Race and Ethnicity has been equivalently used by people as referring to both meanings being the same. Race is a biological myth, because society believes that it’s real. Ethnicity is a self-identity with a shared culture. Society is structured around one’s social perception of race and ethnicity, which enables society to categorize according to importance. I’ll discuss how one’s position in the racial hierarchy encourages and permits prejudice and discrimination. Today’s society is structured in a way by the dominant group that prejudice and discrimination comes across more subtlety and even at times unintentionally. This wasn’t always depicted that way in the past. For instance, in the 1930’s and 40’s the Nazi Party, the dominant group, was very open about their prejudice and discrimination toward the subordinate groups which included Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, and Jehovah Witnesses. Not only did they express their feelings of hate, but also acted upon them by taking away their civil rights and perused them with violence. The terms race and ethnicity are often used synonymously to each other. The definition of race has altered by society and time. These terms need to be independently defined in order to fully understand when and how to use the terms race and ethnicity correctly. Race is socially defined as a category based on people’s distinctive physical characteristics that are inherited, such as color of skin, shape of eyes, facial structures. Many groups have identifiable characteristics that don’t make the foundation for one’s racial distinctions. These specific characteristics can be significant in one region or overlooked in another, depending on one’s social criteria. An example of racial distinctions from different regions could be a person with dark colored skin; in the United States this person might be considered black, however, in parts of South America or Dominican Republic they be identified as white. We know people are look different and we group them on the belief that race is a biologically real (PBS). Humans are much more complex than the color of their skin or the shape of your nose. Race is not based on biology, but race is an idea that we ascribe to biology. Yes, we are all different, however, genetically human are more alike to each other as compared to any other species. Students at a workshop performed an experiment testing their own mtDNA. Students discovered they didn’t have very many differences genetically, even though they were not the same color or nationalities. One black student had more in common genetically to a white blonde Russian student than to another black student. There are no pure races, only assorted physical and genetic variations bridging individuals and groups.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau (2012) they have standards on race and ethnicity, which guide the U.S. Census Bureau in classifying written response to the race question. Race as a social concept may vary from one society to another depending on how people of a society perceive physical differences and similarities among human beings. Society takes these differences and assigns social importance in the society. Ethnicity is defined as having a shared cultural identity. Ethnicity is a common bond with a membership of a particular ethic group. This may include sense of history, common origin, language, religion, values, attitudes, behaviors, foods, and forms of dress. Ethnicity has a huge influence on individuals and groups lives. Due to the fact that society is full of different cultures, it shapes the way we interact with ethnic groups not of our own.
In order to explain how we create and recreate what race and ethnicity means, we need to pull apart the social understanding of race and ethnicity. Now that we know the social definition of race and the sociological meaning of ethnicity, we’ll explore how they influence the social perception towards groups that are different. In the United States two social specific “rules” determine racial categories for people of color. First there is the “one drop rule,” if anyone who has African ancestry, doesn’t matter how minute, will be classified as “black.” Next, we have the “rule of hypodescent,” due to multiracial backgrounds they will be excluded to claim membership in the dominant “race,” but will be placed in the minority racial category. The effect of these rules was to support the social American racial categories that were placed on the people. Depending on the variation definition of race and ethnicity each state may have different laws. Segregation is imposed on non-whites, but in order to do that there must be state laws. Anti-Miscegenation Law was demonstrated by prohibiting interracial marriages. Many states made stipulations that any person one forth or more African ancestry was legally claimed as “black,” hence, prohibited them from marrying someone “white.” The selection of state laws defining racial categories undermined the illogical nature of such classification (Yetman 1999), however, in 1967, Supreme Court ruled in a case of Loving v. Virginia. The judge said the law was unconstitutional. Another case took place in Louisiana (Yetman1999). The case demonstrated the procedure of “one drop rule” and the “rule of hypodescent.” Susie Phipps, a