YES!
It reminds me a bit of the many discussions I've had with far-right buddies of mine about IQ. The topic would be IQ in relation to 'ethnic groups' or 'geographic regions', sub-saharan africa being a popular topic for them. Also Ashkenazi Jews and their (apparently?) higher IQ. They really found those interesting, without making judgments, of course.
And while for the past decade or so I've been happy to talk about IQ, it's meaning, it's implications, ethical or otherwise, there was something about these conversations that felt off to me.
Then at some point I realized that what bothered me was the focus and specific complaints, the 'meta' aspect of these discussions. Stuff like "we hide IQ research because it might expose ethnic differences and the leftie researchers don't like that", more explicitly, but generally it was just the fact that these friends seemed obsessed with IQ in relation to ethnicity.
I realized that, having studied psychology but also always having had an interesting in the topic of IQ, until recently there were SO many other interesting questions to discuss. What 'is' IQ? How does it relate to what we consider 'intelligence'? Why the Flynn effect? Why are people with high IQ just as susceptible, or even more, to manipulation and marketing? How does IQ correlate to empathy, and how does that correlate with how our moral compass works? etc.
IQ in relation to race, no wait, ethnic group, was just one of those interesting questions. it felt like a more sensitive topic to discuss, especially in its implications, but it was just one of many.
I realized that the fact that these friends focused on this ONE topic at the expense of all the other ones (and often complete lack of knowledge) was in itself signifying something (and in my opinion not always racism, but inevitably racism if you followed them to their sources).