If a sterotype is true is it racist?

I couldn't figure out what post you were responding to, so this is probably totally off topic but too interesting to pass up:

 

Then prove it. Or admit, it's only you justifying wanting to be open about being racist.

 

As is dyeing grey hair, plastic surgery, botox, and make-up .... IMO.

 

Even then, true for some western males, not all. I know plenty of white blokes who prefer brunettes.

 

absolutely her body shape. it's a universal mammalian indicator (of fertility).

 

I always thought fried chicken was a southern thing.

 

Blacks southern people. If one is white and from the north, east, or west.

 

I've seen shows like Andy Griffith and they eat a lot of fried chicken. It was only up until recently that I learned it was a black thing as well.

 

If I hold an apple up and it hits the ground, then I know that gravity is a fact.

When I look back at ALL of the world champion running and jumping events won by Blacks about 95% of the time in the last 40 years, then I can logically say that Blacks are superior runners and jumpers to every other race. A racist statement. There is no valid explanation other than genetics. If you have another reason why this is so, let me know.

Now if you want "fairness" to "level the playing field" and achieve equality, then it would only be fair to hold back all Black athletes in running and jumping competitions and have them start later---in the same way Affirmative Action holds back Whites and some Asians.

It looks as though you are very misinformed about the true state of the criminal justice system and Blacks. Blacks commit from 5 to 10 times more violent crimes and murders than Whites. That is a fact. A racist fact, but a fact nonetheless. In large Black enclaves like Chicago, Blacks are 1/3 of the city population, yet are involved in 80 percent of the murders. However, the clearance rate is only about 20%. So do you think it is justice that Black murderers get away with it 80 percent of the time?
http://heyjackass.com/category/2014-chicago-crime-murder-stats/

 

Would be nice if these people didn't have an agenda and showed the genetic profiles of all the important mummies. But they keep those under wraps.

 

This like trying to defend why the Earth is flat, but please tell me why the science is wrong that Blacks have a genetically inherent, superior UV protection from having more melanin in their skin. If you don't believe the science, then you are not a racist.

 

facts aren't racism. Just the facts, ma'am.

 

It's also a stigmatization.

 

But are they superior as a race or merely superior at a given trait? That's the difference between a statement of fact and racist ideals.

This is getting beyond the scope of the discussion.

No, I'm not misinformed about such. I am aware of the statistics you present. But is that because of a racial trait? Or is it more about how they are treated as a race? How they live when raised in a very racist, low income, high crime and gang cultured environment?

 

You are under the impression that you have to believe a race must be superior in most things to be racist. Do you mean greater than 50% of all traits and abilities, or 75% or 100%?

Therefore someone isn't a racist if they think Blacks have genes that give them a superior advantage in running and jumping?
And someone isn't a racist if they believe Whites have genes that give them a superior IQ advantage?

So if environmental and cultural influences are the primary problems with crime and other learning problems, then the best way would be to do a long term study (using DNA that is still banned from being used in IQ studies) of adopted children and adopted twins placed in homes of different ethnic groups. New studies have been banned and are taboo. But these studies give a clue that genetics play about an 80% role in life.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Twin_Family_Study

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial_Adoption_Study

 

You're hell bent to call me a racist aren'tcha?

Racism is saying that one race is superior to another overall.

Let's substitute the word "racist" with "elitist"...partially because racism and sexism are forms of elitism and largely since I can't think of any trait that Whites have that would make them superior to any other race that makes any sense.

Ooh! I can process sunlight into Vitamin D better in low light conditions! Yeah I'm freaking Übermensch here! (for full sarcastic effect, read that in Marvin the Martian's voice)

So let's use elitism. I'm better than my housemate at IT related stuff. That's not being elitist, that's simply stating a fact. He's better than me when it comes to Electrical work. Again that's not being elitist, that's stating a fact. Both of us are aware that the other could learn those particular skills and once learned could perform them as well as if not better than us.

Being elitist would be saying that I'm superior to my housemate because I'm better at IT and he's a moron because he isn't as good. It would also be the same if he were to say likewise about the fact that he's a better electrician and I'm scum dog of the universe because I'm not as good.

That's the difference. One is simply stating that He's the better electrician and I'm the better IT guy and our friends know which one of us to go to depending on need...and the other is being an elitist prick looking down our noses at each other.

So going back to racial traits. Race "A" has "B" trait that makes them better on average than Race "X" at "C" task and Race "X" has "Y" trait that makes them better on average than Race "A" at "Z" task. At no point has it been stated in that comment that Race "A" is superior to Race "X" or vice versa.

Racism would be if Race "A" said that they were superior than Race "X" because of said trait and that Race "X" is inferior or vice versa.

 

I understand your views on the subject, or at least your interpretation of them.

 

Not racist but ignorant.

 

You can call it "interpretation" all you want. The fact is that by definitions of the word racism...it's about attitude. By all the definitions (even the one you pointed from Webster), racism is...

• Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior. (Oxford)
• a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others. (Dictionary.com)
• a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race (Merriam Webster)
  
• Racism is the belief that a particular race is superior or inferior to another, that a person’s social and moral traits are predetermined by his or her inborn biological characteristics. Racial separatism is the belief, most of the time based on racism, that different races should remain segregated and apart from one another. (ADL.Org)

Saying that a group is good at something is not racism. Saying that a group is good at something and saying that all other groups is inferior...is.

A question that I have to ask is why? Why are you so hell bent for leather to claim that everyone else is racist? In a world where racism is rampant...that's a little counter productive.

 

Well, I do find it ironic that you would use a definition from a self-serving ethnic group, the ADL, that even the hate group the Southern Poverty Law Center says is a hate group.

You still cling to your belief that it must be an "overall superiority" to be racist---and none of your above definitions say it must be an "overall superiority." You are like a dog chasing its tail. But that's fine, you can believe anything you want.

I think it is racism to believe the obvious truths that all kinds of things are genetically linked to different ethnic groups giving them various superior or inferior abilities. My motive is to have greater understanding of ourselves.

 

Pot, kettle, achromatic.

 

I was pulling the definitions that were in the top of the web search list. I also used the source you quoted, Merriam Webster.

Uhm..."one's own race is superior" is in several of those definitions. None of them say "Superior in one trait." When the Nazis said "The Aryan Race is superior.", no one was looking at them and asking "At what specifically" because it was well know that they meant that they were the Master Race.

I can process sunlight into vitamin D in low light conditions. I'm not claiming to be a Genetic Superman or that my race is genetically superior to every other race as a result. Welllll...I did call myself Übermensch, but that was out of sarcasm.

You can call me racist all you like. You'd be wrong, but you can call me that. My friends (many of them minority)...know otherwise.

 

They said that the Egyptians were genetically pure and there was little evidence of sub-Saharan African in their blood. That flies in the face of African studies that have promoted the idea that the Pharaohs were black, Hannibal was black, and Jesus was black. It also does not address the theory that the Pharaohs were Macedonians.

 

That the Ptolemies, the last Dynasty of Egyptian Pharoahs, were Macedonians is pretty much established fact, not theory. They were descendants of one of Alexander's Generals. Were there supposedly others?
Most of the Pharoahs who were not outside conquerors, like the Hyksos from Arabia (?) and the Axumites, who were blacks from Ethiopia-Sudan, were pure blood Egyptians. Of them Zahi Hawass, former Director of Egyptian Antiquities has said, "If you want to know what the Ancient Egyptians looked like come and see for yourself, we are still here."

 

The historians at Budweiser say Hannibal was Black. Their picture must be the truth!