How I learned about ETHICITY vs. RACE...It was eye opening

Sweden said:

Do you mean the proper French as spoken in Québec and New Brunswick or the proper French they speak in France? With my Belgian French education I have a little trouble with spoken version of the former.

Click to expand...

When I was dating a lady in Quebec, I played her a Cajun song, and she could only get every other word or so.

RetiredNSmilin said:

You know, Native American is the only PC term I like. I think it is right.

Click to expand...

Enjoyable post generating a lot of non abrasive discussion.

However, I disagree with the acceptance of the term Native American. Indian, agreed, not a particularly good description, but it does have historical validity, in that it was the main term used for the description of the indigenous as a group, for so long in this country.

For one, I do not have any Cherokee or any other of the various indigenous tribes' blood, that I am aware of, in my veins. And yet I consider myself native American.

But being a native then adding an European context to it, the America part variously thought of coming from the name of the Amerigo Vespucci or perhaps from the term given it by the old Norsemen, that apparently fairly commonly plied the North Atlantic prior to Columbus' "discovery" of America, Amteric, meaning district or land of (Leif) Eric...or Ommerike (oh-MEH-ric-eh), an Old Norse word meaning "farthest outland."

Seems our native population should have a name of a more indigenous origin, IMHO. And of course, the indigenous may not have been the first here, either. You have the whole Kennewick Man thing to deal with. The Kennewick Man Finally Freed to Share His Secrets | History | Smithsonian

And again, I take a little bit of umbrage as I, too, consider myself native American.

Gaugingcatenate said:

Enjoyable post generating a lot of non abrasive discussion.

However, I disagree with the acceptance of the term Native American. Indian, agreed, not a particularly good description, but it does have historical validity, in that it was the main term used for the description of the indigenous as a group, for so long in this country.

For one, I do not have any Cherokee or any other of the various indigenous tribes' blood, that I am aware of, in my veins. And yet I consider myself native American.

But being a native then adding an European context to it, the America part variously thought of coming from the name of the Amerigo Vespucci or perhaps from the term given it by the old Norsemen, that apparently fairly commonly plied the North Atlantic prior to Columbus' "discovery" of America, Amteric, meaning district or land of (Leif) Eric...or Ommerike (oh-MEH-ric-eh), an Old Norse word meaning "farthest outland."

Seems our native population should have a name of a more indigenous origin, IMHO. And of course, the indigenous may not have been the first here, either. You have the whole Kennewick Man thing to deal with. The Kennewick Man Finally Freed to Share His Secrets | History | Smithsonian

And again, I take a little bit of umbrage as I, too, consider myself native American.

Click to expand...

Thank you. Other than some technical purists, this has been a pretty civil thread, hasn't it? I am glad.

There is also that "race" (give it a rest, OK) of giants with red hair they found in Lovelock Cave in Nevada. They did not fit any of the indigenous peoples (Utes) in the area, and were actually attacking them, so they killed them all in the cave. At least that is the story the Utes provide.

Fortunately the bat crap built up over their bones and preserved them.

RetiredNSmilin said:

Thank you. Other than some technical purists, this has been a pretty civil thread, hasn't it? I am glad.

There is also that "race" (give it a rest, OK) of giants with red hair they found in Lovelock Cave in Nevada. They did not fit any of the indigenous peoples (Utes) in the area, and were actually attacking them, so they killed them all in the cave. At least that is the story the Utes provide.

Fortunately the bat crap built up over their bones and preserved them.

Click to expand...

I haven't heard about the redheaded giants, now I'm going to have to look into it, sounds interesting.

As someone who is technically one race (white) but mixed ethnicity (half mexican/European) I can relate to what you are talking about. Culturally they are very different and alot of times I am in the middle about how they feel about the other! Many times I have to tell some of my family members who are bagging on white people that they need to check themselves because they are "white" too. :lol:

RetiredNSmilin said:

I guess some just don't have it in them to just relax and enjoy the day.

Every party has a Mr. Buzzkillington in it I guess.

I make a polite post about the Italian "race", and here come the overanalylticals swooping down to peck it to death with technical details rather than going with the sweet flow of the conversation.

PS...Both the Zulu and the Sioux consider their "race" the only good human beings on the planet. All others are a bit less. There is nothing wrong with that kind of pride in one's heritage. Why overanalyize it with scientific and genetic jiberjabber.

Someone is technically wrong on the internet...so what? Could someone please post that cute drawing to that effect?

Click to expand...

Was just saying that there was no consensus on it.
I think it can be dangerous to dismiss things like that, potentially dissuading science from exploring it further.
I'd like to see cures for things that seem to primarily affect certain ethnic/racial groups.

I don't see how it was impolite.

RetiredNSmilin said:

There is also that "race" (give it a rest, OK) of giants with red hair they found in Lovelock Cave in Nevada. They did not fit any of the indigenous peoples (Utes) in the area, and were actually attacking them, so they killed them all in the cave. At least that is the story the Utes provide.

Fortunately the bat crap built up over their bones and preserved them.

Click to expand...

So interesting, isn't it? That is my first career choice, I wanted to be an archaeologist. What they can determine from clues to the past would astound Sherlock Holmes at times.

Yes, and truthfully, I am so glad you brought up the Native American subject as it led me to take some time and to look up the Kennewick Man story I had read years ago... and the old news from those had me thinking the bones had been covered up and destroyed by the tribes, their value lost to us forever. Now I learn through my search that, fortunately, some independent scientists filed a lawsuit and blocked both the tribes and our government from the destruction of these ancient bones.

Ultimately, the scientists won the lawsuit. The court ruled in 2002 that the bones were not related to any living tribe: thus Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, or NAGPRA, did not apply. The judge in the case ordered the corps to make the bone specimens available to the plaintiffs for study. The government appealed and the Court of Appeals in 2004 again ruled resoundingly in favor of the scientists, writing:

"because Kennewick Man’s remains are so old and the information about his era is so limited, the record does not permit the Secretary [of the Interior] to conclude reasonably that Kennewick Man shares special and significant genetic or cultural features with presently existing indigenous tribes, people, or cultures."

Also, in another passage, were are given a reminder as to why we cannot be trusting the government to be the sole arbiters of the truth:

"During the trial, the presiding magistrate judge, John Jelderks, had noted for the record that the corps [Army Corps of Engineers] on multiple occasions misled or deceived the court. He found that the government had indeed acted in “bad faith” and awarded attorney’s fees of $2,379,000 to Schneider and his team."

“At the bare minimum,” Schneider told me, “this lawsuit cost the taxpayers $5 million.”

Also, if interested, a short article on the name America. The Naming of America

americanwoman said:

I haven't heard about the redheaded giants, now I'm going to have to look into it, sounds interesting.

As someone who is technically one race (white) but mixed ethnicity (half mexican/European) I can relate to what you are talking about. Culturally they are very different and alot of times I am in the middle about how they feel about the other! Many times I have to tell some of my family members who are bagging on white people that they need to check themselves because they are "white" too. :lol:

Click to expand...

From wikipedia

According to Paiute oral history, the Si-Te-Cah or Sai'i are a legendary tribe of red-haired cannibalistic giants. Mummified remains fitting the Paiute description were discovered by guano miners in Lovelock Cave in 1911. Adrienne Mayor writes about the Si-Te-Cah in her book, Legends of the First Americans.[10] She suggests that the 'giant' interpretation of the skeletons from Lovelock Cave and other dry caves in Nevada was started by entrepreneurs setting up tourist displays and that the skeletons themselves were of normal size. However, about a hundred miles north of Lovelock there are plentiful fossils of mammoths and cave bears, and their large limb bones could easily be thought to be those of giants by an untrained observer. She also discusses the reddish hair, pointing out that hair pigment is not stable after death and that various factors such as temperature, soil, etc. can turn ancient very dark hair rusty red.

Click to expand...

Harry Guerrilla said:

Was just saying that there was no consensus on it.
I think it can be dangerous to dismiss things like that, potentially dissuading science from exploring it further.
I'd like to see cures for things that seem to primarily affect certain ethnic/racial groups.

I don't see how it was impolite.

Click to expand...

Good morning, USA
I got a feeling that it's gonna be a wonderful day
the sun in the sky has a smile on its face,
and he is shining a salute to the American RACE.

American Dad disagrees with you.

...and, YES, you disrupted the positive flow of posts with your "technicallities", Buzzkillington.

