This week’s glimpse into intersectionality, womanhood, and (specifically within this blog post) race has been very thought-provoking, as well as emotionally-provoking. In the Freedman article, “Looking the Part: Social Status Cues Shape Race Perception”, race is discussed as, “…socially constructed and imbued meaning, in part, by social factors” (Jonathan B. Freeman 2011). In this study, using racially ambiguous faces and status cues such as business attire/janitor uniforms, the researchers tracked participants’ classifications of race and observed split-second racial biases influenced by status and occupational indicators. Freedman and his team found that low-status attire increased the likelihood of categorization as Black, whereas high-status attire increased the likelihood of categorization as White, demonstrating that social and contextual factors guide the perception of race (Jonathan B. Freeman 2011). As an anthropology major with a forensic background, I agree with the social science classification of race as socially constructed.
Race as a social construct (rather than a biological one) is a major topic of discourse in forensic anthropology. Forensic anthropologists must navigate the difference between race and ancestry on a regular basis in the lab, particularly when aiding law enforcement and attempting to make a positive human identification using the analysis of skeletal remains. As anthropology and other disciplines have (hopefully) taught you, race in a biological sense does not exist. When forensic experts examine remains, they try to assess the biological profile of the individual; in other words, they use a series of methods to estimate the age, sex, stature, and ancestry of the person they are observing. Ancestry is analyzed through the systematic evaluation of the expression of many different features on the skull, which are entered into a program such as Fordisc, that ultimately determines a likely ancestral category of which the individual is associated with. The key difference made between ancestry and race is that ancestry is discussed in terms of geographic location of one’s ancestors (i.e. Brazilian, German, Vietnamese, etc.) rather than race’s social connotation that includes problematic physical characteristics such as skin color, hair type, and other cultural factors that are tied to socially-held beliefs/stereotypes (i.e. Black, White, Asian, etc.). Unfortunately, due to a social and academic lag, the ideals of the anthropological community are not fully salient in popular culture and public opinion; most people still believe in the idea of biological race, and forensic anthropologists are in a way coerced to prescribe skeletal remains to a racial category to match missing persons reports (which still ascribe to the racial model rather than one of ancestry). Despite this disconnect, anthropologists continue to advocate for the nonexistence of biological race, urging others to see our racial categories such as Black, White, Asian, Hispanic, etc. as socially defined.
Rachel Dolezal’s claim of being black, while making use of race as a social construct, challenges the way we view race (both in the field of anthropology and in the United States). In this instance, Rachel Dolezal states that she identifies as black, despite her Caucasian parents’ denial of any African American lineage. The former NAACP chapter president Rachel Dolezal explains in her interviews with MSNBC and the Today Show how she has always “self-identified with the black experience” and felt a “…spiritual, visceral…connection with ‘black is beautiful’”, and wanted to celebrate in that identity (Dolezal, Watch Rachel Dolezal’s Long, Unbelieveably Incoherent Interview with Melissa Harris-Perry 2015) (Dolezal, Rachel Dolezal defiantly maintains ‘I identify as black’ in TV interview 2015). Her justification and description supporting her decision to identify as black lies predominately with her embrace of ‘blackness’ as a lifestyle; by growing up with black adopted siblings, being the adoptive mother of two black sons, as a activist in the NAACP, and as a black hairstylist, Rachel Dolezal makes the argument that identifying as black is more true to who she is on a personal level. While she claims that the controversy and discourse surrounding her self-identification brings up meaningful discussions about, “…what it is to be human…definitions of race, ethnicity, culture, self-determination, personal agency, self-determination, and ultimately, empowerment.,” many find her individually-constructed social idea of blackness to be offensive, untruthful, and outrageous (Dolezal, Rachel Dolezal defiantly maintains ‘I identify as black’ in TV interview 2015). As previously mentioned, the public perception of race includes a number of physical characteristics, tied loosely with ancestral lineage, that are associated with cultural practices and social ideas. By styling her hair differently, darkening her complexion (with sun exposure or other means), and claiming to be black without the genuine physical characteristics or ancestral lineage to support her self-identification, many perceive her social construction of her race to be fake or an act of appropriation.
