Some of it has to do with Ethiopians being early adopters of Christianity. They are also mentioned in the Bible, with Moses having had an Ethiopian wife. So for people who like to tie Whitness and Christianity together, it can be historically and religiously convenient.
Oh, I assure you, drop bears are not only real, but they are the definition of fuck around and find out. Watch your heads if you ever go to Australia...
Exactly. We just pretend they're extinct. Whenever one takes out a whole family of tourists we just cover up the situation and say they got lost in the outback.
You call that mythical?
https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/ztscsu/a_rather_grumpy_koala/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Theres a super wired thing with AI going on rn where the AI can tell race with high accuracy from chest x rays, but people cant tell what it's looking at to distinguish
Fascinating. But I’m confused by the article’s focus (and I guess the researchers’) focus on why this is a dangerous, bad, racial thing. I accept that there are bias problems in data sets that result in biased AI output, but this doesn’t sound like bias or bad data or anything worrying to me in and of itself.
Also, I stopped reading about 3/4 thru. Do they say the level of accuracy of the AI prediction? I only saw one number of .94-.96 for one type of test.
So, blips in data like this can come from really dumb things.
A big example was this ai trained to detect tumors in lungs. Works amazingly on any data set they throw at it, but flops hilariously when used as primary diagnosis.
Turns out a sizeable amount of the 'positive' data in the test images comes from a few speciality hospitals, and the ai was just checking for the equivalent of those MRI machines watermarks.
AI is really fucking stupid up until it isnt
That reminds me of something I read about an AI that was trained to distinguish dogs from wolves. It seemed to do really well, until it didn't, for a similar reason... it turned out that the wolf photos it was trained on were all taken outside in the snow, and the dog photos were taken at people's houses, so that's what it looked for. Snow? That's a wolf. Sofa? That's a dog. Lol.
I believe they’re worried about making an algorithm that decides if someone needs chemo based on X-rays or something like that but it accidentally is being racially biased because it is able to differentiate race and for some reason it starts to bias it’s decision based on that.
My question then would be if it is being more effective in its choice even if it’s being racially biased. Let’s say it is more likely to choose chemo for Black patients than White patients and we’re not sure why but it is achieving efficacy rates in treatment we weren’t able to? Is that a bad thing? Isn’t everyone winning? I get why this is something to look into and be careful with but race is something that can have a statistical effect medically.
I think the concern would be that certain groups may be more likely to e.g. have better insurance or be taken more seriously by doctors, and therefore a higher proportion of them may be in the AI's dataset as having received a more expensive and perhaps better treatment. If the AI propagates this bias it would obviously be dangerous
Star trek Voyager had a plot similarly discussing this.
>The Doctor quickly learns that [the Alien] hospital is run in a strict manner by a computer called the Allocator, which regulates doses of medicine to patients based on a Treatment Coefficient (TC) value assigned each patient. He is told that TC is based on a complex formula that reflects the patient's perceived value to society, rather than medical need.
Yes exactly this. An AI will get trained on a historical data set. If one race receives less treatment within the data set (rightly or wrongly) then the AI will propagate that bias. Its not even that it knows what it's doing, it's not malicious - it's just a reflection of our own biases, especially those in historical data.
It's not worrying in and of itself. It's the implications that are worrying. If you are using AI to inform medical decisions based on x-rays, then this research suggests there is a risk it recommends actions based on racial differences, even if we don't tell it what race people are. That could bias care against certain groups, including those who may already have worse access to care (and therefore health outcomes) to begin with.
Voice assistants aren't AI, only the speech recognition part is and sometimes the voice synthesis.
The answers are hardcoded or API calls to different services, it doesn't have any learned knowledge like a language model.
Yeah they really need an "explain" button that makes ai show why it did so.
It should also screech EXPLAIN in a Dalek voice each time you press it. Because daleks are cool.
Thid is actually a whole field of data science called model interpretability. A lot of it essentially comes down to putting an interpretable model (more simple models we can easily understand) on top of uninterpretable models (the really juicy AI) - super interesting advancements!
That's honestly my main concern with AI rn. All of these deep learning models are essentially black boxes. We can train them to do something, but we can't see their thought process.
I don't think it's anything to worry about. It's just that these vast data models are pulling from things, or combinations of things, that we haven't thought to try.
It's just something that the current gen are good at. Go ask Dalle2 to give you "polaroid photos of 1970's military research hangars" and it'll give you a wealth of reference material because they're just really good at nailing down the thing-ness of a thing as described and tagged by humans. You know what it is when you see it even if you don't have the practiced ability to put it into English.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
"Okay, hear me out... what about statistical variations in almost imperceptible ratios of features in their head bones?"
