The
following post features exemplary work from one of my Anth 102: Introduction
to Physical Anthropology students. For this assignment students were tasked with analyzing the lack of biological evidence to support notions of race perpetuated by modern societies and cultures. Please acknowledge her hard work by letting her know how well she did and how much you enjoy her work. :)
By:
Heather Lindenberg
The
concept of race has become a social construct that has been changed throughout history
due to new and old social norms. Race is primarily looked at by biologists and anthropologists
as human variation. Human variation is able to debunk the idea of race as one looks
at the biological factors, which include melanin production, eugenics, and the
vitamin D hypothesis.
To
start off the deconstruction of race, one first needs to know the differences
between “race” and “ethnicity.” In the AAA Statement on Race ,
the American Anthropological Association
has stated that race in America has been frequently defined as, “natural and separate divisions
within the human species based on visible physical differences” (AAA 1). This statement
is debatable because when Americans think of race, they tend to think of skin
color, face
shape, hair color, eye color, nose shape, and even hair texture than look at
race from a biological
standpoint. Society from before World War II has constructed this false idea
and is still
confused with the real definition today. From a biological standpoint, race is
entirely a matter
of adaptation to different environments, genetics, and culture. Ethnicity,
however, can be referred
as an individual respectively distinguishing with a similar social, cultural,
or ancestral group.
(AAA 1). Ethnic groups are defined by common beliefs, religion, habits,
language, geography,
kinship, and history. Race and ethnicity are easily confused. The main
difference is race
is a biological/environmental adaption, while ethnicity is a social group one
distinguishes with
because of a common cultural history.
I
will now start off with a major piece of evidence, which is melanin production.
Melanin is
essentially a built in sunscreen that absorbs harmful UV rays. Better said in
Gina Kirchweger’s article
The
Biology of Skin Color: Black and White ,
melanin can be describes as, “the main determinant
of skin color, to absorb or disperse ultraviolet light” (Kirchweger 1). Melanin can leave
temporary or permanent effects on the human skin. Getting a tan in the summer
is one example
of temporary melanin production. While a permanent effect of melanin production
can be
skin cancer and more importantly a genetic effect that leaves the skin
permanently darker due to
the environment. If one experiences almost constant sun exposure, from living
near the equator,
his/her skin becomes darker in generations to help aid in survival. If one were
to live in the
north where there is hardly any sun exposure, dark skin would be unnecessary
because one does
not need as much “sunscreen” as someone who lives near the equator. Skin color is a
major physical
component most often confused with race. The production of melanin is
biological evidence
toward the confusion that race is not only based on skin color. Melanin is the
scientific cause
for why skin color divides people and has introduced specific categories for
skin tones. This
brings up a lot of racism and misconception for one’s identity based on an individual's
skin.
The
next step in deconstructing race is the social issue of eugenics. Eugenics is
better explained
by Dr Jerry Bergman in his article A Brief History of the Eugenics Movement. Bergman’s definition of eugenics is best
described as,“the
science of improving the human race by
scientific control of breeding” (Bergman 1). Eugenics was once used to “scientifically" excuse
racism because it was a way to treat those with “negative traits” with inequality due to the attempt
to breed those who have the most positive traits. This was and is a major
influence toward
the misconceptions of race because it made people from early ages believe
certain traits and
aspects of a person were wrong or less superior. People who found themselves to
be more superior
than others were mostly northern Europeans. They believed how they looked and
acted was
more beautiful and intelligent than any other individuals. As this idea built,
it made race become
more of a social misconception and still shows signs of this to this day.
The
last piece of evidence that will deconstruct race would be evidence of vitamin
D production
in different variations of people. When thinking of vitamin D, it is thought
mostly in one’s childhood, which is true. Without
enough vitamin D, it can result in rickets, which is described
in Lynn Kilgore’s book, Introduction to Physical
Anthropology , “a condition that leads to skeletal deformities, especially
in weight bearing bones of the legs and pelvis” (Kilgore 418). What
vitamin D has to do with race and human variation is that UV ray exposure is
necessary for vitamin D production. Evidence shows that those with darker skin
tones actually have a harder time breaking down vitamin D, while those with
lighter skin have bodies which “substantially supports vitamin D” (Kilgore). Vitamin D is evidence that
race exists on more than phenotypes/physical
appearance, but also exists in genetics. Linking melanin production and vitamin
D debunks the concept that race is all visual.
Eugenics
could potentially “make” the most superior breed of humans although race and skin
color does not justify what is superior or not. Race in modern society has
become a concept of
how someone looks is assumed, defined, and grouped incorrectly. Race is a
biological misconception
and the truth is, race is based more on genetics than looks. An individual may have
ancestors located close to the equator but if their genetics do not provide
evidence of say a lack
of vitamin D (which is widely common in Africans), it may mean that they do not
have a specific
African background. Race is a part of being culturally diverse and the
assumptions of one’s race by visuals has led to slavery
and even the Nazi movement. Race is not a myth; it is a biological
misconception based on phenotypes. The next time I assume someone is from a certain
part of the world, I will stand back and clear my mind from assumptions before
I actually ask this person about their ancestral background.
Resources
AAA.
"AAA Statement on Race." Connectwith AAA .
American Anthropological Association,
2016.
Web. 02 Mar. 2016.
Bergman,
Jerry. "A History of the Eugenics Movement." A History of the Eugenics
Movement .
Investigator
72, May 2000. Web. 02 Mar. 2016.
Kilgore,
Lynn. Introduction
to Physical Anthropology . 20132014 ed.
Belmont: Yolanda Cossio,
2014.
Print.
Kirchweger,
Gina. "The Biology of Skin Color: Black and White." PBS . PBS, Feb. 2001. Web.
02 Mar. 2016.
