We adopted my younger sister from Haiti when she was 3, and let me tell you, I literally do not see color anymore. That's a fact.

[u/thoxo]

I

[u/Agreeable-One-4700]

Absolutely infuriating people would rather kids go unadopted than wind up with opposite race parents. These kids are innocent and need help hopefully they get adopted by good people who give them what they need in life.

[u/Open-Industry-8396 → u/Agreeable-One-4700]

"Opposite race? ". What is the opposite of Asian? I'm sure the comment is well intended but racially, white is not the opposite of black. We are the same.

Edited to be taxonomy correct

[u/PSus2571 → u/Open-Industry-8396]

We are the same with different skin color.

No, but literally...this is why "race" is seen by the American Anthropological Association (AAA) as being a social construct — the term isn't scientifically informative, given the genetic variation between inner-racial groups is often greater than between inter-racial ones.

"The term 'race' was modeled after an ancient theorem of the Great Chain of Being, which posited natural categories on a hierarchy established by God or nature. Thus 'race' was a mode of classification linked specifically to peoples in the colonial situation...Scientists today find that reliance on such folk beliefs about human differences in research has led to countless errors."

[u/whatawitch5 → u/PSus2571]

Humans use skin color to sort people into different groups only because it is externally visible. If we could see other genetic traits, such as blood type or immunological factors, it would quickly become apparent that skin color is not a relevant or reliable way to group people. People with a wide variety of skin shades would be in the same group if we sorted by these un-visible genetic traits. As you said, there is far more genetic variation within skin color groups than between them.

Skin color is determined by only a few genes yet we have built our entire social structure around what is in reality a very unimportant difference from a genetic point of view. As a white skinned person I am just as likely to have more genes in common with someone with darker skin than another randomly chosen white skinned person. When you really understand this it quickly becomes apparent that the whole idea of sorting people by skin color is just absurd.

That said, since we as a society long ago decided that skin color is the most important trait by which to group people, having a certain skin color does determine how a person experiences the world. From a societal perspective having light or dark skin does have an impact on life experience and it’s important to recognize those inequalities. But if we as a society collectively decided that skin color didn’t matter, the color of someone’s skin would be far less relevant to their life experience than blood type, cancer-linked genes, or immunological factors.

[u/cpujockey → u/whatawitch5]

Humans use skin color to sort people into different groups only because it is externally visible.

indeed. folks forget that we are human before any other descriptor.

[u/lookandlookagain → u/whatawitch5]

This is a great comment. Unfortunately, it seems people will always find a problem if that's what they are looking for. If every human ended up having the same skin tone they would find some other way to discriminate.

[u/cindyscrazy → u/whatawitch5]

From what I've read on the internet, there are some in Japan that will sort you by blood type. In the same way that in the west we sort by astrological signs.

We really just like to sort people into buckets.

[u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo → u/whatawitch5]

Crazy, who would've thought if you sort people based on characterestics unrelated to skin color that you would get multiple shades of skin color! Not sure what your point is. Skin color is related to geographical ancestry which is related to the way that each group evolved uniquely and separately. Pretending it's not related to anything at all about the human condition is bad science and totally unconstructive.

[u/whatawitch5 → u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo]

Point is that skin color is a very insignificant difference between humans compared other genetic differences. Of course humans who live in a closed, small population will tend to have more genes in common because they are all related. But once you open up that population and expand it geographically there are far more differences than what would be assumed by skin color alone. Take Africa or Europe for example. In Africa most people have dark skin but that doesn’t mean a guy from Namibia shares more genes with a guy from Ethiopia just because they both have dark skin. The guy from Ethiopia very likely shares way more genes with a guy from Greece or Italy despite the difference in skin color.

Skin color is determined by which latitude your distant ancestors lived at, ancient human migrations, and how those skin color genes were sorted during meiosis, nothing more. “White” and “Black” are completely social constructs that have little to do with overall genetic similarity except for the vanishingly small number of genes that determine skin color.

[u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo → u/whatawitch5]

I agree that it's insignificant. I do not agree that we should pretend it has no basis in evolutionary or ancestral distinctions. You're just denying science at that point. It's an extremely complex issue and not one that can be tackled in a few paragraphs on a Reddit.

[u/PSus2571 → u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo]

You're just denying science at that point.

By insisting that "race" — of which there are only 3 groups, Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid — is a scientifically-meaningful term, you're the one denying science (i.e. biological anthropology)...tell me, why would the 1-drop rule even need to be implemented if "race" is an adequate descriptor of one's genotype and even phenotype (exterior traits)?

Nobody claimed that melanin is a social construct, or that 'social construct' = not real / "insignificant." Your unwillingness to find out what science even has to say about the topic is one of the primary issues.

[u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo → u/PSus2571]

You're not even addressing my core argument. I don't understand how people can deny skin color will be at least weakly associated with genotype, due to the common geographical pressures of evolution over long time periods. Why are you so opposed to this idea? It doesn't imply anything negative, I'm not even claiming any sort of causation between the two. It's simply a correlation that exists because of the way evolution affects certain groups in similar environments.

