# Cultural perceptions of race



## tvdxer

How is race perceived in your home culture or region?  What races do people where you live generally divide humans into, and what are some nationalities that fit into those various races?  

I live in northern Minnesota, a traditionally very homogenous place populated primarily by the descendants of immigrants from Finland, Norway, Sweden, Germany, Ireland, and some Eastern European countries, most of whom arrived in the United States between 1850 and 1920 (my informed estimate), as well as a small percentage of American Indians, the majority seeming to have substantial European blood in them.  Growing up here, I thought, as a child, of there being primarily (1) white people, (2) black people, and (3) Asian people.  Whites included those of those of European descent, as well as Arabs and Indians (from India).  Blacks were those from Africa (except Northern Africa), and Asians included those from the Far East, such as Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, and Laotians, as well as Polynesians.  I think I tended to group American Indians with Asians, as distant relatives, having heard about the Bering migration theory when I was 7 or so.  

I was very interested in cultures as a young child, and had a beloved atlas, _Earth and Man_, published c. 1970, that delinated humans into Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid.  Of course, that system of classification is very much outdated, although I don't doubt the features that would make a person have a "mongoloid" or "negroid" appearance.

An important note: this thread is not intended to be scientific (or pseudo-scientific), but merely to be a place to describe cultural perceptions.  Please do not let this degenerate into a political discussion.


----------



## Layzie

What do you consider hispanics?


----------



## tvdxer

"What do you consider hispanics?"

Your question should be "What _did_ you consider Hispanics".  Today I don't really believe in a clear-cut system of race.  But when I was younger I always thought of Hispanics as white.


----------



## übermönch

It is unthinkable where I live (Germany). They say that race can be applied to dogs and not to humans. That's reasonable. But nevertheless they talk about southerners or eastern europeans in newpapers to describe crimes rassistically.


----------



## Layzie

tvdxer said:
			
		

> "What do you consider hispanics?"
> 
> Your question should be "What _did_ you consider Hispanics".  Today I don't really believe in a clear-cut system of race.  But when I was younger I always thought of Hispanics as white.



Oh, just wondering. I myself have also been fascinated by the subject of race, which led to me self-studying a lot of history and science. Since you mentioned books, my interest peaked when I read "Guns, Germs, and Steel."I am rather indifferent now though, I don't believe in concrete classifications anymore either.


----------



## Outsider

In Portugal (and in Europe in general, I think), people tend to avoid the topic of race. You may hear passing descriptive (or derogatory) comments, but it's not an issue that comes up much in serious discussion. This does _not_ mean, of course, that we don't think about it, believe in it, or act according to it. Many do.

The races most people seem to believe in, around here, coincide in broad terms with the description you gave above, Tvdxer. But because we're a Latin country, I suppose there's a subtle difference of perspective between our views, and those of the U.S. or northern Europe. People here tend to be more "inclusive" with regard to the white race. You don't have to be as light-skinned, as light-haired, or as light-eyed to be considered white, and most people don't seem to care much for finding colour hierarchies _within_ the white race. (Which would of course be self-defeating.) The black race may be another matter.

However, the ethnic group which is most openly disliked in Portugal, in my experience, are the gypsies, whom most would describe as "white", even if they do tend to look slightly darker than average.


----------



## Pivra

Outsider said:
			
		

> In Portugal (and in Europe in general, I think), people tend to avoid the topic of race. You may hear passing descriptive (or derogatory) comments, but it's not an issue that comes up much in serious discussion. This does _not_ mean, of course, that we don't think about it, believe in it, or act according to it. Many do.
> 
> The races most people seem to believe in, around here, coincide in broad terms with the description you gave above, Tvdxer. But because we're a Latin country, I suppose there's a subtle difference of perspective between our views, and those of the U.S. or northern Europe. People here tend to be more "inclusive" with regard to the white race. You don't have to be as light-skinned, as light-haired, or as light-eyed to be considered white, and most people don't seem to care much for finding colour hierarchies _within_ the white race. (Which would of course be self-defeating.) The black race may be another matter.
> 
> However, the ethnic group which is most openly disliked in Portugal, in my experience, are the gypsies, whom most would describe as "white", even if they do tend to look slightly darker than average.


 
I know a Polish woman who says "I despise them" too. What have they (the gypsies) done to Europe?


----------



## Outsider

I have never had strong feelings towards gypsies, so the best I can do is guess.

