Genes for Skin Color Rebut Dated Notions of Race, Researchers Say
1–10 of 28 posts
Re: Genes for Skin Color Rebut Dated Notions of Race, Researchers Say
#2This article is somehow trying to say that race doesn't exist because we found the genes for skin color? What?
Re: Genes for Skin Color Rebut Dated Notions of Race, Researchers Say
#3I don't really understand the point of the article.
How does this research “dispels a biological concept of race”?
>“If you ask somebody on the street, ‘What are the main differences between races?,’ they’re going to say skin color,” said Sarah A. Tishkoff, a geneticist at the University of Pennsylvania.
Yep, that's true. Skin color is the most prominent and easily identifiable feature. But every human can easily identify black/white/Asian based on facial features or voice. Forensic anthropologists can identify a race based on skull, they can even make a pretty good prediction based solely on a jaw.
The idea that race is just a skin color is not a dated notion of race, it is a modern interpretation that is pushed by leftists. If racists believed that race is just a skin color, why would they be racists?
Now, if we could dispel the idea that race is just a skin color and the idea that some races are inferior, if we could stop treating it as a dichotomy, that would be good.
Re: Genes for Skin Color Rebut Dated Notions of Race, Researchers Say
#4I don't really understand the point of the article. How does this research “dispels a biological concept of race”? >“If you ask somebody on the street, ‘What are the main differences between races?,’ they’re going to say skin color,” said Sarah A. Tishkoff, a geneticist at the University of Pennsylvania. Yep, that's true. Skin color is the most prominent and easily identifiable feature. But every human can easily ide…
Uh, voice? That seems dubious. Apart from vernacular or speaking styles that are generally racial in nature, there's really nothing there.
> But every human can easily identify black/white/Asian...
It's not the obvious cases that matter, but the borderline ones. Is that person Japanese or maybe Inuit?
> If racists believed that race is just a skin color, why would they be racists?
Yes. If we were all precisely the same skin color they'd find other ways to put people down. Your "Jewish" nose. Your "nappy" hair. Color's just the tip of the ice-berg.
Some people are perceived as being inferior because that's what some elements in society need them to be in order to advance their own social standing.
Re: Genes for Skin Color Rebut Dated Notions of Race, Researchers Say
#5This article is somehow trying to say that race doesn't exist because we found the genes for skin color? What?
They're saying that skin color is what people think is a reliable indicator of race, but in fact, genetically speaking, it's a total mess and nothing is clear at all.
Re: Genes for Skin Color Rebut Dated Notions of Race, Researchers Say
#6This article is somehow trying to say that race doesn't exist because we found the genes for skin color? What?
i think the article is claiming that the skin-color-centric definition of race doesn't make sense any more:
“If you ask somebody on the street, ‘What are the main differences between races?,’ they’re going to say skin color,” said Sarah A. Tishkoff, a geneticist at the University of Pennsylvania.
i suppose that Tishkoff is right, but to be a bit more rigorous about it, i would be curious to see the sociological research that demonstrates that "somebody on the street" actually thinks that "the main differences between races" are "skin color." maybe people don't think that. not really sure either way.
Re: Genes for Skin Color Rebut Dated Notions of Race, Researchers Say
#7This article is somehow trying to say that race doesn't exist because we found the genes for skin color? What?
i think the article is claiming that the skin-color-centric definition of race doesn't make sense any more: “If you ask somebody on the street, ‘What are the main differences between races?,’ they’re going to say skin color,” said Sarah A. Tishkoff, a geneticist at the University of Pennsylvania. i suppose that Tishkoff is right, but to be a bit more rigorous about it, i would be curious to see the sociological resea…
I think you're answering a question the article doesn't pose. Tishkoff didn't claim to have refuted the concept of races, but rather just the notion that they were directly tied to skin color.
Re: Genes for Skin Color Rebut Dated Notions of Race, Researchers Say
#8I don't really understand the point of the article. How does this research “dispels a biological concept of race”? >“If you ask somebody on the street, ‘What are the main differences between races?,’ they’re going to say skin color,” said Sarah A. Tishkoff, a geneticist at the University of Pennsylvania. Yep, that's true. Skin color is the most prominent and easily identifiable feature. But every human can easily ide…
Uh, voice? That seems dubious. Apart from vernacular or speaking styles that are generally racial in nature, there's really nothing there. > But every human can easily identify black/white/Asian... It's not the obvious cases that matter, but the borderline ones. Is that person Japanese or maybe Inuit? > If racists believed that race is just a skin color, why would they be racists? Yes. If we were all precisely the sa…
>Uh, voice? That seems dubious. Apart from vernacular or speaking styles that are generally racial in nature, there's really nothing there.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/17342877
>It's not the obvious cases that matter, but the borderline ones. Is that person Japanese or maybe Inuit?
First of all, I don't think it is appropriate to classify "Japanese" or "Inuit" as races. Race is a more general concept.
Anyway, Japanese and Inuit are easy to distinguish. Middle Eastern and European are better examples. If you take one European person and one Middle Eastern person it would be hard to differentiate them, if you take two groups of one hundred people it would be easy.
Re: Genes for Skin Color Rebut Dated Notions of Race, Researchers Say
#9I don't really understand the point of the article. How does this research “dispels a biological concept of race”? >“If you ask somebody on the street, ‘What are the main differences between races?,’ they’re going to say skin color,” said Sarah A. Tishkoff, a geneticist at the University of Pennsylvania. Yep, that's true. Skin color is the most prominent and easily identifiable feature. But every human can easily ide…
It's pretty ridiculous. I see a lot of articles like this, that all go along the lines of science supposedly disproving the existence of something you can easily observe on a day to day basis. If it was about skin color, why aren't albino Africans white?
Re: Genes for Skin Color Rebut Dated Notions of Race, Researchers Say
#10I don't really understand the point of the article. How does this research “dispels a biological concept of race”? >“If you ask somebody on the street, ‘What are the main differences between races?,’ they’re going to say skin color,” said Sarah A. Tishkoff, a geneticist at the University of Pennsylvania. Yep, that's true. Skin color is the most prominent and easily identifiable feature. But every human can easily ide…
Uh, voice? That seems dubious. Apart from vernacular or speaking styles that are generally racial in nature, there's really nothing there. > But every human can easily identify black/white/Asian... It's not the obvious cases that matter, but the borderline ones. Is that person Japanese or maybe Inuit? > If racists believed that race is just a skin color, why would they be racists? Yes. If we were all precisely the sa…
Uh, voice? That seems dubious.
No, that's not dubious.
Rick Astley, most famous for the internet meme of Rick Rolling, had trouble getting taken seriously at first because everyone thought his (first?) song "Never gonna give you up" was sung by a black guy. They could not believe it was really the voice of some skinny, pasty white guy. It sounds black to most people.
I participated in a poorly designed pysch study in college in which they played a tape of a discussion and told us the white speaker was black and the black speaker was white. Participants in the study were not fooled by this. The black guy sounded like Rick Astley, for lack of a better explanation. We all knew we were being lied to. Switching the labels fooled no one.
It isn't a perfect indicator of race. But, yes, there are voice differences that have nothing to do with vernacular speech habits.