The United States' racial groups are American cultural constructions; they represent the way Americans classify people rather than a genetically determined reality. In America, a person's race is determined not by how an individual looks but by their heritage. There is no such thing as race it is a myth; the "race" of individuals varies from place to place. There is no biological basis for classifying race according to skin color instead of body form. The biological characteristics do not change from place to place, country to country, or region to region, instead depending on who's doing the classifying. What appears to be a difference in biological variability is really a difference in cultural classification. I did not realize that in America, we have far less categories for race compared to other countries. I believe our country limits advantages to mainly individuals classified under the "White" race, and disadvantages any individuals of other races. This is sad because we are in the year 2012, and our stereotypes, generalizations, and classifications and interpretations of race still affects an individuals experience in America.
Americans divide and classify individuals by race, which they determine biologically.This is done by observing their skin color and shape. However, anthropologists argue that these American racial groups are social constructs, meaning they represents the way Americans categorize individuals rather than genetically determining their actual reality. After reading through this whole article, the author comes out stating that race is a myth. It is a perception of out minds. The physical characteristics of people stay the same where ever you go but are just pronounced differently. These variations are based off culturally rather than scientifically. By dividing people into groups of blacks, hispanics, and asians, this is just telling us nothing about the individual, but about the American culture. So when deciding what race a person is, we do not need to be saying "black" and "white", but rather "Where?" and "When?".
This talked about the anthropological approach towards ethnicity and talking about race as a myth. It was said that humans have evolved through mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift all causing altered physical appearances which in today’s world we classify as a certain race or ethnicity. We as Americans classify people based on their skin color. Anthropologists believe that racial groups are American cultural constructions that represent the way Americans classify people rather than a genetically determined reality.
When I first started reading this, I was a little confused as to where he was going, but I soon picked up and found that what he said made a lot of sense. This really helped me realize a lot about the way I think of race. I think this would be really great if more people read it. Maybe we could end all 'race' related issues.
This article discussed the socially and regionally constructed definitions of race. I have always had different definitions than the typical black, white, or mixed terms from when my dad's family owned a farm. He identified more races based on what the field workers called each other, rather than the broad racial terms used by most Americans. This article discusses the evolutionary classifications of what we consider race, as well as the anthropological approach of looking at races among different countries. It's interesting to find out why certain people evolved the way they did, such as different groups in Africa being tall and lean, while others are short and stocky. Also the greatest genetic variations are within similar groups of people, which is interesting to think about due to the fact that they may look the most alike to us.
It's interesting when the author contends that race isn't defined by biology, which I disagreed at first. But then he continued to say that our biological make-up doesn't reflect or contribute to our behavior, which I saw truth to. However, I do disagree with him saying that race is a myth. Though it's not universal in every part of the world, there is a general categorization of ethnicity in every culture, which we define as race. Whether it's by culture (hip hop culture, southern culture, Asian culture) or skin color, race is a word used to identify persons' background. I will, however, agree that there is no absolute definition to the term "race."
This article discusses the variations between how race is defined in the United States, as well as the rest of the world. Someone who would be considered black in the United States, might not consider themselves black, depending on how race is defined where they are from. This article brings up the interesting question of, "what exactly is race?" I find it interesting that in Brazil, there are so many different races that in the United States would all be classified as hispanic. Race and immigration has always been an issue in the United States, sometimes I wonder why. I think when it's really broken down, people look and difference and will either automatically feel insecure or a sense of superiority. I think that at the end of the day, we are the most different as individuals, and that our race only really defines our culture, but as biological beings we are largely the same and should treat one another as such.
I think it was interesting how this article shows how race is defined in different parts of the world. The author's daughter was considered African American in the United States, but just by hopping on a plane to Brazil, she was then classified as a category just below blonde even though her skin was dark brown. In addition, it was interesting to examine the author's theory on how he believed that the makeup of racial groups is determined by the environment their bodies had to adapt to. For example, people who live in the tropics of Africa and South America have dark skin that is meant to protect them from the sun, while people in Northern Europe have lighter skin that is meant to make the most effective use of sunlight to produce vitamin D. Overall, I thought that this article was very interesting and informative.
This was a really good and enlightening article! The author makes a lot of good points about race not being biological and there being no scientific evidence to support that theory. He described how race classification is socially constructed and gave the example of both and avocado and human beings being entities that biologically are not changed; the only change that takes place is its classification, depending on who is doing the classifying. An example is how Americans view the avocado as a vegetable and Brazilians view it as a fruit. He also goes on to describe the discrimination of minorities and the missed opportunities they have due to their "race". This was a very interesting article that I learned a lot from.