- Because they lived apart from the rest of society, gypsies often did illegal things to survive. This led others to associate them with criminality. It's unfair, because if you stop to think about it there are many criminals who are not gypsies, too, but most people just never stop to think.

- Gypsies are a very tightly-knit group. If you clash with one of them today, you're likely to have twenty knocking on your door tomorrow. I think this makes people scared of them.

- More recently, I suspect that some people dislike gypsies because they disapprove of their way of life. Their society is very traditional, and very patriarchal. We've just had a thread about arranged marriages; gypsy marriages are typically arranged. Women must submit completely to their parents, brothers and husbands, and infractions are repressed with brutality. I think all this wasn't very different in the rest of society, not long ago, but people tend to forget.


----------



## übermönch

Adding to what Outsider said, gypsies were never accepted as a part of the soceity and allways filled the lowest ranks... and the other way round - nomadic people filling the lowest ranks and speaking a strange language, not regarding if it was celtic or indoiranian, were called gypsies.
By the way, Gypsies in Germany are also one of the most hated groups sharing this position with any immigrants(' descendands), esp. Turks.


----------



## diddue

Outsider said:
			
		

> I have never had strong feelings towards gypsies, so the best I can do is guess.
> 
> - Because they lived apart from the rest of society, gypsies often did illegal things to survive. This led others to associate them with criminality. It's unfair, because if you stop to think about it there are many criminals who are not gypsies, too, but most people just never stop to think.
> 
> - Gypsies are a very tightly-knit group. If you clash with one of them today, you're likely to have twenty knocking on your door tomorrow. I think this makes people scared of them.
> 
> - More recently, I suspect that some people dislike gypsies because they disapprove of their way of life. Their society is very traditional, and very patriarchal. We've just had a thread about arranged marriages; gypsy marriages are typically arranged. Women must submit completely to their parents, brothers and husbands, and infractions are repressed with brutality. I think all this wasn't very different in the rest of society, not long ago, but people tend to forget.



Hi everybody, 

this is a very interesting thread, but how is possible avoid political discussion as tvdxer would? 
In Italy too are Gypsies the most unliked people. This  is obviously  "racism". these sentences above are what people think about gypsies, not the thrue. In Italy some gypsies are also  Italians, but nobody realises this :-(, they all are considered as Gypsies, not as Itlalians. 

Cristina


----------



## french4beth

While at university, an anthropology professor posed the following question: "How many different races are there?"
After several attempts by students to correctly answer the question, he replied: "There is only 1 race, the human race." This event radically changed the way I thought of the word 'race' if the word actually refers to all of humanity.

Found this on wikipedia.com:


> Many evolutionary and social scientists think common race definitions, or any race definitions pertaining to humans, lack taxonomic rigour and validity. They argue that race definitions are imprecise, arbitrary, derived from custom, and that the races observed vary according to the culture examined. They further maintain that "race" as such is best understood as a social construct, and conceptualize and analyze human genotypic and phenotypic variation in terms of populations and clines instead.


I think that what you're speaking about, tvdxer, is _ethnicity_. That's just my two cents' worth...


----------



## gjou

Hello,
this is quite a fussy issue.
France as you may know, has hosted many foreigners from very various countries, mainly from africa, in the recent decades.
This huge and quite recent (20-30 years) shift of population didn't happen without any opposition from natives. In fact today the "front national" wich laud eviction of foreigners, scores 30% of votes in France.
But it's quite difficult to clear up in this reaction, what comes from mere xenophobia, and what comes from racism.
Actualy, I don't think that french people are deeply racists. Many countries would probably have reacted more violently against this kind of situation. 
Maybe because our republican tradition wants us to be indifferent to the color of other's skin.
But of course, things are much too complex..


----------



## vince

There is only one race, the human race. Sure you can divide the world's population into different groups, but does this classification tell us anything? Originally people just grouped people based on skin color. This wasn't very scientific because this would cause black-skinned people from Africa to be grouped with black-skinned people from Australia. Then people tried to find scientific bases to justify their racism. So they tried to look for different genes. But which genes and phenotypes determine people's race? There are many genetic characteristics that a group of people half-way across the globe share that they may not share with a group that lives two hundred miles away.