I am sure you will never see it that way.

RetiredNSmilin said:

Good morning, USA
I got a feeling that it's gonna be a wonderful day
the sun in the sky has a smile on its face,
and he is shining a salute to the American RACE.

American Dad disagrees with you.

Click to expand...

You're free to disagree.

RAMOSS said:

From wikipedia

Click to expand...

I would prefer the oral history of the people's (Paiute's) that were there and fought them than anything WIKIPEDIA says.

They were there, they had trouble with them, they fought them, and they passed the story down through the ages.

I prefer to believe them.

Harry Guerrilla said:

You're free to disagree.

Click to expand...

...and I do.

Stan is NEVER wrong. "Confused" more than a few times, but never wrong.

(got that from Daniel Boone...He said he was confused for a few days, but never lost in the woods)

RNS Law # 3452978

Thou shall never dispute or argue the wisdom of American Dad, Family Guy, Big Bang Theory, Robot Chicken, or Squidbillies.

RetiredNSmilin said:

I would prefer the oral history of the people's (Paiute's) that were there and fought them than anything WIKIPEDIA says.

They were there, they had trouble with them, they fought them, and they passed the story down through the ages.

I prefer to believe them.

Click to expand...

If the stories where passed down through the ages, the people currently telling the stories didn't fight them. Can't say how exaggerated it is, if it ihappend at all

RetiredNSmilin said:

...and I do.

Stan is NEVER wrong. "Confused" more than a few times, but never wrong.

(got that from Daniel Boone...He said he was confused for a few days, but never lost in the woods)

RNS Law # 3452978

Thou shall never dispute or argue the wisdom of American Dad, Family Guy, Big Bang Theory, Robot Chicken, or Squidbillies.

Click to expand...

All I can say, is that the title mentioned you learned something.
My intent was to help you continue, not to disparage.

americanwoman said:

I haven't heard about the redheaded giants, now I'm going to have to look into it, sounds interesting.

As someone who is technically one race (white) but mixed ethnicity (half mexican/European) I can relate to what you are talking about. Culturally they are very different and alot of times I am in the middle about how they feel about the other! Many times I have to tell some of my family members who are bagging on white people that they need to check themselves because they are "white" too. :lol:

Click to expand...

If you skip the skeptics that wrote in WIKI, and instead listen to the Paiute's rich oral history of the event, you will get the real story. It is real because they were there and did it. ZERO of the WIKI writers were there, and also have an agenda.

The Paiutes just say it as they saw it.

PS...theirs is not the only Native American story about strange people's living near them.

For a fascinating story, research the real life of Chief Plenty-Coups of who we call the CROW. He talks about a very strong race of people called the "little people" living in the mountains near them. One killed a full grown elk and carried it off by himself, but they were only about 3 or 4 feet tall. Another sucked a sharp fish bone from a young girl's throat...through her throat....without harming her.

Chief Plenty-Coups (koo) is a legend unto himself. As is the "little people".

Harry Guerrilla said:

All I can say, is that the title mentioned you learned something.
My intent was to help you continue, not to disparage.

Click to expand...

I learn something each and every time I log on here.

I thank you for the education, but I already knew the Italians were not a "race" of people. That is just a loose term several people, and myself use.

It is like calling a cute adult small dog a "puppy". I know damned well it is not a puppy, but just prefer to affectionately call it that. An older gentleman in Japan did not understand that, so I politely explained. Being Japanese, he could not get his head around why I would knowingly say something that is incorrect. Gotta love the Japanese perfectionists.

What you need to examine is why you feel the need to correct minor technical items and not just go with the positive flow of the conversation.

I have two college degrees, and even so I learn new things all the time.

However, I am also retired and now prefer to just enjoy myself with foolish pleasures and do dumb things. It keeps me young and alive.

It is good advice I hope you will understand some day.

I will freely acknowledge I am "technically incorrect" on some or most of my posts. That is NOT why I log on.

I log on to make new friends and to enjoy everyone's company here.

I invite you to be one of them, if you can overlook my deliberate technical flaws.

I am not writing a thesis, just having fun and sharing some of the knowledge I picked up from my travels and the people I have met.

RetiredNSmilin said:

I learn something each and every time I log on here.

