When you look at the categorization of people by color, at least from a DNA aspect, it makes as much sense as categorizing a library full of books by what the 3rd letter the 43rd word of the 5th chapter is.
The social construct thing is very true I live in Quebec/Canada and and in our job there was me (spanish) and a chilean speaking spanish. And a coworker comes Up saying He's sorry that he cant speak spanish because he is White Like wtf??? Literally we were the same color , three of us clearly White. It just shocked me like if there wasnt like millions of people that looked like him un Spain😅😅🤦
@@FamilyFriendlyDaddyBlog this is proof everyone faces discrimination and not once did you say it was wrong you just justified it Not Cool Famous American
@@Momoa786 that’s because most ‘white’-identified North Americans are mixed race too. They’ve been breeding out native Americans and Africans for centuries and allowed them to assimilate into the white race based on blood quantum and if the white skin was achieved.
I think you’re on to something, Nick! I believe that if albino Africans came to the U.S. in the old times, they may have fit in with the white people of European descent. They probably didn’t care about African features back then, but more so just the white skin color. Now I have light skin, but my parents are dark as night. I know that (at least on my father’s side) there are a lot of white folks in my family tree, a few generations back, because of the rapes that slave owners gave to black women. I have at least two great-grandparents who were half-white. That being said, I know I wouldn’t be able to pass. My African features are clearly visible and my hair is wiry.
@@laurag8126 my skin color varies depending on the lighting. I am definitely lighter than the average African-American. Sometimes I can be paler in complexion.
@@FamilyFriendlyDaddyBlog my pleasure, Nick! I love it when people express their family backgrounds. We're all so diverse and so different from each other, yet we're all human. Honestly, I feel like the terms "white people" and "black people" were created for social segregation. We have different skin tones, hair textures, etc. because of varied UV lighting around different parts of the globe. "Black people" are not a different species compared to "white people" (I know you understand that). Of that were the case, we wouldn't get colorful DNA tests highlighting different countries around the world, and we probably would have never been born.
I believe we ARE on this planet and the PLANET has ROCKS (islands, places for ancestors to dwell etc.) FEATURES look similar to..... one man "Noah" in a general sense. John Legend is a pretty good example of someone who appears to be "tri-racial" in some way. Ham, Shem, Japheth. WE in our "weakness" as people create these "mental blocks" when DIVIDE rather than align with reality.
I think its both, you can be darker and just be seen as White like of as having european ancestry whereas native americans/japanese with maybe lighter skin aren't.
Hard to seperate racism and colo(u)rism, often colo(u)rism is in some way established owing to race theory favouring certain people classified as a certain race and a perception of a certain race/colouring being better or just more favoured and people in other groups ordering a sort of hierarchy leaning towards those attributes and that goes with other things, cargo cults for example where things associated with a group perceived as successful, with being high technology or a symbol of affluence, is worshipped, I'm sure the West African "Christian" cults that openly promote wealth as a sign of goodness, it's an association of Christianity and affluence with living successfully. But then again among what would be termed White Society there are distinctions between blond(e)s, brunet(te)s and redheads though they aren't described as seperate races, but may well be treated differently, especially women. In the following discussion though favourability towards lightness is mostly due to it's proximity to what is described as white and all the skin lightening creams that are much used by many from the tropics, the wheatish look popular in India and more particular more sort of pale look that is popular in parts of South East Asia. czcams.com/video/AIx131aaY6A/video.html
First off, race is not a social construct. Human races are scientific and are established on the physical and genetic accumulation of certain inherited traits in the human population. 'Race's in mankind can be likened to 'breed's in other animals. For example, no two Chihuahuas are going to give birth to a German Shephard ever. The same is true for humans. Two Nilotes will never have a child who would be mistaken for a Korean, etc. So race is a physiological reality that holds true scientifically. Had racial isolation continued, humans would have eventually diverged into separate subspecies, then ultimately into separate species, no different to what all other animals do. I've known an albino black person here in my town. His skin was whiter than mine, but you could tell he was still of African American descent. He didn't look Caucasian. His facial and bodily features were such that you could tell he was closely related to others of African heritage, and not closely related (relatively) to peoples from Europe. There is some truth about race in America being tied with cultural identity. For example, a lot of American Blacks do not consider individuals like Condoleeza Rice or Winsome Sears to be "black" because they do not exemplify typical racial attitudes and stereotypes of 'Black America' despite being racially black. Instead, people have to pause and think before answering whether these individuals are really "black" because they act in a manner that many would consider typical of "white" people, and therefore get lumped into the white crowd. Totally fremd to a lot of people who are not accustomed to the American dilemma. Historically, in places like Britain, blacks did not act different to whites, people just acted like normal people. There was no such thing as "acting white" or "acting black". However, this is changing now with places around the world adopting this American phenomenon, and blacks in other countries are starting to see themselves as culturally different to non-blacks of the same country, and are INTENTIONALLY trying to look, speak, and act differently to their white counterparts. Leave it to America to sow its demons of division around the globe. Yay, us. 🙄😒 IMO, people should govern their actions based on what is right and wrong, good and bad, NOT on whether this or that is considered "black" or "white".
