99 réponses à ce sujet

[Sigma Tauri]

Actually, in my experience with medicine and genetics, it's not so much a throw-back to an era of racial chauvanism as much as a matter of practicality. This is because populations do have physical differences, not just skin color but from types of earwax, lactose intolerance up to predispositions for diseases.



I mean these fields aren't racist, but they won't shy away from characterizing peoples like saying "the prevalence for this disease in caucasians is x%." They'll be more specific though, saying northern Europeans have a greater disposition for this particular disease than southern Europeans.



This type of information though doesn't mean it condones racist ideologies. Just that taking demographic data is a common practice in medicine and often is part in population genetics.

[OneBadAssMother]

I agree on that. I'm glad another educated bloke is here.



The specifics which led to the classifications of "subraces" are not racist, that I agree with as well. I disagree however, in using the generalised colonial 4-color theory (was actually 3 color before Australoid got added).

[spacehamsterZH]

monkeycamoran/OBAM, see, that's what I thought - makes perfect sense to me.



And anyone who thinks that's racist seriously needs to pull their head out of where solid waste excretions come from. The whole BS debate could end so easily if the idiots on both sides tried to understand that "equal" does not mean "identical".

[Dethateer]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

monkeycamoran/OBAM, see, that's what I thought - makes perfect sense to me.

And anyone who thinks that's racist seriously needs to pull their head out of where solid waste excretions come from. The whole BS debate could end so easily if the idiots on both sides tried to understand that "equal" does not mean "identical".

If it meant that... wouldn't then absolutely no one be equal?

[spacehamsterZH]

Dethateer wrote...

If it meant that... wouldn't then absolutely no one be equal?

Of course. It's just a completely retarded argument, typically used by the "I'm not racist, but..." crowd, to "disprove" the fundamental assumption behind human rights that all human beings are born equal, i.e. with the same rights and privileges, not with an identical genetic makeup. But hey, who ever expected logic from a racist. Anyway, I better stop now, these discussions usually go south in a hurry.

[OneBadAssMother]

Equality, heh...



If you want to talk racialism in terms of superiority I can bring up my past as a supremist. Turanist supremist even. Not Aryan. Taking full advantage of the fact that "if you aren't white, you cant be racist" white-guilt theory. It was seriously fun.



But in the end, I've learnt through my wife that supremacy exists only on an individual basis no matter what race. Hell I can even take this and say, considering my whole family are "mutts", that "mutts" are superior to purebloods, but in the end I can cite so many examples to the contrary.



Individualism mate. Individualism. That's what makes the MOST sense.

[Dethateer]

How would being a racist be affected by one's skin color (aside from the different targeted abuse group)?

[spacehamsterZH]

OneBadAssMother wrote...

Individualism mate.
Individualism. That's what makes the MOST sense.

Yeah. Most people suck. Some people don't. The end.

The problem is that we have all these tribal and territorial insticts because we're a social species, and when humans rationalize their animal impulses, incredibly stupid ideologies happen.

Modifié par spacehamsterZH, 19 mars 2010 - 05:01 .

[OneBadAssMother]

Haha agreed =)

[TheGriffonsShallRiseAgain]

A the age old argument. Lets cut the bull shall we? The truth of the matter is no matter what anyone says about homosapiens or "race", its highly incorrect. The only other race's of humanoid beings on this planet went extinct about 400,000 years ago. These races being ****** erectus and ****** habilis, and many others which are hard to name.( here is a link-

http://www.talkorigi...ms/species.html ) Basically do some research and dont post theories that have already more over been cast aside.

[TheGriffonsShallRiseAgain]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

OneBadAssMother wrote...

Individualism mate.
Individualism. That's what makes the MOST sense.

Yeah. Most people suck. Some people don't. The end.

The problem is that we have all these tribal and territorial insticts because we're a social species, and when humans rationalize their animal impulses, incredibly stupid ideologies happen.

Precisely, because primal instincts arent rational, they are basic instincts meant to help us survive, adding reason to the equation makes for a ****storm.

[OneBadAssMother]

To ease up the tension I admit I am a ******...

oh FFS I'm straight! What? I can't even call myself ****** Sapien without being called gay?

[Dethateer]

TheGriffonsShallRiseAgain wrote...

A the age old argument.
Lets cut the bull shall we? The truth of the matter is no matter what
anyone says about homosapiens or "race", its highly incorrect. The only
other race's of humanoid beings on this planet went extinct about
400,000 years ago. These races being ****** erectus and ****** habilis, and
many others which are hard to name.( here is a link-
http://www.talkorigi...ms/species.html
) Basically do some research and dont post theories that have already
more over been cast aside.

Those are species, not races. The family is hominidae, "******" is the genus, and we are the last surviving species of that genus, "****** (genus name) sapiens sapiens (specific name)". I.e. Man, wise, wise. (how's that for irony).
[e] Before you jump down my throat, your own link says that as well.

