The social construction of racial identity and its psychological foundations

¶ … Race and Racism

Race is one of the most complicated and interesting topics in the social sciences. In many ways, race is an artificial construct, since there is no single genetic marker differentiating one race from another and racial identities change and bend with cultural norms. On the other hand, even if race is an artificial construct, the fact that racial differentiation exists in a wide variety of cultures and has been one of the causes of some of the more significant historical social problems suggests that dismissing race as merely an artificial construct would be destructive. Regardless of whether there is a genetic, scientific basis for racial distinctions, human beings have demonstrated a determination to make racial differentiations. Therefore, understanding why people consistently choose to make these distinctions can be a crucial step in helping mitigate the negative impact of racism.

Summary

In the Woodward reading, she discusses racial identity within the context of individuals seeking to establish both individual and group identities. She examines how individuals relate to the larger social groups around them, and the interaction between the individual and the group. She approaches the idea of identity from a sociological perspective, with identity being a way to describe the way an individual relates to his or her broader social group. She also discusses identity from a psychological perspective, delving into Freudian notions of identity and how the individual forms an identity over the course of a one's lifetime. Woodward discusses the idea of identity in a modern context, and discusses how modern world events have challenged some traditional notions of identity, such as the changing meaning of what it is to be English in the United Kingdom now that smaller ethnic groups are beginning to assert independence, and how the American identity has changed in the wake of 9-11.

Woodward's focus on identity helps describe the purposes of identity. According to her, "Identity involves aligning ourselves with one group of people, saying that we are the same as them, as well as marking ourselves out as different from other groups of people. We can have a collective identity, at the local or even the global level, whether through culture, religion or politics, as well having an individual identity, as a mother, father or worker" (Woodward 2010, p.20). Race is part of identity. One of the interesting aspects of race that Woodward mentions is that, at least in Western societies, being white is the norm or the default. Therefore, while white people certainly have their race as part of their identities, they may not be fully aware of the impact of race on their identities. Instead, because they are in the majority, their race becomes an undefined part of their identities. This can be an important concept because the idea of self-identifying in terms of race can seem off-putting to members of majority groups, but that does not mean that their race is any less of their identity, simply that their racial identity reflects broader cultural norms and ideals.

She also discusses the idea of difference, particularly physical differences. She discusses the idea that some differences are not very important, such as the shade of one's hair. However, other differences, such as race and gender, signify seemingly greater differences. "Visible features are social, that is they have social implications and the meanings that are attached to them come from the societies in which we live. Some visible features matter more than others and may have social and economic consequences" (Woodward, 2010, p.23). She also mentions the importance of visual representation and how things can have symbolic meaning that serves as shorthand within the context of a culture, which can mean that something visual may or may not represent the actual truth.

Woodward also discusses the way that the Internet can obscure identities and help create relationships in a faux environment. She gives a specific example of a male psychiatrist who pretended to be a disabled female individual in an internet chat-room environment and describes how other members of the group felt betrayed by his deception. However, she also discusses positive ways that the internet can be used to help people in marginalized or fringe groups by introducing them to a broader community, which helps reduce the impact of marginalization. The internet is not the only technological advance that Woodward believes is impacting the face of society. She also believes that evolving reproductive techniques, which alter traditional kinship relationships, may change how individuals and society view identity. Woodward expands on this with a lengthy discussion of what she refers to as the cyborg, but she is not discussing the traditional human/machine hybrid cyborg of science fiction. Instead, her notion of the cyborg focuses on how technological and social advances can enable humans to move forward in society; she even uses this example to suggest technological advances that would assist breastfeeding mothers, while, at the same time, making formula that is healthier for infants, increasing the choices available to women (Woodward, 2010, p. 38).

Woodward also talks about how economics interacts with culture and with personal identity. In a capitalist society, there is an assumption that the buyer is free to make choices through purchases and that these choices will be reflective of the buyer's identity. However, Woodward challenges that assumption. Consumption and production both play important roles in shaping identities. However, consumers are constrained, not only by a lack of resources, but also by the way that corporations shape consumer preferences. This can be done through advertising but is more than just direct advertising. Woodward focuses on how culture has shaped the ideal of womanhood, so that women themselves perpetuate the ideal, which can be true even if women retain the independence to reject corporate-driven ideals (Woodward, 2010, p.42). The consumer culture suggests that people create their identities through their economic choices.