I thank you for the education, but I already knew the Italians were not a "race" of people. That is just a loose term several people, and myself use.

It is like calling a cute adult small dog a "puppy". I know damned well it is not a puppy, but just prefer to affectionately call it that.

What you need to examine is why you feel the need to correct minor technical items and not just go with the positive flow of the conversation.

I have two college degrees, and even so I learn new things all the time.

However, I am also retired and now prefer to just enjoy myself with foolish pleasures and do dumb things. It keeps me young and alive.

It is good advice I hope you will understand some day.

I will freely acknowledge I am "technically incorrect" on some or most of my posts. That is NOT why I log on.

I log on to make new friends and to enjoy everyone's company here.

Click to expand...

I think you've missed the bigger picture.
Learning that the technicalities are wrong, also allows you to learn a whole new history of people, your people and others.
It's fascinating.

Something I learned, while also learning about ethnicity and race.

RetiredNSmilin said:

Thank you. Other than some technical purists, this has been a pretty civil thread, hasn't it? I am glad.

There is also that "race" (give it a rest, OK) of giants with red hair they found in Lovelock Cave in Nevada. They did not fit any of the indigenous peoples (Utes) in the area, and were actually attacking them, so they killed them all in the cave. At least that is the story the Utes provide.

Fortunately the bat crap built up over their bones and preserved them.

Click to expand...

Hat tip on the Lovelock Cave excavations, thank god for guano, eh?

Being a red head, or at least formerly a red head myself, I am guessing I did not descend from those folks , being of mere average size... but I have to admit, we are on average smarter than the average bear... that you boo boo?

Okay, Ok all you stern Park Ranger Smiths and/or anti Yogi Bear cartooners out there, I am just joking... 'cause actually we are, on average, almost all run of the mill brilliant, ha ha ha ha.

RAMOSS said:

If the stories where passed down through the ages, the people currently telling the stories didn't fight them. Can't say how exaggerated it is, if it ihappend at all

Click to expand...

It depends upon the people telling the oral story.

The Native Americans have a rich history of telling very accurate and true oral stories.

Most oral traditions and stories are treated with the deepest respect, and not just any yahoo is trusted to keep them accurate.

That is why they are only trusted with those with a good memory and simple honor.

I am sure neither one of us qualify.

RetiredNSmilin said:

It depends upon the people telling the oral story.

The Native Americans have a rich history of telling very accurate and true oral stories.

Most oral traditions and stories are treated with the deepest respect, and not just any yahoo is trusted to keep them accurate.

That is why they are only trusted with those with a good memory and simple honor.

I am sure neither one of us qualify.

Click to expand...

Welll, how do you know they are accurate? What is the criteria that was used to show that the stories did not change from generation to generation? As for the cave itself,.. how do you know that things weren't set up by the folks looking to make a buck , using old stories from the local natives? 1911 was the time when there were many traveling freak shows all over the country.. so that mindset existed.


I admit, the story is romantic. And, it might have a kernel of truth. But ... making claims and telling stories is a lot different than having actual evidence. The oral tradition is certainly enough to look for evidence, but it's insufficient by itself.

Harry Guerrilla said:

I think you've missed the bigger picture.
Learning that the technicalities are wrong, also allows you to learn a whole new history of people, your people and others.
It's fascinating.

Something I learned, while also learning about ethnicity and race.

Click to expand...

Then I will be happy in my UNEDUCATED BLISS.

I did not "learn" my technicalities were wrong. I knew they were wrong before I wrote them.

What you do not see is that it made a nice compliment to a people I enjoy.

You also do not see that NO ONE likes to be talked down to and FORCEABLY "educated".

You must be a blast at a party. The instant someone says something that is a bit incorrect, I can see you running across the room to point that out to them, rather than just laughing at the joke, or nodding politely.

I am going to drop this conversation. You will never see what you did. I am wasting my time. Time I can spend conversing with more pleasant people, and doing more pleasant things.

Someone smarter than both of us said something about a person that will not change their mind also will not change the subject.

I hope one day you can drop that attitude where you MUST be correct, at all costs, and MUST point that fact out to everyone else.

You have the last word.....slam me to the wall about how dumb I am and incorrect I must be.

