Does race/gender exist (in terms of the Absolute)?

[r0ckyreed]

This is a deep topic and my intentions are not to offend, but to gain understanding about the metaphysical nature of race/gender.

I have been wondering about this for a while and was wanting to know your all’s thoughts. The way I understand race/gender is that they are social constructs or imagination. When I look at my hand or at a person, that is actuality. The ideas of separateness based on race/gender are imaginary. They have the same reality as Santa clause or the buddha. Which you could also argue that Santa clause is just as real as your hand? 

That being said, my understanding of nonduality is that everything is one. But race/gender are based on imaginary divisions created to separate and justify dehumanization and discrimination of certain groups of people. In reality, the separation of people based on gender/race and 3/5s rule was a horrible thing we did and let to many horrible genocides and slavery.

That being said, there was a video where a woman talks about color blindness vs color consciousness. I personally think that there is a 3rd stage kind of like pre-rational, rational and post-rational called color/gender transcendence where we recognize that race is a “real” thing that we invented and continue to invent, but the idea is based on an illusion of separation that we try to transcend in this stage, which in reality we are one but living as if separate. 

Color blindness to me is like denying that race exists or to “not see race.”? The woman in the video critiqued color blindness by saying: “you can choose to not look at the sky, but the sky still exists.” She was comparing a race to the appearance of a sky. I argue that race/gender is much more than the appearance of color and sex organs. It consists of identity, culture, norms, projections, discrimination, bias, etc. 
 

Correct me if I am wrong, but comparing race to the sky seems to treat it like it is an objective fact, whereas in reality race is a social construct of our minds? But I guess you could also argue that the sky is also a social construct and doesn’t really exist because the boundaries between the sky, outer space, and earth are all arbitrary and relative.

What are your all’s thoughts about the metaphysical nature of race/gender?  Please let me know what you think based on your experiences with enlightenment work, mystical/no dual experiences, etc.

Please watch the video:

Even though the idea of race/gender was invented, we still need to be aware of the real life threats it has on society and on marginalized groups, such as racism, discrimination, white privilege, cisgender male privilege, heterosexism, white fragility, and whiteness in general, as well as gender discrimination and binary views of gender, etc. This is an example of how reality is imaginary, yet, we need to be aware of how our imagination creates separation and division and use our minds to unify together because we all bleed red and our hearts beat as one! 
 

I think the true danger comes from when we take separations to be “real” because then it creates a “superior” and “inferior” power dynamic. In addition, by taking our imaginations of separateness to be real, it also creates division and discrimination when we see others as separate from us. This is a real danger that we are seeing with Trumpism, white supremacy, religion, politics (democrat and republic rather than unifying our nation), etc.

Thanks

Edited January 21, 2021 by r0ckyreed

[Blackhawk]

It's not invented. Like for example the difference between a tall and short person isn't invented. The difference is there no matter what you think.

[roopepa]

1 hour ago, Blackhawk said:

The difference is there no matter what you think.

lol

No it isn't.

[Blackhawk]

3 minutes ago, roopepa said:

lol

No it isn't.

Then explain how it isn't?

[roopepa]

@Blackhawk By not thinking there is a difference.

[Blackhawk]

3 minutes ago, roopepa said:

@Blackhawk By not thinking there is a difference.

You can think what you want, like conspiracy theorists do, but that doesn't change the reality.

[roopepa]

11 minutes ago, Blackhawk said:

You can think what you want, like conspiracy theorists do, but that doesn't change the reality.

What reality? The one you're thinking about?

[Blackhawk]

2 minutes ago, roopepa said:

What reality? The one you're thinking about?

The reality which is there no matter what I think.

[r0ckyreed]

3 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

It's not invented. Like for example the difference between a tall and short person isn't invented. The difference is there no matter what you think.

I mean if you think about it, the difference between tall and short is relative to whatever your comparing it to. For instance, is an ant short or tall? Is shortness an inherent property of an ant or is it completely relative and socially constructed? Think about it, shortness and tallness are distinctions that you are projecting onto reality because you may consider Michael Jordan to be tall, but tallness is not a property of Michael Jordan, but a relative comparison you are making between him and you. If you compare Michael Jordan to the cosmos, his tallness ceases to exist. 
 

My argument is that the mechanism that invents sports like Basketball and chess is the same mechanism that invents countries, governments, politics, beauty, society, race, gender, age, etc. Our society is like a Basketball or chess game to me in that it is a made up system to allow the game of survival to be played. In this game, we invented “separate” groups of people based on gender/race/politics/age/countries/states/etc.and we project stereotypes onto people. So if you are a bishop, you are expected to move a certain way such as diagonal. If you are viewed as a pawn, you will have a certain move in society, or if you are highly valued (which value in itself is an invention and projection that is arbitrary) then you may be a king or queen. I think chess is a good example of our society in how white supremacy is still the dominate narrative and needs to be changed (hence, white moves first in chess). But of course this analogy of chess is limited. 
 

