Define "Political Correctness" and point to the examples of it in the text. You made this claim, so the burden is on you to back it up. I do not accept the term "Political Correctness" as anything but a subjective, emotion-laden evaluation.
Like myself at first, you misread the meaning of the statement. "There are more similarities than differences" meaning, once you take out the genes that are common across all of homo sapiens sapiens, there is no scientific way to discern "race", because the visible traits we use to determine belonging to certain races appear so often across the species that it is impossible to define in a meaningful way.
People do frequently "wrongly" identify the race of others -- at least, according to the people who say they have been misidentified. My husband, for example, is Sicilian. If he grows a beard, he looks like, and has been mistaken for, an Arab.
This was not discussed in the article, but "race" as a term has changed in meaning ever since it was invented. Not even American surveys can agree on what races there are.
Secondly many regions are completely ignored as separate even though there are clear differences in how they look. Why is "Asian" one race, when Chinese, Japanese and Koreans look VERY different from Central and South Asians, and Russians are primarily also in Asia. What race are they? Many South Asians share traits with people of African Descent, such as very dark skin and wiry hair. What race are people from India? What if they don't have dark skin and wiry hair? What race are people from the Middle East? What race are the Kurds, who are literally Caucasians, but also from the Middle East, and share some features with Semitic peoples, however some are blond with blue eyes?
Even today, there is no generally agreed-upon definitions of these races, let alone one based on measurable characteristics, so how can one measure the degree of belonging to a race? If you can't measure it, it's not a science-based categorization.
You are in error. Human "discernment" of "Phenotypical" features is notoriously unreliable as a basis for scientific discrimination. One need only to look at the original categorizations of species by the early biologists.
I have demonstrated how race is in fact a completely unscientific method for categorizing people:
1. it mixes unrelated categories
2. it relies upon visual distinction by humans, which is cannot reliably determine relationship
3. There is no agreed-upon definition of measurable characteristics.
4. It ignores DNA
5. It lumps together groups of people that are clearly visually distinct from each other, and leaves others out entirely
Clearly race is an unreliable, inconsistent, self-contradictory, qualitative and totally subjective categorization of humans. There is no other logical conclusion but that it is unscientific.
*********************
Mona Lisa, I am going to address a bunch of your assertions and deliberate obfuscations and other disingenous statements:
1 - Political correctness is to ignore facts or reality, in order to avoid causing anger or outrage.
2 - Race does exist. Race means a group of people with a shared geographical origin and shared physical traits that are discernable and sets them apart from other groups. Yes, race is a continuum, and the closer together people are geographically the more overlap there will be, but on average the groups will look different. Please don't tell me you can't tell that Serena Williams is African and that Maria Sharapova is European. Do you really expect people to look at the actress Amy Adams and the actress Lupitya Nyongo and not notice the obvious regional differences? One has a narrow, high bridged leptarrhine European nose, the other has a wide and flat African nose. The one has slender lips, the other has big lips. The one has a European orthognathic facial bone structure, the other has an African prognathous facial bone structure. The one has smooth red European hair, the other has extremely tightly coiled black hair, also known as "Afro-textured" hair. The one has blue eyes, the other one has black eyes. The one has big, low European calf muscles, the other one has small and high sitting African calf muscles due to her curved African femurs. The one has a long torso and shorter limbs, the other has the typical African short torso and longer limbs. Look at all those differences... and I didn't even mention skin colour!
"because the visible traits we use to determine belonging to certain races appear so often across the species that it is impossible to define in a meaningful way."
This is nonsense. There is not a single European alive that has a nose as wide and flat as George Floyd, or lips as large as George Floyd. There is not a single European alive that has hair as tightly coiled as African hair. It's only in your imagination where people's races are constantly incorrectly discerned. I'm sorry, but I've never walked around anywhere in Europe and saw ethnic Europeans looking similar to Africans or Asians. Everywhere I look in Europe can tell that the Europeans are visually distinct from other groups. I don't walk around and see a European with pot scrubber coiled African hair, or a massive wide flat nose, or facial prognathism, or enormous lips. I really don't. I don't see Europeans with Asian facial bone structure and slanted eyes with epicanthic fold. Even the Sami don't have eyes nearly to the extent of East Asian eyes. I somehow doubt if I walk around in Asia that I will see random European traits everyone, such as an Asian with round eyes, long narrow high-bridged nose, European facial bone structure and long wavy blonde hair.
Mixed race people don't count.
3 - As for your husband looking Arab... I can't take your word for it because you are pushing an agenda and are biased. You want to believe your husband can look Arab as that would support your assertions. I will have to be the judge. You will have to show a picture of your husband because your word simply isn't good enough.
And no, Sicilians do not look like Arabs. They really don't. They might have a similar appearance to some north Africans, but North Africans are not all Arabs. The Mediterranean peoples share some similar features, but on average Mediterranean Europeans are still distinguishable from North Africans. Sicilians and other southern Italians definitely do not look like sub-Saharan Africans or East Asians.
4 - "People do frequently "wrongly" identify the race of others"
No, they don't. Especially not races that are substantially geographically separated. No one is going to confuse a European for a sub-Saharan African. Again, mixed race people don't count.