Modifié par Dethateer, 19 mars 2010 - 05:32 .

[Heavensrun]

spacehamsterZH wrote...

vhatever wrote...

it's completely arbitrary at what point we say: "Wait, stop, this fellow who come out of africa has now become something different than what he was, he is now mongoloid/caucasoid/negroid".

Well, yeah, that's the point I'm driving at. But if that's an arbitrary distinction, it's not a particularly valid scientific category. Which puts us back at square one here, I still have no idea how you define races scientifically.

I'm sorry, but that's absurd.  ALL SCIENTIFIC CATEGORIES ARE ARBITRARY.  They are constructs we invent to organize our understanding of the world.

Even our divisions of species break down in many places in the taxonomic order.  A species is a distinct evolutionary branch that cannot produce viable offspring with individuals of another species, right?  Except sometimes they can.

Hell, was noone paying attention when Pluto got demoted?  The whole -point- of that is that nature likes to drop things in that mess with our classification system.  Pluto met the old definition of a planet, but so did a lot of other worlds in our solar system.  If we acknowledge Pluto as a planet, the list of planets gets big quickly, and potentially bigger all the time.  Hence, to keep textbooks relatively simple for kids, we "demote" pluto, and create another classification.

This is the core of scientific classification.  Boundaries are changing and moving all the time, and they're ALWAYS arbitrary, but that doesn't mean you can't still -classify- things.

[Cowboy_christo]

Lot of big words being thrown around by people who consider themself educated. This was a funny read.

[OneBadAssMother]

Heh, my baby daughter is named Heaven. Striking coincidence you just posted Heavensrun...



She has been dehumanised before she was even born due to racialist BS (not scientifc at all btw - this was mostly propaganded racial BS). Because I, and my wife, are "mutts", and have features that don't classify as specifics in the 4-color theory. So apparently, our daughter (soon to have her first bday in July btw), is an inhuman abomination.



Yet she is the most healthy baby. Heck many parents I've met even said that I'm so lucky I have a perfect baby. But hey, racism... the fact is, people aren't educated about this AT ALL. I would at least have made it compulsory for the AAPA to make an in-school declaration of race, just like how they made "physical development classes" (AKA sex education) compulsory in school curriculums.

[Gorn Kregore]

Hispanic you fools.

[Gill Kaiser]

He's human.

[Dethateer]

Human isn't a...

Wait, why the f**k do I keep bothering? I only have in-game dialogue and the codex to blame for this.

[OneBadAssMother]

Cowboy_christo wrote...

Lot of big words being thrown around by people who consider themself educated. This was a funny read.

We have the ME2 Codex! That is as much lore as we shall ever need!

[Gill Kaiser]

As a Biology major, I don't care that I'm technically incorrect, I'm just being facetious.

[gauntz]

It's funny how people protest against classifying humans into races. Other animals are classified into different races often with far less differences. I think I saw an example where a type of rat in the Americas was slightly larger and with a slightly lighter fur than an European variant, and that was enough to classify them into different races.



However politically correct you want to be, the fact is that people of different historic geographic origin have both visible and invisible differences, although very few are major. Call it race or not, the fact is that we're different.



I strongly have the impression that nature encourages us to seek out our own. Babies treat people differently based on features and skin color (by modern definition I guess this makes them racist), and will often ignore people of a different race. Foreigners, especially from Africa or the Middle East, smell rather off-putting to me, kind of spicy. I'm told my people smells like sour milk to foreigners. I was barely able to recognize difference in Blacks when I was younger. Your average Westerner can barely see a difference between East Asians, and can't see a difference between a Chinese and a Japanese person. And so forth.



It strikes me than many seem to welcome modern changes in society; a rise in interracial relationships and multiculturalism. Why do people welcome a more homogenized society? Isn't culture best enjoyed at it's extremes, without everything becoming more identical and less diverse? If I'm better able to see difference between people of my own people, doesn't that mean that I can better appreciate the beauty of my own people?



Why do people think blending different genetics is a good thing from a pragmatic perspective? As they continue to hammer down, we barely have any important differences. Take the Indians meeting Europeans. Breeding with Europeans gave them better immunity against the European diseases that ravaged their populations. But if the Europeans didn't arrive, it would'nt have been a problem.



I'm not racist, not by the definition that I see one race as superior to another. I recognize minor differences between races, like Blacks having on average slightly denser bones giving them a slight advantage in running, while Whites have a slight advantage in swimming/jumping due to lighter bones on average. That said, I'd prefer my people to survive the coming centures, thank you very much.

[Treekodar]

Yea, let's build a wall around our own race. All the other races can then GTFO.

[Dethateer]

Treekodar wrote...

Yea, let's build a wall around our own race. All the other races can then GTFO.

This can't really be debated without going into the "what do you think the future holds for us" teritorry.

[javierabegazo]

hmm...Don't like the way this is heading. Sorry guys, take it to the Off topic forum