The Illusion of Race

            When we think of the word "race", one of the first things that comes to mind is skin color.  The American Heritage Dictionary lists several definitions of the word race, from "a local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics", to simply, "humans considered as a group".  So what is the real definition of race?  In America today, we are very aware of the idea of race.  Racism is real, and is a part of everyday life.  Many people believe that our skin color affects the way we look and act.  However, if one takes a closer look, science disagrees with this theory.  Our perception of race is a merely a social construct because there is no biological evidence to support the idea that differences among people can be tied to skin color.
         
            Humans have an inherent need to organize and classify things into groups.  In "Scientific and Folk Ideas about Heredity", Jonathan Marks references the way we classify family members.  We call both of our parents' sisters aunts, but use the same term to describe the spouse of our parents' sisters, even though they are not related by blood while our parents' sisters are.  There is a distinction made between sisters and brothers of our parents; we have both aunts and uncles.  We use the same name to describe both male and female cousins, however.  There is no word used to name the spouses of our cousins.  Clearly, our classification of family members is not an exact science.  The names we use for family members, as well as many other classifications, are examples of social constructions.  The term social construct is defined as "a social mechanism, phenomenon, or category created and developed by society; a perception of an individual, group, or idea that is 'constructed' through cultural or social practice" (Websters).  We have created various social constructions over the years to satisfy our need to group and categorize people.

          Today, more and more anthropologists are acknowledging that race is a social construct.  In a statement about race, the American Anthropological Association says, "physical variations in the human species have no meaning except the social ones that humans put on them" (AAA Statement).  Jonathan Marks explains that race is simply another method of classification that we have chosen to adopt.  He says that these methods do not come from nature, but are terms that we construct and impose on nature (Marks).  Similarly to the family classifications, racial classifications are quite inexact.  What counts as a race?  Obviously, white, black, Hispanic, and Asian are words that we associate with race today.  Can Italian, Irish, and Aborigine be called races, or do they fall into one of the previously mentioned racial groups?    What race does a child of mixed descent belong to?  Racial classifications try to place all people into just a few different groups.  Human beings are too diverse a species to be categorized into just a few racial groups.

          Proof of the construction of race can be seen clearly when we look to the past.  Through the years, race has evolved into one of the major classifications used to describe people, but it has not always been this way.  In ancient societies, people were not grouped by color, but by language, religion, status, or class.  Race was still irrelevant in the 1600's when colonists were first arriving in America.  In 1616, John Rolfe, a white man, married Pocahontas, an Indian princess.  This was an issue with the British courts, but not because of the difference in race.  The courts did not approve of a princess marrying a commoner.  If you visited a plantation in early colonial America, you would see both white indentured servants and black slaves working there.  Most people do not realize that we did not enslave Africans because we thought they were inferior, but for their labor capabilities.  For several years, the slaves and indentured servants worked together and were treated equally.  As time progressed, the indentured servant system eventually died out.  The white indentured servants found jobs, and became more integrated with the more wealthy white planters.  Planters became more and more dependent on black slaves.  Race really became an issue around the time of the American Revolution.  America claimed to be the land of freedom, equality, and rights.  Slavery contradicted each of these values.  Thus, race was constructed to use as justification.  It set the slaves apart from the white Americans, giving the country a reason to deny them the rights America stood for.  Later, it was also used to justify taking lands from Native Americans, excluding immigrants from Asia, and territorial acquisition (Race Timeline). 

            As the early Americans began buying into the theory of white superiority, more and more distinctions were made between races.  Laws were made to ensure racial separation.  In 1887, Jim Crow Laws were introduced.  From banning interracial marriage to making it illegal for a black and white person to play pool together in the state of Alabama, the Jim Crow Laws virtually ensured separation.  Mexicans were considered white until the 1930's when Nativists began pushing for them to be classified differently as well.  The only purpose these increases in racial importance served was to justify otherwise unacceptable actions.  As whites became increasingly inclusive, racial tensions increased.  Separation of races became "the norm" and after the abolition of slavery, "ideas of innate inferiority and superiority not only persisted but were intensified." (Race Timeline)  Scientifically, skin color is a variation.  Socially, it was made into a means of separation. 