People can easily identify who is of their race and who isn't. Perhaps when looking at other races than their own they are not as tuned in on the subtle and nuanced differences. For example, a European might not be so easily able to tell the differences between Turkic people and those of the Levant or Arabs, but people of those races will be able to identify the differences very easily. Actually one can consider those people to be of the same race - West Asian. Of course every race has variation within it, so Turks, Arabs, Berbers, Maghreb have subtle differences in their appearance, like how Slavic, Germanic, Iberian, Helenic and Scandinavian people subtle differences in their appearances. Even if you personally think that Turks and Italians look more alike than Italians and Scandinavians, that doesn't invalidate the concept of race. Italians and Norwegians have the same facial features and facial bone structures and hair textures, with Italians having more people on the curly hair end of the spectrum and Norwegians having more people on the straight hair end of the spectrum.
5 - "This was not discussed in the article, but "race" as a term has changed in meaning ever since it was invented. Not even American surveys can agree on what races there are."
I agree that the American legal racial categories need updating. They are indeed silly. Updating them would be very simple and easy. These are the racial categories that should be used: European, West Asian, South Asian, East Asian, Sub-Saharan African, Amerindian, Oceanic, Polynesian, Hispanic Mestizo, Other Mixed race.
6 - "Why is "Asian" one race, when Chinese, Japanese and Koreans look VERY different from Central and South Asians,"
What are you talking about? We do make distinctions between the different Asiatic races when distinguishing between them is relevant or necessary. When they are lumped together it is usually because the white European race and its relationship to the other races is the focus of the topic and thus using the umbrella term "Asian" to group all Asian racial groups together is sufficient. For example, if we are talking about how ethnic racial Europeans could become a minority in their own European homelands if they allow too much Asian immigration, specifying the exact Asian racial group isn't pertinent or consequential. The point is that Europeans will become a minority... whatever group might replace them, whether it's west, south or east Asians, doesn't matter, because it's all equally bad.
7 - "and Russians are primarily also in Asia. What race are they"
Are you joking? You can't be serious. Russia is transcontinental and includes people of the European race and people of the three Asian races. Western Russia is in Europe. "Russians" can be split into two groups: People who are ethnic Russian and those who are citizens of Russia but are not ethnic Russians. Ethnic Russians are European Slavic people. The other racial groups in Russia typically have strong regional identities. The Tatars, for example, will consider themselves Tatars first, and citizens of Russia second. Same applies to the Chechen people.
8 - "Many South Asians share traits with people of African Descent, such as very dark skin and wiry hair."
No. They do not. Indians do not look like Africans. Even if many of them have very dark skin. Their facial features, nose shapes, lips sizes, facial bone structure and body proportions are not African. Their hair is also significantly different to African hair. Seriously, HAVE YOU EVER SEEN AFRICAN HAIR? It's completely unique. No other race has REMOTELY similar hair to African hair. Even the curliest European hair looks completely different to Afro-textured hair. South Asians have the same hair textures as Europeans and West Asians - hair that ranges from straight to wavy to curly. They do not have coiled African hair. You are being very disingenuous in your arguments.
9 - "so how can one measure the degree of belonging to a race? If you can't measure it, it's not a science-based categorization."
It can be measured. Our DNA profiles can point out our geographical origins. You can also measure accurately by sight. 99% of the time you will be able to discern race accurately by looking at someone. In certain cases, such as Southern Europeans and people from the Levant or some Turkic people, some confusion is forgivable as there will be fringe cases where they look very similar due to geographical proximity and Mediterranean people's having mixed around a lot.
10 - "You are in error. Human "discernment" of "Phenotypical" features is notoriously unreliable as a basis for scientific discrimination. One need only to look at the original categorizations of species by the early biologists."
Race doesn't HAVE to be so perfectly scientifically delineated. "Race" is simply a term we use to describe obvious and discernable groups of humans, based on geographical origin and physical traits. That's it. If we were to stop using the word race for this purpose because progressives don't like it and are beating us over the head incessantly, then we will simply find a different term that has the same purpose. We will replace race with "appearance group" or "Ancestral population" or whatever. It will fulfill the same function, so we might as well just stick with race.
The main reason why progressives insist we are all the same race and we should pretend taht there are no differences between humans is because they are pushing a race mixing agenda. They want all humans to merge together until we all look exactly the same and European beauty is annihilated. They are trying to brainwash us to believe that there are no differences and nothing worthy of preservation. What better way to manipulate the white race to surrender itself to its own conquest and extinction than by brainwashing white people to believe that they don't really exist?
11 -
"1. it mixes unrelated categories
2. it relies upon visual distinction by humans, which is cannot reliably determine relationship
3. There is no agreed-upon definition of measurable characteristics.
4. It ignores DNA
5. It lumps together groups of people that are clearly visually distinct from each other, and leaves others out entirely"
Visual distinction by humans is accurate 99.9999% of the time. The fact that there is no agreed-upon definition of measurable characteristics doesn't change the fact that people from different geographical regions look different and have different genetic traits, history and ancestry. It does not ignore DNA. Your DNA shows you are 99% European, then you are of the European race. Simple. It does not lump people together who are visually distinct. South, west and east Asians are not lumped together as the same race. They are only lumped together when the differences between them isn't relevant. Same applies to Africans and East Africans. When they need to be distinguished they are distinguished from one another. It all depends on the relevance those distinctions carry in a particular topic of discussion.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram