LABEL MY RACE HUMAN

"He believed that like skin color, cranial profile, etc., went hand in hand with declarations of group character and aptitude."

The different physical traits of African Americans and Indians became markers or symbols of their status differences. The concept of race was developed and established by a study and thesis paper written by Johann Friedrich Blumenbach. It is amazing how the mere words of another person can effect and change the course of history, and the wealth, health and well being of another. Mere words, whether based on truth, personal beliefs or delusion can make or break a world, a nation, a life, mere words.

The label of race in America was used as a way for the proponents of slavery to continue using humans as free labor, to keep the poor, poor and make the rich richer while integrating the idea in the mind of the Caucasian that their 'race' was superior to that of the Indians and the African. Only society makes a difference between people.

There is nothing in the law of nature that makes one color of person superior to another despite the fact cultural differences, language barrier, and the color of skin all fused together to form a case set against another group of people.

Blumenbach, born May 11, 1752 was a German physiologist and anthropologist. His thesis paper written about the difference in people and titled On the Natural Varieties of Mankind was considered one of the most influential papers of his time and basically established the way different races are seen in the world today. The separation of the people by race was established in order to institute the separation by social and economic differences. 

The idea of the Caucasian race to be superior to other races has been spread across the entire world. How people have been accepted and treated within the context of a given society or culture has a direct impact on how they perform in that society. Racial beliefs constitute myths about the diversity in the human species and about the abilities and behavior of people placed into "racial" categories.

 The myths combined the perception of behavior and physical features together in the public mind, and blocked the ability to understand behavior is not a genetic determination of a person. Temperaments, dispositions, and personalities, regardless of genetic, are developed by the life we live. Blumenbach's theory was based on his study of 60 human skulls, with these skulls Blumenbach divided humans in to fiv e races, Caucasian (white), Mongolian (yellow), Malayan (brown), Ethiopian (black), and American (red). Later in life Blumenbach was in Switzerland when he came across a beautiful Black woman who caused him to do further anatomical research and come up with the belief that Africans were not inferior to the rest of mankind. Unfortunately these later ideas were far less influential than his earlier assertions with regard to the perceived relative qualities of the different so-called races.

He believed that like skin color, cranial profile, etc., went hand in hand with declarations of group character and aptitude. *The "fairness" and relatively high brows of Caucasians were held to be apt physical expressions of a loftier mentality and a more generous spirit. *The epicanthic folds around the eyes of Mongolians and their slightly sallow outer epidermal layer bespoke their supposedly crafty, literal-minded nature
*The dark skin and relatively sloping craniums of Ethiopians were taken as proof of a closer genetic relations to the apes. Despite the fact the skin of chimpanzees and gorillas beneath the hair is whiter than the average Caucasian skin and orangutans and some monkey species have foreheads fully as vertical as the typical Englishman or German. Blumenbach's analysis sealed the fate of every race other than Caucasian as inferior. Looking over the list of the awesome people that have made America the fantastic country it is today, it is has been proven time and time again that the 'inferior' label placed on many races is false. Basically what it all boils down to is the fact one set of people decided they were better than another, used the unknown about the Indians and Africans' culture to foster the belief further and spurred the lies and discrimination to justify the psychological, and physical torture aimed at another group of people
.
Blumenbach died January 22, 1840. His classification and the scientific concept of human races was widely accepted for about two hundred years, but in the late twentieth century, it came to light that Homo sapiens could not be divided into races or subspecies. So where did the term Caucasian originate? The term Caucasian is sometimes used to refer to people whose ancestry can be traced back to Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, South Asia, Russia, and in certain areas of the Horn of Africa and Central Asia. In Europe (especially in Russia and the surrounding area), Caucasian usually refers exclusively to people who are from the Caucasus region or speak the Caucasian languages. Usage of the term Caucasian as a racial classification declined in Europe in the 19th century because it did not allow for enough distinctions as required by the new forms of nationalism that were emerging. In The United Kingdom, Caucasian refers to people from the Caucasus. In Canada, the term Caucasian is known, but rarely used as a description of white people. In Australia and New Zealand, the term Caucasian is mainly used in police offender descriptions. In New Zealand, the terms more commonly used to describe white people are Pakeha, European New Zealander, or simply New Zealander. In the United States, Caucasian has primarily been used as a distinction based on skin color, for a group commonly referred to as White Americans, as defined by the government and Census Bureau. A large segment of the Hispanic community in the United States can be scientifically categorized as Caucasoid, but may not be labeled as white (by themselves or others). The question of a difference between the Caucasian race and white as a racial category in the United States has led to at least one set of major legal contradictions in the United States Supreme Court in the pre-Civil Rights era. In the case of Ozawa v. United States (1922), the court ruled that a law which extended U.S. citizenship only to whites did not apply to fair-skinned people from Japan, because: The term white person, as used in [the law], and in all the earlier naturalization laws, beginning in 1790, applies to such persons as were known in this country as white, in the racial sense, when it was first adopted, and is confined to persons of the Caucasian Race. A Japanese born in Japan, being clearly not a Caucasian cannot be made a citizen of the United States. However a year later, the same court was faced with the trial of United States v. Bhagat Singh Thind (1923), where they ruled that someone from the Indian subcontinent could not become a naturalized United States citizen, because they were not white. The Supreme Court conceded that anthropologists had classified Indians as Caucasians, and thus the same race as whites, as defined in Ozawa. However, it concluded that the average man knows perfectly well there are unmistakable and profound differences, and denied citizenship. After Blumenbach's time, the term Caucasian no longer was associated with peoples from the Caucasus but continued to be used as a racial indicator. Wow, amazing how one person's opinion, a mere word shaped America. We are a nation that thrives on 'mere' words to shape our actions and thoughts...mere can almost be integrated into our name A-mer-i-ca.

