• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

XEmoCatX

New Member
NOTE:
RCTA means race change to another
ECTA means ethnicity change to another

It’s some weird trend in TikTok

To RCTA/ECTA community,

Just stop it

As an Asian, please get a job and give ur mum’s phone back to her.

You’re just making Asians uncomfortable rn

Asia is not just Japan, China and Korea ya know?

Japan and Korea are not just anime/kawaii and K-pop/K drama, they have other stuff too.

You even ruined subliminal community

I’m fine with ppl interested in culture but changing race/ethnicity is absurd.
 
"RCTA was allegedly coined by TikTok user @fr0sty_bears.
Unlike Oli London, members of this underground community don't typically seek out surgery to alter their appearance. On the contrary, RCTA-identifying individuals believe it's possible to change their DNA via "subliminals" and "manifesting," and seemingly don't intend to cause any harm. They even believe that changing their past, where they were born, and their ancestors is achievable."


 
Already studied genetics and dna altering theses and theories. It’s not possible to alter dna or physical appearance by modifying dna. Attempts to do so risk health damage.
 
Of course you can change your DNA. Or at least half or more of the western world believes you can, and they are neither quiet nor polite about it.

If you can manifest a DNA change of one kind, and literally force other people to accept it, why not do it in other ways?

"You reap what you sow".
 
@XEmoCatX

In case the real message in my post above wasn't clear, I'm pro-facts and pro-science, which means I'm unhappy with a lot more than RCTA/ECTA based on manifested DNA modifications.

So I'm quite sympathetic towards the views you shared. But I believe it's too late to do anything about it. If this is ever "fixed" it won't be as a result of calm, rational discussions /sigh.


The problem is that society made a choice to catch itself in a trap of its own making: that impossible DNA changes are in fact possible.. And now we're seeing effects of the rule "If a lie becomes a truth, the truth becomes a lie".
We can't blame Zoomers and Gen Alpha for buying into what they were taught.
We can't even blame them for being less likely to be able to count or read than their elders /sigh.
But regardless of "why", they're "lost in the fog".

FWIW: I agree with the others OFC: it's not possible to change the DNA in the majority of the cells in a human body. Exceptions are things like transplants and blood transfusions.

So, with a reminder that we're all pink inside, and we all have red blood, and that "race" is just a random thing we fixate on because we're visual creatures:

Race/ethnicity is real in a sense. It's fixed at birth (along with a lot of other stuff of course). Body modification is possible for some aspects of appearance, but it's impossible to effect some kind of fundamental change in every cell in a living person's body.

On the other hand, race is just a minor aspect of appearance, with a few less visible distinctions that correlate (like the famous variation in the frequency of sickle-cell anemia). In general we might just as well classify people by the shape of their ears.

So race is "real" but for the most part, race as such is not important. Why does it matter?
Differences in culture are important, but clearly not "real" in the sense of being coded in DNA.
Note that there's also a strong connection between language and culture. It's out of scope for this though.
And to link it up: the best statistical measure of whether two people will get on well if if they speak the same language with the same dialect and accent. i.e. we are comfortable with people who share our culture.

In the past, culture and appearance were generally linked of course: the human world once comprised a majority of places where culture and race/ethnicity were strongly correlated, with a modest amount of mixing, and a few places where homogenous areas intersected, in which that was significant variation in the culture/race combinations.

Where does this leave us in a world where some of the more advanced societies treat DNA as mutable in ways that are currently impossible, have stopped "curating" their own cultures, and believe that an integrated society can, as a whole, be "multicultural" ?

Confused, and collectively looking foolish /sigh.
 
@XEmoCatX

In case the real message in my post above wasn't clear, I'm pro-facts and pro-science, which means I'm unhappy with a lot more than RCTA/ECTA based on manifested DNA modifications.

So I'm quite sympathetic towards the views you shared. But I believe it's too late to do anything about it. If this is ever "fixed" it won't be as a result of calm, rational discussions /sigh.


The problem is that society made a choice to catch itself in a trap of its own making: that impossible DNA changes are in fact possible.. And now we're seeing effects of the rule "If a lie becomes a truth, the truth becomes a lie".
We can't blame Zoomers and Gen Alpha for buying into what they were taught.
We can't even blame them for being less likely to be able to count or read than their elders /sigh.
But regardless of "why", they're "lost in the fog".

FWIW: I agree with the others OFC: it's not possible to change the DNA in the majority of the cells in a human body. Exceptions are things like transplants and blood transfusions.

So, with a reminder that we're all pink inside, and we all have red blood, and that "race" is just a random thing we fixate on because we're visual creatures:

Race/ethnicity is real in a sense. It's fixed at birth (along with a lot of other stuff of course). Body modification is possible for some aspects of appearance, but it's impossible to effect some kind of fundamental change in every cell in a living person's body.

On the other hand, race is just a minor aspect of appearance, with a few less visible distinctions that correlate (like the famous variation in the frequency of sickle-cell anemia). In general we might just as well classify people by the shape of their ears.

So race is "real" but for the most part, race as such is not important. Why does it matter?
Differences in culture are important, but clearly not "real" in the sense of being coded in DNA.
Note that there's also a strong connection between language and culture. It's out of scope for this though.
And to link it up: the best statistical measure of whether two people will get on well if if they speak the same language with the same dialect and accent. i.e. we are comfortable with people who share our culture.

In the past, culture and appearance were generally linked of course: the human world once comprised a majority of places where culture and race/ethnicity were strongly correlated, with a modest amount of mixing, and a few places where homogenous areas intersected, in which that was significant variation in the culture/race combinations.

Where does this leave us in a world where some of the more advanced societies treat DNA as mutable in ways that are currently impossible, have stopped "curating" their own cultures, and believe that an integrated society can, as a whole, be "multicultural" ?

Confused, and collectively looking foolish /sigh.
I saw ur message, u are right.
 

New Threads

Top Bottom