Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics

[crazy canuck]

Ok, tell me how you divide up races and what aspects of each race you think are signficant so as to make such a division meaningful?

I would think the significance would involve genetic and physical issues obviously. 

The human race is 99.9% genetically identical.  The variations are accounted for mainly by mutations that are not traceable to "racial" differences.

Here is an interesting paper on the dangers/folly of going back to the good old days of dividing people by race.  http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/ViewPage.aspx?pageId=72

[Valmy]

The human race is 99.9% genetically identical.  The variations are accounted for mainly by mutations that are not traceable to "racial" differences.

Ok so I was talking about that if it were to be done the significance would be to track those variations.  I am not sure what traceable racial differences are as opposed to genetic mutations that have been passed down.  What else would racial differences possibly be?

Anyway you asked a question about how or why we might divide people by race in such a way that would be meaningful and I proposed one for the sake of conversation.

Here is an interesting paper on the dangers/folly of going back to the good old days of dividing people by race.

We have left the days of dividing people by race?  I hadn't noticed.

[Jacob]

Ok, tell me how you divide up races and what aspects of each race you think are signficant so as to make such a division meaningful?

I would think the significance would involve genetic and physical issues obviously.  Such as susceptibility to things like Sickle-Cell disease.  Obviously these divisions will break down over time as everybody intermarries in our new globalized world but at this time population groups still have distinctions in these areas.

It is my understanding that the reasonable genetic/physical divisions of the human population do not map to the social ones, and that different reasonable genetic/physical divisions do not map to one another coherently either.

[crazy canuck]

What else would racial differences possibly be?

If you took the time to read the article I posted, it is that very notion that is problematic.

Genetic mutation comes about because a wide number of factors - race is a problematic construct at best.

[Valmy]

Ok, tell me how you divide up races and what aspects of each race you think are signficant so as to make such a division meaningful?

I would think the significance would involve genetic and physical issues obviously.  Such as susceptibility to things like Sickle-Cell disease.  Obviously these divisions will break down over time as everybody intermarries in our new globalized world but at this time population groups still have distinctions in these areas.

It is my understanding that the reasonable genetic/physical divisions of the human population do not map to the social ones, and that different reasonable genetic/physical divisions do not map to one another coherently either.

Well there may not be any purpose at all.  But if there were any reasons to do so that were meaningful or significant it would be there.

[Valmy]

What else would racial differences possibly be?

If you took the time to read the article I posted, it is that very notion that is problematic.

Genetic mutation comes about because a wide number of factors - race is a problematic construct at best.

I read the article.  I was just saying if hypothetically there were racial differences what else could possibly be their origins than genetic mutations?

Then article seemed to confirm exactly what I was saying as well, that races are all mixing together making these differences, if any, not worth much in the long run.

[katmai]

You fucking fucks, this is Olympics thread, not genetics and race discussion FFS!!!

[Valmy]

You fucking fucks, this is Olympics thread, not genetics and race discussion FFS!!!

We are just coming to the conclusion that the reason most winners in the Winter Olympics are people of European Ancestry is because of their genetic superiority.  There are absolutely no other contributing factors.

[Maximus]

No it isn't. That's racial supremism. Racism is a necessary prerequisite for it, but it's not the same thing.

This is certainly not how the vast majority of people in the world use the word.

Yeah, I would say that "racism" generally incorporates the supremism.  I've found the word "racialism" used for what Max seems to be describing.

Based on this thread, there seems to be a school of thought that regards racialism as racism, to no doubt discredit the concept.  I can understand the motivation, as racialism can lead to racism or be used as a pretext for racism, but I would guess that even the proponents of this equivalence themselves know that they're full of shit for the greater good.

If you disagree with a definition that's one thing but it doesn't make it full of shit.

Here's the thing.  The arbitrary handful of visible characteristics that make up "race" are not really useful for determining anything else about a person.  Racism, as I was taught, is the belief that these characteristic are useful for anything other than as a descriptor.

[alfred russel]

You fucking fucks, this is Olympics thread, not genetics and race discussion FFS!!!

We are just coming to the conclusion that the reason most winners in the Winter Olympics are people of European Ancestry is because of their genetic superiority.  There are absolutely no other contributing factors.

Probably just because black people stand out from the snow. White people have natural camoflauge and can sneak up on people easier, or pull away without anyone noticing. It is a big advantage in a race.

Also, I don't want to talk about what happens in the backcountry during the less regulated biathlon competitions.

[Valmy]

Here's the thing.  The arbitrary handful of visible characteristics that make up "race" are not really useful for determining anything else about a person.  Racism, as I was taught, is the belief that these characteristic are useful for anything other than as a descriptor.

Yeah that is usually my response to the racists and their constant use of stats.  'Blacks dominate the NBA therefore racism is right' or whatever.  Um for every non-black dude in the NBA there are thousands of black dudes who they beat out for that spot.  Even in that rather extreme example it is not really useful in dealing with individuals which is why racism is wrong.

[Sheilbh]

People go shirtless in 50 degree weather?

How long were you in the UK?

[Ed Anger]

You fucking fucks, this is Olympics thread, not genetics and race discussion FFS!!!

The Olympics 1936 thread.

[katmai]

You fucking fucks, this is Olympics thread, not genetics and race discussion FFS!!!

The Olympics 1936 thread.

You and your Hitler fetish!

[DGuller]

If you disagree with a definition that's one thing but it doesn't make it full of shit.

Of course that alone doesn't make it full of shit.

Here's the thing.  The arbitrary handful of visible characteristics that make up "race" are not really useful for determining anything else about a person.  Racism, as I was taught, is the belief that these characteristic are useful for anything other than as a descriptor.

Here's the thing:  this is a convenient untruth.  By that logic, the medical researchers who say that African Americans are much more likely to have hypertension are racists.