Stainless_Steel wrote: » Stupid question.
Rory1 wrote: » why? can you explain?
Stainless_Steel wrote: » Whites are clearly superior.
Stainless_Steel wrote: » Your sarcasm meter is broken.
whisperfaeces wrote: » Race is a social construct. There is no difference between humans except the colour of their skin.
chopper6 wrote: » Nodin to aisle 8 please......
whisperfaeces wrote: » A member of the human race.
Me? wrote: » I had an encounter with a racist in London back in the early 90's. he was a scary individual. When he realised I was Irish he calmed down and backed off, turned out he only had hatred for the English honkies. I had no idea at the time what a honky was.
My name is URL wrote: » Myself and a friend got a load of racial abuse in London a few years ago. Group of dudes who looked like they were from the Middle East kept shouting profanities at us and calling us whiteys and so on... personally I found it hilarious.
Hitchens wrote: » ....and bring a mop and bucket
Nimrod 7 wrote: » That's a bit like saying different species don't exist because we're all alive. Races are differences between humans in terms of appearances, languages spoken, culture, geography etc. It's not a derogatory word and it doesn't imply that one is superior or inferior to another in any way.
Killer Wench wrote: » Race and ethnicity are both social constructions.
chopper6 wrote: » Not true...racial differences appear in skelatons...for example a white and black skull will differ in the alignment of the teeth.
Most anthropologists recognize that race is a social concept, not a biological one. That is, it stigmatizes some individuals as different and reinforces the privileges of others. There is no evidence that there are large groups of biologically distinct human beings (i.e. subspecies) that correspond to what people refer to when they talk about "race." Furthermore, to base any kind of biological category on a single physical characteristic, such as skin color (which, in itself is incredibly varied and determined by multiple genes), is clearly nonsense. Yet the concept of race persists in our popular culture, and is occasionally given legitimacy by researchers from fields as varied as psychology and political science. (Check out the American Anthropological Association Statement on Race and the statement on "Race" and Intelligence). In the next few Editor's Choice columns we'll explore the phenomenon of race and racism to try to understand why it persists and point the way to some valuable resources on the Internet. In this column we will explore the history of "scientific racism," that is the attempt to "prove" scientifically that some "races" are qualitatively superior to others. In effect, scientific racism attempts to use science to legitimate racist beliefs. Scientific racism has a long history. In the nineteenth century scholars such as Samuel George Morton attempted to prove that some "races" were superior to others by measuring the cranial capacity (brain size) of skulls representing different groups (e.g. "Blacks," "American Indians," "Whites"); his concluded, based on his measurements, that Whites were superior to other groups.
Clandestine wrote: » Thats right NOW CHECK YOUR WHITE PRIVILEGE.