How I like to view it is that we are one human race with many cultures. But do not confuse culture with race - a "white" person can be of traditionally African culture just as an "Asian" person can be of traditionally European culture. In a truly globalized world, one's appearance does not dictate their culture, religion, personality, and traditions.


----------



## vince

Race in Canada (in Toronto, at least):

In Canada, people often pride themselves as being different from the U.S. in not being racist, but this is not true. In Canada there is a general racist sentiment, but it is what I call "enlightened racism".

Here, people don't group you into broad White, Latino, Black, and Asian categories. You are grouped into ethnic groups, hence the "enlightened". Instead of only looking at skin color, you are judged based on your skin color PLUS wherever most of your ancestors are from. The term "Asian-Canadian" is very rare compared to "Asian-American", it is because people don't identify themselves as Asian here, but Chinese, Korean, Philipino, Vietnamese, etc. There is no pan-Asian solidarity or sense of community. Only within each ethnic group. Why is this still a form of racism? Because membership within each ethnic group is determined by your appearance and where your ancestors are from, not by whose traditions and culture you actually take part in. If you are of "Asian descent" but were born and raised in Venezuela, no one will believe you are Hispanic here, but a Chinese-Canadian. As such, due to the official policy of multiculturalism here, you are strongly encouraged to preserve "your" ethnically-determined Chinese culture: speak Cantonese/Mandarin, use chopsticks, dress like in HK/Taiwan. I mean, you are free to speak Spanish and listen to Latin music if you wish, but your "true" identity is Chinese.

Here in Canada, people claim they are not racist because they want to learn more about other cultures. So they will often ask you where you are from. They will not be satisfied if you say, "I was born and raised in Toronto". They will persist and ask, "no, where are you REALLY from? Where are your ancestors from?" If you give in and say "China", then they will ask you things like, "what sort of things do people eat in YOUR country?", fully implying that your country is not Canada, but whatever your ethnic origin says you are from.

In Toronto, there is very little interaction between immigrant ethnic groups, so in a way people are segregated like in the U.S. based on their physical appearance. The difference here is that you are segregated not by poor economic conditions beyond your control, but by voluntary association with people of your own ethnicity. Many people have been in Canada for 30+ years and even have Canadian citizenship, but they only speak English when doing business and have few friends outside their ethnic group. They often view outsiders with mistrust, saying things (in their native language, of course) like "oh, those thieving Chinese can't be trusted!" or "Tamil people grow up to be gangsters".

So is Canada really better than the U.S. in terms of race? In a way yes, but in many ways, no.


----------



## diddue

french4beth said:
			
		

> "There is only 1 race, the human race." This event radically changed the way I thought of the word 'race' if the word actually refers to all of humanity.



I agree. 
 one race, several peoples...


cristina


----------



## vince

diddue said:
			
		

> I agree.
> one race, several peoples...
> 
> 
> cristina



If by "people" you mean culture, then I agree.
But if "people" is a concept you want to tie genetics and bloodline to, then I disagree, you might as well use the term "race".


----------



## diddue

vince said:
			
		

> If by "people" you mean culture, then I agree.
> But if "people" is a concept you want to tie genetics and bloodline to, then I disagree, you might as well use the term "race".


Sorry, I 'm not english , I'm learning.. in Italian "popolo" is connected with culture, so  I guess the same for English ... yes, for sure I mean culture!!!

Cristina


----------



## .   1

*LABELLED*

If you see what I can't I'm autistic - If I see what you can't I'm psychotic
If you hear what I can't I'm moronic - If I hear what you can't I'm schizophrenic
*Labels are used to cover personal inadequacy*
If I laugh when you don't I am manic - If you laugh when I don't I'm egocentric
If I cry when you don't I'm depressive - If you cry when I don't I'm abrasive
*A perceived difference is created by the label*
If I work when you don't I'm obsessive - If you work when I don't I'm regressive
If I drink when you don't I'm a drunk - If you don't when I do I'm a prude
*That difference is then exaggerated*
If I toke when you don't I'm a crim - If you toke when I don't I am prim
If I'm she and you're he I am feminist - If I'm he and you're she I am chauvinist
*From exaggeration comes separation*
If I dream what you don't I am rampant - If you dream what I don't I am stagnant
When you tear our trees down I am pained - When I stand in your path I'm fair game
*To separate is to repress*
When you get in my face I am punched - If I get near your face I am punched
If you know what I don't I'm excluded - If I know what you don't I'm deluded
*Labels are used to cover personal inadequacy*
*A perceived difference is created by the label*
*That difference is then exaggerated*
*From exaggeration comes separation*
*To separate is to repress*

When you think what I can’t you are able
If I think what you don't who is labelled

.,,


----------



## vince

That was a great poem

I agree with it -- labels often serve to divide and discriminate.

