What is race?

[Circe]

Vela said:

My point here is that small differences sometimes are the big difference.

p.s. Please note that admitting the reality of biological diversity among the human species is not necessarily an endorsement of any social ideology.

When I quoted the American Anthropological Association's Statement on "Race", I did not do so with the intention of pointing out that my conclusion coincides with theirs. I just stated their point of view and asked for your comments on that, and the comments were pretty much the way I expected them to be

I agree with you inasmuch as believe that race is a biological concept, and that what is a negligible difference, genetically speaking, results in observable phenotypic difference, i.e. subspecies.
However, I also believe that these biological differences should not have as significant a social role as they have today.

It is well known that adherents of some social ideologies have manipulated the facts and used the visible differences (skin colour, eye shape, etc.) to "scientifically" prove genetic/biological differences between races and consequently genetic/biological supremacy of one race over another, thus turning race also into a significant social concept.
How I understood, the main idea of the Statement is to denounce these quasi-scientific justifications of the existence of race in the social sense, by proving that there is not that much genetic difference between the races.

To sum up, I don't negate the existence of race as a biological concept, nor do I want to say that these 6% are insignificant from the genetic/biological point of view. I just don't believe these 6% should be significant from a social point of view, as is the case today.

Human diversity should not be negated but acknowledged and celebrated, and it should by no means be used for manipulation and dissemination of hatred, or as a justification for abuse.

[Kabbealompost]

Hmm. Social.

Would we care about race if it wasn't told us everday how important race was?
Would we care about race if it wasn't told us how big the differences were?

And some people come, and tell us some stuff about science, genetics, and now it should be seen as proven as a fact that race is THE REALITY.

What can I say? Rubbish.

[nockwasright]

It should also be added that living in the same social organisations for millennia creates a cultural capital that is partially the expression of the racial characteristic of the population, and partially (more) of the events of history. In the end such cultural capital is hardly distinguishable from race, or subrace. E.g.: Germans and Northern Slavs, who from a general viewpoint are extremely close genetically, have quite a different cultural capital which identifies them clearly. Culture is the great amplifier of race.

[NuSapiens]

CooCooCachoo said:

Race is the evidense of geographic specificity in regards to the biology of the human race.

The significance of these differences is overrated, in terms of actual biology, but it continues to be a juicy taboo topic because many of these differences include methods by which the species induces sexual attraction. In modern society sexual selection is what propells and preserves race, and not any environmental selection. ...Different races/ethnicities are shown to have widely different methods, by which they they induce attraction. (Larged lipped Africans, White hairless Nordics, Big Butted Hottentots) And this drives endless fascination about the topic.

Because sex is very primal, peoples feelings regarding race can be very strong.. ...And we, as members of the 21'st century rest on recent history knowing how barbaric people can be without proper understanding of such a primal force.

Dodonna is where people postulate about these differences, in a general friendly and pseudo academic manner, and play an identification/classification game about those differences when different racial traits mix.

Right on the money.