Human (specie) not to be confused with humans

[Ben Adams]

Not sure this is the right place for this, please advise if otherwise.

Was reprimanded this morning for describing someone as oriental. Then pummeled for pointing out the differences between humans around the world.
Supposedly this is not correct anymore.

We are one specie, human. There are no sub-categories of sorting below that.
(such as race, etc.)

And there are no acceptable ways of saying that a man from South Africa is a completely different human from a man from Japan. Apparently these are "breeds" and that too is socially unacceptable.

So I suppose it's just "US". and I find that rather foolish.

Anyone care to explain why a man from Japan is the exact same animal as a man from South Africa when it is quite clear that they are not?

 

[ehcks]

Anyone care to explain why a man from Japan is the exact same animal as a man from South Africa when it is quite clear that they are not?

But they are. Suggesting that the difference in human skin color has such significance is like looking at two of the same breed of cat but claiming that their different fur color means they're different animals.

 

[ehcks]

The largest difference between the so-called "races" of humans is skin color. That's not enough to be different breeds.

Compare us to dogs, and note that different breeds of dogs are wildly different in shape, size, bone structure... Some are so different that even though they're genetically capable of breeding, a male Great Dane would kill a female toy poodle by trying.

Humans have nothing like that.

 

[Ben Adams]

Alright so if you want to describe someone in a group to point them out, and all of them are wearing the same uniform, what is the proper way to do that.

Also, African and Japanese have a lot more differences than skin color. From statue, to bone structure, to facial features, to hair texture. It is not like saying two cats with different colors are just cats. They are completely different.
I do not see why acknowledging those differences is so terrible, just because they were used historically to do some really bad stuff to each other. They are still different, regardless of how humans have reacted to those differences.

 

[casebro]

X, you are being disengenuous. The differences in dog breeds, other than size, are obvious to anybody that has met met than one breed. Pointers, setters, herds, bull baiters and boxers.

I see no reason the same won't hold true for humans. Not just the color of skin, or size, but provable different muscle structures, variations in health issues, etc. The incoming science of pharmacogenetics points the way. Ther ARE physical differences. And like dog breed's instincts, I see no reason to not believe that human breeds vary in temperament too.

That all said, our similarities are generally greater then our differences, and it does not behoove any of us to prejudge a person without having particular knowledge. And I don't think we have done actual studies to show 'racial' differences. The whole subject is quite taboo in today's anti-discrimination world. As will be show by the flaming I will be subject to post haste.

 

[Ryokan]

There's hasn't been another breed/race of Homo Sapiens since the Neanderthals.

ETA: As for casebro, the differences between individuals of one human 'race' can often be greater than the variations between the 'races' themselves. Biologically, there simply isn't enough variation to divide humans into races or sub-species. The differences are skin deep.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Was reprimanded this morning for describing someone as oriental.

The problem may be vocabulary. "Oriental" is not a term favorably used these days, unless you are speaking of rugs. "Asian" is preferable, although depending on which side of the Atlantic you're on you'll be referring to a different set of people.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

.
We are one specie, human. There are no sub-categories of sorting below that.
(such as race, etc.)

Well, there is an official subcategory below that and, in fact, we are all members of that subspecies (Homo sapiens sapiens). Despite the differences that appear so important to us we are a species that is on the low side of the diversity curve, with only one subspecies present at the moment.

While race is not fully objective or officially recognized by science it's quite apparent that many people and governments have racial categories. That's impossible to deny.

 

[Ryokan]

The problem may be vocabulary. "Oriental" is not a term favorably used these days, unless you are speaking of rugs. "Asian" is preferable, although depending on which side of the Atlantic you're on you'll be referring to a different set of people.

I think it's only the Brits who refer to Pakistanis and Indians as Asians in Europe.

 

[Babbylonian]

I think it's only the Brits who refer to Pakistanis and Indians as Asians in Europe.

And I doubt any European would refer to them as "Oriental"...

It's sad when racists can't tell the visual differences between Asians from different regions. Aren't they even trying anymore?

 

[triforcharity]

There's hasn't been another breed/race of Homo Sapiens since the Neanderthals.

ETA: As for casebro, the differences between individuals of one human 'race' can often be greater than the variations between the 'races' themselves. Biologically, there simply isn't enough variation to divide humans into races or sub-species. The differences are skin deep.

