When immigrants flooded the shores of the United States in the earliest part of the twentieth century, the Immigration Commission hired an anthropologist to prepare a Dictionary of Races of Races or People. W.E.B. Du Bois observed in the late 1930s that no scientific definition of race is possible. He said Race is a dynamic and not a static conception, and that typical races are continually changing and developing, amalgamating and differentiating. What Du Bois meant in layman’s term was that it is impossible to characterize people based on measurements. Orser begins his book by talking about Race, Racialization, Ethnicity and Racism. Orser says that it can be argued that the science of humanity in America was initially organized around …show more content…
The first example of classifying people was during the seventh century when Isidore of Seville used region to classify the world’s people into two groups: Christians and Idol worshippers. I thought this was quite interesting because it has never crossed my mind, classsification has been a thing since humanity. I always thought people were only classified into groups based on physical characteristics. On the other hand, Ancient Egyptians, Indians, Greeks and Indian created and used what is called the racialist classification of human difference. He brought up ethnicity because archaeologists have made significant advances in connecting past ethnic groups with excavated material cultures. The prominent role of ethnic research in archaeology makes sense because it re affirmed the long-held archaeological tenet that culturally discrete peoples could be identified by their specific objects. Orser continues by saying that the basis for identifying archaeological cultures linked distinct peoples and their unique artifacts. This quite Interesting because objects from the past, some maybe valuable brings about a sense of culture. Orser also made a relationship/distinction between Class and Race. A statement that I thought summarized the relationship betw Class and Race was when he said "The Negro is poor because is black ; that is obvious enough.p But, perhaps more Importantly, the Negro is black because he is poor. This statement is interesting, it was true years
In Omi and Winant, Racial Formation the topic of what race is brought up. They bring up the question of "What is race?" Which lead to the use of pseudo-science to justify the physical difference that were observed. Race is later defined as a social construct which is shaped by broader societal forces.
The book has as its principal thesis the consideration of race as “a folk classification, a product of popular beliefs about human differences that evolved from 16th to 19th centuries” (Smedley, 2007, pag.24). The book also specifies three characteristics that distinguish the racial ideology in America: the absence of a category for biracial people, the homogenization of the black or African American Americans, and the impossibility to change a person’s race. (Smedley, 2007, pag.7)
To many people across a variety of different nationalities and cultures, race has been proven to be a key factor for how society views you in the eyes of those who are prominently in charge. The term race has been brought up in recent years, to be considered a form of identification, as the word race is used to describe physical characteristics such as a person’s color of skin, hair, and eyes. When in reality, the correct term they should be using is Ethnicity. As a result, the term race is used to separate people into sub-categories based on the color of their skin. This type of classification, is a man-made creation used by society to classify certain groups of people into lower classes, while keeping the predominate group in charge at the top.
Humans define race by how they conceive and categorize different social realities. Thus, race is often referred to as a social construct. The differences in skin color and facial characteristics have led most of society to classify humans into groups instead of individuals. These constructs affect us all, and they often result in situations where majority racial groups cause undue suffering to those that are part of the minority. The understanding of race as a social construct is best illustrated by the examination of racial issues within our own culture, specifically those that have plagued the history of the United States.
Racial Formation in the United States by Michael Omi and Howard Winant made me readjust my understanding of race by definition and consider it as a new phenomenon. Through, Omi and Winant fulfilled their purpose of providing an account of how concepts of race are created and transformed, how they become the focus of political conflict, and how they shape and permeate both identities and institutions. I always considered race to be physical characteristic by the complexion of ones’ skin tone and the physical attributes, such as bone structure, hair texture, and facial form. I knew race to be a segregating factor, however I never considered the meaning of race as concept or signification of identity that refers to different types of human bodies, to the perceived corporal and phenotypic makers of difference and the meanings and social practices that are ascribed to these differences, in which in turn create the oppressing dominations of racialization, racial profiling, and racism. (p.111). Again connecting themes from the previous readings, my westernized influences are in a direct correlation to how to the idea of how I see race and the template it has set for the rather automatic patterns of inequalities, marginalization, and difference. I never realized how ubiquitous and evolving race is within the United States.
In the world of sociology, the theory of racialization is a widely known and occasionally frustrating topic. However, two sociologists have successfully been able to define and break down the essential information behind this theory. Within their own writing, Michael Omi and Howard Winant (1986) define racial formation as,” the process by which social, economic, and political forces determine the content and importance of racial categories” (Omi and Winant 16). In essence, this theory frames the very meaning of “race” itself. The stereotypes of race are rooted deep within the contexts of history, allowing these concepts to be subject to gradual change over time. In addition to the original standards of racial formations, there have been other writings that parallel very closely to the ideas set forth by Omi and Winant. Richard Wright, Pem D. Buck, and Karen Brodkin are three notable authors that have excellently highlighted the concepts set forth by Omi and Winant.
