The Invention of "Race" As a Physiological Construct

[Bijan]

Intriguing slide show:

http://www.theroot.com/multimedia/15-facts-about-race

[jeremyp]

When somebody can seriously explain to me why Kenyans and Ethiopians dominate in the distance track races, and Afro American/Carribean dominate in the sprints then I'll accept that race is just psychological.

[lonewolf]

When somebody can seriously explain to me why Kenyans and Ethiopians dominate in the distance track races, and Afro American/Carribean dominate in the sprints then I'll accept that race is just psychological.

Ditto. I don't see it as demeaning or derogatory to make this observation.

[kuha]

When somebody can seriously explain to me why Kenyans and Ethiopians dominate in the distance track races, and Afro American/Carribean dominate in the sprints then I'll accept that race is just psychological.

So "Kenyan/Ethiopian" is one "race" and "Afro American/Carribean" is another "race"?



To be serious, one really has to approach this whole thing from the standpoint of physiology (and then genetics and culture). No reference to the hopelessly misleading notion of "race" is really needed.

But we've been around this block before...many times...

[gh]

One of the responders in the article in the link said this, which I find pretty cogent:

<<On the contrary, as medicine advances it is becoming clear that to optimally prescribe medication the genotype of the individual must be known. Some races are far more sensitive to medicine X, some are less responsive to medicine Y.

Race is an imprecise proxy for genotype (in the “all genes” rather than “specific genes” sense). Until such time as when a genetic study is performed for each individual as part of a baseline medical exam, race will direct medical practitioners in terms of both diagnosis and treatment.>>

Nobody had to "invent" race for there to be a scientific basis for groupings of physical characteristics. Color-blind grouping that's evident at the cellular/molecular level.

[Marlow]

Lead curator Yolanda Moses talked to The Root about just how laughably illusory and profoundly real race is.

When somebody can seriously explain to me why Kenyans and Ethiopians dominate in the distance track races, and Afro American/Carribean dominate in the sprints then I'll accept that race is just psychological.

Race, as a biological principle, may be illusory, but how 'peoples' evolved differently is very real. And it is these 'tribal' differences that make all the difference in how some genotypes ("The traits you have inherited are the result of your genotype, the makeup of your specific genes as passed on from your ancestors" - vocabulary.com) are built differently and respond differently to stimuli.

This whole 'issue' is nothing more than a semantics squabble, and Mr. Moses is NOT using the word as 99% of the rest of the world understands it (and no, just cuz he's an 'expert', it doens't mean he 'wins'; on the contrary, he loses, because he is not clearly communicating his ideas to the lay person).

As Jeremy says, there definitely ARE differences between 'peoples'.

[Pego]

When somebody can seriously explain to me why Kenyans and Ethiopians dominate in the distance track races, and Afro American/Carribean dominate in the sprints then I'll accept that race is just psychological.

The only thing apparently evident in your example is that the eastern Africans seem to share a gene(s) beneficial for endurance running, while the western Africans possess a gene(s) advantageous to running fast. I don't see anything specific to an actual race. Oh, yes. You must have observed how differently Kenyans and Ethiopians look. They clearly are not a homogeneous population.

[kuha]

As Jeremy says, there definitely ARE differences between 'peoples'.

Of course. And if we're SERIOUS about the issue, we deal primarily with genetic populations. If we're really NOT serious--and there's a ton of frivolous, pointless discussion of this "topic"--then we use the word "race" as if it actually told us something interesting.

[Marlow]

if we're SERIOUS about the issue, we deal primarily with genetic populations. If we're really NOT serious--and there's a ton of frivolous, pointless discussion of this "topic"--then we use the word "race" as if it actually told us something interesting.

Zackly

[jeremyp]

When somebody can seriously explain to me why Kenyans and Ethiopians dominate in the distance track races, and Afro American/Carribean dominate in the sprints then I'll accept that race is just psychological.

So "Kenyan/Ethiopian" is one "race" and "Afro American/Carribean" is another "race"?



To be serious, one really has to approach this whole thing from the standpoint of physiology (and then genetics and culture). No reference to the hopelessly misleading notion of "race" is really needed.

But we've been around this block before...many times...

True, but are we not agreed that "physiological" groupings seem to come from close geographical locations?

[kuha]

Not necessarily. But if it was true, then talk in geographic terms. If we're going to make arguments, then the terms we use have to actually mean something.

[Daisy]

but are we not agreed that "physiological" groupings seem to come from close geographical locations?

A better phrase would be 'are more frequent in some geographical locations'.

[Marlow]

but are we not agreed that "physiological" groupings seem to come from close geographical locations?

A better phrase would be 'are more frequent in some geographical locations'.