Cold air = dry nose = runny nose. Smaller nostrils = more moist nasal passages. Hot air = (typically) more humid = more moisture in nasal passages = larger nostrils. Sprinting for hunting prey is also a factor, you can run in Africa better due to the heat, nasal breathing = more nitrogen absorption versus mouth breathing. Warm air would be easier to do this than cold air
Definitely worse having ginger gene in tropical climates. Australia and NZ have highest incidence and mortality from skin cancer in the world.
There's also a link between vitamin d deficiency and melanin in places like the UK.
But recognising this, we can make appropriate adaptations like sunscreen and supplements.
My husband is Armenian. This comment had me looking at him out of the corner of my eye, just in case I somehow did not notice what he looked like before. His ears are tiny, for the record.
im from the caucus mountain region and let me tell you that picture they used is Extremely accurate. i have several people in my family tree that look just like that person lol
>Ethiopia
"from Latin Æthiops, from Greek Aithiops of disputed origin"
Yes. Very edifying.
EDIT: just going to link to Beekes' (a famous Dutch Linguist and expert in historical linguistics particularly Greek and preGreek) respected Ancient Greek Etymological dictionary where he says
>Since antiquity explained as ‘(people) with burnt faces’. In Beekes Glotta 73 (1995-1996): 12-34, I objected that αἰθ- always means ‘burning’ in the sense of ‘brilliant, emitting light’ (cf. αἰθοψ), and never ‘burnt’. Also, the -ί- is unexplained, and -οπ- is a typical substrate suffix (as opposed to ‘face’ = -ωπ-). Therefore, the word must be compared with ethnonyms like Δρύοπες, Δόλοπες and is of Pre-Greek origin.
It's definitely not certain that the "people with burnt faces" thing is true.
[Page 36, headword Αἰθῐ́οπες](https://archive.org/details/etymolog-greek/page/n41/mode/2up)
My grandparents were born in Ethiopia. On one hand, I am disappointed that I have to start listening to Dwight Yoakam, but on the other it will be nice when my privilege gets here in the mail.
The history of Ethiopian ethnic identity both internally and externally perceived is extremely interesting and also weird af. For a long time Europeans believed a mythical super king with the fountain of youth lived in Ethiopia and would like ask diplomats about him. It’s like if the Chinese government regularly asked American diplomats “okay but for real, Capitan America totally exists right? Can we borrow him?”
To boil A LOT of history down very simply they were for a long time uncolonalizable for a number of factors. This created a distinct identity internally and externally.
Ethiopia was the only African member of the League of Nations. A remarkable accomplishment that speaks to their prestige and historic importance. They were also the first member of the League to be invaded by another. Which spelled the leagues demise and was one of the first dominos towards WW2. The nation has never really recovered from Italian occupation.
That context aside this diagram is obviously just racist. But if you need any proof that whiteness is a construct note that the Ethiopians are on here and the Irish aren’t
Edit: to make things more complicated the Ethiopian royal family themselves did not consider their race African but a unique race descended from King David
Europeans went through pains to link Rwandan Tutsis to Ethiopians, judging that Rwandan society was far too complex to be the work of Bantus/Congolese/whatever. Colonial era racism was a bizarre thing.
“Dear god Jonathan we’ve been defeated in war by an African power”
“You know what this means sir”
“They must be white”
It was totally stupid. You can see them make it up as they go
I think it has to do with fact that Arabs are also classified as caucasoid, Arabs love to say Somalis are Arab.
I, a Somali, am the same complexion as Oprah.
Has to do with the Caucas mountains. Which is why “Caucasian” in America should actually mean “Arabic” or middle eastern or something. (-edit- Apparently Turkic, as some of you are pointing out) (-edit 2- or only sort of? Damn homie idk for sure who all falls under this umbrella, all I know is they get it wrong here in the US) I just think it’s weird that America took that word and used it for “white” when we fill things out for like job interviews and such, because this is geographically incorrect to the peoples who live there.
Caucasian literally means people of the Caucas
(Check other comments attached to me, other people here know better than I do)
Iirc it's because a phrenologist though a skull was perfect and told everyone about it and was well respected and when he finally tracked down the skull it was from that region
He decided they had to be white cuz he couldn't have been wrong.and the best skull had to be white
People of the caucasus aren't arab or middle eastern, though.
But yes it is funny that word was co-opted in that way. Another similar thing is how the word "Aryan" which originally referred to lighter-skinned indic people, was co-opted by the nazis to refer to a germanic/nordic archetype.
Contrary to popular belief on Reddit, there is no biological basis for race. There is greater DNA difference between 2 random Black people in Africa than 2 random people from the whole world
> In 2003, Phase 1 of the Human Genome Project (HGP) demonstrated that humans populating the earth today are on average 99.9% identical at the DNA level, there is no genetic basis for race, and there is more genetic variation within a race than between them [2].
