The statements on race that both the American Anthropological Association (AAA) and the American Association of Physical Anthropologists (AAPA) reflect the position of anthropologist in that there is effectively no such thing as race. The ideology of race is a way that humans have categorized different traits which was caused by the spread of humans in different geographical locations. For example, since I am from an Asian decent people always ask me, “what race are you?” and I would always reply with “Oh I am Taiwanese”. And in reality, after this class I might consider saying “I am a human”. I really connect strongly with point 10 and 11 from the AAPA statement on race. “There is no necessary concordance between biological characteristics and culturally defined groups. On every continent, there are diverse populations that differ in language, economy, and culture. There is no national, religious, linguistic or cultural group or economic class that constitutes a race. I find this extremely interesting as I feel like instead of asking what race a person is necessarily, people have been transitioning to “what ethnicity are you?” or “what nationality are you?”.
Additionally, I found number 11 interesting as I identify myself as Taiwanese while China and Taiwan have had problems nation-wise. We speak the same language with slightly different tones and a slightly modified written language, but besides that, I would say trait wise and biological wise we are very similar. Number 11 in AAPA states “Physical, cultural and social environments influence the behavioral differences among individuals in society.” I find this extremely true as majority of the Taiwanese were Chinese immigrants who moved from the mainland to Taiwan. Yet the culture between the two countries are extremely different as generations evolve further and further from the mainland. “The genetic capacity for intellectual development is one of the biological traits of our species essential for its survival. This genetic capacity is known to differ among individuals… Racist political doctrines find no foundation in scientific knowledge concerning modern or past human populations.” This quote is interesting because even though we experience different cultures just by living in a different place geographically, humans still have this biological trait that is our intellectual development.
I found it interesting that on surveys and job applications typically have a section to declare one’s race. When ultimately “race” is an ideology that the American culture has revolved around. I found it interesting when the AAA statement touched on the ideology of Hitler and the Nazi’s on their take of race, social, economic, and political point of views. The “inferior races” were exterminated solely based on the insane notion that these people with these traits and beliefs were inferior and should be exterminated. While this is the past even today, we see topics of race and racism constantly popping up in our own politics. We see Trump news all the time on TV saying he’s racist or he’s not racist, and constant racial influences such as “Black Lives Matter” movement when we’re all the same race.
I agree with the statements on race that both the American Anthropological Association (AAA) and the American Association of Physical Anthropologists (AAPA). And how it reflects the position of anthropologist that its no such thing as a race. Its only one race the human race. We all are one, but of course come from different backgrounds and traditions that group us with our culture. I agree with the diversity we all come with with different languages, skin color etc.
Hello! I find your perspective interesting since you are often asked about your race and/or ethnicity! It is true, we do use the word race often when inquiring about someone’s background or heritage when, in fact, it probably isn’t the correct usage of the word.
I like dhow you pointed out that there is still some biological connection between humans by mentioning the “intellectual ability” as one of, if not the most, binding biological factor that we have with other humans.
I want to note as well that in your response you did a great job of quoting and referring to specific parts in the passage that supported or explained the portion you were discussing. I found this to make your post easy to read and understand as you listed from the reading, but also added your own thoughts and opinions. Well done!
Hi James! I really enjoyed reading your blog post! I found it really fascinating, as well as useful, that you used your own experiences and identity as a part of your response to the prompt. It is interesting to think about the relationship between Taiwan and China in relation to the topics we discussed this week because of the fact that they are linguistically and biologically similar, but there is the large difference in culture and identity. These large dissimilarities in biologically-similar people is something we have seen around the world in many instances, such as countries split apart due to war or other conflicts. Your comment on more current events is also intriguing because of the fact that these ridiculous notions of race that were used not only in colonial times, the lead up to/around the Civil War, and the Third Reich, but some people still exist that use these bogus excuses/justifications to be hateful. It was clear, as we saw in lecture, that humans seem to differ more within than between groups and that the differences between are pretty small and not as determining as many had thought they were.
Hey!
Your comments on “Black Lives Matter” and it’s racial underpinnings really got me thinking about it in respect to the counter movement, “All Lives Matter,” again. To start, the project espoused by the “All Lives Matter” movement appears to have been illegitimate, for both movements wished to make American institutions equally sensitive to all people – with “Black Lives Matter” only targeted the institutions surrounding policing in their efforts to bring an appropriate sensitivity to black lives – yet what “All Lives Matter” achieved, by push back against the semantics of “Black Lives Matter,” was diffuse the focus of the debate surrounding policing in America, effectively undermining the ability for meaningful strides to be made in making all lives actually matter. Their means were not achieving the end which they said they held.
Nonetheless, “All Lives Mater” took the claim that race is a construct which has no grounds in reality, and used it to undercut the validity of the “Black Lives Mater” movement. They used it to point out that any reference to race was absurd. Why is this fact not helpful? It makes me wonder if there is not two sorts of facts, one which is functionally true –that we engage with meaningfully in our daily lives, yet is false when investigated – and one which is experientially verified to be true. We so often refer to this outdated concept of race, and in some instances do so in ways that constructively effect our world. By only appealing to what we know to be true, we loose the ability to grapple with the world in a multitude of meaningful ways. Especially when many of our institutions function with race as a reality, such as the censuses, and profiling. Maybe this is why cutting off discussion involving race can be problematic?
Hey James, as I began reading our required blog post for this week, I saw that anthropologists out there didn’t believe in race and I truly did not understand. I did not agree, I thought “how is race not a thing, we can see people of different cultures and different origins that group together and identify as one. Forensic anthropologists have the ability to look at decomposed remains and are able to identify their ‘race’. How can race not exist?”. But as you mentioned, AAPA’s statement that touches on the fact that there is no necessary concordance between biological characteristics and culturally define groups. I also read that biologically there are almost no genetic differences between these so-called races. So like myself, and the way you pointed out, instead of thinking race, we should ask about nationality, or ethnicity instead of race.
