Matthew Le God Posted 25 May, 2011 Share Posted 25 May, 2011 English is a nationality, if he'd called him a typical lump of a caucasian striker, well then we would have had Uncle Tom's Cabin all over again Even using terms like "caucasian" doesn't really work. Go back far enough and we all have common ancestors, where do you draw the line for each "race"? As I said earlier...there is the same amount of genetic variation among individuals within a so called racial group as there is between individuals in different racial groups. What that means is that there is no real genetic difference between blacks and whites or between whites and Asians or between any of the so called races. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avenue Saint Posted 25 May, 2011 Share Posted 25 May, 2011 Even using terms like "caucasian" doesn't really work. Go back far enough and we all have common ancestors, where do you draw the line for each "race"? As I said earlier...there is the same amount of genetic variation among individuals within a so called racial group as there is between individuals in different racial groups. What that means is that there is no real genetic difference between blacks and whites or between whites and Asians or between any of the so called races. You have a point with regards, how far back does one go... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Bad Bob Posted 25 May, 2011 Share Posted 25 May, 2011 You have a point with regards, how far back does one go... Oh, about 2.5 million years, give or take Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 25 May, 2011 Share Posted 25 May, 2011 You were the one that implied the English were a race. Not me. You understood perfectly the gist and whilst technically you may be correct it is a valid enough example, other wise terms such as "paki" couldn't be considered racist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 25 May, 2011 Share Posted 25 May, 2011 You understood perfectly the gist and whilst technically you may be correct it is a valid enough example, other wise terms such as "paki" couldn't be considered racist. "Paki" is considered racist because it is used in a derogatory manner to label people in a negative way. If the people of the world understood that there really is no such thing genetically as "race" and we are just human, it would be a much better place! Sadly it is unlikely to happen anytime soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 25 May, 2011 Share Posted 25 May, 2011 "English Lump" is considered racist because it is used in a derogatory manner to label people in a negative way. If the people of the world understood that there really is no such thing genetically as "race" and we are just human, it would be a much better place! Sadly it is unlikely to happen anytime soon. No further questions your honour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 25 May, 2011 Share Posted 25 May, 2011 You understood perfectly the gist and whilst technically you may be correct it is a valid enough example, other wise terms such as "paki" couldn't be considered racist. MLG seems to make a living out of being "technically correct" while altogether missing the point entirely. I think this thread has more than run its course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts