“white” person

someone of european decent, traits attributed to white people are pointy noses, lack of ability to eat anything spicier than water, lighter skin color, ignorance, belief that they are superior to others, belief that they are an oppressed group, oppressive group, affinity for having s-x with animals, having s-x with relatives, belief they are many different races, little to no -ss, love of starbucks, love of uggs, nasally voice, condescending, distrust of black people, distrust of arab people, distrust of hispanic people, love of asian women, lack of basic hygiene, lack of knowledge of when to wear shoes or not, lack of ability to spell in their own languages, hatred of people who spell better than them, inability to dance, quickly jumping to the conclusion that one’s parents must be killed because one was not given an x-box and playstation, denying tragedies occurred such as the holocaust, love of quinoa, love of gluten free products, claiming “i’m not racist but…(something racist)”, claiming one is not racist as one has a black friend, deciding what’s best for the poor, complaining about controlling only most of instead of all of the world, lack of lips, either being too pc or not even close to being pc enough, love of perpetuation of stereotypes towards oppressed peoples and most importantly of all the complete lack of knowledge of anything outside of their tiny white social circles.
person 1:”yeah, so i’m 2.62% cherokee, 67.78232% british, 34.74832% german and so many other things, i’m so diverse.”
innocent bystander:”f-cking “white” person….”
this is a term used to incorectly label people with ethnicity from europe (correct describer: caucasain) who have light color skin. light skin can be within range from yellow to peach to pink to tan to orange to light red. mixing all these colors together, gets your ever-so-frequently-used-slur: “white”. all humans, please, open your eyes and tell me those color hues make white. “white” cannnot be a culture. white cannot be a race. white cannot be a people. and i, for-a-fact, cannot be a f-cking color.
“hey “white” person help me to the red bull”-person 1 “i’m sorry, do i look like i fell out of a crayola crayon box? read my name tag and show respect.”-person 2
blumenbach’s final taxonomy of 1795 divided all humans into five groups, defined both by geography and appearance–in his order, the caucasian variety, for the light-skinned people of europe and adjacent parts of asia and africa; the mongolian variety, for most other inhabitants of asia, including china and j-pan; the ethiopian variety, for the dark- skinned people of africa; the american variety, for most native populations of the new world; and the malay variety, for the polynesians and melanesians of the pacific and for the aborigines of australia.

linnaeus divided the species h-m- sapiens into four basic varieties, defined primarily by geography and, interestingly, not in the ranked order favored by most europeans in the racist tradition–americ-n-s, europaeus, asiaticus, and afer, or african. in so doing, linnaeus presented nothing original; he merely mapped humans onto the four geographic regions of conventional cartography.
the overt geometry of linnaeus’s model is not linear or hierarchical. when we visualize his scheme as an essential picture in our mind, we see a map of the world divided into four regions, with the people in each region characterized by a list of different traits.

so a “white” person is according to these taxonomists a person who had come from a region of the northern world.
these taxonomists were “white” themselves.
any person who considers him or herself as “white”, and, who is considered as “white” by a substantial number of other persons who consider themselves as “white”, and who generally functions as “white” in all places at all times.
it appears that being “white” is a result of what one has the ability to ‘do’ in addition to what has done to them.

for example, logically speaking a “white” person has the abilty to practice white supremacy/racsim, while at the same time cannot be subject to that same system of mistreatment on the basis of “color”.

being “white” seems to have little to do with appearance. since there are millions of people who are cl-ssified as “white” that have darker skin than people cl-ssified as ‘non-white’.