True, but it wasn’t until relatively recent in history that we could see the whole picture, before we were only seeing different parts of the world. After the circumnavigation of the globe the larger picture became clear.
In my opinion there are 3 primary races (European, Asian, African) and then simply different percentage blends of the three establish the basis all of the others. ie. middle eastern people are a blend of all three, Mediterranean peoples are mostly white with a touch of African, SE Asians are mostly Asian with a touch of African, ect.
There are three races with many subdivisons...Caucasoid, Negroid, and Asian ( as in Chinese, Japanese, Korean ) amnd mixing of races don't make other races!
There are WHITES who have ALWAYS lived in Africa....the Egyptians are but one such!
Semites are WHITE!
The Ancient Persians were WHITE and NOT the subdivision Semites!
The ancient Annu, of Japan were/are WHIR+TE/Caucasoid and NOT Asian!
Mediterraneans are NOT a mixture of Caucasoids and Negroids! Do you even know just WHO were/are considered to be peoples of the Mediterranean? It sure doesn't sound like it!
Your opinion utterly USELESS and uneducated!
That's fine. My opinion is that the native people of the South Pacific and Australia are sufficiently different that no combination of your categories really accounts for them.
However, what's the point? However we categorize people as "races," we do it for a reason, and usually the reason is to treat them differently under law.
Sex distinctions are obvious in biology and have an obvious purpose in the structure of society. In the most basic terms, females give birth to offspring, males don't. The correlation of this basic sexual dimorphism with "gender" is more complex. Whatever non-reproductive thing you can say about females in Culture A, you can say it about males in Culture B.