The term race is regularly applied in reference to the assumed genetically inherited traits of a group of people based on physical characteristics (Robbins et al. 2016, 76). The notion of race is inadequately disguised as a biological category as it is deeply embedded in sociocultural systems, and is thus difficult to identify as a cultural ideology (Gravlee 2009, 54). According to a statement shared by individuals representing the various subfields of anthropology, they are in agreement that, “race is powerful, but not based in genes or biology” (Ifekwunigwe et al. 2017, 423). Evidence regarding the cultural construction of race is indisputable based on its insufficient biological basis, and adverse sociocultural and political agenda. Despite arguments to the contrary, it is the cultural implementation of a race to oppress a certain minority population which generates a biological influence on human health within and between racial groups (Ifekwunigwe et al. 2017, 424). This essay will provide evidence justifying that race does not exist as an innate biological system of the categorization of humans, but rather it is a sociological cultural concept that is subject to change depending on the time and place in which it is enforced.
Perhaps the most prominent scientific critique of the concept of race as a biological construct rather than a cultural entity involves the false oversimplification of the complexity of human genetic variation, and its frequent conflation with race (Gravlee 2009, 50). Human genetic variation refers to the differences in populations due to varying alleles (alternative forms) of any given gene (Gravlee 2009, 50). Essentially, most human genetic variation is considered to be clinal. Clinal variation results in changes in human genetic variations such as skin pigment, eye colour, and hair colour based on geographical and environmental factors (Robbins et al. 2016, 76). Also, in order to be different distinct races, humans would biologically not be able to interbreed, but this is obviously not the case as all humans can breed with one another regardless of their skin colour (Gravlee 2009, 50). Due to its variability, groups of people would never have clear genetic boundaries separating them into distinct groups as the notion of race incorrectly suggests (Gravlee 2009, 50). In other words, race cannot be considered biological because it does not reflect the large variability of human genes.
Additionally, many who claim the existence of race in biology do so with arguments of cluster analysis studies, which have the purpose of detecting patterns in a given dataset (Gravlee 2009, 50). However, the suggestion that humans are able to be categorized in five clusters does not mean that this is the natural division of humans (Gravlee 2009, 50). In fact, the exact number of clusters necessary to categorize all of the human genetic variations, as well as the confinements and confirmations of these scientific groupings, have been inconsistent among many cluster analysis studies (Gravlee 2009, 50). This ultimately demonstrates that there is no distinct biological basis to categorize humans into races.
In addition to the absence of biological basis, the acceptance of the concept of race must be a cultural construct because it is flexible based on sociocultural context, whereas science is unprejudiced and indisputable, as it is based on facts. The contemporary perspective of race prevails as the result of relatively recent history, economic, and political circumstances (Ifekwunigwe et al. 2017, 423). It can cause racial inequality and may alter racial statuses during different time periods to comply with a specific agenda. An example of the utilization of the cultural construction of race is seen in the enslavement of people of African descent (Ifekwunigwe et al. 2017, 423). The European invention of race, with the aid of scientific racism, allowed for the white race to consider themselves superior to African individuals (Robbins et al. 2016, 78), which in turn validated their enslavement. European Americans felt as though they are a separate distinct category, and so they felt no kinship towards them. However this did not occur due to biological differences, but rather human-made cultural differences based on prejudice and social construct of the time. A clear example of this bias is illustrated historically in the variability of what was considered black in the United States from state to state. Some states insisted on a “one drop rule”, where even if an individual with a completely white complexion has any ancestry trail leading to them to any minimal traces of black, they are considered black by association (McGarry 2018). However, these individuals could simply cross state lines and no longer be considered black based on the standards of the neighboring state. If race was indeed something humans were born with, then it would be ascribed, and unable to change based on location. The variability and inconsistency regarding the definition of race through time and place proves its lack of a scientific basis. Its fluctuating demeanor solidifies its underlying basis as a social and political construct used for the perpetuation of power and control.
In addition to the ambiguous boundaries as to what is considered black or white, a race also cannot be biological and must be cultural, due to its changeability. To be specific, historically if the circumstances of a time were to change, as is the case of the perceptions of Mexicans in the United States, the perception of race can also change. In 1929, if an individual was of Mexican birth or ancestry in the United States, they were considered white, but merely a year later in 1930, the census changed to consider Mexicans as non-white in order to limit immigration (McGarry 2018). Over a decade later, in 1942, the United States needed to increase its labour force and in order to promote immigration, the Mexicans were once again considered white (McGarry 2018). The inconsistency of what is considered white is historic evidence that race cannot be biological. Biology is objective and independent of social context, whereas the subjectivity of race indicates that it is culturally constructed and fluid in order to suit the political and social needs of a majority race.
Although there is no biological basis for the concept of race, there is, in fact, a biological influence on health as a result of an individual's racial categorization in some circumstances. There are many instances where people who belong to a certain race are subjected to racial discrimination which then results in physiological stress, which in excess ultimately may lead to a lower quality of health (Ifekwunigwe et al. 2017, 429). Several researchers have concluded that four of the five major factors contributing to a person’s overall health are socioeconomic status, health behaviours, psychosocial stress, and social structure and context (Gravlee 2009, 49). According to Westerhaur et al., cited in Ifekwunigwe et al., an individual’s societal environment contributes 90 percent of health outcomes, whereas merely 10 percent is determined by biology (2017, 430). All of these societal factors are actively impacted by the race construct, demonstrating that biology does not impact race, but rather the existence of race and racism is a sociocultural phenomenon (Gravlee 2009, 54). Additionally, the common residential segregation of people based on their race allows for pathogenic social situations where the disease is distributed within a racial population based on living in the same neighborhood (Gravlee 2009, 52). In this way, race and the associated residential separation that often occurs as a result of race, are a large factor in diseases such as obesity, cardiovascular disease, and tuberculosis (Gravlee 2009, 52).
With the relatively recent increase in cultural anthropologists conducting research that accounts for the effects of race as a cultural construct, many earlier studies that claimed race had a biological basis have been disproven. For instance, a previous study was done exhibiting that within the African Diaspora, those with darker skin had a higher average blood pressure than Africans with lighter skin (Gravlee 2009, 53). Researchers had originally concluded that this pattern was due to a racially related genetic predisposition, however, these studies had not considered the cultural factors involved in this analysis. In fact, the studies incorrectly merged the skin pigmentation phenotype and the cultural significance of skin color in order to classify individuals socially (Gravlee 2009, 53). In more recent studies which consider the cultural basis of one’s skin colour and race, researchers found that “both self-rated and culturally ascribed colour – but not skin pigmentation – were associated with blood pressure through an interaction with income and education” (Gravlee 2009, 54). Thus, it is not the biological aspects of skin pigmentation which causes increased blood pressure in darker skinned Africans, but it is rather the cultural implications of having darker skin in a society which negatively impacts their health.
Despite the popular belief that race is an ascribed identity that one is born into, physical and cultural anthropologists alike are in agreement that the concept of race is cultural construct and not a biological characteristic. The proof for this exists on both a biological and sociocultural basis. Scientifically, human genetic variation consists of too much diversity to be able to classify people based on physical characteristics into racial categories. Furthermore, race has been infamously irregular and inconsistent in order to adhere to the political agenda of the majority race, which historically and currently, is European or white. Finally, perhaps the best, and most ironic, argument for the cultural construction of race is seen in the adverse biological health impact faced by certain racial groups. Not as a product of biology, but rather as a consequence of the social oppression or segregation of a racial group. All of these relatively recent developments have disproven the previous misunderstanding of race as biological and instead, justify with good evidence that race is a human-made cultural ideology.