Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Nikon
and yet the populace of the Earth is referred to as the Human Race, which is why I say classing subgroups based on ethnicity as 'races' is to imply a separation which does not in fact exist.
It is all within the usage of the word. Gay used to mean happy, then it became a term used to describe homosexuals, then it became an insult.
For the artificial barriers people erect based on evolutionary locations to be demolished, the acceptance of everyone into one genus is necessary, otherwise we end up with more barriers. It is not acceptable to describe one whose country of origin (not necessarily themselves, but ancestrally) is Pakistan as a P**i, (since that is now an insulting term) However it is acceptable to call one whose country of origin is Britain, a 'brit' - both are merely abbreviations of the original country name, yet one found it's meaning routed into that of an insult. I find 'race' comments to be insulting since it implies a biological difference other than that of the attributes bestowed by evolutionary conditions.
|
You make a very good argument for promoting a change in terminology. However, you do your argument a disservice by making this your opening statement:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Nikon
I also argue that there is NO SUCH THING AS RACISM. Since we are ALL members of the HUMAN RACE, we are all anatomically idetical, with differing amounts of evolution induced disparity in physical appearance and minor differing cellular traits depending on where our ancestors lived. We all have the same internal organs, we all bleed red.
'Racism' cannot exist, except as a term.
|
You need to remember that while you as the writer are someone who attaches a particular understanding to the words 'race' and 'racism', your readers are (I would argue) almost exclusively going to have a different, shall we say more 'traditional' understanding of those words.
I am a great believer in authorial intent; I have little sympathy for arch-postmodernists who use text for their own literary masturbation. However, I do believe the author has a responsibility to consider what the natural reading of his material will be to his intended audience. And your intended audience - the other members of this forum - are for the most part going to read the phrase 'NO SUCH THING AS RACISM', which you even helpfully SHOUTED, and assume you're about to try to justify hate crimes against specific ethnic groups. Which of course you weren't, but had you tried a different tack you may have found you didn't need to re-state, re-phrase and elaborate upon your argument quite so much in your subsequent posts.