I tried to explain. I hope this makes sense.

Edited January 21, 2021 by r0ckyreed

[r0ckyreed]

1 hour ago, Blackhawk said:

You can think what you want, like conspiracy theorists do, but that doesn't change the reality.

I would be careful here because your worldview is your reality.

 

1 hour ago, Blackhawk said:

The reality which is there no matter what I think.

What you think and believe deeply becomes your reality. Even if you believe reality exists outside of your own mind, thoughts, and beliefs, that is still a belief and worldview that is called realism.

[Blackhawk]

20 minutes ago, r0ckyreed said:

I mean if you think about it, the difference between tall and short is relative to whatever your comparing it to. For instance, is an ant short or tall? Is shortness an inherent property of an ant or is it completely relative and socially constructed? Think about it, shortness and tallness are distinctions that you are projecting onto reality because you may consider Michael Jordan to be tall, but tallness is not a property of Michael Jordan, but a relative comparison you are making between him and you. If you compare Michael Jordan to the cosmos, his tallness ceases to exist. 
 

My argument is that the mechanism that invents sports like Basketball and chess is the same mechanism that invents countries, governments, politics, beauty, society, race, gender, age, etc. Our society is like a Basketball or chess game to me in that it is a made up system to allow the game of survival to be played. In this game, we invented “separate” groups of people based on gender/race/politics/age/countries/states/etc.and we project stereotypes onto people. So if you are a bishop, you are expected to move a certain way such as diagonal. If you are viewed as a pawn, you will have a certain move in society, or if you are highly valued (which value in itself is an invention and projection that is arbitrary) then you may be a king or queen. I think chess is a good example of our society in how white supremacy is still the dominate narrative and needs to be changed (hence, white moves first in chess). But of course this analogy of chess is limited. 
 

I tried to explain. I hope this makes sense.

A ant is short compared to a giraffe. No matter what you think.

As soon as you are able to perceive something, for example a ant, then you are automatically relating it to other things. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to perceive it in the first place. Without any contrast you can't perceive it at all.

It's not socially constructed.

And no race/gender isn't based on imaginary divisions created to separate and justify dehumanization and discrimination of certain groups of people.

16 minutes ago, r0ckyreed said:

I would be careful here because your worldview is your reality.

 

What you think and believe deeply becomes your reality. Even if you believe reality exists outside of your own mind, thoughts, and beliefs, that is still a belief and worldview that is called realism.

No what you think and believe doesn't become your reality.

Just because someone thinks Hillary Clinton is satanic and drinking baby blood and raping babies in a basement doesn't make it true.

You're simply dead wrong about everything you have said in this thread. I shouldn't even waste my time and energy on this shit. So I would appreciate if we could end this discussion.

Edited January 21, 2021 by Blackhawk

[SaWaSaurus]

@Blackhawk

Why is Obama black and not white?

[Forestluv]

26 minutes ago, r0ckyreed said:

I mean if you think about it, the difference between tall and short is relative to whatever your comparing it to. For instance, is an ant short or tall? Is shortness an inherent property of an ant or is it completely relative and socially constructed? Think about it, shortness and tallness are distinctions that you are projecting onto reality because you may consider Michael Jordan to be tall, but tallness is not a property of Michael Jordan, but a relative comparison you are making between him and you. If you compare Michael Jordan to the cosmos, his tallness ceases to exist. 

Of course any “thing” needs a “not that thing” for contrast. If everything was blue, blue ceases to exist. 

Yet you are also creating relative constructs about relative constructs. Ultimately, it all deconstructs to Nothing.

[r0ckyreed]

3 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

A ant is short compared to a giraffe. No matter what you think.

As soon as you are able to perceive something, for example a ant, then you are automatically relating it to other things. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to perceive it in the first place. Without any contrast you can't perceive it at all.

It's not socially constructed.

And no race/gender isn't based on imaginary divisions created to separate and justify dehumanization and discrimination of certain groups of people.

No what you think and believe doesn't become your reality.

Just because someone thinks Hillary Clinton is satanic and drinking baby blood and raping babies in a basement doesn't make it true.

You're simply dead wrong about everything you have said in this thread. I shouldn't even waste my time and energy on this shit. So I would appreciate if we could end this discussion.

Notice that everything I am saying and everything you are saying (we are speaking English) is a social construct. Tall and short, giraffe and ant are social constructs that we use to make distinctions in reality. For instance, a ant is not just an ant, but the ground, soil, plants, trees, planets, sun, air, water, etc.  you can make distinctions, but you cannot separAte life. 
 

How is race/gender not a social construct? You gave me your answer but provided no explanation.

Look up Johann Blumenbach and look up Cornell West’s article on the Genealogy of Modern Racism where he explains that race, beauty, history, and science are intertwined to create modern racism and white supremacy.