In recent years and in light of recent tragedies, police actions, specifically police brutality, has come into view of a large, public and rather critical eye. The power to take life rests in the final stage of the criminal justice system. However, the controversy lies where due process does not. While the use of deadly force is defined and limited by departmental policies, it remains an act guided chiefly by the judgment of individual officers in pressure situations. (Goldkamp 1976, 169). Many current studies have emphasized the racial disparities in minority deaths, primarily black Americans, killed by police through means of deadly force. The history of occurrences reveals the forlorn truth that police reforms only receive attention in wake of highly publicized episodes of police misconduct. The notorious 1992 Los Angeles riots brought the matter to mass public attention and prompted improved law enforcement policy. Significant local reforms resulted, for instance, ending the policy of lifetime terms for police chiefs. Additionally, on a broader platform, in 1994, Congress approved provisions to the Crime Control Act in effort to tackle police abuse in a more structured way.
Race, simple external differences linked to other complex internal differences, has historically created issues in American society. “Race and racial inequalities are one of the most vital issues confronting contemporary U.S. society,” explains Sociologist Ronald Takaki. In the past race has had both biological and social implications across the country.
Ethnicity and race are ways to differentiate a group of person from another; therefore, in the 21th century this terms has acquired a powerful meaning in society. A few months ago, I learned how significant this terms are.
One of the most prevalent themes throughout the world’s history is the dispute over race and racial differences. But, there is a problem: the majority of the population doesn’t have a clear understanding of what race is. Race is a socially constructed grouping of people that was created in order for people to differentiate themselves from one another and has many sources of influence. While most people believe race is determined by biological characteristics (hair type, skin color, eye shape, etc.), this is not true. To make things more complicated, there is no cut and dry definition to race. Authors of Race and Ethnicity in Society, Elizabeth Higginbotham and Margret Anderson, claim that there are seven different distinct ways to define race. They begin with the popular belief of biological characteristics, and, as mentioned before, through social construction. They go on to note that race can be formed from an ethnic group, from social class rank, from racial formation by institutions, and also can form from one’s self-definition (Higginbotham & Anderson, 2012, p. 13). All of these ways to define race have been seen throughout our history, and many of them have caused problems for minorities, especially in the United States.
Back when the European explorers discovered people who did not look like them it started racial conflicts. They questioned if the natives where human and did not treat them as equals. In the nineteenth century Max Webber disregarded the biological explanations for racial conflict and emphasized the social and political factors which engendered such conflicts. Since Webber did this it began changing perspective on race. In the text is states that in the contemporary social science literature race is assumed to be a variable which it shaped by broader societal force. In this time race is not seen as difference in skin color but difference in status. Which made society believe one race is better than the others. Over the years the meaning of race has changed tremendously. For example, the existence of water is not based on collective acceptance, or
I would like to discuss the issue of race and ethnicity in sports. We will also explore the bigger questions. How much does race and ethnicity matter in the sports world? Are certain races dominant in certain sports? Is there a difference in how we treat players based on race and ethnicity? Does it matter? I would like to answer some of these questions and gain a better understanding of how much of a part they play.
Race is a social construct that was created by the Europeans in order to minoritize different racial groups. In the reading by Bonilla-Silva, he defines race to be manmade, “This means that notions of racial difference are human creations rather than eternal, essential categories… racial categories have a history and are subject to change.” For example in a lecture by Dr. Aguilar-Hernandez, he stated that the Irish, Italians and Jews were called black before but are now considered white, Mexican-Americans were also considered white up until the 1980s. These ideas lead to the racialization of racial groups.
People are usually categorized in terms of race and/or ethnicity. Race is a term typically used to classify people according to similar and specific physical characteristics. Ethnicity is a term more broadly used that connects people according to an inherited status such as: a shared ancestry, language, history, religion, cuisine, art, clothing style, and/or physical appearance, etc.
The idea of race has been constructed over hundreds of years, with numerous cultural implications arising from this construction. Since Johann Fredrich Blumenbach’s racial hierarchy, the inventor of a “…modern racial classification" (Gould 1994:66), the idea of race as a scientific truth justified slavery, colonisation and other existing racial structures. We see these racial hierarchies with notions of white superiority affecting events around the globe everyday; regardless of the fact that race has been proven as a flawed biological concept, with racial categories a result of ‘pseudo science’. The events following Hurricane Katrina in 2005 are evidence of the racist attitudes that linger in our society, institutionally and in everyday life – racism is more than simply individual attitudes, and is embedded in the social structures of society.