Are there any testable hypotheses that we can falsify?

It is very difficult, if not impossible, to prove a negative fact.

In this toxic climate, one could easily face this accusation. And it is not clear how it is possible to “prove” that one is not a racist.

For example, I may believe that I prefer a person with a darker complexion more than a person with a lighter complexion. It is simply a preference, in that same way that I prefer an apple over an orange.

However, many people will say that I am definitely a racist.

RE: "I prefer a person with a darker complexion more than a person with a lighter complexion. It is simply a preference, in that same way that I prefer an apple over an orange."

It depends on what for are preferring the person for and what other conditions may apply. If you are preferring the darker-complected person on the basis of their skin color for a job over a better qualified lighter-complected candidate, then sure, that's racism. If you are merely expressing a preference in dating habits based on sexual attraction, a preference that is independent of and doesn't carry over into your hiring preferences, then maybe not.

There are two equally qualified persons, and I prefer to select the one with the darker complexion. I am discriminating and making a judgement.

In this selection, I am discriminating in the sense that I am making a distinction between the two persons. I am also making a judgement about the merits of the two persons. All things considered, the darker complexion person, simply due to the complexion will add diversity to my team and this is valuable.

Well sure, qualifications for a position can include race or gender, e.g. in the interests of promoting diversity or providing role models for students as part of affirmative action initiatives. If that is the intent, then the lighter-complected person would not be better qualified, assuming otherwise satisfactory competence for the darker-complected person. (Probably an optimal approach would involve some sort of weighted point system.) In your particular example, you would not be making an arbitrary decision ("not be discriminating arbitrarily") on the basis of skin-color.

If you have two equally qualified (including equally complected) applicants you should probably just flip a coin.

well let's see.

first determine why your children have formed this opinion. what is it based on, and how valid is it?

second, remember that your children are still developing and in school they are forming bonds and frienships with other children - and if there's one characteristic common to most it is the desire to belong to the group. to receive approval from their elders (teachers, in this case). not to forget that sooner or later the little dears will start to question your hitherto godlike aura

it is quite possible that, with dozens of new definitions floating around, as well as thousands of ideas gaining traction, and more than enough bigots flapping their gums to remain in the public eye, on twitter, or uppermost in voters' minds, there may be someone whose definition of racist could include you.

then you tease it out and go over it with your children in a way that lets them discover for themselves that you are not like that.

D.E. Morant Not exactly sure but they had a big discussion in school, and in that discussion they all agreed that the parents were racists.

They discussed white privilege, and since Asians can be “honorary” whites……

this seems to be largely a revolt among children/young people against those in authority - namely parents. teachers will be next, particularly as these children discover that their teachers are in bed with the parents.

an anecdote:

i was discussing a historical topic when i said "oriental" and was severely chided - it's "asian"!

it isn't just"asian". carpets are oriental, a pearl has orient, peoples living hundreds of years ago were not called asians but orientals.

as for privilege - let's not forget that virtually every organized society has had privilege, perhaps based on different criteria than our own, but privilege nonetheless. and there's (i'm being PC here) south-east-asian privilege as well, for the family that occupies a twenty-seven storey house in mumbai said to have been built for one billion dollars. mukesh ambani - the owner - certainly has that privilege.

D.E. Morant I've gotten the same reaction as you to my use of "Oriental", which is the term I grew up with. It's confusing because many self-styled Asians (esp. the formerly so-called Oriental ones) don't group themselves inclusively with many of those other ethnic groups living in Asia. Of course way back the term "Oriental" was confusing too: the geographic occidental/oriental divide was sometimes said to be located at the Dardanelles, but conceptually the Arabic cultures of northeastern Africa were also subsumed under the label of Orientalism (not to mention that infamous idiom that located the divide at Calais). A guy I knew who ran a café in the city where I grew up happily called himself a "Chinaman", another term which has become a no-no.

I believe that there are shades of racism, not sure how many, but many. Unless we have a nuanced discussion about racism, this toxic environment will continue to discourage thoughtful exchange of ideas between persons who fiercely disagree. We must continue to dialogue respectfully. Offense is taken too easily.

The reason of the discrimination is vary. We need not be too curious why the person like a certain color. Importantly, do not too easy to say a person is a racist.