          Many people pin stereotypes or physical differences to race and believe that it has some sort of bearing on personalities, tendencies, and even mental capacities.  There is no genetic proof to support this.  75% of genes found in human beings are the same.  That leaves little room for differentiation (Lewontin).  Of these varying genes, most of them differ within populations.  For example, 93% of genetic variation in the world is found in Sub-Saharan Africans.  This means that if the rest of the world was destroyed and only Sub-Saharan Africans were left, the planet would only lose 7% of its genetic diversity.  Studies suggest that these differences within populations are greater than the differences between different groups.  Genetically, two Asian men are likely to be more diverse than an Asian man and a Caucasian man.    It has also been proven that there is not even one common gene that separates one race from any other (Graves).  Many view race as a major difference between people.  In reality, we are all so much more alike than different in terms of genetics.  According to the American Anthropological Society, "The concept of race is a social and cultural construction...The concept of "race" has no validity...in the human species." (Ten Things Everyone Should Know About Race)

          If race is not valid scientifically, then to what can we attribute "racial" stereotypes?  We have mistakenly associated stereotypes with an entire race, when the differences between racial groups are actually a byproduct of culture and environment.  Many people point out that African-Americans tend to excel in sports, that they just have athletic genes.  There are many great African-American athletes, but race is not a factor in their success.  Their "athletic genes" come from their environments or the environments of their ancestors.  Kenyans often excel in long-distance running.  If you take a closer look, however, the Kenyans excelling in long-distances are the ones from parts of Kenya with a high altitude.  They are not successful because they are black or even because they are from Kenya.  The Kenyans from areas of low altitude were not as successful.  This indicates that such trends are due to environmental conditions, not race.  Still, not all Kenyans from high altitudes are capable of winning marathons.  Athletic success depends on a number of other factors as well (Graves Interview).   

          Scientists and researchers often attempt to make connections between race and diseases.  This is an argument used to suggest that there are differences between races genetically.  One example of this is the high occurrence of sickle-cell anemia in African Americans.  In reality, there is no direct relationship between being black and sickle-cell anemia.  The allele for this disease is found in malaria transmission zones.  The gene is passed down from people who lived in central and western Africa, as well as Arabia, India, and the Mediterranean Basin.  People with this disease inherited it as a result of the environment of their ancestors, not their color (Graves).  Susceptibility to disease is not linked to race. 

          The most common argument against the notion of race as a social construct is the physical differences that can be seen among people.  Many view different skin colors as proof that different races exist.  In The Race Myth, Joseph Graves explains why this is inaccurate.  "Physical traits fail to define races because local populations produce traits that adapt to climate and other environmental factors wherever these factors occur" (Graves 17).  This means that skin color is merely a result of where people came from on the globe.  Color varies as climate varies, just like non-visible differences such as disease susceptibility and athletic ability vary as other environmental conditions vary.

          So what is race?  Clearly it is a term that has been socially constructed because there is no scientific evidence to support it.  There is no genetic evidence to indicate the existence of different races.  It is an unstable term that has become deeply embedded in American society.  Differences are attached to it, when they really should be attached to culture and location.  Although racism is still real in America today, race is not.


Works Cited

American Anthropological Association Statement on "Race".  1998.  12 March 2008. http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm.

Graves, Joseph L. The Race Myth. New York: Dutton, 2004.

Graves, Joseph.  "Interview with Joseph Graves."  Race:  The Power of an Illusion.  PBS.  10 March 2008.  http://www.pbs.org/race/000_About/002_04-background-01-06.htm.

Lewontin, Richard.  "Interview with Richard Lewontin."  Race:  The Power of an Illusion.  PBS.  14 Dec. 2007.  http://www.pbs.org/race/000_About/002_04-background-01-04.htm

Marks, Jonathan.  "Scientific and Folk Ideas about Heredity."  Race:  The Power of an Illusion.  http://www.pbs.org/race/000_About/002_04-background-01-12.htm

"Race Timeline." Race: The Power of an Illusion. PBS. 14 Dec 2007 <http://www.pbs.org/race/003_RaceTimeline/003_01-timeline.htm>.

"Race." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2000. www.bartleby.com/61/. 12 Dec. 2007.

"social construct." Webster's New Millennium™ Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.7). Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. 12 Mar. 2008. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/social construct>.

Ten Things Everyone Should Know About Race.  Race:  The Power of an Illusion.  PBS.  14 Dec. 2007.  http://www.pbs.org/race/000_About/002_04-background-01-04.htm