Hi!
I found your post and perspective to be super interesting and insightful. Hearing the point of view of someone who is often asked the question of what “race” they are was super interesting, and I also agree with the AAA and AAPA’s statements on race. I also thought that the historical and current political aspects of race that you brought up were super interesting points to make! I think that you making a point of saying that we should ask about nationality or ethnicity also makes much more sense than asking what someone’s “race” is, since “race” tends to have a broad and varying definition!
I really like how you said that after this class you would considering answer the question of “what race are you?” with “I am a human”. What I realized in this class is how divided our society really is. The race is a major component to the division and it separates communities instead of bringing them together. Anthologists find that “there is no necessary concordance between biological characteristics and culturally defined groups” as you said in your post. If more people understood this then we may not live such divided lives even though we may speak a different language, live in a different economy and culture. It is very interesting how truly different cultures can be even though they have originated from the same geographic locations, as you explain about Taiwanese and Chinese.
James,
I really enjoyed reading your post this week. I like how you included your own experiences with race into your discussion about the statements made by anthropologists on race to further your points and beliefs. Additionally, I also liked your mentioning of how the statement from the AAA related to Nazism and Hitler because I also noticed that in my initial reading of the statement. I thought it was quite interesting that they were able to take a commonly known and widely accepted wrong (because sometimes other genocides are not acknowledged, as evident by the ongoing and current racism we see today) and use it to their advantage in explaining the purpose of race as a construct. To go off of this even further, I loved how you were able to tie in current events like Black Lives Matter.
I really like how you mentioned that you would classify your race as a ‘Human’, not a Taiwanese. I have to agree that I had that same feeling after this week’s learning. Separating ethnicity and nationality was good idea to put it on. As a Korean, neighborhood country, we see Taiwan and China are two different state that each shows similar and different culture. Most of east Asian countries are aware of you might have come from same origin or immigrated, but more importantly two countries had walked two different path creating own cultural, social, and physical environments as time passes. There, we see that biological race can not justify a ethnicity or ‘race’ from the case of Taiwan and China.
Thanks for post!
Hello!
I really enjoyed reading your post, i feel like you have a very interesting perspective. I think it is a great idea to start identifying yourself as a human. This would stop the racial questions- because honestly it is not really anyones business where you come from based on your looks or accent. I like that you mentioned this and also the implications that could come with it- stereotypes. Race just does not matter in the grand scheme of things. I have also gotten the question of “what nationality are you” before because of my tan skin, and I am always taken aback by this question. I think when reflecting upon these 2 statements from the AAA and the AAPA, they both showed that we need to educate the general population on this matter.
Thank you for sharing!
I think that the statements on race from both the American Association of Physical Anthropologists and the American Anthropological Association, were quite refreshing and needed. Too many problems have been generated by misconceptions and ignorance stemming from the issue of race. I think that the South China Sea conflict is one of the prime examples of this. Obviously there is a lot of trade issues and money involved, but the history that surrounds that location has become the basis of many of the primary arguments. I think these statements help bring up the idea that we should all really look deep down and see what truly makes us different. Once that happens, its only natural that people start making better decisions and treating each other better. Your line about not identifying yourself as Taiwanese was really interesting in relation to the topic at hand. This was a fairly decent blog post.
I really enjoyed reading your blog post. I completely agree on your perspective of what you took from the statements from the American Association of Physical Anthropologists and the American Anthropological Association. Especially, since you are from Asian descent, I really applaud that you may start telling people that you “are human”. I believe that if everyone stopped stereotyping or HAD to know peoples descent in order to “know them better” (which I’m not saying is necessarily a bad thing, especially knowing peoples heritage and journey) but I think that it would definitely stop the racism issue that the United States still struggles with today. I really do think that everyone would start treating each other as human beings rather than treating people based upon their looks or race.
I enjoyed reading your post because of how you connected to yourself and personal experiences you have had with how not only the word ‘race’ is used, but also understood by people. This tends to create a lot of discrepancies and often has people wording questions in ways they maybe should not. Since, we are all from the human race, and what makes us different are things that we have adapted to over, time such as things involving geography, this may also include experiences too though such as diversity. I also think it is interesting that job applications, and basically any form that you fill out has a ‘race’ section. This further shows just how confused and how this confusion will further over time because of the incorrect usage of the word. The word ‘race’ was used in the first place to create a divide, and help out one group of people more than others, and that is still the case today.
I thought it was really interesting when you spoke about how after class people would ask what race you are. I get the same question from lots of people I work and go to school with and the question just hits me hard sometimes because I just want to say human as well seeing that the fact that not cultural differences arise why ask? The ethnicity and nationality is you come from speaks a lot more for a individual and can give you a greater deal of insight then asking what race a person is from because the traits that are passed on, the physical ones are based on things they cannot change like the environment and those things also will not give insight to who that person is.
Hi James, thank you for sharing this well-thought out post. I found your post interesting because you have such a different angle on the topic than I do. Personally, as a white American, I don’t receive many, if any, question about my race. I agree with you that race is not the important or even interesting question people should ask when learning about a new friend. Ethnicity is what people often mean when asking about race and I feel that people need to realize this more and not get the two confused. I also believe it is no longer relevant to be asked on job applications or standardized tests what your race is. Does anyone ever base a decision off of what you fill in for “race” on those questionnaires anyway? Thanks for sharing!