I've never thought too much about race, other than racism. It never occurred to me that race is not biological. I thought it was very interesting the way he compared Brazil and America in their racial constructions. I also like the example of the avocado he used. It made the concept much easier to understand race classification as a folk taxonomy.
This was a really interesting article. I had heard of mulatto and such before, but did not pay it much attention. I had no idea just how different classifying race across cultures could be, or how complicated.
I thought the article made a lot of sense when it talked about the differences in Brazilian and American folk taxonomy with both the avocado and race. And his argument for the difference in one's skin pigmentation being related to their proximity to the equator is a very plausible explanation for skin color variation. However, I do not think he's correct in saying "race is a myth". Race is a reality. People refer to it and make judgements based on it every day. It our perception of race that is the myth.
I really enjoyed this article. I found it very interesting how race is defined in different parts of the world. It was crazy to see how the author's daughter was considered African American in the United States, but in Brazil she was classified as a category just below blonde even though her skin was dark brown. The author also made good points on how he believed that the makeup of racial groups is determined by the environment. People's bodies had to adapt to the environment. A good example of this is that people who live in the tropics of Africa and South America have dark skin that is meant to protect them from the sun. Versus people in Northern Europe have lighter skin that is meant to make the most effective use of sunlight to produce vitamin D. I found this article very informative.
I thought it was very interesting to see the various ways in which cultures classify race. That tells you about what that culture values. In Brazil, races are categorized by appearance, which are important in Brazilian culture. In America, however, races are categorized by heritage, which demonstrates that importance in American culture. Also, I liked how the author portrays humans as being essentially the same. The author pointed out that we all originated in African and only when people separated, either to other lands or within Africa, did differences in appearance begin to occur. He attributed the reasons for the differences to the various needs of those places. For example, the bodies of the Masai are tall and lanky to release heat.
I like the article because it used realistic examples. It was easy to relate to like the comparison to body shape. He said that lankiness and heaviness is related to biology but we do not associate them that way. We classify people by race not by body type. I think that this article was informative because it shows how race is socially constructed.
This article is very interesting. With looking at the text and evaluating my own experiences for the paper, I realized how much perception of differences play into human interaction. I know whenever I fill out my "race" on an application or some sort, I always struggle with what I am to put. I am Puerto Rican, but look very American because of my European decent. So there always is this conflict on interests, not really sure what to put for them. I have applied to Hispanic scholarships without even knowing a sentence in Spanish. I am also scared to be thought of as an illegal when applying for a job and putting down my race as Hispanic. Other Hispanics would not refer to me as one. So it's interesting to see how this article plays out in real life. Also I've always wondered why Asians have different shaped eyes and I was glad to be able to put that case to rest.
I very much enjoyed the article, the research behind it, and the practical application of the knowledge it contains. It is both a beautiful and a freeing thing to realize that race is only a tool of social stratification, not a marker of biological difference and true heritage. I thoroughly enjoyed the science behind the article, especially the exposition of why different people groups are shaped differently and look differently.
I found this article to be pretty interesting. I never realized that race in and of itself wasn't a biological reality. I have always been a person who strives to treat everyone in the same manner that I would wish to be treated, regardless of the tone of their skin. However, I am also very guilty of using race subconsciously to classify people: "that black guy over there" or "that Asian girl over here". The diversity of skin tone seems to be a very easy, stopgap way to classify people, and until I read this article, I never realized how arbitrary it was.
This article was extremely eye opening and helped me to learn new things about the term race. I did not previously know that race was not a biological factor, but after reading this article it makes sense. Completing one of the activities associated with our last writing assignment in which you had to match a persons face to a certain race was the most helpful as to realizing the concept of this article. People are put into a race based on their physical appearance, and even I am guilty of that at times. However this article puts things into prospect and makes me think not to be so judgmental towards people.
I thought that the article "Mixed Blood"' was very interesting. After reading this article I agreed with the author Fish and believe that race is a myth. Humans are technically classified as a species allowing any "type" to mate with another. The reason for differences between species happened through mutation, natural selection and genetic drift. Many of these differences happen over a period of time. Dark skin evolved for humans living in areas with large sun exposure, to protect them. while light skin descendants use maximum sun light to absorb vitamin D. The article also made a good point about how race has no biological basis for classifying race, and depends on how societies classify that variability.
