taken to clearly distinguish race and ethnicity in arguments, the same way sex and gender are carefully distinguished. I honestly think this is responsible for a lot of confusion. Race and sex are classified by a basket of biological indicators, period. ETHNICITY and gender are classified by a basket of participatory indicators, period. And so on.

p.s, Not arguing that the biological features currently used to categorize races have more validity than others. Just hoping the language eventually becomes more accurate because there are so many interesting opinions. I also think some arguments are being supported with examples of 'transethnicity' not 'transrace', which doesn't quite read right?



For example:

RACE VS ETHNICITY


Biological Traits (congenital)
-----------------------------

Element: race
Outer Identifiers: skin colour, hair texture, eye colour/shape, nose shape/size, etc.



Shared Experience (Participatory)
--------------------------------
Element: Ethnicity
Outer Identifiers: heritage (i.e.racial ancestry), cultural behavior,language,shared history,nationality, etc.



Societal Perception (Imposed)
----------------------------
Element: Govt Classification
Outer Identifiers: Census race/eth designation, Medical race/eth designation

Element: Discrimination
Outer Identifiers: disenfranchisement, inequity,racism, etc