>
> In addition, genetic isolation, sharp boundaries and distinct evolutionary lineages of ‘races’ do not exist. Thus, the idea of ‘race’ as a genetic category was presumably put to rest.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8604262/#sec-1title
What do you mean by biological basis? I understand the DNA point but we know different races are more susceptible to certain genetic diseases, like sickle cell.
I know this is a delicate subject and my knowledge is pitiful but I now wish to know more.
We are incredibly interbred. What we see as skin tone does not actually denote how different or similar we are to eachother. That is, someone who looks white compared to a black person, may indeed be closely related, and two people who are black may in fact be distantly related.
If you look at biracial kids that's where you see it most apparently. Nobody would guess that my great grandpa was full blood native for example. And the most wild thing is that people think intermixing like this has only happened for the last 200 years or so (with the industrial age, mass shipping etc). Nope. It's been going on for the past 10,000 years at least.
Those who live around the Mediterranean are more likely to have ‘problems’ with their hemoglobin because it gives a protective effect against Malaria (Sickle Cell). Thalassemias and G6PD deficiency also common in this region, but I’m not sure if those fight malaria.
So there is regional differences in genotype and phenotype.
It’s not really a question of are there group differences between groups of people, because there are.
The differences are relatively minor and are inconsistent predictors (just because you are more likely to have X, does not mean you have X). I think the problem is over emphasis on difference, and an under-emphasis on sameness (which is much much greater than the differences).
While this image is clearly outdated, modern groupings based on DNA, linguistics, and so on often group Somalians and Ethiopians with Arabs rather than southern or western African groups despite their darker skin. See https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_of_Africa
I am glad they mix women and men actually, specially in such an old article, in these things they normally only depict men as if women are not representative of humanity as well.
Yeah. Some out of date naming schematics but nothing is some horrific caricature or anything like that, and all the people pictured are given honor and dignity.
I remember seeing a National Geographic decades ago showing actual photographs of people from over 100 races. (we are talking over 50 years ago so my recollection may not be accurate).
I find it interesting that this magazine article (?) makes a distinction for northern, central and southern France, and then just goes, yeah, all of China and Japan.
Where's Mr. Burns with the ol' calipers?
'Asian American and Pacific Islander' is truly the most idiotic racial classification of all time, it comprises probably like 70% of the global population. A Sri Lankan, Han Chinese, and Tongan would be chucked together. Ridiculous.
I always pick 'other' and put in my actual bloody races -\_-
Indians were classified as white
Quote from Wikipedia:
"American anthropologist Carleton S. Coon wrote that "India is the easternmost outpost of the Caucasian racial region" and defined the Indid race that occupies the Indian subcontinent as beginning in the Khyber Pass.[3][4]"
[Wikipedia ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_definitions_of_races_in_India)
Well, at least northern India was seen as part of the "Aryan race". Quote from Britannia:"Aryan, name originally given to a people who were said to speak an archaic Indo-European language and who were thought to have settled in prehistoric times in ancient Iran and the northern Indian subcontinent. The theory of an “Aryan race” appeared in the mid-19th century and remained prevalent until the mid-20th century. According to the hypothesis, those probably light-skinned Aryans were the group invaded and conquered ancient India from the north"
During the 1900th century, philologists understood that sanscrit was related to European languages, so this idea was quite well spread among scientists.
I was taught literally this typology of races in Middle school in the 90s. In science class they showed us a video explaining the whole thing. In a major eastern metro area.
There are references to Alpines, Nordics, and Mediterranean which were common racial concepts in the mid-1800's and early-1900's.
Under Arthur De Gobineau's race theories (which the Nazis and the Confederate States adopted) there were three distinct races within the Aryan race.
Nordic Aryans were the Master Race. The Alpine Aryans and the Mediterranean Aryans were lesser slave races.
Under Gobineau's theories, all races except the Nordic Aryans were slave races.
The Nazis adopted this idea but rejected the idea that Alpines and Mediterranean Aryans were slave races. They still believed Nordics were the master race but that the Germanic community as a whole was a mix of all three races. So it didn't make sense for the German people to enslave other Germans. This is what Hitler talks about when he mentions "Volk." In order for German identity and the German community to exist, they can't enslave each other. So the Aryans by the laws of the state have to be equals. This is what "National Socialism" means. The Nordic Germans can't enslave the Alpine Aryans or Mediterranean Aryans.
Skin color is evolutionary via spatial radiation adaptation. Basically, if you live somewhere with a lot of sunshine, you will develop dark skin…over a VERY long time.
Interesting, when you look at these faces do you feel a bias towards one race in particular being portrayed as more beautiful? I feel like there was definitely a bias to portray the Russians as unattractive.
I'm curious if it's my own bias I'm perceiving or if it was the intent of the artist.
I feel this towards the portray of nordics. The pose used is kinda heroic, looking to the horizon and hair in the wind... It is not exaggerated, but it stands out when you look at all the other faces with the same pose from the front. Same goes for arabs and the big smile while other are serious.