If you can line up two sets of people from two different places and be able to tell them apart, just on physical appearance, then that's what we're talking about. 'North Africans' (Algerians, Morroccans, Tunisians, Libyans, Egyptians) look alike (generally), but not like 'East Africans' (Ethiopia, Kenyan) and not like West/Central Africans (Congo, Nigeria). 'East Asians' look different than 'West Asians', who look different from 'Northern Europeans' . . . in general (!).

I think we can make some general observations about the differences among these peoples without being labelled race-ists.

[Bijan]

jeremyp wrote:

When somebody can seriously explain to me why Kenyans and Ethiopians dominate in the distance track races, and Afro American/Carribean dominate in the sprints then I'll accept that race is just psychological.


Why do South Korean women dominate the LPGA Top 10? Why do white males dominate the U.S. presidency? Why are men from the Dominican Republic, per capita, better professional baseball players than Black Americans? Irish cops in NY/Bost 1920's-1970's? Genetics?

People gravitate toward the professions where they see themselves represented or role modeled. The talent is only evident because of the larger number of entrants and the thus heightened competition. Black American men could also dominate h.s. and college volleyball (if physiology and the collateral gifts that make one successful at basketball were all it took), but coaches have not recruited them to do so, and there is no "Oscar Robertson" or "Willie Mays".

[TrakFan]

The talent is only evident because of the larger number of entrants and the thus heightened competition...

Be careful -- you're sounding a bit too logical.

[jeremyp]

jeremyp wrote:

When somebody can seriously explain to me why Kenyans and Ethiopians dominate in the distance track races, and Afro American/Carribean dominate in the sprints then I'll accept that race is just psychological.

Why do South Korean women dominate the LPGA Top 10? Why do white males dominate the U.S. presidency? Why are men from the Dominican Republic, per capita, better professional baseball players than Black Americans? Irish cops in NY/Bost 1920's-1970's? Genetics?

Apples and pears. I was talking about excelling in a particular sport events: Distance running and sprints.

People gravitate toward the professions where they see themselves represented or role modeled. The talent is only evident because of the larger number of entrants and the thus heightened competition. Black American men could also dominate h.s. and college volleyball (if physiology and the collateral gifts that make one successful at basketball were all it took), but coaches have not recruited them to do so, and there is no "Oscar Robertson" or "Willie Mays".

Maybe so, but why then does Europe and America get good distance runners who were born in Eastern Africa, and never ran until they emigrated? Mo Farah, came to UK age 8. Meb Keflizighi came to US, age 12. Lomong came to US, age 16, didn't think about running until 15. Abdirahman came to the US at 19 from Somalia and was encouraged by Martin Keino to run" Because of the way he looked." These are all cases of East African born males who never ran track until they came west and then, in spite of being surrounded by a non running "role models" excelled. To me physical ability was the slam dunk reason. 2 Somalis, an Eritrean, and a Sudanese.

Why have the Carribean never produced a really good distance runner? My guess is that slaves came mostly from western Africa. While "race" may not be the issue, physiological differences within a "race" may be.

[kuha]

While "race" may not be the issue, physiological differences within a "race" may be.

It's enough--and clearer--simply to say that "physiological differences" are the issue--as they largely are. (Culture and environment do play some role here, but genetic disposition is certainly most important.)

But, really, is this big question still relevant? Don't we all know the answer? The genetic pool most typical of certain areas of East Africa has produced a majority of top distance runners--particularly when growing up at altitude is included in the mix. The genetic pool most typical (historically) of portions of West Africa has produced a majority of the top sprinters.

That's it...with a good deal of additional nuance.

If that's the "what" of the matter, the "why" can only be understood in terms of physiology (primarily) and culture/environment (secondarily). The point is that invoking "race" doesn't help us understand anything.

[jazzcyclist]

When somebody can seriously explain to me why Kenyans and Ethiopians dominate in the distance track races, and Afro American/Carribean dominate in the sprints then I'll accept that race is just psychological.

Isn't adaption to different climates, geography and diet over long periods of time the primary reason for different races? Years ago, I remember reading an article that pointed out that though the Great Rift Valley only accounted for 10% of Kenya's population, it produced 99% of its elite distance runners. However, their physical appearance was no different than that of the 90% of Kenyans that aren't from the Great Rift Valley.

[gh]

....
Why do South Korean women dominate the LPGA Top 10? Why do white males dominate the U.S. presidency? ....Irish cops in NY/Bost 1920's-1970's? ....

None of those require a particular physical skill set.

[Avante]

I don't care what anyone says about race and if I'd never heard or read anything about it I'd still know that we humans are built differently. There is no doubt that the average Samoan is far larger than the average Filipino. Kenyans are smaller than Nigerians on the average. Asians are shorter than Europeans.

