An excellent point. We are “trained” to be able to discern whether people are members of our own clan or tribe. Its a useful survival trait. But its probably mostly social construct. We can find the few common traits which allow us to group people into “not us” categories.
I never get bored thinking about the bulk of all human diversity being in Africa. In a way its not so surprising. The pygmies of Central Africa, the Dinka of South Sudan, the Yoruba vs the Masai. But even with all the physical diversity that I can see the vast bulk of all human diversity is in how certain proteins are synthesized and we cant see it. We cant even see when people are well adapted to milk drinking but there are some proxy traits which correlate well with it.
I remember watching some documentary a while back and the narrator made the point that a mere 6 days or so of human decomposition is enough to no longer be able to discern race without an autopsy. Everyone’s skin decomposes to the same dark color very quickly.
Maybe it would be more accurate to say that “race, as understood by most people, is a hopeless simplification of a complex issue”.
Physicians need to consider race when considering risk of disease and treatment options. A Forensic Anthropologist can use measurements to determine the likely race of a person from their skeletal remains.
I don’t think the dog breed analogy is the best one. I kind of think the color spectrum is a better analogy. A young child might see and identify a limited number of primary colors. We adults see color on a spectrum. A researcher on the subject might see color on multiple different levels of complexity. That researcher might say that there is no real “red” or “blue”. But that does not invalidate the fact that almost all of us can readily identify colors, and can accurately predict the result of mixing or filtering pigments or dyes.
Maybe that analogy is flawed as well.
It seems to me from your gif that you doubt what I said. I would like to ask that you tell me what precisely do you think I did if not agree with you. My intent was to nod along, and offer a different angle on the same central point. Clearly, I did not achieve what I intended. Will you help me determine where I went wrong?
Just by the way, one thing I really never came to terms with was the West African “pleasantries”, which are an important element of social life there. People mock each other in no uncertain terms based on their ethnicity and culture. Often, this is mixed with comments which I, as an outsider, read as blatant racism. A friend and colleague of mine who has very dark skin indeed often got mocked as "Sénégalaise, and explained to me that the Wollof people (she’s Mossi) are a bit frowned upon, but the mockery would be reciprocal, and very much ok. And there was me, really trying hard - but it bothered me anyway. It really still does. I cannot get rid of the feeling it’s wrong.
The way you phrased your comment made it seem as if you didn’t actually read my whole comment and were explaining to me about race not being a thing, as if I had not said that in the first place. Perhaps if you had said something about agreeing with me in your comment, it would not have come off that way.
Keep in mind that given that we are communicating primarily in words here, I can’t see your face and pick up on subtle clues about your intent. This is partially about the imperfection of this communications medium.
Fair enough. I apologize for the miscommunication. It may be a cultural thing. Down my way, echoing someone’s words while adding your own commentary is how you agree in a conversational setting. Saying ‘I agree’ would come off as high-handed, depending on context. Though, yeah, nodding is involved.
It might take awhile.; after all Australian Aborigines were largely isolated on their own planet for at least 50,000 years and they are definitely the same species as my cousins prove.
But no one these days doubts the “one species” thing. The only time that becomes relevant is when people confuse “race” with “species”, as in “human race” vs. “European race” vs “British race”.
What is disputed that there are differences in intelligence, up to the point where people claim that there are no physical differences apart from a few minor cosmetic differences.
Yup, some of the earliest African tourists who quite clearly had a lot of wanderlust. I am impressed and have been for sometime. Not just for walking there (admittedly not in one go) but also for figuring out how best to live there for 50,000 years without totally fucking the place up.
Definitely. But what am I? Prejudiced, bigoted, or even racist?
You know, I often wonder if my attitude towards the people I interacted with in West Africa was a kind of multiple-inverted racism. I nearly choked on my decision not to tell them that their behaviour was racists towards (e.g.) the Fulani we met. I didn’t think it was my place, as a white European, to fall into a neo-colonialist ways of explaining to someone born and raised into the local culture of “plaisanteries” why their behaviour was not acceptable. But it made me highly uncomfortable. Said behaviour included, frankly, kidnapping a cowheard who was trespassing and only releasing him against a “fee” paid by the relatives.
This is not keeping me up at night, but I still wonder. Working abroad really gave me some things to think about for the rest of my life. I can highly recommend it, despite and because the immense challenges.
