Race As A Social Construct -

[Billy of Hills]

A lot of tumblrites will scream and flail about how race is all the evil white man's lies and we're all the same except whitey is basically Hitler but worse.
Are they just stimming? Are they right? Are negros subhuman?

 

[Alberto Balsalm]

Well, there's no real biological cutoff line where you can say "this here's one race, this one's another". Where those lines fall is entirely dependent on who you are and where you are - the average American would say both British and Irish people are just "white", for instance, while someone in either of those countries might see them as wholly distinct races.

Tumblrites are attracted to the phrase because it sounds like a bold claim to make, but really, it's just kind of... common sense that doesn't change anything about race relations.

 

[Vitriol]

A previous thread on this devolved into slav/nigger/abbo jokes. I'd be obliged if we could keep that to inner circle.

The lgbt thread is a good model for how a thread like this should ideally develop.

 

[GS 281]

Of course race is a social construct. The meaning and significance is based on the nature of how we group people. Race could be based on the thickness of hair, eye color, a number of different factors. People try to use stats to support ideas that one race or ethnicity is more capable or intelligent than another. The significance of these differences can be controlled to the point of insignificance by socio-economic factors. That said, the validity of intelligence tests is questionable in the scope of measuring natural ability not nurtured or developed by education.

If we were to understand "intelligence" to be based on reaction times, then people with dark colored eyes would be generally more "intelligent" than people with light colored eyes. Reaction time could be explained as explaining "intelligence" because it is the quickness by which one decides to react and how to react. If this were the case, then black people would be likely found to have significantly higher intelligence than white people on average. Eye color would be a controlling factor that would lead to the difference in means being insignificant.

In the scope of measuring difference between races and ethnicities in the scope of many of the different IQ measures relied on today, white people will score higher than black people in the US. What is interesting however, is that the significance of the difference disappears when we look at the scores of native whites against those of black immigrants. Immigrants from the Caribbean and from Africa will score higher than native blacks. So when we look at the difference between races, looking at the differences in the scope of different dimensions causes them to disappear based on socio-economic elements.

For this reason, race, and the problems that come from race appear to be socially constructed and to b the consequence of socio-economic structure.

 

[Oglooger]

If race was a fake social construct, then I should be able have sex with an Asian from some isolated part of China and she would give birth to a black baby.

 

[Puppet Pal Clem]

Society is a social construct.

 

[Takayuki Yagami]

Society is a social construct.

Which doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Language is a social construct too.

 

[Puppet Pal Clem]

Which doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Language is a social construct too.

That was my point.

Pointing out something is a social construct doesn't necessarily undermine any utility it has.

 

[Innocuous Banter]

Racial differences are real, end of thread

 

[Marvin]

If race was a fake social construct, then I should be able have sex with an Asian from some isolated part of China and she would give birth to a black baby.

Genetics are indeed a thing. Genetics determine things like skin color, eye color and other physical attributes.

When a non-tumblrite says "race is just a social construct", they usually mean that the definition of "race" is shaky to the point that there's no solid biological standard for where one race starts and one race begins.

It's kind of like when alt medicine people complain about "toxins" in food. There's no solid definition of "toxin". It's just variously used to mean "something scary and bad for you". Bad in what way? Poisonous? Makes you fat? What? There's no solid meaning to it. They'll use it to refer to both pesticides and hormones in agricultural products, even those two things have vastly different effects, costs and benefits.

Of course, like @Puppet Pal Clem notes, race is still a useful way of categorizing people. It's just not biologically based. It's based in sociology and how people interpret people's physical features. It's strongly influenced by their culture.

This is anecdotal of course, but I spent some time recently with a lot of central asians; it was very illuminating. As an American, most of my understanding of what an "asian" is was limited to east asians, like the Chinese, Japanese and Koreans. I always assumed that some people lived above India, but I never really thought too much about them. So during my time recently, I learned that central asia is, racially, a very smooth gradient from the far east, to the middle east. The mongols smeared their genetics across the area.

Heh, one of the guys I was hanging out with could tell me precisely which country each person was from based on subtle little differences I never would've picked up on.

There's kind of a similar thing when comparing west african features (broad noses for example) to east african features.

 

[Male Idiot]

If race was a fake social construct, then I should be able have sex with an Asian from some isolated part of China and she would give birth to a black baby.

Tumbler does not do science. It has been clearly and scientifically stated that there are four races for humans. Europid , Mongolid, Negrid and Australid*. This is basic elementary school biology. There can be of course mixing of these, with their own scientific names that i don't recall but I'm sure HP Lovecraft mentioned rather unflatteringly.

The fact that people think some races are smarter is just a misconception. There are measurable real differences of course, for example black people can tolerate heat better than white people, but white people can take the cold weather better. These are just adaptations to the environment. These are usually very minor or cosmetic, like nose shape.