When it comes to athletic events that require explosive movements. speed, quickness and leaping ability it's those from western Africa that possess the physique best suited for that sort of physical activity.

None of that has anything to do Physiological. It's...Physique.

[jeremyp]

When it comes to athletics events that require explosive movements and leaping ability it's those from western Africa that possess the physique best suited for that sort of physical activity.

And the reason great high jumpers are mostly European is?

[kuha]

None of that has anything to do Physiological. It's...Physique.

This is entirely correct, thank you.

It's the little, teeny tiny "physiques" that are arranged in tiny double helixes, and which get mixed and matched through sexual reproduction, and modified over time by mutation. It's all spelled out in Charles Darwin's famous Theory of Physiquetude.

[Daisy]

It's all spelled out in Charles Darwin's famous Theory of Physiquetude.

It's well known that he studied finches, pigeons, snails and even plants. But little known is his work with some of the most famous body builders of the time. This work almost derailed his more famous theory due to the fact that the dramatic changes to the body were almost all attributed to the environment rather than the parents.

[Avante]

When it comes to athletics events that require explosive movements and leaping ability it's those from western Africa that possess the physique best suited for that sort of physical activity.

And the reason great high jumpers are mostly European is?

Why are you ignoring sprinting, hurdling, long jump? Are you telling me that you've never noticed what I was saying?

[Bijan]

gh posted:

Bijan wrote-
....
Why do South Korean women dominate the LPGA Top 10? Why do white males dominate the U.S. presidency? ....Irish cops in NY/Bost 1920's-1970's? ....

None of those require a particular physical skill set.

Yes, but in my same comment, I said volleyball calls on some of the same physical skill set as basketball, but most elite (NCAA, pro beach, Olympic) U.S. players are white males.

Soccer demands a certain skill set (speed, agility, change of direction, balance)- we don't see many Black Americans on the elite level there. High jumping also does.

These things have far less to do w/ physique, than the fact that youth gravitate toward pursuits and professions where they see themselves represented. Where were all the world ranked Mexican prizefighters before Carlos Zarate, Ruben Olivares and Salvador Sanchez? Seven of the first nine Kentucky Derby winners had Black jockeys up. NY and Phila. Jews dominated professional and college basketball from 1930-1950.

Black people are not superior entertainers, boxers, or sprinters. Black males in this country devoted hours of training toward those pursuits because they were exluced, de facto or de jura, or by lack of means, from Fortune 500 leadership, elite law sand medical schools, physics, elected office, and advertising.

10,000 hrs. of practice x skill = outlier.

[Avante]

gh posted:

Bijan wrote-
....
Why do South Korean women dominate the LPGA Top 10? Why do white males dominate the U.S. presidency? ....Irish cops in NY/Bost 1920's-1970's? ....

None of those require a particular physical skill set.

Yes, but in my same comment, I said volleyball calls on some of the same physical skill set as basketball, but most elite (NCAA, pro beach, Olympic) U.S. players are white males.

Soccer demands a certain skill set (speed, agility, change of direction, balance)- we don't see many Black Americans on the elite level there. High jumping also does.

These things have far less to do w/ physique, than the fact that youth gravitate toward pursuits and professions where they see themselves represented. Where were all the world ranked Mexican prizefighters before Carlos Zarate, Ruben Olivares and Salvador Sanchez? Seven of the first nine Kentucky Derby winners had Black jockeys up. NY and Phila. Jews dominated professional and college basketball from 1930-1950.

Black people are not superior entertainers, boxers, or sprinters. Black males in this country devoted hours of training toward those pursuits because they were exluced, de facto or de jura, or by lack of means, from Fortune 500 leadership, elite law sand medical schools, physics, elected office, and advertising.

10,000 hrs. of practice x skill = outlier.

We see black sprinters dominating midget track. Sorry but you're wrong about those with roots to western Africa not being the fastest sprinters. They are.

High school kids aren't being excluded from anything, why do black sprinters dominate there? No it's not about hours spent training, it's about unique physical characteristics found in those with western African roots.

[jazzcyclist]

We see black sprinters dominating midget track. Sorry but you're wrong about those with roots to western Africa not being the fastest sprinters. They are.

High school kids aren't being excluded from anything, why do black sprinters dominate there? No it's not about hours spent training, it's about unique physical characteristics found in those with western African roots.

While I do agree with your basic premise, I think culture still plays a role. If kids of European descent were raised in the same environment as kids from west African descent, I don't think the numbers would be as lopsided as they are and you would see more Lemaitres and Wariners on the circuit though Blacks would still dominate. This explains why Europeans are such much more successful in the NBA than White Americans these days.

[Marlow]

though Blacks would still dominate

Just ask yourself why and I think you'll see his point. All things being equal, one's genetic 'heritage' plays the second MOST powerful role in determining one's athletic success. One's own parents' particular set of genes are the primary origin, but they are also endowed through their heritage.