light skinned woman with white features, and black straight hair, noted on her birth certificate classified her as “colored.” Mrs. Phipps disputed, claimed she was brought up white and married a white man twice. She challenged the Louisiana law of 1970. The state maintained their decision of her classification as “colored.” Louisiana did later repeal the laws. This racial categorization did not reflect her physical characteristics, she looked white, but because of her ancestry being of color, even though she did not carry that trait visually. We had a class discussion about Gregory Howard Williams growing up in Virginia believing he was “white.” Williams wrote a book about his experience describing his difficulties trying to balance “life on the color line” between black and white. At the age of ten he moved to Muncie, Indiana with his father. He was told his life was going to be different in Muncie. His father explained to him and his brother that in Virginia they were white boys, but in Indiana they are colored boys, therefore, you’ll be treated differently. In Muncie they were forced into a racially segregated community. The socially structured style of racial and ethnic categories and identities is revealed by situations which persons change categories. If race classifications are real, then people should not be able to escape the change. These examples demonstrate that racial identity are based on the nature of social construction, no matter how arbitrary and irrational, society creates criteria to allow one group to treat another differently because of ancestry or color of skin. It goes deeper than just physical differences. Much more is implicated, based on the social categories to which people are assigned. These behaviors society conducted created a barrier between the racial categories, as to keep black people separate from white people. Society has constructed “white” is good and “black” is bad. Sometimes society makes mistakes, and then they change concepts or criteria. As in 1988 (USY 1988 in Yetman1999p.6), a South African newspaper reported a list of nearly 800 South Africans who became officially members of a different race group the year before. This information reinforces the notion that social categories are socially based. More commonly racial conflicts in America are based on physical, rather than the cultural differences, also more intense. In other global regions, conflicts between ethnic cultures or even religions are socially constructed. Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland have had their religious differences in the past quarter century.
Open system stratification allows people to change social positions with very little to get in their way to achieve the social mobility desired; this isn’t always the case in different regions around the world. While working on my forum one assignment, I learned about the concept of the system of stratification. Closed systems are groups in a fixed social class because of their race, ethnicity, social background, or sex, which they have no control. The strictest stratification is the cast system. Caste system is described by rigid separate social categories, which a person’s status is birth-ascribed, inherited, permanent and fixed. No chance to change. The dominant society had total control over the weaker minority.
In Japan there’s a Burakumin society, and are descendants of the untouchable “eta caste.” They are despised and are considered outcaste status by the other Japanese society. Laws were made to stabilize their inferior status in society, even though they looked no different than any other Japanese person. The eta caste was emancipated, but still is looked down upon socially. Burakumin still haven’t gained equality, because they are economically, politically, and socially trapped from their cultural difference.
One’s position in the racial hierarchy encourages and permits prejudice and discrimination. This happens because society has created relationships that keep them divided. Minority groups are subordinate in terms of power and privilege to the majority, or dominant, group. A minority is defined not by being outnumbered but by unequal treatment, distinctive physical or cultural traits, involuntary membership, awareness of subordination, and in-group marriage. Subordinate groups are classified in terms of race, ethnicity, religion, and gender. Significant for racial and ethnic oppression in the United States is the distinction between assimilation and pluralism. Assimilation demands subordinate-group conformity to the dominant group, and pluralism implies mutual respect among diverse groups.
The dominant group always sees the subordinate groups as a constant threat to their social position, even when things are stable. The conflict may not be continuous or obvious in a social system based on inequality, but the chance of conflict is always there (Yetman1999). This type of thinking was evident in the American slave system. Slave owners, the dominate group, applied regulations in order to keep their slaves subordinate. They didn’t allow slaves to read or write, no leaving plantation without a pass, unable to carry guns, and they used physical violence to keep them subordinate. Controlling the slaves every aspect of life kept the slaves with a feeling inferiority.
