I think that in earlier times of human history skin color could more accurately define to others the differences among two groups of people. But, not in today's world, where there is great deal of ethnically mixed individuals, especially in the United States. Someone's general geographic look doesn't have to mean anything at all about their social status and/or background, and that is not becoming any less prevalent.
So, as classification by an outward appearance slowly becomes less reliable for us to make the assumptions that we srtive to make, the next point of judgment is in the language used by any individual or a group. I often find myself trying to guess where a person is from by listening to accents. I think we gauge people on many levels when we interact with language. Things like; how much money someone might make, their profession, religious leanings and many other simple assumptions.
Language is definitely intertwined with ethnicity. Being from a mix of European ancestry, I have learned to associate myself with the term "white". Somewhere along the way, I started feeling that the label carried a weight that I didn't feel that I should have to carry. For whatever reason when the question is asked, I like to check the "other" box and write in "European American". Though some can argue that the two have the same meaning, I don' think they do.
I also think that there is the possibility that the "white" ethnicity dominance in the United States is slightly exaggerated by way of the term "white" being one of the most broad options available (except for maybe "American Indian"). This map didn't exactly match up to my own personal definitions of the races. I think if I were to create my own version of this map I would want to add 10 more naming of races to the list. Is that a good or a bad thing?

No comments:
Post a Comment