
    Its interesting with the use of the term ethnicity. As many ancient cultures also had a reference to the distinguishing characteristics that separated them from others, most specifically the Egyptians. Whether the Nubians, Hittites, etc... the Egyptians were very specific about the inferiority of those of different cultural and ethnic backgrounds.

    The whole concept of ethnic "inferiority" seems to have been inbred in humans since our first true attempts at civilizations. I mean that statement as a truly sad statement
    Controlled Labs Head Board Rep
    adam @ ControlledLabs.com
    CONTROLLED LABS products are produced in a GMP for Sport certified facility
  14. Board Sponsor
    AE14's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  200 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    12,505
    Rep Power
    1097383
    Level
    74
    Lv. Percent
    53.49%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    Do you feel that the trans atlantic slave trade had an impact on more then just the Americas but on the whole world?
    definitely the whole world. THe slave trade was huge business for many European nations. However, they were able to end the trade without needing a war like Americans did. In fact, the Americans did not truly need a war to end the trade (and it was not a major reason for the war, btw). England for example, provided financial assistance to those adversely affected by the end of the slave trade. The US could have done the same. However, we decided that the fight to preserve the Union was a wonderful screen to serve this purpose. I better stop my rant now, or I will slander the "great" Lincoln, and people will not be happy
    Controlled Labs Head Board Rep
    adam @ ControlledLabs.com
    CONTROLLED LABS products are produced in a GMP for Sport certified facility
  15. Pro Virili Parte
    JudoJosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    30
    Posts
    9,066
    Rep Power
    2762303
    Level
    81
    Lv. Percent
    35.49%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Re: What is race?


    Quote Originally Posted by AE14 View Post
    definitely the whole world. THe slave trade was huge business for many European nations. However, they were able to end the trade without needing a war like Americans did. In fact, the Americans did not truly need a war to end the trade (and it was not a major reason for the war, btw). England for example, provided financial assistance to those adversely affected by the end of the slave trade. The US could have done the same. However, we decided that the fight to preserve the Union was a wonderful screen to serve this purpose. I better stop my rant now, or I will slander the "great" Lincoln, and people will not be happy
    This

    http://db.tt/5CBhahWj

    Brings up some interesting points about that period of American history (late 1700s). I was amazed about how the author declares the US constitution was written mostly influenced by the slave trade. The authors stance was that while most Americans view the constitution as a document that created the sociopoltical structure that keeps the nation together, is wrong and in fact the constitution was created to maintain seperation and oppression of the time.

    Two lines I remember are "domestic slavery is the mist prominent feature in the aristocratic countenance of the proposed consitiution" (then he goes on to list all the mentions in our constitution where slavery is mentioned. Another one was "its a bourgeois democratic document for the governing of a slave holder capatlist republic"

    I found it a very interesting read to say the least


    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S™II using Tapatalk 2
    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates
  16. Diamond Member
    AZMIDLYF's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  215 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Age
    55
    Posts
    14,730
    Rep Power
    4928438
    Level
    92
    Lv. Percent
    16.29%
    Achievements Activity ProActivity AuthorityActivity VeteranPosting ProPosting Authority

    What is Race?

