(November 15, 2017 at 1:23 pm)Chad32 Wrote: If someone wants to be culturally Filipino, I have no problem with that. Although obviosuly they wouldn't be genetically that ethnicity.

This.

People can identify as what they want.

If it wasn't already clear I almost always identify as a turtle although currently I identify as a Cartman-From-South-Park-Dressed-As-A-Robot.

When I'm in turtle mode if no one acknowledges my turtleyness I cry buckets (just not always out of my eyes . . . ).

But seriously, how you feel and how you are genetically doesn't necessarily have to match.

(November 15, 2017 at 12:49 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: It is kind of contradictory. On one hand we say that femininity/masculinity don't exist and that males/females are the same and interchangeable. On the other hand we recognize the extreme psychological plight a person is put in when they feel feminine but are actually male.

So, which is it?

They cant both be true. Personally I'll take the latter one and acknowledge the differences between men and women.

As for race, I have no idea.

I think this is a hole in postmodern feminist thought. These new gender and sexual identities are built around culturally manufactured ideas of gender that they themselves reject.

Gender and race are no doubt social constructs. Different cultures throughout history see these concepts very differently. They rarely remain constant for more than a century at a time. An example when it comes to race: what is white, according to Americans? Most people today would say that Irish and Polish were white. Less than 100 years ago people thought of them as "inbetweens," and, even though they literally looked white, they weren't truly white. The Courts even claimed that certain immigrants, including them, were not "legally white." So you see that race and our idea of it changes over time.

Does that give a white guy the excuse to call himself Filipino? I say no, mostly because each ethnic group deals with issues that are almost exclusive to them, and you are undermining these by pretending you are one of them.

Quote:On one hand we say that femininity/masculinity don't exist and that males/females are the same and interchangeable.

Who says -this-?

-and does -this- make any sense at all

Quote:On the other hand we recognize the extreme psychological plight a person is put in when they feel feminine but are actually male.

.......unless the qualifiers above..regardless of their accuracy or a specific persons acceptance of them, are real and present and persist in society, and have effects?

I reject the notion that chocolate is objectively better than vanilla..too, doesn't mean I don't think that chocolate is objectively better than vanilla. I know it's not true, but I can't help the way I feel. This isn;t a "hole" in post modern chocolatism, it's a misapprehension of post modern chocolatist thought.

In forensic anthropology, they use 3 different types of racial groups:

Caucasoid
Negroid
Mongoloid

And it's much more about bone structure than skin color. Arabs fall under Caucasoid, for example. Central/South Americans are usually either caucasoid or mongoloid depending on how much their ancestry came from the natives, who were mongoloid, vs the europeans, who were caucasoid.

They use this to determine a person's race when they find their skeletal remains but don't have an identity.

Anyway, interesting bit of info. I don't think race is entirely a social construct. People evolved differently depending on their location in the world.

(November 15, 2017 at 1:39 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(November 15, 2017 at 1:23 pm)Chad32 Wrote: If someone wants to be culturally Filipino, I have no problem with that. Although obviosuly they wouldn't be genetically that ethnicity.

Would you have a problem with him expecting others to acknowledge him as Filipine, checking off the wrong box under "ethnicity/race" when applying for jobs, schools, etc, and trying to get special benefits from minority programs?

Nope. If he's living the lifestyle, then go ahead.

And yeah, if nothing else, you can fit Humans into one of those three groups, according to bone structure.

(November 15, 2017 at 2:37 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Anyway, interesting bit of info. I don't think race is entirely a social construct. People evolved differently depending on their location in the world.

So close.

The lines we draw are arbitrary. People different colored skin and then we say it's a different race. It is indeed a social construct. We've all ultimately evolved from one race in Africa and we just draw our lines. Cultural lines are less arbitrary than race but they're still arbitrary.

And we say that because one person has girl bits and the other person has boy bits that they're male and female. But if someone born with male genitals had female chromosomes and female brain structure then it would once again show that we're just making our own definitions out of things. Ultimately there are no clear cut lines, it's all a continuum like the rest of evolution. Sexual reproduction between two types (male and female) is just the evolutionary path that nature has happened to take.... clear distinctions between one and the other is not necessary all that is necessary is some way to reproduce.

as long as he's not displacing an actual Filipino from a reserved spot for college placement tuition grant program, for instance, or something nefarious, I don't give a rat's ass

(November 15, 2017 at 2:52 pm)LastPoet Wrote:

(November 15, 2017 at 2:37 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Anyway, interesting bit of info. I don't think race is entirely a social construct. People evolved differently depending on their location in the world.

So close.

To what?

---

(November 15, 2017 at 3:01 pm)Hammy Wrote: The lines we draw are arbitrary. People different colored skin and then we say it's a different race. It is indeed a social construct. We've all ultimately evolved from one race in Africa and we just draw our lines. Cultural lines are less arbitrary than race but they're still arbitrary.

And we say that because one person has girl bits and the other person has boy bits that they're male and female. But if someone born with male genitals had female chromosomes and female brain structure then it would once again show that we're just making our own definitions out of things. Ultimately there are no clear cut lines, it's all a continuum like the rest of evolution. Sexual reproduction between two types (male and female) is just the evolutionary path that nature has happened to take.... clear distinctions between one and the other is not necessary all that is necessary is some way to reproduce.

No one is born with female chromosomes and male genitalia. That's impossible.

(November 15, 2017 at 3:23 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: No one is born with female chromosomes and male genitalia. That's impossible.

https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/001669.htm

Quote:46, XX INTERSEX

The person has the chromosomes of a woman, the ovaries of a woman, but external (outside) genitals that appear male. This most often is the result of a female fetus having been exposed to excess male hormones before birth.