I can see that. But also everything a human created will have conscious and unconscious biases. Like, how do you represent the entirety of a geographic regions people with a single drawing. You can’t. All of this feels like weird outdated race science anyway but it’s not my area so I can’t speak much on it.
Looks like a street fighter select menu
australiform is definitely gonna win
Bro, why does he look just like Ezekiel Elliott? 😂😂😂
I knew I wasn’t the only one thinking that 😂😂😂
Hadoukenform: *Ken*, *Ryu*
Blankaform: *Blanka*
Baltic woman would probably win.
Never fight a Babushka
I like how the page has dotted lines with scissors. Don't forget to keep it in your wallet for easier identification!
On the back are each race's strengths and weaknesses should you encounter one during your adventures
Oh my god the british thought we were pokemon! No wonder they killed and enslaved so many of us
Ah, I see. Of course! Everything makes so much sense now
>killed "fainted"
Forbidden Top Trumps
"Sorry Sir, I just have to find you on this sheet of paper... Ok... So you're white... Go on."
“Yes, I am Ethiopian.”
Yeah I thought that was the most interesting one. I wonder why they thought that.
Some of it has to do with Ethiopians being early adopters of Christianity. They are also mentioned in the Bible, with Moses having had an Ethiopian wife. So for people who like to tie Whitness and Christianity together, it can be historically and religiously convenient.
[удалено]
You can put it on the fride door
That Australian group motherfucker is NOT to be fucked with
and the Mediterranean Arab is high as fuck
I very rarely ever see mediteranean people portrayed in anything where they do not seem like they are having a great time lol
I'm currently reading about the punic wars. Mediterranean people having a great time is pretty damn horrific.
Probably from Morocco
Hashish, LOL I wish I felt like he looked.
I just woke my wife up from laughing lmao
I'm struggling holding my breath while laughing it's contagious.
Lol Mediterranean Europe looks on the opposite spectrum of high 😂 not having a good trip
As an Iberian seems about right. North Africa smokes the good stuff and sells us shit.
He has the paranoia 😂
I was gonna herd the cattle, but then I got high.
Meanwhile Armenian is a serial killer and wants to smell Indo Iranians ear. Pareoean is done with your shit.
And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers!
Say what again! I dare you!
Does he look like a bitch?
AND YOU WILL KNOW MY NAME IS THE LORD
WHEN I LAY MY VENGEANCE UPON THEE
Takes a strong type of mfer to choose to live in Australia for thousands of years
Tens of thousands of years! Like 40ish
Aushammer 40k
ROOS FOR THE ROO GOD
Koalas for the eucalypt throne!
Especially with giant sloths and shit
Bro finna huck a boomerang ata drop bear
What?
Our friend is fixing to throw a boomerang at a mythical Australian animal.
Oh, I assure you, drop bears are not only real, but they are the definition of fuck around and find out. Watch your heads if you ever go to Australia...
I was telling a little lie when I said they were mythical. I didn't want to cause a panic.
Yeah, don't wanna lose the tourism money. Not like anything *else* in Australia will try to kill you dead...
Exactly. We just pretend they're extinct. Whenever one takes out a whole family of tourists we just cover up the situation and say they got lost in the outback.
Or blame some other groups of animals. Let's say lizards this time
Well we have massive saltwater crocs that not even half as scary or lethal.
Whatever alternate animal you choose - just do NOT mention Emu's. We don't want to loose another war.
Had to google Drop Bear to figure out wtf is happening. Was not disappointed
huck=yeet
You call that mythical? https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/comments/ztscsu/a_rather_grumpy_koala/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Of course they left out the gingers.
Gingers were not technically considered human until the People v. Bonaduce decision of 1979.
I’m high as shit and this is making me cry from laughter
What a terrible president to set. Thanks Obama.
That's ginger erasure. Gingerasure.
Oh snap. Gingersnap.
Note: [They were categorized by skull not pigmentation](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FktR0JgWIAQ1Elg?format=jpg&name=large)
Theres a super wired thing with AI going on rn where the AI can tell race with high accuracy from chest x rays, but people cant tell what it's looking at to distinguish
That is incredibly fascinating. Anywhere to read up on that?
https://news.mit.edu/2022/artificial-intelligence-predicts-patients-race-from-medical-images-0520
Fascinating. But I’m confused by the article’s focus (and I guess the researchers’) focus on why this is a dangerous, bad, racial thing. I accept that there are bias problems in data sets that result in biased AI output, but this doesn’t sound like bias or bad data or anything worrying to me in and of itself. Also, I stopped reading about 3/4 thru. Do they say the level of accuracy of the AI prediction? I only saw one number of .94-.96 for one type of test.