    What is Race? When some people use the “race” they attach a biological meaning, still others use “race” as a socially constructed concept. It is clear that even though race does not have a biological meaning, it does have a social meaning which has been legally constructed.
    Biological Construction
    By . . .”biological race,” I mean the view of race espoused by Judge Tucker, and still popular today, that there exist natural, physical divisions among humans that are hereditary, reflected in morphology, and roughly but correctly captured by terms like Black, White, and Asian (or Negroid, Caucasoid, and Mongoloid). Under this view, one’s ancestors and epidermis ineluctably determine membership in a genetically defined racial group. The connection between human physiognomy and racial status is concrete; in Judge Tucker’s words, every individual’s race has been “stampt” by nature. . . .Despite the prevalent belief in biological races, overwhelming evidence proves that race is not biological. Biological races like Negroid and Caucasoid simply do not exist. A newly popular argument among several scholars, is that races are wholly illusory, whether as a biological or social concept. Under this thinking, if there is no natural link between faces and races, then no connection exists.
    There are no genetic characteristics possessed by all Blacks but not by non- Blacks; similarly, there is no gene or cluster of genes common to all Whites but not to non-Whites. One’s race is not determined by a single gene or gene cluster, as is, for example, sickle cell anemia. Nor are races marked by important differences in gene frequencies, the rates of appearance of certain gene types. The data compiled by various scientists demonstrates, contrary to popular opinion, that intra-group differences exceed inter-group differences. That is, greater genetic variation exists within the populations typically labeled Black and White than between these populations. This finding refutes the supposition that racial divisions reflect fundamental genetic differences.
    Notice this does not mean that individuals are genetically indistinguishable from each other, or even that small population groups cannot be genetically differentiated. Small populations, for example the Xhosa or the Basques, share similar gene frequencies. However, differentiation is a function of separation, usually geographic, and occurs in gradations rather than across fractures.. .. . . The notion that humankind can be divided along White, Black, and Yellow lines reveals the social rather than the scientific origin of race. The idea that there exist three races, and that these races are “Caucasoid,” “Negroid,” and “Mongoloid,” is rooted in the European imagination of the Middle Ages, which encompassed only Europe, Africa, and the Near East.. . Nevertheless, the history of science has long been the history of failed efforts to justify these social beliefs. Along the way, various minds tried to fashion practical human typologies along the following physical axes: skin color, hair texture, facial angle, jaw size, cranial capacity, brain mass, frontal lobe mass, brain surface fissures and convolutions, and even body lice. As one scholar notes, “[t]he nineteenth century was a period of exhaustive and–as it turned out–futile search for criteria to define and describe race differences.”. . . Attempts to define racial categories by physical attributes ultimately failed. By 1871, some leading intellectuals had recognized that even using the word “race” “was virtually a confession of ignorance or evil intent.” The genetic studies of the last few decades have only added more nails to the coffin of biological race. Evidence shows that those features usually coded to race, for example, stature, skin color, hair texture, and facial structure, do not correlate strongly with genetic variation. . . The rejection of race in science is now almost complete. In the end, we should embrace historian Barbara Fields’s succinct conclusion with respect to the plausibility of biological races: “Anyone who continues to believe in race as a physical attribute of individuals, despite the now commonplace disclaimers of biologists and geneticists, might as well also believe that Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the tooth fairy are real, and that the earth stands still while the sun moves.”
    . . . Unfortunately, few in this society seem prepared to fully relinquish their subscription to notions of biological race.. . .[including the] Congress and the Supreme Court. Congress’ anachronistic understanding of race is exemplified by a 1988 statute that explains that “the term ‘racial group’ means a set of individuals whose identity as such is distinctive in terms of physical characteristics or biological descent.” The Supreme Court, although purporting to sever race from biology, also seems incapable of doing so. In Saint Francis College v. Al-Khazraji, the Court determined that an Arab could recover damages for racial discrimination under 42 U.S.C. 1981. . . Despite a seeming rejection of biological race, Justice White [stated]: “The Court of Appeals was thus quite right in holding that 1981, ‘at a minimum,’ reaches discrimination against an individual ‘because he or she is genetically part of an ethnically and physiognomically distinctive subgrouping of homo sapiens.”‘. . . By adopting the lower court’s language of genetics and distinctive subgroupings, Justice White demonstrates the Court’s continued reliance on blood as a metonym for race. . . .In Metrobroadcasting v. FCC, Justice Scalia again reveals the Court’s understanding of race as a matter of blood. During oral argument, Scalia attacked the argument that granting minorities broadcasting licenses would enhance diversity by blasting “the policy as a matter of ‘blood,’ at one point charging that the policy reduced to a question of ‘blood . . . blood, not background and environment.”‘
    Social Construction
    . . . I define a “race” as a vast group of people loosely bound together by historically contingent, socially significant elements of their morphology and/or ancestry. I argue that race must be understood as a sui generis social phenomenon in which contested systems of meaning serve as the connections between physical features, races, and personal characteristics. In other words, social meanings connect our faces to our souls. Race is neither an essence nor an illusion, but rather an ongoing, contradictory, self-reinforcing process subject to the macro forces of social and political struggle and the micro effects of daily decisions. . . Referents of terms like Black, White, Asian, and Latino are social groups, not genetically distinct branches of humankind
    Always open light. Its not what you open with, its what you finish with. Louie Simmons
  17. Senior Member
    mikeg313's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,310
    Rep Power
    460196
    Level
    43
    Lv. Percent
    20.1%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by AZMIDLYF View Post
    What is Race?