Beads On A String-America's Racially Intertwined Biographical History ~

Kindle, Smashwords , Sony or Kobo, Scribed
Nook and iTunes Before you leave, please take some time to do this…

Write down a couple of quick notes for:

Ways this post or blog held or lost your attention.

Is there a way I can enchance it visually?

Did you find any interest in the featured book?

What social network would be best for you to share this information?

I'd love it if you told me your answers in the comments below so I can know how to serve my readers.

Would you like to read a sample of my writings in other genres? Download a free copy of, " WHEN ONE DOOR CLOSES" At Smashwords HERE Put in code: MP63V

Times have changed or so people keep professing. You would think with these changing times acceptance of differences would have grown as a norm. Instead the opposite is true.

Okay, I'm still blogging from A-Z and "T" has caused me to think hard. Over the airwaves, I saw three things yesterday that really bugged me.

1. Racism in publishing and writing. The hardest thing in the world is to have a book published. To make it even harder, throw in skin color. I can speak of other nationalities having the same problems, but think about it....if race is brought up, it's always a Black/White thing. The truth is (and I don't want to venture into why) African Americans are still getting flogged. Sure many things have changed, but discrimination is slapping us in the face in the bookstores and the publishing arena. Why the big separation? No matter what 'we' write it ends up under the label of a color.  The characters on the covers are more often than not white-washed because the belief is no one would want to read books published by one of us. And our beauty does not sale books.

How many people of different races venture down the African American rows? It puts a block on whether or not a writer become a successful author. Truth be said, Americans (Black) authors writing about Black characters whether they are American or not do not get front placement as Americans (White)authors writing about Black characters. One of the best sites I have run across is White Readers Meet Black Authors. Carleen Brice does a wonderful job of highlighting awesome books by Americans of different nationalities and this particular highlighted author hits right on the point.  Desegregation has not made an impact on the publishing world. I write and I read in color. I am not a label.

2. Traditional & Self-Publication. I don't know a writer worth their weight who wouldn't want to have their words traditionally published. The process is hard, nerve wrecking, and totally frustrating. Not to mention the querying process for a coveted agent. You have to have the self-esteem of a brick and the skin of leather. To make it worse, when one gets tired of the routine and decides to self-publish they (and their works) are treated as if they are a preschooler without the ability to string together words and put together a professional package. I think its sad when this ability is rated as the lowest form of writing and disregarded as trash. We may miss out on some great literary works because of another labeling stigma.

3.Homeschooling & Unschooling.This topic can also tie in with the others because its worthiness is garnered from it's label. As a person who home & unschooled three daughters into college, and these girls run their own businesses, I feel irritated when people spout off about children educated in this manner becoming hindrances to fellow citizens. The process of sharing knowledge comes from all aspects of society and I really don't think one is waaaay better than the other. Failures come from public, private as well as the home educated. The method nor the process to educate matter as much as the attention given to the one being educated. In this day and age with the vast amount of abilities to get information failure is not an option it is a choice.

Anyway, as I said times have changed. Its time for the people to change.