[anon84873628]

I think you know perfectly well my meaning in context of the comment thread I was replying to.

Yes, some people are mixed ethnicity or "white passing". Yes societal views changes ("Italian used to not be considered white"). At the end of the day, most people fall into one of the categories and don't get to change that.

[defrost]

Which categories are these though? William Z. Ripley's 1899 The Races of Europe or more, say, Steven Coons Carleton's 1939 treatise?

[mindslight]

> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.

But since you're insisting that this be spelled out: The categories are quite arbitrary, can vary, and can change. Yes, race is a social construct.

The point is the physical attributes that often define the categories cannot be significantly changed. One can't particularly make their own skin lighter, regardless of people with marginal skin tones being able to change other aspects about themselves to pass for a lighter category, or regardless of being able to go to a different community where one might be in the lighter category by default.

Compare with say how easy it is for someone with different political views to just hold their tongue when bureaucrats and true believers are waxing poetic about DEI, just as one had to hold their tongue when bureaucrats and true believers were waxing poetic about the virtues of mega golf or owning a boat, just as one might have to hold their tongue these days when bureaucrats and true believers are waxing poetic about the virtues of fascism.

(also can we stop using the word "conservative" as a lazy synonym? Applying that label to the Republican party after ~2020 is absurd)

[defrost]

> The categories are quite arbitrary, can vary, and can change. Yes, race is a social construct.

Obviously.

> Compare with say how easy it is for someone with different political views to just hold their tongue when bureaucrats and true believers are waxing poetic about DEI, just as one had to hold their tongue when bureaucrats and true believers were waxing poetic about the virtues of mega golf or owning a boat, just as one might have to hold their tongue these days when bureaucrats and true believers are waxing poetic about the virtues of fascism.

That seems very un-Australian; I'm unfamiliar with the concept of letting rank stupidity ride w/out having a poke at it, and a lot of people have boats, big, small, whatever.

I'm quite fond of shed built ground effect boat/planes FWiW: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ILbQHnHPnY

> can we stop using the word "conservative" as a lazy synonym? Applying that label to the Republican party after ~2020 is absurd

TBH I'm not sure I have ever done that; "Conservative" varies by country, as does "Liberal".

[mindslight]

Well I'm glad that you've apparently got a lower density of rank stupidity in Australia such that you've never been in situations where you've just had to let it wash over you while avoiding provoking it! In the US we've got an epidemic of it, quite obviously.

That's a cool boat/plane! I'm certainly not picking on people who are interested enough to build their own, or even just buy into doing something they themselves really enjoy. Rather I was referring to the previous managerial fashions in the US, before the DEI fashion took over.

The point about "conservative" wasn't directed at you, but all of the parent comments who did use it that way

[defrost]

Australia was once awash with "real British" people who constantly attempted to lord it over all - it really doesn't pay to let self denoted elites get away with that shit.

Modern Australia is seeing new waves of various behaviours, like all cultures these things ebb and flow - at our last elections the poor (particular) Christian conservative liberals that tried to ride the US wave of being mean to trans people and blaming big problems on a tiny tiny minority got hammered electorally for what was seen as un-Australian behaviour (giving everyone a fair go, regardless).

This time around the xenophobes are back stronger than ever riding a wave of flag draping nationalism not so subtlely hiding a grab bag of white supremacism and general X-phobia; we have

[try_the_bass]

> I think you know perfectly well my meaning in context of the comment thread I was replying to.

No, I don't, and smugly insinuating I have some ulterior motive or whatever is, frankly, offensive.

I asked you a question because I didn't know what you meant, because you made a statement that was wildly ambiguous even with well-defined context.

> most people fall into one of the categories

One of... Which categories, exactly? This is why I'm asking. You keep making statements as if they're somehow inherently obvious, but... I can think of many different competing definitions of "race", so I'm trying to figure out which one you're using, or if you're even using one at all.

[anon84873628]

White vs black skin, a very obvious category in a conversation about DEI programs or systemic bias in the US.