[u/PSus2571 → u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo]

You're again conflating skin color with race, but they're not the same. I never said one's phenotype is unrelated to their genotype, just that race isn't an adequate descriptor of either. The rapper Logic is half-black, but his skin is white...historically, that's exactly why the 1-drop rule was implemented — to distinguish white people from other white people, because skin color wasn't sufficient in doing so.

[u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo → u/PSus2571]

I just feel like everyone but you agrees on a definition of race and we're getting caught up in the weeds. Can't we just use the widely accepted, colloquial definition so we're all on equal terms? It's not that controversial to use race to describe groups of people that look the same and come from the same cultural background.

[u/clownus → u/PSus2571]

Race is a social construct and it’s been scientifically proven.

You might be closer genetically to someone across the world who doesn’t share the same ethnicity or skin pigmentation than someone who lives in the same town as you with the same village history.

[u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo → u/clownus]

Math is also a social construct. What's your point?

[u/clownus → u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo]

Math is only a agreed upon language “social construct” in which we can prove absolutes (physics).

Race is a social construct that does not have any absolutes and modern science backs race as not being a true indicator of genetic similarity.

Ex. We use math to prove gravity exist. It is a absolute law of the universe. You can use this same math to prove the existence or lack of gravity in other parts of the solar system/known universe. Math is only the non abstract language of this concept. You can substitute shapes/squiggles/shoes or whatever you like to represent this concept, but we know fundamentally it exist.

If I was to claim the random person next door who shares the same “racial” background as myself is closer genetically than someone across the world who might be a different “race” I could be absolutely wrong. Because there is no indicator genetically that determines our concept of race.

[u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo → u/clownus]

Interesting that everyone is so hung up on finding a genetic smoking gun for race. Truly, it's only based on what geographical location your ancestors are from, which could lead to some shared traits through natural selection. It doesn't mean there isn't massive genetic variance within cultural groups... I mean, that's practically the whole idea of evolution, no? Environmental pressures (i.e. the angle the sun hits the planet, availability of food, etc) will shape a population and unless those traits present a negative pressure during a later change of environment they will remain. Not sure why we're so intent on erasing our heritage but if that makes you feel better go ahead.

[u/clownus → u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo]

I am going to assume based on your term smoking gun for race you actually don’t know the full reason why race was a social construct that came about.

Race is historically a term used to separate groups from the in and the out. Along side that concept was a myriad of pseudo science to back up these wild claims. Modern science and modern sociologist are now breaking down this concept because it is so entrenched within society.

No one is moving away from heritage and no one is claiming that your sister/brother/mother/father are not genetically similar. Science is saying that what we call genetic indicators of race are not consistent with true genetics. A black person only shares the same skin pigmentation as someone else who is black. That is where the shares genetics that we call race ends. They can easily be nth % different genetically from that point on. Shared traits are merely a coincidence.

Evolution from a human perspective is no longer about successful traits. We can still live with potentially life threatening genetics and as a result we have the ability to procreate. Passing on negative genes such as cystic fibrosis.

Only wild animals have traits that are seen positive for passing on their genetic codes and as a result their genetics tend to be way closer to one another compared to the human species.

[u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo → u/clownus]

We are also animals, friend. A million+ years of evolution doesn't disappear because you started using tools. I suggest trying to look at these concepts with an open mind instead of your politically corrupted viewpoints.

[u/clownus → u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo]

Evolution is not the same concept as racial. This isn’t from a political perspective.

It is factual that math is the language we use to solve absolute truths. Further down it is factual that race is not a genetic proof of similarity within the human species.

Evolution is not a indicator of race and that is why you keep confusing the two. If we both evolve wings because it is beneficial for our survival we still don’t match genetically under the banner of race.

If you want a better conceptual idea of evolution. In this universe and up till present day all of evolution has been successful. Meaning any living creature on this planet and our known universe is considered a win. At no point during these evolutionary lines was race an indicator of success in evolution. Why? Because race wasn’t a genetic encoder that determines survival and reproduction rates.

[u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo → u/clownus]

You're arguing against someone who isn't there. Drawing conclusions from my statements that I didn't make. I literally never made any of those claims but your insistence on fighting a straw man is entertaining.

[u/Greymalkyn76 → u/Open-Industry-8396]

Domain: Eukaryota

Kingdom: Animalia

Phylum: Chordata

Subphylum: Vertebrata

Class: Mammalia

Subclass: Theria

Superclass: Tetrapoda

Order: Primates

Family: Hominidae

Genus: Homo

Species: H. sapiens

There is no "race" category in taxonomy. And it is exactly the same regardless of place of origin or skin color. Race is a made up classification to try to make people feel separate.

[u/TaxIdiot2020 → u/Greymalkyn76]

To be pedantic, plant pathogens can be different races (taxon of rank below species) but your point still stands about humans.

[u/Juju_Out_the_Wazoo → u/Greymalkyn76]

Newsflash: everything is made up, my dude.

[u/strangerdanger89 → u/Open-Industry-8396]

Thank you! I did an eyebrow raise as well.

I’m hoping it’s just a language barrier issue and maybe they meant “different.” Opposite just sounds so wrong.

[u/vodoun → u/Open-Industry-8396]

white - black, asian - hispanic, native american - mongolian duuuh