Why can't we all be considered as human beings

Why must we create pre-conceived notions of people based on their physical appearances, or who a couple of their ancestors were?

Why can't we be judged as individuals and not as a group?

Why can't we have the freedom to be who we want to be or do what we want to do, and not be limited by what racist society says we can be?


----------



## GenJen54

*MOD WARNING: *

*HERE IS THE TOPIC OF THE THREAD: *


> How is race perceived in your home culture or region? What races do people where you live generally divide humans into, and what are some nationalities that fit into those various races?
> 
> An important note: this thread is not intended to be scientific (or pseudo-scientific), but merely to be a place to describe cultural perceptions. Please do not let this degenerate into a political discussion* nor poetic explication*.


 
Please respect the thread starter's desire for topic. If you cannot do so, please do not post. Future off-topic posts will be deleted. Thank you.


----------



## maxiogee

. said:
			
		

> If I drink when you don't I'm a drunk - If you don't when I do I'm a prude



These two phrases state the same condition —> I do, you don't.


----------



## panjabigator

Many people assume that Asians are just people who are of East Asian decent.  I cannot say the word Indian because people assume Native American, and that I'm using a misnomer.  I can't say Asian either (people have "corrected me").  

I'd say in Florida, the division done by people is simple: white, black, or hispanic.  And then there is other...


----------



## GenJen54

panjabigator said:
			
		

> I'd say in Florida, the division done by people is simple: white, black, or hispanic. And then there is other...


 
When I lived in South Florida, I noted in particular how careful people were to be specific when referring to the latino/hispanic communities, because there are/were so many. 

We didn't say hispanic, we said Cuban (Cubano), Mexican, Nicaraguan, Colombian, Venezuelan, Guatemalan, etc.

There was also a strong Haitian population there, and they were never lumped in with African-Americans or blacks. 

On government documents, of course, this is a different story. I noticed in general everyday speaking however, specific country groups were more common.


----------



## panjabigator

GenJen54 said:
			
		

> When I lived in South Florida, I noted in particular how careful people were to be specific when referring to the latino/hispanic communities, because there are/were so many.
> 
> We didn't say hispanic, we said Cuban (Cubano), Mexican, Nicaraguan, Colombian, Venezuelan, Guatemalan, etc.
> 
> There was also a strong Haitian population there, and they were never lumped in with African-Americans or blacks.
> 
> On government documents, of course, this is a different story. I noticed in general everyday speaking however, specific country groups were more common.



I would definitely follow the terminology that you provided to identify a community rather than lump them up as I posted earlier.  But I have noticed many people just call someone Black and not Hatian, or Hispanic and not Guatamalan.


----------



## .   1

maxiogee said:
			
		

> These two phrases state the same condition —> I do, you don't.


Yeah,
Thanks mate.
I find it very difficult to proof-read my own work.
The line should be;
If I drink when you don't I'm a drunk - If I don't when you do I'm a prude

It is extremely gratifying to have someone examine my work to this depth and it makes the time invested in this forum seem as though I am able to accomplish something.

.,,


----------



## danielfranco

When I was growing up in Mexico I didn't know I was a racist, but my extended family-unit and their associates thought that the darker your skin was, the less "worth" you had. But they also taught me to look down on people with a lighter skin tone. The lighter (whiter) you were, the dumber you were. In fact, if your skin was of any other color than that of the majority of them, you were not worth their time because you were somehow "less" than they.
Fine...

Nuts to them, say I.

That's one of the many reasons why now I live three thousand miles away from them: You see, I have the darkest skin color among all of them...
So now I surround myself with people that think as I taught myself to think, and teach my children this new version of things: "There is only one race, the human race; and, do you know what color it is? It is black... (go on, ask a Geneticist, really)"

Deal with it, I recently told a few relatives, with an ugly smirk on my face...