Biologically, no. However, there are many differences between the different "races" for lack of a better word. Asian men are typically not as tall as say, Middle Eastern men. Asian women typically are shorter than say, African women. There are differences. Why someone would claim otherwise, is absurd.

 

[Ryokan]

Biologically, no. However, there are many differences between the different "races" for lack of a better word. Asian men are typically not as tall as say, Middle Eastern men. Asian women typically are shorter than say, African women. There are differences. Why someone would claim otherwise, is absurd.

Good thing no one has claimed that then.

There's still not enough variation to divide the humans species into races.

By the way, until recently the tallest man in the world was Chinese.

 

[Ryokan]

X, you are being disengenuous. The differences in dog breeds, other than size, are obvious to anybody that has met met than one breed. Pointers, setters, herds, bull baiters and boxers.

I see no reason the same won't hold true for humans. Not just the color of skin, or size, but provable different muscle structures, variations in health issues, etc. The incoming science of pharmacogenetics points the way. Ther ARE physical differences. And like dog breed's instincts, I see no reason to not believe that human breeds vary in temperament too.

Do you agree with triforcharity that Asians are the shortest humans? As said, until 2009, the tallest man in the world was Chinese. If you really want to compare it with dogs, then that would be like if the tallest dog in the world was a chihuahua.

 

[Ben Adams]

Thanks for the responses.

I do understand now that there is no sub specie in science, nor a breed, and if I am hearing it right, nor a race.

And that the social mores or folkways change and that it is no longer acceptable to describe someone as oriental, though I have no idea why.

But still no answer to what I guess I am asking, so allow me to ask it a different way.
3 people, one each from Sweden, Africa and Japan, side by side.

Please describe what makes them different in a socially acceptable way, thanks!

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Ethnic groups and country/continent of origin are acceptable references. The problem is compounded (and why casebro is wrong) is that more than likely the person you are referencing is of mixed ancestry. Take Obama, his mother was white but he is almost always referred to as black. That's fine, he's apparently comfortable with that ethnic identity, but it is really just that, an ethnic identity, not a 'breed'.

BTW, 'species' is singular or plural.

 

[trustbutverify]

There's hasn't been another breed/race of Homo Sapiens since the Neanderthals.

ETA: As for casebro, the differences between individuals of one human 'race' can often be greater than the variations between the 'races' themselves. Biologically, there simply isn't enough variation to divide humans into races or sub-species. The differences are skin deep.

Yes. The human "races" are basically large extended tribes/families, with the genetic similarities you would expect in a family, especially where inbreeding dominates.

 

[Ryokan]

But still no answer to what I guess I am asking, so allow me to ask it a different way.
3 people, one each from Sweden, Africa and Japan, side by side.

Please describe what makes them different in a socially acceptable way, thanks!

The only think we could tell about them is their nationality - or what continent they're from in the case of Africa.

You do know that not everyone in Africa is black, right? And not everyone from Sweden is white.

 

[A'isha]

3 people, one each from Sweden, Africa and Japan, side by side.

Please describe what makes them different in a socially acceptable way, thanks!

Well, there's the way you just did there. That usually works just fine.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The only think we could tell about them is their nationality - or what continent they're from in the case of Africa.

You do know that not everyone in Africa is black, right? And not everyone from Sweden is white.

Which reminds me, I said continent of origin, I should have said continent the appearance is associated with. We're all Africans if you go back far enough, and like Ryo says, not everyone from Africa is dark skinned.

 

[Brian-M]

The largest difference between the so-called "races" of humans is skin color. That's not enough to be different breeds.

Compare us to dogs, and note that different breeds of dogs are wildly different in shape, size, bone structure... Some are so different that even though they're genetically capable of breeding, a male Great Dane would kill a female toy poodle by trying.

Humans have nothing like that.

Maybe not the great-dane/toy-poodle equivalent, but we do have a different-breed equivalent. Such as the Congo pygmies.

Genetically, the pygmies are extremely divergent from all other human populations, suggesting they have an ancient indigenous lineage.

Unlike dwarfism, which is regarded as a medical condition, in pygmies the physiological differences to other humans are the product of evolutionary adaptation.

Some of their genetic differences include adaptation to low UV light (and subsequent low levels of Vitamin D), and a modified pituitary gland capable of functioning normally with iodine deficient diets.