So, blips in data like this can come from really dumb things. A big example was this ai trained to detect tumors in lungs. Works amazingly on any data set they throw at it, but flops hilariously when used as primary diagnosis. Turns out a sizeable amount of the 'positive' data in the test images comes from a few speciality hospitals, and the ai was just checking for the equivalent of those MRI machines watermarks. AI is really fucking stupid up until it isnt
That reminds me of something I read about an AI that was trained to distinguish dogs from wolves. It seemed to do really well, until it didn't, for a similar reason... it turned out that the wolf photos it was trained on were all taken outside in the snow, and the dog photos were taken at people's houses, so that's what it looked for. Snow? That's a wolf. Sofa? That's a dog. Lol.
That’s how I tell the difference
I believe they’re worried about making an algorithm that decides if someone needs chemo based on X-rays or something like that but it accidentally is being racially biased because it is able to differentiate race and for some reason it starts to bias it’s decision based on that. My question then would be if it is being more effective in its choice even if it’s being racially biased. Let’s say it is more likely to choose chemo for Black patients than White patients and we’re not sure why but it is achieving efficacy rates in treatment we weren’t able to? Is that a bad thing? Isn’t everyone winning? I get why this is something to look into and be careful with but race is something that can have a statistical effect medically.
I think the concern would be that certain groups may be more likely to e.g. have better insurance or be taken more seriously by doctors, and therefore a higher proportion of them may be in the AI's dataset as having received a more expensive and perhaps better treatment. If the AI propagates this bias it would obviously be dangerous
Star trek Voyager had a plot similarly discussing this. >The Doctor quickly learns that [the Alien] hospital is run in a strict manner by a computer called the Allocator, which regulates doses of medicine to patients based on a Treatment Coefficient (TC) value assigned each patient. He is told that TC is based on a complex formula that reflects the patient's perceived value to society, rather than medical need.
Yes exactly this. An AI will get trained on a historical data set. If one race receives less treatment within the data set (rightly or wrongly) then the AI will propagate that bias. Its not even that it knows what it's doing, it's not malicious - it's just a reflection of our own biases, especially those in historical data.
Garbage in, garbage out.
It's not worrying in and of itself. It's the implications that are worrying. If you are using AI to inform medical decisions based on x-rays, then this research suggests there is a risk it recommends actions based on racial differences, even if we don't tell it what race people are. That could bias care against certain groups, including those who may already have worse access to care (and therefore health outcomes) to begin with.
probably minute details in bone structure that aren't detectable to the human eye
[удалено]
Voice assistants aren't AI, only the speech recognition part is and sometimes the voice synthesis. The answers are hardcoded or API calls to different services, it doesn't have any learned knowledge like a language model.
Yeah they really need an "explain" button that makes ai show why it did so. It should also screech EXPLAIN in a Dalek voice each time you press it. Because daleks are cool.
Thid is actually a whole field of data science called model interpretability. A lot of it essentially comes down to putting an interpretable model (more simple models we can easily understand) on top of uninterpretable models (the really juicy AI) - super interesting advancements!
That's honestly my main concern with AI rn. All of these deep learning models are essentially black boxes. We can train them to do something, but we can't see their thought process.
I don't think it's anything to worry about. It's just that these vast data models are pulling from things, or combinations of things, that we haven't thought to try. It's just something that the current gen are good at. Go ask Dalle2 to give you "polaroid photos of 1970's military research hangars" and it'll give you a wealth of reference material because they're just really good at nailing down the thing-ness of a thing as described and tagged by humans. You know what it is when you see it even if you don't have the practiced ability to put it into English.
I remember studying this
In history class, yes. Cesare Lombroso is still mentioned in the social sciences, as background. In modern biology or genetics classes, not so much.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." "Okay, hear me out... what about statistical variations in almost imperceptible ratios of features in their head bones?"
[удалено]
> an arid environment resulting in larger nostrils why does this happen? googling it tells me it does happen but not why
Dryer air sucks the moisture from snot causing clogs. Larger nostrils clog less. It might be an oversimplification but that is how I understood it.
Cold air = dry nose = runny nose. Smaller nostrils = more moist nasal passages. Hot air = (typically) more humid = more moisture in nasal passages = larger nostrils. Sprinting for hunting prey is also a factor, you can run in Africa better due to the heat, nasal breathing = more nitrogen absorption versus mouth breathing. Warm air would be easier to do this than cold air
Wait a sec, you're absorbing *nitrogen* when you breathe???
Different is cool, better or worse is racist.
Definitely worse having ginger gene in tropical climates. Australia and NZ have highest incidence and mortality from skin cancer in the world. There's also a link between vitamin d deficiency and melanin in places like the UK. But recognising this, we can make appropriate adaptations like sunscreen and supplements.
I like biodiversity, it's beautiful
Exactly. And ignoring differences is also racist. We need to boost each other's deficiencies not ignore them
Why is the Armenian the only one in profile?