----------



## hedonist

danielfranco said:
			
		

> When I was growing up in Mexico I didn't know I was a racist, but my extended family-unit and their associates thought that the darker your skin was, the less "worth" you had. But they also taught me to look down on people with a lighter skin tone. The lighter (whiter) you were, the dumber you were. In fact, if your skin was of any other color than that of the majority of them, you were not worth their time because you were somehow "less" than they.
> Fine...
> 
> Nuts to them, say I.
> 
> That's one of the many reasons why now I live three thousand miles away from them: You see, I have the darkest skin color among all of them...
> So now I surround myself with people that think as I taught myself to think, and teach my children this new version of things: "There is only one race, the human race; and, do you know what color it is? It is black... (go on, ask a Geneticist, really)"
> 
> Deal with it, I recently told a few relatives, with an ugly smirk on my face...





> That's one of the many reasons why now I live three thousand miles away from them: You see, I have the darkest skin color among all of them...


But that's no reason to bail out on your own people.  If you don't love your own _family_ (extended ethnicity in this case), then certainly nobody else will.  There are people with issues in every ethinicity, don't paint them all (including your own) with the same brush.  I guess that's the defeatist attitude you were talking about before.  Is it any wonder then why Mexico is the way it is when there's lack of pride and love for one's country.


----------



## maxiogee

. said:
			
		

> It is extremely gratifying to have someone examine my work to this depth and it makes the time invested in this forum seem as though I am able to accomplish something.



Well I'm a philosophical git at times. It looked worth reading, and for that reason it was also worth proof-reading.


by the by


> .,,
> Trying not to judge


Isn't 'trying' the whole purpose of a judge! 

It's a good motto however, when it comes to different traditions and cultures, as we can never really know the backstory of why people do what they do and say what they say unless we not only sharte a language with them but also have some common cultural references.


----------



## danielfranco

hedonist said:
			
		

> But that's no reason to bail out on your own people.  If you don't love your own _family_ (extended ethnicity in this case), then certainly nobody else will.  There are people with issues in every ethinicity, don't paint them all (including your own) with the same brush.  I guess that's the defeatist attitude you were talking about before.  Is it any wonder then why Mexico is the way it is when there's lack of pride and love for one's country.



Oh, don't worry about any of that, hedonist. The reasons to bail out on those people (family and relatives) were manifold.
As to loving them, that's no problem at all, I do love them, I just don't want to be near them, is all.
I'm explaining this because I don't want you all to draw the wrong conclusion: I didn't say in any part of my post that ALL Mexicans or ALL people who share my ancestry are racists. I just mentioned the fact that the people I KNEW were like that. Perhaps, in the spirit of political correctness I should have said "many of them", or even "some of them", or maybe "inside sources have implied that...", or something like that.
As for the conclusion that Mexico is the way it is because of the "lack of pride and love" for it, I don't know what to say... If I had stayed there, then maybe I'd be part of the problem, no? But I didn't. I don't know if that's part of the defeatist attitude mentioned before.
Oh, I give up, is no good anyway, I don't know why I try when I know I'm no good at all...


----------



## oxazol

Only one thing:  Stop using stupid politically correct words!!!!
Of course that there are differents races in humans:
- One species: Homo Sapiens
- Several races with tiny genetical differences.
There are physiological differences such us: hair, eyes, nose, skin.....
The problem is that now, we are all mixed and it not useful (and not socially correct) to use this concept.


----------



## french4beth

oxazol said:
			
		

> Only one thing: Stop using stupid politically correct words!!!!


May I invite you to peruse the WR rules?


> 2. Be *helpful*, not hurtful.
> 3. Be *polite*.
> 24. Always be respectful of other users, the system, and the moderators. We put the system online in good faith. Please use it in good faith.
> 26. Personal attacks on other members will be removed. Any offensive remarks may, at the discretion of the moderators, be removed. The rules of *common courtesy and decency* shall be applied at all times.


And: 


> The WordReference Forums Guidelines
> Mission Statement
> II. The Forums promote learning and maintain an atmosphere that is serious, academic and collaborative, with a respectful*, helpful and cordial tone*.


----------



## übermönch

oxazol said:
			
		

> Only one thing:  Stop using stupid politically correct words!!!!


yeah, better try these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_slurs


> Of course that there are differents races in humans:
> - One species: Homo Sapiens
> - Several races with tiny genetical differences.
> There are physiological differences such us: hair, eyes, nose, skin.....
> The problem is that now, we are all mixed and it not useful (and not socially correct) to use this concept.


So there are 6 milliards races minus twins.


----------

