SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Free Malaysia Today reports
At the [Malaysian] National Scholastic Chess Championship 2017, which took place in Putrajaya recently, the girl was informed that what she wore was "improper and had violated the dress code" for the tournament.
[...] The girl's chess coach, Kaushal Khandhar, wrote on Facebook, "In the middle of Round 2, (without stopping the clocks) Chief Arbiter informs my student that the dress she wore was improper and violated the dress code of the tournament.
"It was later informed (by Chief Arbiter) to my student and her mother, that the Tournament Director deemed my student's dress to be 'seductive' and a 'temptation from a certain angle far, far away'."
[...] Kaushal said after discussions with the chief arbiter, the girl was allowed to compete, provided she bought a pair of slacks for the next day, but that decision came at 10pm and with the event at Putrajaya, there was no way the girl's mother could buy anything for the 9am start the next day.
"Before the morning round next day, my student's mother called the tournament director regarding this matter. Initially he had replied that he was not aware of the situation but after a brief discussion, we realised he knew all the details on this incident prior to this phone call.
"He promised to return the call upon discussion with the chief arbiter, but this did not happen. He would further not answer or return any calls by my student's mother", Kaushal wrote, adding that the situation led to the inevitable decision of withdrawal from the tournament altogether."
We should perhaps note here that Malaysia is majority-Muslim.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 01 2017, @07:35PM (8 children)
You couldn't possibly be more wrong.
Race is entirely about physical appearance: skin tone; color, texture, and location of hair; eye shape; nose shape; lip shape.
Your ignorant opinions are not facts.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 01 2017, @09:39PM (6 children)
You couldn't possibly be more wrong.
Yeah? You know who says I'm right?
All the geneticists. [scientificamerican.com]
Like this famous guy: ''Race is a social concept, not a scientific one" [nytimes.com] — Dr. J. Craig Venter, founder Human Genome Project
There is literally more diversity of characteristics [pbs.org] within so-called racial groups than there is between them.
Also, the dictionary: [oxforddictionaries.com]
1.2 A group of people sharing the same culture, history, language, etc.; an ethnic group.
We use race to mean culture all the time, for example:
"African music"
"Arabic architecture"
"Asian food"
"European couture"
— none of those are about physical characteristics of people hence they can't be genetic.
You know who says you are right?
All the racists who don't want to acknowledge their racism.
Time to put on your big boy pants and recognize that your grade-school definition of race is not useful in a grown-up world.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday May 02 2017, @01:22AM (5 children)
You are illiterate, of course. Put your bullshit aside, read -OriginalOwner's- post again, and believe him. Race is not about collard greens, but skin color. I have no idea what kind of game you're trying to play here, but you don't get to redefine words that have led to slavery, wars, and all other kinds of human misery. Race is about color and appearance, not the manner in which you stitch your clothing, or worship God.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 02 2017, @01:30AM (3 children)
Ah derpaway, triggered by reality's well known-liberal bias.
Nobody's redefining anything. Its the fucking OED man, the most definitive english language dictionary on the planet.
I always suspected you never went to college. Now I'm wondering if you even graduated from middle school.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 02 2017, @02:29AM
The two or three of you are using different definitions of race. Runaway's definition is more of a common use term, humans tend to use skin color, common physical traits, and culture as an indication of "race". AC's definition is more scientific, and it is correct to say that the idea of separate races who are genetically different from each other is a load of hogwash.
Given the trolling and bigotry that truly does float through here I can understand that the summary's note is easily taken into different contexts. My take on it was that the submitter wanted to highlight that the country has a majority of religious conservative types. Maybe next time one more sentence would have avoided this whole crapfset of a thread.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday May 02 2017, @02:42AM (1 child)
Not triggered so much, as sorry for your lack of contact with reality. Why don't you take yourself to some ghetto with a bunch of young black males hanging on the street corner, and get their opinion on race. Most of us live out in the real world, and deal with American culture on a daily basis. Sitting snug in the middle of academia, dealing with numbers and graphs doesn't prepare you for the reality out on the streets.
And, reality doesn't give half of one fuck for liberal biases. You keep telling yourself that. If anything, reality is conservative. Ever heard of the law of conservation of matter and energy? Or, do they even teach that in liberal arts schools?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 02 2017, @03:01AM
Why don't you take yourself to some ghetto
...
Sitting snug in the middle of academia,
...
If anything, reality is conservative. Ever heard of the law of conservation of matter and energy?
Yeah, you aren't triggered at all.
snicker
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 02 2017, @03:45AM
You know who says you are right?
All the racists who don't want to acknowledge their racism.
That's your cue runaway.
Thanks for doing your part!
(Score: 2) by Mykl on Tuesday May 02 2017, @01:33AM
Australian law would disagree. Journalist Andrew Bolt was sued under Section 18c of the Racial Discrimination Act [theaustralian.com.au] by putting forward his opinion that fair-skinned Aboriginal people who 'looked' caucasian were claiming Aboriginal heritage to gain advantage in society (qualify for affirmative action, grants, government programs etc). The fact that it's illegal to voice that opinion is a separate discussion, but the point is that the courts here have confirmed that race does not purely rest upon what you look like.
US parallel would include people who are 1/8 or 1/16 Native American.