[Bijan]

Some are missing my point. If more Black American males pursued being fighter pilots (superb hand eye coordination, mathematical aptitude, sharp reflexes, good spatial skills, average height), one deem they were well suited for that. The same w/ running movie studios, NCAA volleyball, or being POTUS (strong recall, oratory gifts, networking ability, charisma, campaign stamina).

We see concentrations of humans in amateur and professional circles where they feel either welcome or well-represented (thus the rehearsal/practice). Brazil doesn't dominate in men's FIBA basketball because few have seriously tapped the population base or the youth programs. Being "cut out" f/ something is of little or no use if you either:
A) never tried or heard of it
B) lack the access
C) are not interested for socio-cultural reasons

Now that women are welcome, half of American law school students, and slightly more than 50% of the med school enrollment, are young women.

[Marlow]

Some are missing my point. If . . .

I'm pretty sure everyone did get that point (too). The sticking point is the reality that some human phenotypes are better suited to a physical activity than others. Rift Valley people are GENERALLY better 'made' for distance running than Samoans. Nigerians are better suited for sprinting than Rift Valleyers. Etc.

[kuha]

I thouht the central issue here was the misleading and useless "r" word. EVERYONE knows and agrees that skill sets reflect in large measure (but never exclusively) one's genetic endowment and, thereby, one's ancestral roots/genetic population. That's old news.

[Avante]

We see black sprinters dominating midget track. Sorry but you're wrong about those with roots to western Africa not being the fastest sprinters. They are.

High school kids aren't being excluded from anything, why do black sprinters dominate there? No it's not about hours spent training, it's about unique physical characteristics found in those with western African roots.

While I do agree with your basic premise, I think culture still plays a role. If kids of European descent were raised in the same environment as kids from west African descent, I don't think the numbers would be as lopsided as they are and you would see more Lemaitres and Wariners on the circuit though Blacks would still dominate. This explains why Europeans are such much more successful in the NBA than White Americans these days.

As you know "most" of those great speedy, agile, quick, elusive backs/kick returners were/ are black. They don't get that sort of ability because of culture.We aren't going to be seeing white athletes running like Devin Hester, Dante Hall, Gale Sayers, Barry Sanders, Deion Sanders etc. That's not about culture,want, need or anything other than race. And those differences that give us race.

Can white sprinters run a sub 9.80? I have my doubts.

As you know there was a time when white sprinters were abundant. They won the 52, 56 and 60 Olympic 100m. It's when guys like Hayes, Hines, Greene and Smith showed up and starting running those kinds of times that we saw the demise of the white sprinter. They simply couldn't match up. Even Borzov couldn't run what Hayes, Hines and Greene were running.

When something/anything is as dramatic/absolute as why we never ever see white American female 100m sprinters. It goes far deeper than culture. Only a blind man would fail to see how black female athletes are more muscular and physically blessed for sprinting.

[Marlow]

I thouht the central issue here was the misleading and useless "r" word.

Oh, I thought we all agreed that 'race', like 'terrorism' on another thread, is indeed a worthless term, since no two people see as meaning the same thing. Race, as it's used in 2011 America, has degenerated into a back-construct of the word, 'racism'. Since the 'race' card is pulled out at any opportunity (by any and all 'races'), it simply refers to any ethnic sub-set in the general population, be it neo-Gypsy or post-modern Goth.

[jazzcyclist]

When something/anything is as dramatic/absolute as why we never ever see white American female 100m sprinters. It goes far deeper than culture. Only a blind man would fail to see how black female athletes are more muscular and physically blessed for sprinting.

Did you even bother to read my post? Evidently not, otherwise you would not have gotten the idea that I was saying that culture was the only factor. I said culture plays A factor. I didn't say culture plays THE ONLY factor. However, if you believe that culture plays no factor at all, you're wrong.

[Avante]

When something/anything is as dramatic/absolute as why we never ever see white American female 100m sprinters. It goes far deeper than culture. Only a blind man would fail to see how black female athletes are more muscular and physically blessed for sprinting.

Did you even bother to read my post? Evidently not, otherwise you would not have gotten the idea that I was saying that culture was the only factor. I said culture plays A factor. I didn't say culture plays THE ONLY factor. However, if you believe that culture plays no factor at all, you're wrong.

I read everything you said, my point was that culture has nothing at all to do with this. It's a total/compltete non factor. Blacks dominate certain aspects of athletics because of a difference in physical attributes. That doesn't change because of cultural anythings.

What if Kenyans starting digging the shot put? What if Samoans got into the steeplechase? It doesn't matter they do not possess the right physique for those events.

No Jazz this isn't about culture/want/need, we are talking physical differences as the only factor that matters.