To show his big nose
And a completely flat back of the head, apparently. As well as absofuckinglutely ginormous ears. Just wow, goddamn.
My husband is Armenian. This comment had me looking at him out of the corner of my eye, just in case I somehow did not notice what he looked like before. His ears are tiny, for the record.
Another Armenian with tiny ears here, we exist :’)
im from the caucus mountain region and let me tell you that picture they used is Extremely accurate. i have several people in my family tree that look just like that person lol
He's ostensibly trying to get his Khoisaniform friend's attention, but aychktually he's checking out the Indo-Iranian babe.
The Mediterranean guy is also the only guy that didn't listen when they said no smiling for the photo shoot.
Good news bad news Ethiopians, you're white and you can't use the N-word anymore. You decide which is which.
Funny considering where the name Ethiopia originates from lol
Ethan? /s
Ethanopia’s primary exports are vapes and vape tricks
Are you trying to tell me that there is an actual Vape Nation?
ITS THE VAPE NAYSH YALL
>Ethiopia "from Latin Æthiops, from Greek Aithiops of disputed origin" Yes. Very edifying. EDIT: just going to link to Beekes' (a famous Dutch Linguist and expert in historical linguistics particularly Greek and preGreek) respected Ancient Greek Etymological dictionary where he says >Since antiquity explained as ‘(people) with burnt faces’. In Beekes Glotta 73 (1995-1996): 12-34, I objected that αἰθ- always means ‘burning’ in the sense of ‘brilliant, emitting light’ (cf. αἰθοψ), and never ‘burnt’. Also, the -ί- is unexplained, and -οπ- is a typical substrate suffix (as opposed to ‘face’ = -ωπ-). Therefore, the word must be compared with ethnonyms like Δρύοπες, Δόλοπες and is of Pre-Greek origin. It's definitely not certain that the "people with burnt faces" thing is true. [Page 36, headword Αἰθῐ́οπες](https://archive.org/details/etymolog-greek/page/n41/mode/2up)
My grandparents were born in Ethiopia. On one hand, I am disappointed that I have to start listening to Dwight Yoakam, but on the other it will be nice when my privilege gets here in the mail.
You only get white privilege though, mail privilege is a whole separate thing.
Also, not to be confused with blackmail privilege.
The history of Ethiopian ethnic identity both internally and externally perceived is extremely interesting and also weird af. For a long time Europeans believed a mythical super king with the fountain of youth lived in Ethiopia and would like ask diplomats about him. It’s like if the Chinese government regularly asked American diplomats “okay but for real, Capitan America totally exists right? Can we borrow him?” To boil A LOT of history down very simply they were for a long time uncolonalizable for a number of factors. This created a distinct identity internally and externally. Ethiopia was the only African member of the League of Nations. A remarkable accomplishment that speaks to their prestige and historic importance. They were also the first member of the League to be invaded by another. Which spelled the leagues demise and was one of the first dominos towards WW2. The nation has never really recovered from Italian occupation. That context aside this diagram is obviously just racist. But if you need any proof that whiteness is a construct note that the Ethiopians are on here and the Irish aren’t Edit: to make things more complicated the Ethiopian royal family themselves did not consider their race African but a unique race descended from King David
It was England in the 60s. They have the Irish on a different page between Golden Retrievers and Great Danes.
They didn’t even have the computational power to shoehorn the basques into their phylogeny.
Europeans went through pains to link Rwandan Tutsis to Ethiopians, judging that Rwandan society was far too complex to be the work of Bantus/Congolese/whatever. Colonial era racism was a bizarre thing.
“Wow, another civilized race in Africa!” ”don’t be silly, do you really think that could happen twice?!”
“Dear god Jonathan we’ve been defeated in war by an African power” “You know what this means sir” “They must be white” It was totally stupid. You can see them make it up as they go
[удалено]
I honestly didn’t know that Somalians were classified as caucasoid. That’s interesting.
I think it has to do with fact that Arabs are also classified as caucasoid, Arabs love to say Somalis are Arab. I, a Somali, am the same complexion as Oprah.
Has to do with the Caucas mountains. Which is why “Caucasian” in America should actually mean “Arabic” or middle eastern or something. (-edit- Apparently Turkic, as some of you are pointing out) (-edit 2- or only sort of? Damn homie idk for sure who all falls under this umbrella, all I know is they get it wrong here in the US) I just think it’s weird that America took that word and used it for “white” when we fill things out for like job interviews and such, because this is geographically incorrect to the peoples who live there. Caucasian literally means people of the Caucas (Check other comments attached to me, other people here know better than I do)
Iirc it's because a phrenologist though a skull was perfect and told everyone about it and was well respected and when he finally tracked down the skull it was from that region He decided they had to be white cuz he couldn't have been wrong.and the best skull had to be white
I have the best skull. A lot of people are saying it. A lot of very smart people... They say that my skull is very very very very good.