The ONLY way that race is not a social construct is if it was predefined by someone with the authority to make those definitions. Then the question becomes, who has that authority, and what race do they categorize themselves to be?
@@trenton1190 Wrong. Genetics determines race, not a human, not an agenda, not a culture. A coyote is not a jackal - not because someone decided they wanted them to be termed separately. It's because they have different, distinguishing features and different genetic variations. Same applies to biological race. There is a failing attempt in America today to erase biological race and pretend it doesn't exist - as if it exists solely because we made it up to begin with. Um, no. It's real all on its own. And there's nothing wrong with it. All races are equal, and equally beautiful.
First off, race was already defined long before the genome was discovered and observable. You still didn't tell me who you believe defined it. Like I said before, the human genome is so vastly complex that categorizing people by todays standard of race is as silly as categorizing a library full of books by what the 3rd letter the 43rd word of the 5th chapter is.
@@trenton1190 No it's not. What a ridiculous analogy. Racial definitions were originally observed and established due to general, consistent physical characteristics within given populations. It doesn't matter who first defined them. But if you want to know who gets the official credit that would be Linnaeus.
DISCRIMINATION IS FUCKED UP PERIOD AND IT SEEMN YOU MAKING EXCUSES FOR IT WITHOUT SAYING ITS A MESSED UP SYSTEM OR YOU OK WITH THE DISCRIMINATION OR NO BECAUSE YOU NEVER SAID SO
When you look at the categorization of people by color, at least from a DNA aspect, it makes as much sense as categorizing a library full of books by what the 3rd letter the 43rd word of the 5th chapter is.
Glad to see you fixed your face nick!
The social construct thing is very true
I live in Quebec/Canada and and in our job there was me (spanish) and a chilean speaking spanish.
And a coworker comes Up saying He's sorry that he cant speak spanish because he is White
Like wtf??? Literally we were the same color , three of us clearly White.
It just shocked me like if there wasnt like millions of people that looked like him un Spain😅😅🤦
Wow, that is hilarious!
@@FamilyFriendlyDaddyBlog this is proof everyone faces discrimination and not once did you say it was wrong you just justified it Not Cool Famous American
@@Momoa786 that’s because most ‘white’-identified North Americans are mixed race too. They’ve been breeding out native Americans and Africans for centuries and allowed them to assimilate into the white race based on blood quantum and if the white skin was achieved.
Hey nick can guy who is half typical black/afro half typical german be fair skinned with an afro features??
I think you’re on to something, Nick! I believe that if albino Africans came to the U.S. in the old times, they may have fit in with the white people of European descent. They probably didn’t care about African features back then, but more so just the white skin color. Now I have light skin, but my parents are dark as night. I know that (at least on my father’s side) there are a lot of white folks in my family tree, a few generations back, because of the rapes that slave owners gave to black women. I have at least two great-grandparents who were half-white. That being said, I know I wouldn’t be able to pass. My African features are clearly visible and my hair is wiry.
Thanks for backing me up on this, Jason!
@@laurag8126 my skin color varies depending on the lighting. I am definitely lighter than the average African-American. Sometimes I can be paler in complexion.
@@FamilyFriendlyDaddyBlog my pleasure, Nick! I love it when people express their family backgrounds. We're all so diverse and so different from each other, yet we're all human. Honestly, I feel like the terms "white people" and "black people" were created for social segregation. We have different skin tones, hair textures, etc. because of varied UV lighting around different parts of the globe. "Black people" are not a different species compared to "white people" (I know you understand that). Of that were the case, we wouldn't get colorful DNA tests highlighting different countries around the world, and we probably would have never been born.
I believe we ARE on this planet and the PLANET has ROCKS (islands, places for ancestors to dwell etc.) FEATURES look similar to..... one man "Noah" in a general sense. John Legend is a pretty good example of someone who appears to be "tri-racial" in some way. Ham, Shem, Japheth. WE in our "weakness" as people create these "mental blocks" when DIVIDE rather than align with reality.