    What is Race? When some people use the "race" they attach a biological meaning, still others use "race" as a socially constructed concept. It is clear that even though race does not have a biological meaning, it does have a social meaning which has been legally constructed.
    Biological Construction
    By . . ."biological race," I mean the view of race espoused by Judge Tucker, and still popular today, that there exist natural, physical divisions among humans that are hereditary, reflected in morphology, and roughly but correctly captured by terms like Black, White, and Asian (or Negroid, Caucasoid, and Mongoloid). Under this view, one's ancestors and epidermis ineluctably determine membership in a genetically defined racial group. The connection between human physiognomy and racial status is concrete; in Judge Tucker's words, every individual's race has been "stampt" by nature. . . .Despite the prevalent belief in biological races, overwhelming evidence proves that race is not biological. Biological races like Negroid and Caucasoid simply do not exist. A newly popular argument among several scholars, is that races are wholly illusory, whether as a biological or social concept. Under this thinking, if there is no natural link between faces and races, then no connection exists.
    There are no genetic characteristics possessed by all Blacks but not by non- Blacks; similarly, there is no gene or cluster of genes common to all Whites but not to non-Whites. One's race is not determined by a single gene or gene cluster, as is, for example, sickle cell anemia. Nor are races marked by important differences in gene frequencies, the rates of appearance of certain gene types. The data compiled by various scientists demonstrates, contrary to popular opinion, that intra-group differences exceed inter-group differences. That is, greater genetic variation exists within the populations typically labeled Black and White than between these populations. This finding refutes the supposition that racial divisions reflect fundamental genetic differences.
    Notice this does not mean that individuals are genetically indistinguishable from each other, or even that small population groups cannot be genetically differentiated. Small populations, for example the Xhosa or the Basques, share similar gene frequencies. However, differentiation is a function of separation, usually geographic, and occurs in gradations rather than across fractures.. .. . . The notion that humankind can be divided along White, Black, and Yellow lines reveals the social rather than the scientific origin of race. The idea that there exist three races, and that these races are "Caucasoid," "Negroid," and "Mongoloid," is rooted in the European imagination of the Middle Ages, which encompassed only Europe, Africa, and the Near East.. . Nevertheless, the history of science has long been the history of failed efforts to justify these social beliefs. Along the way, various minds tried to fashion practical human typologies along the following physical axes: skin color, hair texture, facial angle, jaw size, cranial capacity, brain mass, frontal lobe mass, brain surface fissures and convolutions, and even body lice. As one scholar notes, "[t]he nineteenth century was a period of exhaustive and-as it turned out-futile search for criteria to define and describe race differences.". . . Attempts to define racial categories by physical attributes ultimately failed. By 1871, some leading intellectuals had recognized that even using the word "race" "was virtually a confession of ignorance or evil intent." The genetic studies of the last few decades have only added more nails to the coffin of biological race. Evidence shows that those features usually coded to race, for example, stature, skin color, hair texture, and facial structure, do not correlate strongly with genetic variation. . . The rejection of race in science is now almost complete. In the end, we should embrace historian Barbara Fields's succinct conclusion with respect to the plausibility of biological races: "Anyone who continues to believe in race as a physical attribute of individuals, despite the now commonplace disclaimers of biologists and geneticists, might as well also believe that Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the tooth fairy are real, and that the earth stands still while the sun moves."
    . . . Unfortunately, few in this society seem prepared to fully relinquish their subscription to notions of biological race.. . .[including the] Congress and the Supreme Court. Congress' anachronistic understanding of race is exemplified by a 1988 statute that explains that "the term 'racial group' means a set of individuals whose identity as such is distinctive in terms of physical characteristics or biological descent." The Supreme Court, although purporting to sever race from biology, also seems incapable of doing so. In Saint Francis College v. Al-Khazraji, the Court determined that an Arab could recover damages for racial discrimination under 42 U.S.C. 1981. . . Despite a seeming rejection of biological race, Justice White [stated]: "The Court of Appeals was thus quite right in holding that 1981, 'at a minimum,' reaches discrimination against an individual 'because he or she is genetically part of an ethnically and physiognomically distinctive subgrouping of homo sapiens."'. . . By adopting the lower court's language of genetics and distinctive subgroupings, Justice White demonstrates the Court's continued reliance on blood as a metonym for race. . . .In Metrobroadcasting v. FCC, Justice Scalia again reveals the Court's understanding of race as a matter of blood. During oral argument, Scalia attacked the argument that granting minorities broadcasting licenses would enhance diversity by blasting "the policy as a matter of 'blood,' at one point charging that the policy reduced to a question of 'blood . . . blood, not background and environment."'
    Social Construction
    . . . I define a "race" as a vast group of people loosely bound together by historically contingent, socially significant elements of their morphology and/or ancestry. I argue that race must be understood as a sui generis social phenomenon in which contested systems of meaning serve as the connections between physical features, races, and personal characteristics. In other words, social meanings connect our faces to our souls. Race is neither an essence nor an illusion, but rather an ongoing, contradictory, self-reinforcing process subject to the macro forces of social and political struggle and the micro effects of daily decisions. . . Referents of terms like Black, White, Asian, and Latino are social groups, not genetically distinct branches of humankind
    ****in A..... Props for that
  18. Professional Member
    mich29's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    4,518
    Rep Power
    107134
    Level
    47
    Lv. Percent
    24.67%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    its simply a way to categorize people without it things would quickly get confusing
  19. Elite Member
    Celorza's Avatar
    Stats
    5'6"  150 lbs.
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Age
    23
    Posts
    9,552
    Rep Power
    2428710
    Level
    76
    Lv. Percent
    42.77%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Not a huge contribution to the thread, heading out into the gym atm...but Josh, AFAIK there's only a Human Race as a whole. There is not a difference in the phenotypes (be them asian, african, mongolian, anglo, etc) in the genetic code. Race IMO is one of the most pointless concepts in the world, since we are all a human race, racism is thus just a misconception and the belief that phenotypes can divide the population and mistakenly label them into "races"; thus giving the chance for a certain "race" to believe itself "superior" to another one, not to be confused with Ethnic Hatred though...completely different concepts.