Sweden said:

Really great post. But can we please avoid using the word 'race'? Genetics has advanced enormously over the last few decades and it is now beyond doubt that there are no definable 'races'. Using this deeply flawed concept leads to endless confusion.

Click to expand...

Exactly, both race and ethnicity are ultimately human constructs.

RetiredNSmilin said:

Then I will be happy in my UNEDUCATED BLISS.

I did not "learn" my technicalities were wrong. I knew they were wrong before I wrote them.

What you do not see is that it made a nice compliment to a people I enjoy.

You also do not see that NO ONE likes to be talked down to and FORCEABLY "educated".

You must be a blast at a party. The instant someone says something that is a bit incorrect, I can see you running across the room to point that out to them, rather than just laughing at the joke, or nodding politely.

I am going to drop this conversation. You will never see what you did. I am wasting my time. Time I can spend conversing with more pleasant people, and doing more pleasant things.

Someone smarter than both of us said something about a person that will not change their mind also will not change the subject.

I hope one day you can drop that attitude where you MUST be correct, at all costs, and MUST point that fact out to everyone else.

You have the last word.....slam me to the wall about how dumb I am and incorrect I must be.

Click to expand...

Have a fine day.

RAMOSS said:

Welll, how do you know they are accurate? What is the criteria that was used to show that the stories did not change from generation to generation? As for the cave itself,.. how do you know that things weren't set up by the folks looking to make a buck , using old stories from the local natives? 1911 was the time when there were many traveling freak shows all over the country.. so that mindset existed.


I admit, the story is romantic. And, it might have a kernel of truth. But ... making claims and telling stories is a lot different than having actual evidence. The oral tradition is certainly enough to look for evidence, but it's insufficient by itself.

Click to expand...

YOU don't know, you just have to go on a little bit of faith. Not everything in the world can fit under a microscope.

Remember at one time Gorillas were thought to be mythical beasts. Troy was only a legend, and Machu Pichu (sp) was only a dream like place like El Dorado.

You need to have some faith first. Few "science types" do. If it can't be measured, weighed, or put under a microscope, it does not exist.

That is why they are completely WRONG every few dacades or so. They have no sense of faith or romanticism.

Just how amny scientists would crap their pants if a real live Bigfoot was capured tomorrow.

Remember too it is the faith and romance of yesterday that created the new technology of today.

RetiredNSmilin said:

YOU don't know, you just have to go on a little bit of faith. Not everything in the world can fit under a microscope.

Remember at one time Gorillas were thought to be mythical beasts. Troy was only a legend, and Machu Pichu (sp) was only a dream like place like El Dorado.

You need to have some faith first. Few "science types" do. If it can't be measured, weighed, or put under a microscope, it does not exist.

That is why they are completely WRONG every few dacades or so. They have no sense of faith or romanticism.

Just how amny scientists would crap their pants if a real live Bigfoot was capured tomorrow.

Remember too it is the faith and romance of yesterday that created the new technology of today.

Click to expand...

I find when people say 'You ahve to have a little faith', so often they are wrong when the facts come into light. As for a real bigfoot coming into light, gosh, yo uwould see people excited. But, then again, there have been so many fakes, and people get their money taken following a con man, I don't think it's likely.

Just because someone makes a story up doesn't mean it's true.

RetiredNSmilin said:

YOU don't know, you just have to go on a little bit of faith. Not everything in the world can fit under a microscope.

Remember at one time Gorillas were thought to be mythical beasts. Troy was only a legend, and Machu Pichu (sp) was only a dream like place like El Dorado.

You need to have some faith first. Few "science types" do. If it can't be measured, weighed, or put under a microscope, it does not exist.

That is why they are completely WRONG every few dacades or so. They have no sense of faith or romanticism.

Just how amny scientists would crap their pants if a real live Bigfoot was capured tomorrow.

Remember too it is the faith and romance of yesterday that created the new technology of today.

Click to expand...

I have to agree, there are many cases of, "We don't know, what we don't know!"
If we have oral legends, that have some unusual details, they have as good a chance of being true as not.
If the detail is something totally unheard of, the odds improve on the side of the oral history.
Since there is no likelihood of the residence of Nevada circa 1000 BC ever having seen someone with red hair,
it would seem odd that they would add that to the story, unless it were true.