Aielyn
Yes you are childish, ignoring the glaring holes in your idiotic logic because it undermines everything you say.
Funny, a lot of "arbitrary" criteria in there, shared with the usage of "ethnicity"
How is skin colour vague?
Really? How often do you have to go to church to qualify? How often do you need to read the bible?
Except accents vary within countries, and within regions wthin countries, yet you think ecnompbutting different characteristics withing one ethic identifier is OK, but doing *exactly* the same thing for "race" isn't
How about Japanese who don't eat fish? How about people of Japanese parents who don't speak Japanese?
Either your parents have african ancestry or they don't. Yet you describe "african american" as a "Racist" term.
Great thinking there, bozo
They seem as vague as racial groupings to me.
See above. Your definitions are vague and cannot match many within your ethnic descriptors. Yet when someone does the same thing for "race" they are racist.
And yet the same criteria used to define "race" is somehow racist.
You're a hypocrite and a cretin
And how about "race" when not used by "racists", you dippoo? How many times does this need to be explained to you. FagBags calls people racist for identifying "race" in any context whatsoever, not just using some nazi-genetic superiority argument. Yet when using the same generalisations under the rubric of "ethnicity", it's somehow acceptable.
What stinking hypocrites you both are
Sounds vague, just like your "culture" descriptions, which can include people not born in Japan, not living in Japan, and who can't speak Japanese. In short, someone who has little in common with Japanese at all, yet you're happy lumping them in the same group under the rubric of ethnicity
Fantastic circular logic: you're lebanese if you're lebanese. How about people who's grandparents were born in Lebanon, but not their parents? How about the muslim-christian division? How about people who've become Australian citizens and no longer identify themselves as levanese.
Doesn't look to "specific" to me. Just like your ludicrous Japanese example
To be the child of Caucasian parents.
You starting to see the point now?
Nope. You still can't provide a "specific" definition of "ethnicity" that is really any different to usages of "race".
LOL. Idiot. You can define tem in *exactly the same way* you used to define "Lebanese" and "Japanese"
You're so tied up in logical knots you must be licking your own arse.
No it isn't, because it doesn't cover the differences.
So, please provide a *specific* definition of Lebanese, Christian and Scottish
Actually, you've completely failed to differentiate your use of "ethnicity" from the somehow "racist" use of "race"
Except you couldn't even describe what it means to be Lebanese or Japanese
Sounds exactly like your lame ethnic descriptions
LOL. Bloody hell, now you can't even keep your own bullpoo straight. here are your own words:
"race does not exist (in the sense of "caucasian", or "african american"), that it is a false construct made by racists to justify bigotry and discrimination. "
Now you claim "african american", despite being a racist construct, is AOK as an "ethnicity"
Get your own opinion of African Americans right first
He does indeed, which is why he never likes answering specific questions.
Except you can't define "ethnicity" any better than someone can specificially define a "race"
No it can't, as you own absurd examples have proved
Exactly like your "ethnic" descriptions
And I gave exactly the same criteria you used to describe "lebanese". Of course, your usage was somehow not "racist"
"race does not exist (in the sense of "caucasian", or "african american"), that it is a false construct made by racists to justify bigotry and discrimination. "
So you're ignoring all usages of "race" except those used by "racists". How convenient