This is a scientific construct and not a social one. It is also worth noting that people often use the word race to refer to species and confuse the two. To a layman, this can be explained by the following example:
Dogs are a species. All dogs are dogs. Dog breeds are races, or populations, as it is now termed by the SJW crowd. So when a german shepard tries to bite a weiner dog, its racism!**

Social one for example would list blacks and native australians in the same category, because to the average white guy, they look alike. But that is scientifically not true.

*

Spoiler: Native Australians have their very own race and genes to show for it! I did learn useful things in school.

** Germans shepherds tend to be rather violent towards smaller dog breeds for some odd reason, according to anecdotal evidence.

 

[AnOminous]

** Germans shepherds tend to be rather violent towards smaller dog breeds for some odd reason, according to anecdotal evidence.

They probably think they're rats or some other sort of vermin.

 

[Putato]

The way race is perceived by culture is what's the social construct. That's why you have chucklefucks like Rachel Dolezal and Shaun King, who are white, but manage to con people into thinking that they're black/mixed.
If you were to give them a cheek swab, you wouldn't find any more african DNA (for lack of a better term) in them than the Queen of England would have.
There's a reason you can trace your genetics to find out what race you are. Race is a set of physical attributes connected to the people of certain areas of the world.
Tumblr seems to either confuse race with culture or use them interchangeably. Culture is the social construct. Race is genetics.

 

[*Asterisk*]

@Billy of Hills being a spooge-catcher is, in no way whatsoever, a social construct.

Run 'em through any kind of lab you like. The results will come back: "FAAAAAAAGGG!"

 

[DuskEngine]

Europid , Mongolid, Negrid and Australid

even leaving aside the question of what has been 'clearly and scientifically stated' that's pretty retarded unless you want to claim all Melanesians and Dravidians are Australoid, and that the Sami or Slavs are 'Europid'.

 

[SlayerOfTyranny]

This is so absurd it's laughable.

How in the world can race be a "social construct"?

Last time I checked white people have white skin and black people have black skin.That is something that is true regardless of sociology.

That has nothing to do with superiority or inferiority or bias by the way it's just an objective fact.

Race being a social construct is just as absurd as gender being a social construct.

Both race and gender are fully scientific and biological.

Is a vagina a "social construct?"

Is a dick and testicles a "social construct?"

Normal testosterone range for a male: 230-1,000 ng/dL

Normal testosterone range for a female: 20-85 ng/dL

Proof that gender is not a social construct:

If you inject male hormones into a women or female hormones into a man they change dramatically even if the "social construct" remains the same.That would be impossible if "gender is a social construct".

But lol science is dumb and sexist fuck that patriarchy.I will not let facts of reality oppress me.

I mean literally how insane and ignorant do you have to be to actually believe that "gender is a social construct" especially in this day and age when a few minutes in a book or even on google will prove you otherwise?

Anybody who passed sex ed as a kid could figure that one out.

But there are massive amounts of people that actually believe this shit.

That's like saying "height is a social construct.You can be whatever height you want to be!".If you are short it's not a "social construct".It's just a genetic fact of reality.

 

[AnOminous]

This is so absurd it's laughable.

You're such a cute little pony.

 

[Marvin]

The way race is perceived by culture is what's the social construct. That's why you have chucklefucks like Rachel Dolezal and Shaun King, who are white, but manage to con people into thinking that they're black/mixed.
If you were to give them a cheek swab, you wouldn't find any more african DNA (for lack of a better term) in them than the Queen of England would have.
There's a reason you can trace your genetics to find out what race you are. Race is a set of physical attributes connected to the people of certain areas of the world.
Tumblr seems to either confuse race with culture or use them interchangeably. Culture is the social construct. Race is genetics.

That's the thing, race isn't genetics. You're right, you can indeed do a cheek swab and discover if someone has sub-Saharan African DNA. But sub-Saharan African is not the same thing as black.

And actually, plenty of people in similar situations as Shaun King have lots of African DNA in them. And lots of people who might pass as black aren't actually very African.

The American understanding of race is extremely warped from what is genetically justifiable. Not to say that it isn't inspired by genetics, but I would say that claiming genetics is the sole justifier for race, or even a primary justifier, is really just glossing over hundreds of years of history.

 

[AnOminous]

That's the thing, race isn't genetics. You're right, you can indeed do a cheek swab and discover if someone has sub-Saharan African DNA. But sub-Saharan African is not the same thing as black.

And actually, plenty of people in similar situations as Shaun King have lots of African DNA in them. And lots of people who might pass as black aren't actually very African.

The concept of race as a matter of genetics is a lot different from the social construct known as race. <--- note use of "social construct"

 

[Male Idiot]

even leaving aside the question of what has been 'clearly and scientifically stated' that's pretty retarded unless you want to claim all Melanesians and Dravidians are Australoid, and that the Sami or Slavs are 'Europid'.

Since when are Slavs not European? I mean, I get it, they hate them in US and Western Europe for some reason, but this is beyond silly.