But the idea of realism is also a belief. How do you determine between truth and falsehood? You believe that reality exists independently of you, which makes that true for you. What if reality is completely relative? If that is true, then there is no objective standard for reality. 
 

You say that I am wrong, but what am I wrong about and what standards are you using believe that you are right and I am wrong. What is right and wrong and how do you know it exists? How can I be wrong about my own life experience/beliefs?
 

I am only wrong in comparison to your worldview which seems to suggest that there is an objective reality in which you and I are separate and separate from where science, race, gender, etc. aren’t social constructs that we invented but that are real. 
 

Take care and have a great day!

 

 

Edited January 21, 2021 by r0ckyreed

[r0ckyreed]

3 hours ago, Forestluv said:

Yet you are also creating relative constructs about relative constructs. Ultimately, it all deconstructs to Nothing.

That’s the part I still haven’t figured out and I am still trying to figure out.

[Blackhawk]

14 minutes ago, r0ckyreed said:

How is race/gender not a social construct? You gave me your answer but provided no explanation.

The skin color of different races are different. And the bodies are a bit different. And their genes are a bit different.

Women and men have different bodies. And their psyche/brains are different.

They are not fucking social constructs. Seriously.

14 minutes ago, r0ckyreed said:

Tall and short, giraffe and ant are social constructs that we use to make distinctions in reality.

Jesus. Fucking. Christ.

Aaaaaaaah. Don't write to me anymore, I beg you. No one in this thread.

Edited January 21, 2021 by Blackhawk

[r0ckyreed]

1 hour ago, Blackhawk said:

Women and men have different bodies. And their psyche/brains are different.

Everyone’s brain is different and unique. There is no female or male brain. It’s just a body and brain. How do you explain transgenderism and gender non-binary/non-conforming people? 

 

1 hour ago, Blackhawk said:

Jesus. Fucking. Christ.

Aaaaaaaah. Don't write to me anymore, I beg you. No one in this thread.

Calm down. It’s just words on a screen. This will be the last thing I write because you clearly have your mind made up and are being really defensive about what was supposed to be a friendly, open discussion about the nature of race/gender.

 This forum is all about openmindedness and respectfully sharing one’s questions, insights, and experiences. If you can’t handle my own questions or challenges to your worldview, then you don’t need to be here. Growth requires that you examine your own biases and challenge yourself. Life is nothing without challenge.

This right here is the separation that I am talking about that contributes to all the bigotry and hate in the world. 
 

I wish you well and have a safe and relaxing 2021. Take care. ?☮️?

[Preety_India]

Race and gender are genetic because you can see the difference between the sex organs between a male and a female . 

Second race is genetic 

Both are purely biological constructs and not created by a thought or belief. 

However this is in no means is a justification for inequality or separation or any form of supremacy. 

 

Edited January 22, 2021 by Preety_India

[TheAlchemist]

We can make the observation that there are people with "penises" and people with "vaginas" and people with something in between. We can make the observation that we have people who produce a large amount of small reproductive cells (sperm) and people who produce small amounts of larger reproductive cells (egg cells). We can observe that we have people with a more submissive and some people with a more dominant sexual nature.

In the west we have given these observations the meaning that there are 2 distinct genders, and these two genders have certain tendencies and should behave in a certain way. We have many cultures where the model is not the same, some cultures have 3 genders or a mixed genders for example.

Nowhere inherent in biology is it somehow coded that there is only a woman and a man. That is something we literally imagined up. Those are social contructs, those are models and generalizations that we have built out of the observations we have made. But the map is not the territory. We can simply just imagine up a new model if we want to, we can give a totally new meaning to these observations if we want to. We can even totally abolish the term gender if we find that it is not relevant or useful anymore. That is the power of culture, the issues arise when we take the model and our generalizations to be some natural law, something that cannot be reinterpreted or reimagined.

When somebody says they are transgender or non-binary or something and you feel uncomfortable with that, it's simply because it goes against your model of reality that you have been programmed into. 

At the absolute, all these distinctions are probably just a joke. But even at the "relative" level I think the relevance of gender can be questioned. 

Edited January 22, 2021 by TheAlchemist

[Carl-Richard]

12 hours ago, Blackhawk said:

The skin color of different races are different. And the bodies are a bit different. And their genes are a bit different.

Women and men have different bodies. And their psyche/brains are different.

They are not fucking social constructs.

Social construction is essentially about what society tells you. There are different levels of social construction. For example, all words and symbols, all concepts, are socially constructed. That includes words like biology, genes, genitalia, chromosomes etc.. You got all of those from society. 

Another form of social construction is more about how you relate to a certain concept. For example, society tells you that a person of a certain gender expresses themselves a certain way (looks, expressions, dress etc.). This causes confusion because society also tells you that gender is based on sex. But notice how that is also something that society tells you, hence it's a social construct. Gender expression can sometimes be in conflict with society's perceived relationship between gender and sex (after all, sex does not actually equal gender). 

Edited January 22, 2021 by Carl-Richard