Re: What Are the Race Deniers Denying?
Noel Dickover (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Mon, 27 Jan 1997 18:16:40 -0500
On 25 Jan 1997, Ron Kephart wrote:
> <email@example.com> wrote:
> > So you are a race denier also. Explain, please, what *you* mean by race
> > and by "biological reality."
> I will answer, although I'm not the person you asked. I have type O
> blood. Let's say I need blood, and there are two donors available.
> One is a "white" person (by North American def.) with type A, and the
> other is a "black" person (also by North American def.) with type O.
> And, by the way, I am "white".
> If I accidently get blood from the person of my "race" I'm a dead man.
> That is biological reality. Getting blood from the "black" person
> has no consequences at all. None. Although I suspect there are people
> reading this who think I would start waking up in the middle of the
> night craving watermelon. To those people I say: Go back to school,
> and learn something this time!
> No one has ever suggested placing people into races on the basis of
> blood type, and yet that would be a more biologically meaningful way
> of doing it. The fact that we don't shows that "race" is a concept
> constructed for convenience, in this case the convenience of being
> able to categorize people as legitimate targets of European military,
> political, and economic exploitation. Skin color is a convenient,
> easy to spot marker; blood type is not. It's that simple. I can't
> make it any clearer, so I'm going now.
But this applies across species as well. Why not classify all the primates
on the basis of their blood types?