    I don't know if anyone has time, but I'll post what Dr. Graham Cox (if I can find it) has written about it, later...if not someone look him up. One of his lectures about Race, Racism and Ethnic Hatred really opened my eyes and left me disappointed at human behavior through the years.
    >SNS-Glycophase<
    Serious Nutrition Solutions Rep
  20. Senior Member
    benmayro's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  190 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,977
    Rep Power
    169364
    Level
    35
    Lv. Percent
    84.42%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    I did not read everything in here. What we label as race are the certain mutations/adaptations different human beings have for their respective environment(or ancestors environment)
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/training-forum/198788-highschool-athlete-thread.html
  21. Senior Member
    mikeg313's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  220 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,310
    Rep Power
    460196
    Level
    43
    Lv. Percent
    20.1%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Celorza View Post
    Not a huge contribution to the thread, heading out into the gym atm...but Josh, AFAIK there's only a Human Race as a whole. There is not a difference in the phenotypes (be them asian, african, mongolian, anglo, etc) in the genetic code. Race IMO is one of the most pointless concepts in the world, since we are all a human race, racism is thus just a misconception and the belief that phenotypes can divide the population and mistakenly label them into "races"; thus giving the chance for a certain "race" to believe itself "superior" to another one, not to be confused with Ethnic Hatred though...completely different concepts.