The United States' racial groups are American cultural constructions; they represent the way Americans classify people rather than a genetically determined reality. In America, a person's race is determined not by how an individual looks but by their heritage. There is no such thing as race it is a myth; the "race" of individuals varies from place to place. There is no biological basis for classifying race according to skin color instead of body form. The biological characteristics do not change from place to place, country to country, or region to region, instead depending on who's doing the classifying. What appears to be a difference in biological variability is really a difference in cultural classification. I did not realize that in America, we have far less categories for race compared to other countries. I believe our country limits advantages to mainly individuals classified under the "White" race, and disadvantages any individuals of other races. This is sad because we are in the year 2012, and our stereotypes, generalizations, and classifications and interpretations of race still affects an individuals experience in America.
ReplyDeleteAmericans divide and classify individuals by race, which they determine biologically.This is done by observing their skin color and shape. However, anthropologists argue that these American racial groups are social constructs, meaning they represents the way Americans categorize individuals rather than genetically determining their actual reality. After reading through this whole article, the author comes out stating that race is a myth. It is a perception of out minds. The physical characteristics of people stay the same where ever you go but are just pronounced differently. These variations are based off culturally rather than scientifically. By dividing people into groups of blacks, hispanics, and asians, this is just telling us nothing about the individual, but about the American culture. So when deciding what race a person is, we do not need to be saying "black" and "white", but rather "Where?" and "When?".
ReplyDeleteThis talked about the anthropological approach towards ethnicity and talking about race as a myth. It was said that humans have evolved through mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift all causing altered physical appearances which in today’s world we classify as a certain race or ethnicity. We as Americans classify people based on their skin color. Anthropologists believe that racial groups are American cultural constructions that represent the way Americans classify people rather than a genetically determined reality.
ReplyDeleteWhen I first started reading this, I was a little confused as to where he was going, but I soon picked up and found that what he said made a lot of sense. This really helped me realize a lot about the way I think of race. I think this would be really great if more people read it. Maybe we could end all 'race' related issues.
ReplyDeleteThis article discussed the socially and regionally constructed definitions of race. I have always had different definitions than the typical black, white, or mixed terms from when my dad's family owned a farm. He identified more races based on what the field workers called each other, rather than the broad racial terms used by most Americans. This article discusses the evolutionary classifications of what we consider race, as well as the anthropological approach of looking at races among different countries. It's interesting to find out why certain people evolved the way they did, such as different groups in Africa being tall and lean, while others are short and stocky. Also the greatest genetic variations are within similar groups of people, which is interesting to think about due to the fact that they may look the most alike to us.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting when the author contends that race isn't defined by biology, which I disagreed at first. But then he continued to say that our biological make-up doesn't reflect or contribute to our behavior, which I saw truth to. However, I do disagree with him saying that race is a myth. Though it's not universal in every part of the world, there is a general categorization of ethnicity in every culture, which we define as race. Whether it's by culture (hip hop culture, southern culture, Asian culture) or skin color, race is a word used to identify persons' background. I will, however, agree that there is no absolute definition to the term "race."
ReplyDeleteThis article discusses the variations between how race is defined in the United States, as well as the rest of the world. Someone who would be considered black in the United States, might not consider themselves black, depending on how race is defined where they are from. This article brings up the interesting question of, "what exactly is race?" I find it interesting that in Brazil, there are so many different races that in the United States would all be classified as hispanic. Race and immigration has always been an issue in the United States, sometimes I wonder why. I think when it's really broken down, people look and difference and will either automatically feel insecure or a sense of superiority. I think that at the end of the day, we are the most different as individuals, and that our race only really defines our culture, but as biological beings we are largely the same and should treat one another as such.
ReplyDeleteI think it was interesting how this article shows how race is defined in different parts of the world. The author's daughter was considered African American in the United States, but just by hopping on a plane to Brazil, she was then classified as a category just below blonde even though her skin was dark brown. In addition, it was interesting to examine the author's theory on how he believed that the makeup of racial groups is determined by the environment their bodies had to adapt to. For example, people who live in the tropics of Africa and South America have dark skin that is meant to protect them from the sun, while people in Northern Europe have lighter skin that is meant to make the most effective use of sunlight to produce vitamin D. Overall, I thought that this article was very interesting and informative.
ReplyDeleteThis was a really good and enlightening article! The author makes a lot of good points about race not being biological and there being no scientific evidence to support that theory. He described how race classification is socially constructed and gave the example of both and avocado and human beings being entities that biologically are not changed; the only change that takes place is its classification, depending on who is doing the classifying. An example is how Americans view the avocado as a vegetable and Brazilians view it as a fruit. He also goes on to describe the discrimination of minorities and the missed opportunities they have due to their "race". This was a very interesting article that I learned a lot from.