The dominant group constantly blames social problems on the subordinate group. Knowing the dominant group lets us understand the social living of the subordinate group. The dominant group points out the minority’s deficiency, and deflects them from institutional. Doane’s article identifies that the dominance shapes the nature of group ethnicity (Doane 1997). Race and ethnic relations in the U.S. has been shaped by the nature of the dominant group ethnic identity. Next, the dominant group ethnicity is involved in the intergroup relations. This allows the dominant group to keep a position on top of the ethnic hierarchy. Finally, the dominant group identity and the role are influenced politically and use it in intergroup competition. Over time, the English-American dominant group would widen the ranks and admit new members, because of this dominance of the white Protestant Americans/European Americans has persisted.
An important connection in all majority-minority relationships are prejudice and discrimination. Prejudice and discrimination is not the same. Prejudice is a negative, emotional, or hostile attitude towards a person or group because they’re members of another group. Some forms of prejudice are avoidance, fear, or rudeness. Discrimination consists of negative treatment based on people’s group membership. This Action toward somebody is to hurt them in a social, emotional, economic, or physical way. This can be done in many ways; mild-such as an ethnic jokes; verbal threats or abuse, intimidation, and harassment; ruin property with ethnic slurs, offensive graffiti, unfair treatment, slavery, or outright violence. Prejudice doesn’t always lead to discrimination, but at times act as a cause of discrimination. People can be prejudice without discrimination. Understanding about majority-minority relations isn’t going to happen by prejudice alone (Schermerhorn 1970 in Yetman1999). I will discuss two different types of discrimination. Institutional discrimination is built into a social system, whose effect is to perpetuate and maintain the power, influence and well-being of one group over another. It’s an organized action and social trends, which exclude minorities from equal opportunities of power or status mobility, while portraying a neutral stance. School systems are an example of institutional discrimination; our taxes pay for public school; better neighborhoods collect higher taxes; a district with more money can spend it for better education. While the inner city schools have to deal with lesser money for their school system. Institutional discrimination don’t intend to hurt racial groups up front, but it’s more subtle, complex, and less noticeable than attitudinal discrimination. Attitudinal discrimination is the behavior that spawns from prejudicial attitudes, and it can be direct, visual, and over the top. Racism is a set of ideas and beliefs used to justify, explain, or rationalize a racial social order. Dominant group is believed to be superior to the different racial groups. The ideology gives moral justification for dominant group of their positions of privileges and power, while discouraging minority groups from questioning there established status.
To summarize, we clarified that race and ethnicity cannot be used interchangeably. Race is socially defined as a category based on people’s distinctive physical characteristics that are inherited and ethnicity is defined as having a shared cultural identity. We learned society makes mistakes, and then they change concepts or criteria. Anti-Miscegenation Law demonstrated how the dominant group tried to keep people from interracial marriages, a form of segregation. The caste system developed a way to keep power and prestige for the dominant group, while subordinate never change social status. Social categories are socially based. One’s position in the racial hierarchy encourages and permits prejudice and discrimination. Society has created relationships that keep groups divided. The dominant group constantly blames social problems on the subordinate group, because the institutional will always deflect blame. Doane’s article about dominant group ethnic identity introduced the connection between our social construction and our own hidden ethnic identity. Prejudice; negative attitude and discrimination; negative treatment definitions clarified when and how in society it’s used. Racism ideology to justify the behavior towards people who are different adds to the complexity of race and ethnicity in our social construction. Discrimination persists in U.S. even if it’s subtle or unintentional.

Citations

PBS. 2003 California Newsreel. Race- The Power of Illusion. Episode One: The Difference Between Us. http://www.pbs.org/race/000_About/002_04-about-01-01.htm
Schermerhorn, Richard A. 1970. Comparative Ethnic Relations: A Framework for Theory and Research. New York: Random House.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. 2012 .Race Categories. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. http://www.census.gov/population/race/about/
UYS, Pieter-Dirk. 1988. “Chameleons Thrive Under Apartheild.” New York Times. September 23.
Yetman, Norman R. 1999. Majority and Minority; The Dynamics of Race and Ethnicity in American Life. Allyn and Bacon.