    I don't know if anyone has time, but I'll post what Dr. Graham Cox (if I can find it) has written about it, later...if not someone look him up. One of his lectures about Race, Racism and Ethnic Hatred really opened my eyes and left me disappointed at human behavior through the years.
    If you wanna be disappointed in the human race just go to a Walmart on the weekends.
  22. Advanced Member
    TexasGuy's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  238 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    812
    Rep Power
    200687
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    75.13%

    race:
    n.
    1. A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics.
    2. A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: the German race.
    3. A genealogical line; a lineage.
    4. Humans considered as a group.
    5. Biology
    a. An interbreeding, usually geographically isolated population of organisms differing from other populations of the same species in the frequency of hereditary traits. A race that has been given formal taxonomic recognition is known as a subspecies.
    b. A breed or strain, as of domestic animals.
    6. A distinguishing or characteristic quality, such as the flavor of a wine.



    The superiority aspect is of course in the eye of the beholder.
  23. Advanced Member
    TexasGuy's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  238 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    812
    Rep Power
    200687
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    75.13%

    I think the Jews and Arabs in general would disagree that race is a fairly new concept.
    Quote Originally Posted by JudoJosh View Post
    The categorization of people (race) first appeared in Spain. Razza was used to describe the breeds of dogs and horses and then used to describe wines. Then razza started to be used to describe people but it was based off what religion they were and where they were from.

    The idea of race is a fairly new concept in human history. Lets remember that the term race does not necessarily equal ethnicity and/or culture. So what is race? What separates a white man from a black man?

    Fun fact, oddly ethnicity used to be a negative term. It was synonymous for "heathens" and today the term is used casually without the original negative connotations. Perhaps we will see the same with the word "race"?

    Personally I don't really have an opinion, or haven't formed one really yet. Just thought it was interesting that from a biological perspective there is a signifficent lack of evidence that differentiates one race from another.

    AE what is your take? I am extremely interested to hear your thoughts on this

    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SII using Tapatalk 2
  24. Senior Member
    benmayro's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  190 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,977
    Rep Power
    169364
    Level
    35
    Lv. Percent
    84.42%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by TexasGuy View Post
    I think the Jews and Arabs in general would disagree that race is a fairly new concept.
    Jews are part of a religion. that's like saying your race is Christian.
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/training-forum/198788-highschool-athlete-thread.html
  25. New Member
    bigintensions's Avatar
    Stats
    5'9"  185 lbs.
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Age
    19
    Posts
    475
    Rep Power
    70532
    Level
    22
    Lv. Percent
    95.19%

    Quote Originally Posted by benmayro

    Jews are part of a religion. that's like saying your race is Christian.
    Jews actually were considered a race a while ago, I don't know if they still are today.
  26. Advanced Member
    TexasGuy's Avatar
    Stats
    6'0"  238 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    812
    Rep Power
    200687
    Level
    28
    Lv. Percent
    75.13%

    Quote Originally Posted by benmayro View Post
    Jews are part of a religion. that's like saying your race is Christian.
    http://m.forward.com/articles/155742...-reveal/?p=all
  27. Senior Member
    benmayro's Avatar
    Stats
    5'8"  190 lbs.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,977
    Rep Power
    169364
    Level
    35
    Lv. Percent
    84.42%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    You can't credit this article. it is not peer review, does not list sources? And hooligan and claim that. And Jews were once considered a race. and witches were once considered real and earthquakes came from godd
    http://anabolicminds.com/forum/training-forum/198788-highschool-athlete-thread.html
  28. Pro Virili Parte
    JudoJosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    30
    Posts
    9,066
    Rep Power
    2762303
    Level
    81
    Lv. Percent
    35.49%
    Achievements Activity VeteranActivity ProActivity AuthorityPosting ProPosting Authority

    Re: What is race?


    Again, my question is, is race more than just a social construct? Does it have a biological foundation?

    As for the comment of Jews and Arabs, in that time period race referred to ones religion and where they were from. i.e North African Muslims were known as Moors


    Sent from my Samsung Galaxy SII using Tapatalk 2
    "The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance." - Socrates
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. what is a good sleep-aid?
    By hamper19 in forum Supplements
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 04-10-2003, 03:33 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-02-2003, 01:54 PM
  3. What is your biggest pleasure?
    By Rhinoman in forum General Chat
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-24-2002, 04:14 PM
  4. What is 1-test?
    By txwakeskater in forum Supplements
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-19-2002, 05:09 PM
  5. Okay what is unsic acid...
    By Lifeguard in forum Supplements
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 10-28-2002, 09:35 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in