Woodward also discusses how one's place of origin plays a role in personal identity. There are multiple dimensions to where a person comes from: country, state, and then region, whether that be a city or a town. All of these factors influence job opportunities, educational opportunities, diversity, and the people one is likely to know. However, the place of origin also has significant racial implications, as non-white people are often asked where they come from in order to determine racial or ethnic origins, even though they may have grown up in Western country and identify themselves with that country. Where one comes from can really have a significant impact on an individual's abilities. "For example, political and legal rights and the right to receive health care and welfare benefits all depend on residence qualifications" (Woodward, 2010, p.46).

Eriksen takes a social anthropology approach to the concept of ethnicity. In fact, the social anthropology approach is critical to Eriksen's explanation of what he means by ethnicity.

Eriksen believes that "through its dependence on long-term fieldwork, anthropology has the advantage of generating first-hand knowledge of social life at the level of everyday interaction. To a great extent, this is the locus where ethnicity is created and re-created. Ethnicity emerges and is made relevant through social situations and encounters, and through people's ways of coping with the demands and challenges of life" (Eriksen, 1993, p.1).

Eriksen is interested in looking at the relationship between ethnicity and nationalism. Eriksen discusses the growing interest in nationalism among social scientists since World War II, which one assumes is due to a desire to avoid repeating the type of nationalism that led to the Holocaust. However, Eriksen also suggests that this attempt to understand the role that ethnicity plays in politics is important. According to him, "thirty-five of the thirty-seven major armed conflicts in the world in 1991 were internal conflicts, and most of them- from Sri Lanka to Northern Ireland- could plausibly be described as ethnic conflicts. In addition to violent ethnic movements there are also many important non-violent ethnic movements, such as the Quebecois independence movement in Canada" (Eriken, 1993, p.2).

Eriksen points out that the concept of ethnicity is oftentimes confused with being a minority. However, ethnicity focuses on the majority as well as the minority. Ethnicity refers to "aspects of relationships between groups which consider themselves, and are regarded by others, as being culturally distinctive" (Eriksen, 1993, p.4). Ethnicity is also not synonymous with race, though ethnicity and race are frequently used interchangeably. Eriksen points out that race is a questionable concept because in-group variation is often greater than inter-group variation (Eriksen, 1993, p.4). However, he acknowledges that race is a cultural construct, even if there are no biological justifications for racial divisions. He points out that ethnic and racial discrimination both occur. He does acknowledge that race-based discrimination can be very difficult for the people experiencing the discrimination because having a different physical appearance can make assimilating into the dominant ethnic group more difficult.

One of the issues that Eriksen points out is that ethnicity is frequently linked to social class. He acknowledges that socioeconomic class is not fixed in the same way that ethnicity is fixed, but also recognizes an overlap in categories. Despite this overlap, Eriksen is cautious about conflating the two ideas. He believes that "both class differences and ethnic differences can be pervasive features of societies, but they are not one and the same thing and must be distinguished from one another analytically" (Eriksen, 1993, p.7).

Eriksen also challenges the idea of the American melting pot. He suggests that ethnic groups have long adhered to an ethnic identity in addition to identify as Americans and that this ethnic identification can last for multiple generations after the original family members first moved to the United States. Moreover, ethnic group identifications, which were once thought to be more primitive ways of self-identification, seem to be linked to more advanced societies. That does not mean that ethnicity is a modern concept, but there is a modern focus on ethnicity. Eriksen refers to a switch from looking at tribes to looking at ethnic groups and suggests that the change is deeper than semantics, that it reflects an awareness that members of different ethnic groups interact with and impact one another. In this way, ethnic identities are informed by and created by groups of which they are not a part. Eriksen also looks at the boundaries of a group and how those boundaries can be difficult to define. Ethnicity is more than culture, but cultural differences are one of the ways that people differentiate between ethnic groups.

Eriksen also mentions the importance of context in ethnic studies. He suggests that ethnicity can be an important concept in multiple arenas of sociological and anthropological study. However, he also suggests that the term ethnic is used in a variety of ways in these different contexts and can refer to: urban ethnic minorities, indigenous peoples, proto-nations, and ethnic groups in plural societies (Eriksen, 1999, p.14-15).