ReplyDeleteI've never thought too much about race, other than racism. It never occurred to me that race is not biological. I thought it was very interesting the way he compared Brazil and America in their racial constructions. I also like the example of the avocado he used. It made the concept much easier to understand race classification as a folk taxonomy.
ReplyDeleteThis was a really interesting article. I had heard of mulatto and such before, but did not pay it much attention. I had no idea just how different classifying race across cultures could be, or how complicated.
ReplyDeleteI thought the article made a lot of sense when it talked about the differences in Brazilian and American folk taxonomy with both the avocado and race. And his argument for the difference in one's skin pigmentation being related to their proximity to the equator is a very plausible explanation for skin color variation. However, I do not think he's correct in saying "race is a myth". Race is a reality. People refer to it and make judgements based on it every day. It our perception of race that is the myth.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed this article. I found it very interesting how race is defined in different parts of the world. It was crazy to see how the author's daughter was considered African American in the United States, but in Brazil she was classified as a category just below blonde even though her skin was dark brown. The author also made good points on how he believed that the makeup of racial groups is determined by the environment. People's bodies had to adapt to the environment. A good example of this is that people who live in the tropics of Africa and South America have dark skin that is meant to protect them from the sun. Versus people in Northern Europe have lighter skin that is meant to make the most effective use of sunlight to produce vitamin D. I found this article very informative.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was very interesting to see the various ways in which cultures classify race. That tells you about what that culture values. In Brazil, races are categorized by appearance, which are important in Brazilian culture. In America, however, races are categorized by heritage, which demonstrates that importance in American culture. Also, I liked how the author portrays humans as being essentially the same. The author pointed out that we all originated in African and only when people separated, either to other lands or within Africa, did differences in appearance begin to occur. He attributed the reasons for the differences to the various needs of those places. For example, the bodies of the Masai are tall and lanky to release heat.
ReplyDeleteI like the article because it used realistic examples. It was easy to relate to like the comparison to body shape. He said that lankiness and heaviness is related to biology but we do not associate them that way. We classify people by race not by body type. I think that this article was informative because it shows how race is socially constructed.
ReplyDeleteThis article is very interesting. With looking at the text and evaluating my own experiences for the paper, I realized how much perception of differences play into human interaction. I know whenever I fill out my "race" on an application or some sort, I always struggle with what I am to put. I am Puerto Rican, but look very American because of my European decent. So there always is this conflict on interests, not really sure what to put for them. I have applied to Hispanic scholarships without even knowing a sentence in Spanish. I am also scared to be thought of as an illegal when applying for a job and putting down my race as Hispanic. Other Hispanics would not refer to me as one. So it's interesting to see how this article plays out in real life. Also I've always wondered why Asians have different shaped eyes and I was glad to be able to put that case to rest.
ReplyDeleteI very much enjoyed the article, the research behind it, and the practical application of the knowledge it contains. It is both a beautiful and a freeing thing to realize that race is only a tool of social stratification, not a marker of biological difference and true heritage. I thoroughly enjoyed the science behind the article, especially the exposition of why different people groups are shaped differently and look differently.
ReplyDeleteI found this article to be pretty interesting. I never realized that race in and of itself wasn't a biological reality. I have always been a person who strives to treat everyone in the same manner that I would wish to be treated, regardless of the tone of their skin. However, I am also very guilty of using race subconsciously to classify people: "that black guy over there" or "that Asian girl over here". The diversity of skin tone seems to be a very easy, stopgap way to classify people, and until I read this article, I never realized how arbitrary it was.
ReplyDeleteThis article was extremely eye opening and helped me to learn new things about the term race. I did not previously know that race was not a biological factor, but after reading this article it makes sense. Completing one of the activities associated with our last writing assignment in which you had to match a persons face to a certain race was the most helpful as to realizing the concept of this article. People are put into a race based on their physical appearance, and even I am guilty of that at times. However this article puts things into prospect and makes me think not to be so judgmental towards people.
ReplyDeleteI thought that the article "Mixed Blood"' was very interesting. After reading this article I agreed with the author Fish and believe that race is a myth. Humans are technically classified as a species allowing any "type" to mate with another. The reason for differences between species happened through mutation, natural selection and genetic drift. Many of these differences happen over a period of time. Dark skin evolved for humans living in areas with large sun exposure, to protect them. while light skin descendants use maximum sun light to absorb vitamin D. The article also made a good point about how race has no biological basis for classifying race, and depends on how societies classify that variability.
ReplyDelete