Armenians are Europeans ( and white ) !

[Hate_Sheep]

Re: Armenians are Europeans ( and white ) !

Hello? Not all Armenians lived in Soviet Armenia. We didn't all get to mix with modern day Georgians and Azeris, and I'm sure that the number of those who did isn't as significant of a number that you're trying to portray, without the use of any statistics whatsoever!

When will you learn that it isn't the common American public, and some Russian mobs who decide who is Caucasian and who is not? When will you see that it public perception does not equate into scientific evidence of anything?
It isn't the lacking of fair coloured skin or vice versa that decides who is Caucasian (meaning "white, and not "from Caucasus" by the way), hell, Pakistanis, and even many very dark complexioned peoples are included in this category. Arabs are surely included, and I might take back my former claim that Dravidian Indians aren't included either... I'm not even sure anymore. The fact is, there are more genes involved in the makeup of a Caucasoid than sheer skin colour! Skin colour is just the coating on top of the cake! Why do you think we assign the Chinese to a different category when a significant number of them are whiter than the general Caucasoid!

Hopefully Anahita too will see that skin colour is rarely the focal point of the distinctions in these categories.

We are Caucasian, not Negro, not Mongolian, Caucasian, and so are ethnic Russians, Britons, French, Germans, Iranians, Pakistanis, etc... End of story.

Yes you are right, East Indians, Arabs, iranians etc, are all caucasian too. However, there are are two versions of race, scientific and social. From a scientific sense caucasians are grouped together, by skull, and skeletal structrue. However, society, whether we like it or not, judges people from outwards appearance. Since white is not a proper scientific definition of race, but rather a social definition, then you do have to care what americans and russians think of us. If you dont believe me, just look at all these people on this forum, that label middle eastern, or "brown" as a race, when there is no brown race even. They are using social terms, just like americans, and russians use. In other words, most people judge race, from an outward rather then inward appearance.
It is also a misnomer to call caucasians "white", since many are not white in appearance. It goes back to my point, that white is not neccassarily the same as caucasian.
Caucasian is a scientific defintion of race, while white is a social defintion. Therfore, if "white" is a social term created by Germans, Americans, Russians etc, and the typical European, doesn't accept, the typical Armenian as white, then yes it matters what they think. Scientifically is when it doesnt matter what they think.

[Anonymouse]

Re: Armenians are Europeans ( and white ) !

Yes you are right, East Indians, Arabs, iranians etc, are all caucasian too. However, there are are two versions of race, scientific and social. From a scientific sense caucasians are grouped together, by skull, and skeletal structrue. However, society, whether we like it or not, judges people from outwards appearance. Since white is not a proper scientific definition of race, but rather a social definition, then you do have to care what americans and russians think of us. If you dont believe me, just look at all these people on this forum, that label middle eastern, or "brown" as a race, when there is no brown race even. They are using social terms, just like americans, and russians use. In other words, most people judge race, from an outward rather then inward appearance.
It is also a misnomer to call caucasians "white", since many are not white in appearance. It goes back to my point, that white is not neccassarily the same as caucasian.
Caucasian is a scientific defintion of race, while white is a social defintion. Therfore, if "white" is a social term coined by Germans, Americans, Russians etc, and the typical European, doesn't accept, the typical Armenian as white, then yes it matters what they think. Scientifically is when it doesnt matter what they think.

Courtesy of Merriam-Webster

Main Entry: 3 race
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, generation, from Old Italian razza
1 : a breeding stock of animals
2 a : a family, tribe, people, or nation belonging to the same stock b : a class or kind of people unified by community of interests, habits, or characteristics <the English race>
3 a : an actually or potentially interbreeding group within a species; also : a taxonomic category (as a subspecies) representing such a group b : BREED c : a division of mankind possessing traits that are transmissible by descent and sufficient to characterize it as a distinct human type
4 obsolete : inherited temperament or disposition
5 : distinctive flavor, taste, or strength

So, technically, there can be a "brown race".

[Anahita]

Re: Armenians are Europeans ( and white ) !

Courtesy of Merriam-Webster

Main Entry: 3 race
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, generation, from Old Italian razza
1 : a breeding stock of animals
2 a : a family, tribe, people, or nation belonging to the same stock b : a class or kind of people unified by community of interests, habits, or characteristics <the English race>
3 a : an actually or potentially interbreeding group within a species; also : a taxonomic category (as a subspecies) representing such a group b : BREED c : a division of mankind possessing traits that are transmissible by descent and sufficient to characterize it as a distinct human type
4 obsolete : inherited temperament or disposition
5 : distinctive flavor, taste, or strength

So, technically, there can be a "brown race".

That definition speaks, alone. We are all of the HUMAN RACE. In my HO (humble opinion), the discussion should be about culture, history, and language, not so much race.

[Anahita]

Re: Armenians are Europeans ( and white ) !

That is untrue. It is merely a conjecture. There is nothing that indicates that this is an undeniable truth. As anything with modern 'science'. 50% truth and 50% conjecture.