Personally, I think the way that Rachel Dolezal has socially constructed blackness for herself and imbued meaning of what it is to be black is a major overstep of the colloquial definition of race, as well as a misunderstanding/misuse of the anthropological definition of race. She is, by popular categorization, not racially black, and most certainly not ancestrally African American. While it is in her personal right to feel more connected to a particular lifestyle or group of people, I think her assertion of being black is extremely problematic and attempts to undermine/abuse shifts in social perception for her own personal agenda or gain (at the expense of an already marginalized group in America).
References
Dolezal, Rachel, interview by Matt Lauer. 2015. Rachel Dolezal defiantly maintains ‘I identify as black’ in TV interview
Dolezal, Rachel, interview by Melissa Harris-Perry. 2015. Watch Rachel Dolezal’s Long, Unbelieveably Incoherent Interview with Melissa Harris-Perry
Jonathan B. Freeman, Andrew M. Penner, Aliya Saperstein, Matthias Scheutz, Nalini Ambady. 2011. “Looking the Part: Social Status Cues Shape Race Perception.” PLoS ONE.
I like that you brought up forensic anthropologists work with trying to approximate ancestry from remains. I’ve heard Dr. Hefner and his students speak about that on occasion. The idea is gaining quite a bit of traction in the biological/forensic field, but it’ll be a while before it works to reconceptualize our ideas surrounding race.
As for Dolezal, one of the harder things to do as an anthropologist is to take a step back and not to judge a thing or practice that we witness, but to attempt to explain it using science because our own judgements prevent us from seeing and understanding the bigger picture. I have a really hard time doing this myself, since I’m a very political and activist minded person, but it’s a necessary skill for our field.
Hi Savannah,
I do agree with several of the points you have gone onwards to make throughout the duration of this topic and what it has to offer. Personally speaking, I chose to write about Rachel Dolezal as well as her character, understanding, and perspective truly interested me. Especially when it came to how she approached the issue and how she tried to be open minded about other’s opinions during the interview. Seeing that Rachel has made the choices she had, do you see any way where she can continue to assert herself as a black individual without receiving hateful comments and or sparking disdain within communities all around her? In addition to what you said, another point of view I would personally like to offer is the idea that we are able to put together a deeper understanding of what is in front of us by treating people the way they want to be treated, as it is simple, well – known core concept. However, contrary to what I am saying, I found a source (The New York Times) that suggested that she was recently found with welfare fraud. Therefore my insight suggests that this could’ve done for publicity.
Hi Savannah,
I enjoyed reading your blog post and I learned something new from you that I didn’t know before, such as race not existing in a biological sense. This is something I have never learned about until now. I always thought race has to deal with mainly ancestral lineage and physical characteristics taking a part in that.
How do you think we could change society’s perception of not thinking race is biological? Do you think people will be accepting of changing their perception? Do you think people would change who they identify as if they were to think race is not biological?
When reading the article “Looking the Part: Social Status Cues Shape Race Perception” Freedman talks about race being socially constructed and I agree with this statement as well. I feel like this is where some of the stereotypes of whites and blacks come from when it comes to status and occupational factors. In my Social Differences and Inequalities class, we learned that this is something other countries do as well not just the United States. My professor told us that in the Latin culture, they do something similar to this.
Growing up and going to school in Florida we were taught that our ancestral lineage is who we are and what we identify as. I feel as if most people around the world go off this concept as well to determine their race. So when I read Rachel Dolezal’s story about her identifying as a Black person, I felt offended as a person who is African American and who has African lineage in my blood. I felt as if she’s identifying as black to use it as an accessory. For me, being black comes with a lot of stuff. I face discrimination, stereotypes, I have to work a lot harder, I have to prove myself to society and other things. This who I am and I really live this lifestyle and for someone who has interests in it and embraces the culture and identifies themselves as black when they’re really not is offensive and like a slap in the people’s faces who are apart of the black community. Personally, I just don’t agree with her reasoning for wanting to identify as black. I totally agree with you that Rachel’s statement of identifying as black was a misuse of race in terms of the anthropology definition.
Do you think Michael Jackson who is black and identifies as black, although he bleached his skin shifts his personal agenda?