Analysis and Comparison

The selection by Woodward examines race as a largely social construct from the perspective of a sociologist. In other words, for Woodward, race is important in how it impacts the relationships between people. However, Woodward does not limit herself to a purely sociological investigation of the concept of race. She realizes that sociology interacts with psychology, so that social factors about race can inform and influence a person's self-image. This interaction between psychology and sociology is a critical factor in understanding racism, because it provides insight into why dominant groups would feel it necessary to discriminate against minority groups and why some members of minority groups would embrace the very same stereotypes that are used to keep them in subservient positions. From a sociological perspective, most group distinctions in people are the result of choices made by those people rather than biological differences.

Eriksen's reading is from an anthropological standpoint. Anthropology differs from sociology in that is more comprehensive, but not as specific about in-group interactions as sociology. Anthropology also incorporates elements that sociology does not. For example, anthropological explanations are more likely to feature genetic or biological elements than sociological explanations are, because immutable characteristics are an important element of anthropology. As a result, Eriksen seems less eager than Woodward to completely dismiss the notion that some aspects of racial differentiation are biological, even though he acknowledges greater within-group variety than between-group variety.

Interestingly, neither of the authors really seems to give a sufficient explanation for why racism occurs. One assumes that, at some level, racism has a benefit to communities and individuals. If it were completely without value, it seems like racism would no longer be in existence, because it would not have been promoted through natural selection, either biologically or in the development of societies. However, not only has racism proven resistant to extinction, but Eriksen actually suggests that it is more likely to thrive in modern societies than in primitive societies. However, like Woodward, Eriksen fails to provide a sufficient explanation for why sracism would exist in any society. Woodward's article is better at provoking critical thinking in the audience, by describing scenarios that are meant to challenge the reader and make the reader consider his or her own response in different scenarios. This is important because, particularly when studying people from different cultures, it can become tempting to marginalize their responses and treat them as somehow inferior or lesser. Hypothetical scenarios can encourage the audience to put themselves in the place of those people and empathize with them, which could actually be one of the building blocks to a less- racist society.

Personal Views on Conquering Racism

What neither of the authors states, but what appears to have been a historical fact is the cyclical nature of out-group selection. In many cases, this minority oppression is done on a racial basis. For example, in the United States, discrimination against African-Americans was the norm for centuries, but, in many ways, African-Americans have become an accepted part of the American sub-culture and Arab-Americans, particularly Muslims, have become the new racial group that should be feared. Some of this may be explained by the fact that most white Americans know some African-Americans, and younger generations of white Americans have gone to school, worked, and socialized with African-Americans, so that they may be more difficult to identify as completely out-group. In contrast, Arab-Americans are not as widely dispersed so that many white Americans have never met them. This suggests that education and ensuring that the laws and the courts are used to require integration and punish discrimination are important components to ending racism, because top-down policies to end racial discrimination have shown some success with African-Americans.

However, these top-down policies do not address the fact that the majority group then finds other groups to oppress. One need only look at how many older African-Americans, who were once impacted by laws limiting their civil rights, support laws that limit the right of gays to marry or adopt children; having become part of the majority, at least within that context, there seems to be little concern for the impact of discriminatory policies on minority groups. While homosexuals are not an ethnic group, I feel like they do provide a perfect example of the complexities of modern discrimination. First, they have been identified as a dangerous out-group, despite the fact that they compose a relatively small percentage of the overall population. Second, discrimination against homosexuals does not have a rational basis in fear about the scarcity of resources, since allowing homosexuals to marry has absolutely no impact on the availability of marriage to heterosexuals.

Given how pervasive the urge to discriminate appears to be, I do not know that there is anything that can be done about racism. Even if, as a society, we are able to temporarily eradicate racism, I think that it would be replaced by another type of discrimination, such as gender-based or religious-based discrimination that could prove to be equally damaging, and might even be more difficult to eradicate. That does not mean that I do not believe that society should do anything to attempt to end racism. Instead, I believe that discrimination should be actively and voraciously attacked with all legal means necessary. I believe that forced tolerance, such as the forced integration of schools, does lead to a reduction in racist thoughts and beliefs. More importantly, even when legal norms cannot change people's thoughts and beliefs, they can help lessen the negative impact of discrimination on the minority group.