Summary: The Marker Of Race

J.C
English 103
Professor Acosta
March 17, 2014
The Marker of Race One can imagine that before the existence of racial categories one of the considerable categories for people was based on how they grouped themselves. However when an outsider is who names that group from a different perspective the association behind that name may change the social outcomes of how the group is perceived. The naming of a group can come with a perceive difference especially if the category of identity is merely founded on visible traits. When analyzing what makes that category of race one must consider what the markers are that set up that concept. Markers are what essentially make a category of identity known in the way one may use it to categorize
This comes with the assumption that one is able to define who another being at first glance based on their skin color. More specifically, when considering what race is one may question who constructed the concept and why they considered skin color as a reliable main marker of race. One answer may be that it is the most visible and easiest to point out. As Anthropologist professor Audrey Smedley says in “ ‘Race’ and the Construction of Human Identity,” that race “brought about a subtle but powerful transformation in the world’s perceptions of human differences…it imposed social meanings on physical variations among human groups that served as the basis for structuring the whole society” (49). In other words, Smedley says that the identification of identity through perception was what ultimately promoted the concept of race. Perception is not ultimately true and at most can be a matter of position and interpretation. If something is visibly different it does not guarantee that they are similar in another context. Yet by using skin color as an indicator of race it is easily forgotten that there will always be difference in nature and physical differences are part of
In general, skin color has been taught to be the indicator of how we categorize people, particularly in American culture one can see that this idea of placing emphasis on skin color to group ourselves has stood for a while because we have believed it to be true. Part of the construction of skin color is that it playa a large part in our culture already. Such as the implementation of the one-drop rule being passed as a way of prohibiting miscegenation between whites in blacks in America. In “Who is Black? One Nation’s Definition,” Sociologist James Davis contends that “because blacks are define according to the one-drop rule, they are a socially constructed category in which there is a wide variation in racial traits and therefore not a race group in the scientific sense” (63). Inclusively, the United State Census has also used skin color to determine the population’s demographics; however, it was only until much recently that they began to consider ethnicity over skin color. If the indicator of skin color were not present as to determine who is what then we would not see the color of skin but rather language or geographical location as to determine identity. The relationship merely lies on physical attributes that the marker makes us do and what it culturally influences us to do. Davis suggests that