I think its both, you can be darker and just be seen as White like of as having european ancestry whereas native americans/japanese with maybe lighter skin aren't.
Hard to seperate racism and colo(u)rism, often colo(u)rism is in some way established owing to race theory favouring certain people classified as a certain race and a perception of a certain race/colouring being better or just more favoured and people in other groups ordering a sort of hierarchy leaning towards those attributes and that goes with other things, cargo cults for example where things associated with a group perceived as successful, with being high technology or a symbol of affluence, is worshipped, I'm sure the West African "Christian" cults that openly promote wealth as a sign of goodness, it's an association of Christianity and affluence with living successfully.
But then again among what would be termed White Society there are distinctions between blond(e)s, brunet(te)s and redheads though they aren't described as seperate races, but may well be treated differently, especially women.
In the following discussion though favourability towards lightness is mostly due to it's proximity to what is described as white and all the skin lightening creams that are much used by many from the tropics, the wheatish look popular in India and more particular more sort of pale look that is popular in parts of South East Asia.
czcams.com/video/AIx131aaY6A/video.html
First off, race is not a social construct. Human races are scientific and are established on the physical and genetic accumulation of certain inherited traits in the human population. 'Race's in mankind can be likened to 'breed's in other animals. For example, no two Chihuahuas are going to give birth to a German Shephard ever. The same is true for humans. Two Nilotes will never have a child who would be mistaken for a Korean, etc. So race is a physiological reality that holds true scientifically. Had racial isolation continued, humans would have eventually diverged into separate subspecies, then ultimately into separate species, no different to what all other animals do.
I've known an albino black person here in my town. His skin was whiter than mine, but you could tell he was still of African American descent. He didn't look Caucasian. His facial and bodily features were such that you could tell he was closely related to others of African heritage, and not closely related (relatively) to peoples from Europe.
There is some truth about race in America being tied with cultural identity. For example, a lot of American Blacks do not consider individuals like Condoleeza Rice or Winsome Sears to be "black" because they do not exemplify typical racial attitudes and stereotypes of 'Black America' despite being racially black. Instead, people have to pause and think before answering whether these individuals are really "black" because they act in a manner that many would consider typical of "white" people, and therefore get lumped into the white crowd. Totally fremd to a lot of people who are not accustomed to the American dilemma.
Historically, in places like Britain, blacks did not act different to whites, people just acted like normal people. There was no such thing as "acting white" or "acting black". However, this is changing now with places around the world adopting this American phenomenon, and blacks in other countries are starting to see themselves as culturally different to non-blacks of the same country, and are INTENTIONALLY trying to look, speak, and act differently to their white counterparts. Leave it to America to sow its demons of division around the globe. Yay, us. 🙄😒 IMO, people should govern their actions based on what is right and wrong, good and bad, NOT on whether this or that is considered "black" or "white".
The ONLY way that race is not a social construct is if it was predefined by someone with the authority to make those definitions. Then the question becomes, who has that authority, and what race do they categorize themselves to be?
@@trenton1190 Wrong. Genetics determines race, not a human, not an agenda, not a culture. A coyote is not a jackal - not because someone decided they wanted them to be termed separately. It's because they have different, distinguishing features and different genetic variations. Same applies to biological race. There is a failing attempt in America today to erase biological race and pretend it doesn't exist - as if it exists solely because we made it up to begin with. Um, no. It's real all on its own. And there's nothing wrong with it. All races are equal, and equally beautiful.
First off, race was already defined long before the genome was discovered and observable. You still didn't tell me who you believe defined it. Like I said before, the human genome is so vastly complex that categorizing people by todays standard of race is as silly as categorizing a library full of books by what the 3rd letter the 43rd word of the 5th chapter is.
@@trenton1190 No it's not. What a ridiculous analogy. Racial definitions were originally observed and established due to general, consistent physical characteristics within given populations. It doesn't matter who first defined them. But if you want to know who gets the official credit that would be Linnaeus.
@@brianlewis5692Ah, Linnaeus, the first racist. You should teach a class on genders.
DISCRIMINATION IS FUCKED UP PERIOD AND IT SEEMN YOU MAKING EXCUSES FOR IT WITHOUT SAYING ITS A MESSED UP SYSTEM OR YOU OK WITH THE DISCRIMINATION OR NO BECAUSE YOU NEVER SAID SO