Metoo said:

If I understand what you said both ethnicity (I actually talked about nationality) and sexual orientation are not race, both are inborn traits which can be masked/changed but ethnicity fits under the umbrella of racism whereas sexual orientation does not.

---

Metoo said:

The bit I am puzzled by is why you believe it is so, other than your personal convictions

---

Tantrika said:

You don't understand, as that was not my statement
as you quoted my statement, you can make another attempt at understanding
and tell me how you have drawn this conclusion so your error can be corrected

---

Metoo said:

So, please confirm if I now got it right this time:

Neither ethnicity (I actually used the term nationality) nor sexual orientation are race, both can be masked/changed with some effort but the former falls under racism because one is of a certain ethnicity/nationality at the moment of birth whereas parents pull children into religion some time later?

---

Tantrika said:

an ethnicity...still fits under the umbrella of racism and racial identity

---

Metoo said:

...how do you view Judaism which considers that, as long as both parents are Jewish so is their child - from the moment of birth - or the Muslim doctrine claiming that ALL humans are born Muslim?

---

Tantrika said:

Metoo said:

So, please confirm if I now got it right this time:

Neither ethnicity (I actually used the term nationality) nor sexual orientation are race, both can be masked/changed with some effort but the former falls under racism because one is of a certain ethnicity/nationality at the moment of birth whereas parents pull children into religion some time later?

---

no

Tantrika said:

an ethnicity...still fits under the umbrella of racism and racial identity

---

temporarily masking something and permanently changing something are not interchangeable terms, either

Metoo said:

...how do you view Judaism which considers that, as long as both parents are Jewish so is their child - from the moment of birth - or the Muslim doctrine claiming that ALL humans are born Muslim?

---

as ethnicities

---

Metoo said:

So if you:
1. view both Judaism and being Muslim as ethnicities (?) and
2. ethnicities fall under the umbrella of racism (?) therefore
3. does it follow that anti Judaism and anti Muslim sentiment fall under the umbrella of racism?

---

Enlil said:

One is not born into a religion.  One may be forced to participate in certain activities, but eventually, a person becomes an adult and chooses his/her belief system.  That choice, along with the ignorance and stupidity that led to it, are fair game upon which to judge someone.

---

qman said:

Enlil said:

One is not born into a religion.  One may be forced to participate in certain activities, but eventually, a person becomes an adult and chooses his/her belief system.  That choice, along with the ignorance and stupidity that led to it, are fair game upon which to judge someone.

---

How can one really choose their beliefs?  I couldn't choose to be a Muslim or Christian today. I could attend church and go through the motions, but I still wouldn't be a Christian.

Even when the vast majority of devout followers of religion are pointed out the flaws in their reasoning, they still continue to believe in their fantasy.

---

Metoo said:

Thank you for your explanation.

The hidden question 4 was actually:

4. what other systems commonly referred to as religion (Buddhism, Jainism, Daoism, Hinduism, Christianinty etc) fall under the umbrella of racism?

---

Would likely apply Jainism and Hinduism
as the belief systems are incredibly integrated in to all parts of life
and in the instance of Hinduism, social ordering structures

Buddhism is iffy
places like Tibet, Bhutan, and Sri Lanka
tend to hold an ethnic identity relative to their nation with Buddhism as state recognized but an after thought

if the CCP did not do so much to drive out all references to religiosity
would argue Confucian ethnic identity is shared across China, Korea, and Japan
but they are typically classed, in the West, by more common racial traits and labeled Asian
while China and Japan in particular instead have very strict perceived hierarchies of racial superiority over other Asians

would argue that Copts in Egypt are about the only ethnic group of Christians off the top of my head
but it could be possible to argue some sort of Slavic ethnic identity to Orthodox traditions, that would really piss off the people being grouped together

Daoism "proper" barely presents a system to be considered cohesively religous let alone ordering society beyond that

Metoo said:

Fascinating.

So, in a pubic debate, to make a generalised anti-Muslim, anti-Jewish, anti-Hindu or anti-Jainist statement is racist but a similar anti-Christian statement is only racist if it targets the Copts or the Orthodox crowd? Again, apologies if I got things wrong - it is a lot to take in!

---

Tantrika said:

Laid out to read it back
would maybe exclude anti-Jainist sentiment
most Jains share an identity as Indian rather than Jain, to my knowledge

similarly Orthodox can prolly go
Slavic practitioners would be identitified as Slav first

but other than that, not "only" the Copts
the Copts stand out as it is my position that the terrorist bombing of their church in Cairo was racist in nature
rather than "just" religious as it can be initially taken
but there is also another group of Christians in...Iraq maybe?
with pretty distinct ideas about desert-dwelling and monastic ritual as ways of life
would likely consider them to be ethnically connected as well

---

Metoo said:

Tantrika said:

Laid out to read it back
would maybe exclude anti-Jainist sentiment
most Jains share an identity as Indian rather than Jain, to my knowledge

similarly Orthodox can prolly go
Slavic practitioners would be identitified as Slav first

but other than that, not "only" the Copts
the Copts stand out as it is my position that the terrorist bombing of their church in Cairo was racist in nature
rather than "just" religious as it can be initially taken
but there is also another group of Christians in...Iraq maybe?
with pretty distinct ideas about desert-dwelling and monastic ritual as ways of life
would likely consider them to be ethnically connected as well

---

You realise that you are making a lot of assumptions about what other people identify with and in what priority, where they dwell, what social order they follow etc

---

Yeah, and anyone who feels their identity is otherwise can ask me to correct my expression in referring to them

Metoo said:

...to be able to call out a racist statement made in public?...

---

Not quite, in that way am utilizing fairly standard and accepted designators of identity

Metoo said:

From the public dialogue point of view this will mean that anyone who does not share your assessments of these complex historic, demographic and social proceses will have a different working definition of racism?

---

my information provided has been in line with the definition of racism as is accepted commonly enough to update the dictionary for
the dictionary is a tool that describes the language that exists and is commonly recognized, not prescribes how language is to be used

even if Trump and his supporters have a different working definition of racism that is convenient to them
that is not what is commonly accepted, and the onus is then put on them to provide a description as to why they think their definition should supercede the commonly accepted one



for me this has been about helping someone understand a definition they appeared to lack comprehension of
not about telling someone my personal views

Metoo said:

You are obviously entitled to see things your way - I am mainly concerned about a healthy exchange of opinions in which accusations of racism can be levelled freely because there is no  (and cannot be a) universally agreed definition behind the term?

---

well hopefully you understand the mechanics of language well enough now to feel as comfortable as the rest of us in your exchanges and expressing your views

Enlil said:

You're confused. Whether something is racist or some other form of irrational prejudice is irrelevant. Those are just labels. They don't determine what is and isn't socially acceptable.

---

Metoo said:

Enlil said:

You're confused. Whether something is racist or some other form of irrational prejudice is irrelevant. Those are just labels. They don't determine what is and isn't socially acceptable.

---

Calling someone a racist is not socially acceptable unless they present racist views. Unless we can agree on what racism means how would we know if someone is racist or not?

---

Enlil said:

Meh, it's social acceptable to call someone almost anything these days. Our president literally makes fun of people with disabilities.

---

Trump is ableist on top of racist and anti-gay

Tantrika said:

my information provided has been in line with the definition of racism as is accepted commonly enough to update the dictionary for
the dictionary is a tool that describes the language that exists and is commonly recognized, not prescribes how language is to be used

---