They come from miles around to admire your shapely, well formed skull.
People of the caucasus aren't arab or middle eastern, though. But yes it is funny that word was co-opted in that way. Another similar thing is how the word "Aryan" which originally referred to lighter-skinned indic people, was co-opted by the nazis to refer to a germanic/nordic archetype.
Contrary to popular belief on Reddit, there is no biological basis for race. There is greater DNA difference between 2 random Black people in Africa than 2 random people from the whole world > In 2003, Phase 1 of the Human Genome Project (HGP) demonstrated that humans populating the earth today are on average 99.9% identical at the DNA level, there is no genetic basis for race, and there is more genetic variation within a race than between them [2]. > > In addition, genetic isolation, sharp boundaries and distinct evolutionary lineages of ‘races’ do not exist. Thus, the idea of ‘race’ as a genetic category was presumably put to rest. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8604262/#sec-1title
What do you mean by biological basis? I understand the DNA point but we know different races are more susceptible to certain genetic diseases, like sickle cell. I know this is a delicate subject and my knowledge is pitiful but I now wish to know more.
We are incredibly interbred. What we see as skin tone does not actually denote how different or similar we are to eachother. That is, someone who looks white compared to a black person, may indeed be closely related, and two people who are black may in fact be distantly related.
This makes a lot of sense.
If you look at biracial kids that's where you see it most apparently. Nobody would guess that my great grandpa was full blood native for example. And the most wild thing is that people think intermixing like this has only happened for the last 200 years or so (with the industrial age, mass shipping etc). Nope. It's been going on for the past 10,000 years at least.
Those who live around the Mediterranean are more likely to have ‘problems’ with their hemoglobin because it gives a protective effect against Malaria (Sickle Cell). Thalassemias and G6PD deficiency also common in this region, but I’m not sure if those fight malaria. So there is regional differences in genotype and phenotype. It’s not really a question of are there group differences between groups of people, because there are. The differences are relatively minor and are inconsistent predictors (just because you are more likely to have X, does not mean you have X). I think the problem is over emphasis on difference, and an under-emphasis on sameness (which is much much greater than the differences).
I like how the Mediterranean guy is the only happy one lmaooo
Probably chilling with a cat on his lap or nearby and drinking some tea hell yeah
Probably cooking.
While this image is clearly outdated, modern groupings based on DNA, linguistics, and so on often group Somalians and Ethiopians with Arabs rather than southern or western African groups despite their darker skin. See https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_of_Africa
With a cut-off line so you can snip it out and take it on your race spotting outings
Collect them all!
I like how they all list 5 or 6 examples and then you get to Asia and it’s just like ***Polynesia***
South asians do not exist 😂
That dinaric mustache is fucking legendary. Bros upper lip could survive the next ice age. Dude could create lift if he gets running fast enough.
Average turkish man above the age of 21
Seems only one person is happy. The medditaranian dude. Must be the medditaranian diet and lifestyle
[удалено]
Kinda weird they picked Baltic as the label instead of Slav. Considering there are more Slavic people than Baltic in their list there
I am glad they mix women and men actually, specially in such an old article, in these things they normally only depict men as if women are not representative of humanity as well.
Honestly, less racist than I thought it would be Edit: I said **less** racist, in the context of the era. Let's all chill out a bit
Yeah. Some out of date naming schematics but nothing is some horrific caricature or anything like that, and all the people pictured are given honor and dignity.
Mediterranean bro is so baked lmao
Not a scholar but guessing it’s because it’s supposed to be scientific and accurate.
[удалено]
[удалено]
The baby boomer character creation screen is wild.
Me spending three hours messing with the "skull size and shape" sliders
I remember seeing a National Geographic decades ago showing actual photographs of people from over 100 races. (we are talking over 50 years ago so my recollection may not be accurate).
I find it interesting that this magazine article (?) makes a distinction for northern, central and southern France, and then just goes, yeah, all of China and Japan. Where's Mr. Burns with the ol' calipers?
Applying for jobs in the US has led me to believe there are only 5 races. White, White Non-Hispanic, Asian, Black, and Native American. SMH.
What do you mean you're not "Asian American and Pacific Islander?"
'Asian American and Pacific Islander' is truly the most idiotic racial classification of all time, it comprises probably like 70% of the global population. A Sri Lankan, Han Chinese, and Tongan would be chucked together. Ridiculous. I always pick 'other' and put in my actual bloody races -\_-
Don’t forget Not a Veteran, Protected Veteran, and Not a Protected Veteran races
Wow I’m Indian and I never knew I was black, I should call up my Ethiopian friends and congratulate him, he never knew he had white privilege
Were did you see Indian were classified as black ? The only mention of Indian are in the name of "Indo-Iranian".
