Construction and De-construction of Race Essay

Races exist. They are everywhere in the world. In our history classes, we have discussed the existence of Caucasians, Mongoloids, Negroes, etc. The members of each racial group have common characteristics that make them distinct from other groups. However, in the quest to understand better the human variations across races, professionals from various fields – medicine, biology, anthropology, etc – have conducted studies to prove, or disprove, the existence of races in the scientific sense. In Modern Human Variation: An Introduction to Contemporary Human Biological Diversity , three models of human classification were discussed. First is the typological model which â€Å"focuses on a small number of traits that are readily observable from a distance such as skin color, hair form, body build, and stature. † Diamond (1994) gives truth to this, citing that â€Å"all native Swedes differ from all native Nigerians in appearance† and that one race cannot be mistaken with the other. However, Diamond also argued that â€Å"there are many different, equally valid procedures for defining races, and those different procedures yield very different classifications. † He further discussed other studies in which the differing geographical locations of humans contribute to their varying human traits. Factors such as survival and sexual selection, and a third possible explanation which is no function at all, were considered in human classification. Again, inconsistencies of this theory were later discovered, showing evidences that â€Å"among topical peoples, anthropologists love to stress the dark skins of African blacks, people of the southern Indian peninsula, and New Guineans and love to forget the pale skins of Amazonian Indians and Southeast Asians living at the same latitudes† (Diamond, 2004). With these contentions, the typological model is contradicted. On the other hand, the population model â€Å"looks for breeding populations first and then considers the anatomical and physiological traits that may distinguish them. † This means looking into a single group where members mate only with people within the group. The same article discussed, however, that with the relatively convenient means of intercontinental travel, intermixture of humanity has emerged, thus making the population model relatively ambiguous in the study of human variation today. The third model, the clinal model, â€Å"is based on the fact that genetically inherited traits most often change gradually in frequency from one geographic area to another. † With this framework, the clinal model may seem to be the soundest theory on human classification. However, it cannot be fully relied on since â€Å"the distribution of some traits is partly discontinuous†¦ these can be understood as results of historical migrations or exclusive breeding within more or less closed communities. † We have tried to construct races through scientific studies but failed to establish its exact definition. This brings us back to again to the crux of our contention. Do races exist? Yes, they do. People from all over the world have been grouped based on their physical characteristics, culture, religion, ethnicity, and other factors. Groups were given names so that individuals can easily identify in which group they belong. This is how lay humans understand the word â€Å"race† today. The concept has been constructed to satisfy the human need for order. But as Goodman (2005) puts it, â€Å"race is not a mere social construct, but as a lived experience has devastatingly real effects. † The construction of race led to the emergence of racial discrimination, making some â€Å"races† assume superiority over others. With this assumption, people of the â€Å"superior race† consequently assumed power over the â€Å"minorities†. The political advantage of the â€Å"superior race† gave way for them to gain more access to resources and wealth. Discrimination further reached the social sphere, with the â€Å"minorities† being labeled as the â€Å"ugly† people since their physical traits differ, most of the time in the opposite manner, from those of the â€Å"superior race†. Looking back through world history, our books tell us stories of some â€Å"races† (e. g. Africans) who were enslaved by the â€Å"superior races† during the earlier times. At present, racism still exists in the form of prejudice to certain â€Å"races† that have been generalized to possess certain characteristics. In Asia, the revolt of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) has caused prejudice against Muslims in most parts of the world, generalizing these people as terrorists. Accordingly, the social construction of races have inflicted numerous, and perhaps even millions, of incidents of social injustice worldwide. Then again, combining the clinal and population models, Keita et al (2004) contend that â€Å"the nonexistence of ‘races’ or subspecies in modern humans does not preclude substantial genetic variation that may be localized to regions or populations. † The authors cited a recent study on the single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the human genome, which can â€Å"make forensic distinctions possible even within restricted regions such as Scandinavia. † It was however clarified that â€Å"because this identification is possible does not mean that there is a level of differentiation equal to ‘races’. † We cannot totally negate the scientific studies conducted and currently being conducted on human biological variation. These studies, as in the point of view of Keita et al have policy implications for health studies. While Keita et al advocate for more refined and detailed study on human biological variation, Goodman is also supported in his position to â€Å"call for a new vocabulary and concepts† to study the same. This way, the widely-known concept of race may be de-constructed. Difference in skin color, hair form, body build, religion, culture, ethnicity, and others, does not make an individual less of a human, and as such these characteristics should not be seen as barriers to social justice.