OK. Since we are talking about the narratives and facts the stories are based on.... The fact: ALL HUMANITY IS FAMILY.

[Anonymouse]

Re: Armenians are Europeans ( and white ) !

That definition speaks, alone. We are all of the HUMAN RACE. In my HO (humble opinion), the discussion should be about culture, history, and language, not so much race.

OK. Since we are talking about the narratives and facts the stories are based on.... The fact: ALL HUMANITY IS FAMILY.

Such views, while warm and cozy, are purely illusory. Why is it that humans altogether can be a race, but when we break them down into subgroups and call them races, that is somehow forbidden? Humans are a race, just as much as blacks or Asians are a race. So when it benefits the multiculturalist egalitarian ideology and agenda, we are all one and lets hold hands across the globe, but when it is contrarian, any talk of the same thing applied to different population groups is the sin of ages.

[Hate_Sheep]

Re: Armenians are Europeans ( and white ) !

Courtesy of Merriam-Webster

Main Entry: 3 race
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle French, generation, from Old Italian razza
1 : a breeding stock of animals
2 a : a family, tribe, people, or nation belonging to the same stock b : a class or kind of people unified by community of interests, habits, or characteristics <the English race>
3 a : an actually or potentially interbreeding group within a species; also : a taxonomic category (as a subspecies) representing such a group b : BREED c : a division of mankind possessing traits that are transmissible by descent and sufficient to characterize it as a distinct human type
4 obsolete : inherited temperament or disposition
5 : distinctive flavor, taste, or strength

So, technically, there can be a "brown race".

Technically Armenian can be considered a race, as definition number 2 clearly indicates. I still dont see anything that makes reference to a brown race though.
Traditionally and scientifically there is only 3 racial subgroups (caucasian, negroid, and mongloid) , 4 if you include Indian (i.e. native indian). The so called "brown" race, even in reference to a social term, is too inconsistent. How can Mexicans, East Indians, Arabs, Filipinos all be part of the same race (brown), when they have absolutely nothing in common, racially, culturally, or genetically ( i.e. genes, and physical appearance) and etc. Furthermore from a scientific definition of race, many of the so called brown races, belong to different racial categories. As an example Pakistani is caucasian, while Filipino would be mongloid.
Technically Arab, Pakistani and East Indian would be closer related to Armenian, then it would be to Mexican, Puerto Rican, Filipino, or Cambodian. Does this mean Armenians should be considered brown as well? Brown cannot apply to all these people, so who would be brown and who would not be?
I find this definiton of a "brown" race much too flawed, and inconsistent.

[Siggie]

Re: Armenians are Europeans ( and white ) !

Hey Siggie, I very strongly recommend this book to you. Great new ideas are presented there (and scholars always love new ‘idea’ leads. My friend who is doctoral student in psychology thinks this a new ‘primary’ source/reference for theory. “Technology, Trauma and the Wild,” “Jungian Psychology and the World Unconscious,” “Shamanic Counseling and Ecopsychology, ”… gestalt, child development, therapy, and many more essays. There are so many new ideas in the field of psychology that you can’t help but find 100 more new ideas on your own, just reading it.

Sorry.. only seeing this now.
I don't know why practically everone equates psychology as a whole to clinical or counseling psychology.
I don't have even the smallest interest in either. I study cognition and its application to the legal setting, so none of that is of any interest to me. The next time you want to recommend a book to me, don't do it in a thread that I haven't posted in if you want me to see it.

[Anonymouse]

Re: Armenians are Europeans ( and white ) !

Technically Armenian can be considered a race, as definition number 2 clearly indicates. I still dont see anything that makes reference to a brown race though.
Traditionally and scientifically there is only 3 racial subgroups (caucasian, negroid, and mongloid) , 4 if you include Indian (i.e. native indian). The so called "brown" race, even in reference to a social term, is too inconsistent. How can Mexicans, East Indians, Arabs, Filipinos all be part of the same race (brown), when they have absolutely nothing in common, racially, culturally, or genetically ( i.e. genes, and physical appearance) and etc. Furthermore from a scientific definition of race, many of the so called brown races, belong to different racial categories. As an example Pakistani is caucasian, while Filipino would be mongloid.
Technically Arab, Pakistani and East Indian would be closer related to Armenian, then it would be to Mexican, Puerto Rican, Filipino, or Cambodian. Does this mean Armenians should be considered brown as well? Brown cannot apply to all these people, so who would be brown and who would not be?
I find this definiton of a "brown" race much too flawed, and inconsistent.

"a division of mankind possessing traits that are transmissible by descent and sufficient to characterize it as a distinct human type"

When they breed, you don't see any of the brown mestizos or Indians changing their over makeup, unless they mix with a lighter or darker skinned person.

[TomServo]

Re: Armenians are Europeans ( and white ) !

Why is Hate_Sheep harping on topics related to race and skin color?

Post in some other threads, Sheep. It's fun.

[skhara]

Re: Armenians are Europeans ( and white ) !

Question:
What color are Armenians according to American negros?

I've been called the following two colors by a couple of American negros:

"White" and "Tan".