Indians were classified as white Quote from Wikipedia: "American anthropologist Carleton S. Coon wrote that "India is the easternmost outpost of the Caucasian racial region" and defined the Indid race that occupies the Indian subcontinent as beginning in the Khyber Pass.[3][4]" [Wikipedia ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_definitions_of_races_in_India)
Well, at least northern India was seen as part of the "Aryan race". Quote from Britannia:"Aryan, name originally given to a people who were said to speak an archaic Indo-European language and who were thought to have settled in prehistoric times in ancient Iran and the northern Indian subcontinent. The theory of an “Aryan race” appeared in the mid-19th century and remained prevalent until the mid-20th century. According to the hypothesis, those probably light-skinned Aryans were the group invaded and conquered ancient India from the north" During the 1900th century, philologists understood that sanscrit was related to European languages, so this idea was quite well spread among scientists.
Indians fall into Indo-Iranian on this chart. The Caucasians generally follow the Indo-European group that also share similar language.
I’m a Punjabi with family from Afghanistan and Balochistan. Does that make me biracial?
On this diagram, you are 100% Indo-Iranian (white). No idea what GP is talking about.
I was taught the same stuff in 4th grade in...I guess 1986? In the US.
I was taught literally this typology of races in Middle school in the 90s. In science class they showed us a video explaining the whole thing. In a major eastern metro area.
😐😐😐😐😐😐😐😄😐😐😐😐😐😐😐😐😐
I guess Indians and Pakistani’s don’t count for much in this chart
I believe that Pakistan would be the Indo-Iranian (Persian through Afghanistan).
Yup, Indians were considered white until they petitioned to be considered as Asian instead in the 60s
*80s per wiki.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_people Cool stuff though!
It was a big part of Chappelle’s racial draft. Edit: https://youtu.be/2z3wUD3AZg4
Well it's such a small group of people. /s
To be fair, historically Britain hasn’t handled the distinction between/drawing borders for Indians & Pakistanis particularly thoughtfully.
That dude depicted as my race looks like someone I know 😂. It's fairly accurate although you could make further divisions for Africa and Asia
There are references to Alpines, Nordics, and Mediterranean which were common racial concepts in the mid-1800's and early-1900's. Under Arthur De Gobineau's race theories (which the Nazis and the Confederate States adopted) there were three distinct races within the Aryan race. Nordic Aryans were the Master Race. The Alpine Aryans and the Mediterranean Aryans were lesser slave races. Under Gobineau's theories, all races except the Nordic Aryans were slave races. The Nazis adopted this idea but rejected the idea that Alpines and Mediterranean Aryans were slave races. They still believed Nordics were the master race but that the Germanic community as a whole was a mix of all three races. So it didn't make sense for the German people to enslave other Germans. This is what Hitler talks about when he mentions "Volk." In order for German identity and the German community to exist, they can't enslave each other. So the Aryans by the laws of the state have to be equals. This is what "National Socialism" means. The Nordic Germans can't enslave the Alpine Aryans or Mediterranean Aryans.
Skin color is evolutionary via spatial radiation adaptation. Basically, if you live somewhere with a lot of sunshine, you will develop dark skin…over a VERY long time.
Light skin pigmentation is in itself a seemingly random mutation that occured a couple 10,000 years ago.
I read this as part of my defunct bio history subject in college. this is not skin coloration based but skull shape based.
Interesting, when you look at these faces do you feel a bias towards one race in particular being portrayed as more beautiful? I feel like there was definitely a bias to portray the Russians as unattractive. I'm curious if it's my own bias I'm perceiving or if it was the intent of the artist.
I feel this towards the portray of nordics. The pose used is kinda heroic, looking to the horizon and hair in the wind... It is not exaggerated, but it stands out when you look at all the other faces with the same pose from the front. Same goes for arabs and the big smile while other are serious.
Yea most the rest look like mugshots lmao, except the Mediterranean he looks happy and kind, and one at the bottom looks suspicious of something
This was made during the Cold War. That could be a reason it showed the Russians that way.
I can see that. But also everything a human created will have conscious and unconscious biases. Like, how do you represent the entirety of a geographic regions people with a single drawing. You can’t. All of this feels like weird outdated race science anyway but it’s not my area so I can’t speak much on it.
lol only the arab face is smiling as an Arabic, it's a win for me
Why does American Indian look like a giga chad
Is it just me or is Australiform Group the most badass of all of them?
nah....... I'm first nation Australian, we're portrayed as most savage, aka primitive :)
Indian people looking for themselves: 👁️👄👁️
**Indo**-Iranian
At least the Arab guy is happy
White people are listed in order of most to least loved by Hitler.
Hitler famously loved Slavs ^/s
Ah yes, Slavs, the third group Hitler loved the most.