Do you really believe that race = skin colour?

[Joanna]

Seriously? That is so stupid.

[Jimbo Gomez]

Think before you make stupid posts. Regardless of wether you agree with most racialists or not, you can't be so stupid that you believe that we equate race and racial differences just with the skin colour. If that is what you meant to ask, you asked a stupid question. If you meant to ask something else on the other hand, I suggest you rephrase your question to make it less vague.

[von Sternberg]

Ha ha, sayonara cunt.

[Flying Drumhead Court-Martial]

Cuz gooks would be white if only they had the skin color.

[Joanna]

Think before you make stupid posts. Regardless of wether you agree with most racialists or not, you can't be so stupid that you believe that we equate race and racial differences just with the skin colour. If that is what you meant to ask, you asked a stupid question. If you meant to ask something else on the other hand, I suggest you rephrase your question to make it less vague.
English is my second language, so excuse me.

I have seen most anti-racists say something to the effect of: "Race is only skin colour."

Asians, Arabs, Africans and other non-whites are lumped together as "people of colour".

Anti-racists ask 'racists': "How they can hate based on skin tone?"

I really, really do get the impression that anti-racists honestly and truly believe that the differences between races is skin tone, because the language they use clearly privilege color as pure distinguishing difference between Europeans and Asians and Africans and Indians and so on...

I don't understand how you can believe this. It is obvious to the naked eye that different races have different facial features.

There are black skinned Africans and black skinned Indians. I can easily tell them apart.

There are brown skinned Arabs and brown skinned Vietnamese. I can easily tell them apart by their facial features.

There are white skinned Swedish and white skinned Koreans. Again, I can easily tell them apart.

[Jimbo Gomez]

That is not what I said or implied. First of all, I think it's safe to say that I can't be reasobably considered an anti-racist. Second: obviously the different races look different, in skin tone, skull shape, hair, stature,... The reason racialists think the races are so different from eachother have to do with the fact that we believe there are other differences besides the physical ones, such as differences in intelligence and cognitive abilities, temper, social skills and attitude, self control,...

If you wanted to ask this question to a large amount of antis, you're on the wrong forum. I suggest you ask that question over at msf.

[Joanna]

But this is the anti-racist section!

[Stoic_Cynic]

This seems appropriate:

http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh293/Hospitaller_Knight/Misc/GuessTheRacialGroup.jpg

[Flying Drumhead Court-Martial]

English is my second language, so excuse me.


You were born in Australia. Why should we excuse you?

But this is the anti-racist section!

Which basically means an anti-racist can start threads addressed to racists.

[Joanna]

You were born in Australia. Why should we excuse you?



Which basically means an anti-racist can start threads addressed to racists.


I spent the first few years of my life speaking Vietnamese. I learned English when I started going to public school. Happy now?


Oh, I see.

[tictac]

Race is not just skin deep, I believe most people say that because they either have coloured friends of whom they don’t want to verbally hurt or they don’t want to be excluded from the majority, so they show no initiative and agree with what society presents them with in fear that if they were to stray from the general ideology of mainstream society, they would be ridiculed, isolated and punished verbally or physically by their peers…just a thought

[Morpheus]

Race is not just skin deep, I believe most people say that because they either have coloured friends of whom they don’t want to verbally hurt or they don’t want to be excluded from the majority, so they show no initiative and agree with what society presents them with in fear that if they were to stray from the general ideology of mainstream society, they would be ridiculed, isolated and punished verbally or physically by their peers…just a thought

Most scientists who hold the position that there are no biological races among humans do not argue that "race is only skin deep."

That's really a non-starter popular among racialists.

The common argument is that genetic variation between human populations does not meet the scientific criteria for classification as sub-species (a term often regarded as synonymous with race).

They stress that not just any biological differentiation between populations can be equated with racial differences. Race doesn't simply mean biological difference. It implies a specific structuring of human populations which is often described as anatomical trait complexes denoting distinct evolutionary lineages.

It's generally acknowledged that there is genetic variation, it's simply claimed that that variation isn't racial.

[The Right Hand of God]

It's generally acknowledged that there is genetic variation, it's simply claimed that that variation isn't racial.

This so-called genetic variation can be classified into a number of broad and distinct groups known as races or sub-species, which proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that race is still a valid classificatory metric. The fact that this genetic variation can be sorted into different groups shows that human differences are indeed racial or group-oriented, if you will.

[Dead Eye]

Only a moron would believe that race is just skin colour.