anthropaper

docx

School

University of Toronto *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

204

Subject

Anthropology

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by ConstableBoulder12801

1. Define the “integrative” and “exploitative” theories of social stratification, and briefly discuss how they ex- plain social hierarchy. Cultural anthropological theory has largely defined the schools of thought of social hierarchy theory through the binary lens of the integrative theory and the exploitative theory. Integrative theory posits that there is a necessity for a social hierarchy in order for society to operate accordingly. The latter theory posits that the very conception of social hierarchy exists as an oppressive tool for a dominant class to take advantage of another. Both of these schools of thought seek to explain social phenomena by identify- ing socioeconomic conditions and power dynamics within social groups. These social classes are typically classified as the upper class, middle class and the lower class, each possessing a unique set of social characteristics and trends. All of these classes are bred from the inherent inequalities existing in all social hierar- chies regardless of size or composition, even extending to tribal and uncivilized societies. The integrative school of thought grounds their theory in the open class system which ascribes a meritocracy and places less em- phasis on upbringing, family status, sex and other socially as- cribed categories in favour of the potential for upward mobility in the social strata. The exploitative school of thought differs in that all social hierarchies are defined in terms of class conflict under which the upper class always seeks to exploit the lower classes by seizing the means of power and overlooking the true value of labour for profit motives. These ideas are derived from Karl Marx’s dialectical materialism for which he describes the self enrichment fuelled hunt for material wealth as the root issue at hand in the conflict of the social classes. While both theories oppose one an- other at a fundamental level they both serve well in in advancing the discussion of social hierarchy by providing a nuanced per- spective of how social strata interact with one another at a an economic, political and cultural level and how civilization has de- veloped this very division.

2. How does institutional/structural racism differ from indi- vidual racial bias or bigotry? Give one example and ex- plain how structural racism operates? The discussion of race relations in North America has played a critical role in our political and social discourses for centuries. De- spite virtual scientific consensus that the very concept of race is a social construct that bases its social hierarchy on populist claims of a difference in physical characteristics amongst a subset of people, the discussion of race and identity politics still remains very relevant. The North American construction of race has a history of division as we have seen with the legacy of Jim Crow and the transatlantic slave trade. The residual impact of slavery is still prevalent al- though fortunately not as apparent. Racism has now become more institutional and clandestine as we have progressed to un- derstand the dangers of alienating people on the basis of race. However, this institutional racism operates at a much more com- plex level as it has become entrenched into our social and eco- nomic fabric and has become harder to identify. The practice of systemically discriminating against minorities through the imple- mentation of policies and activities that seek to further divide people along racial lines. A prominent example of this is redlining, a policy that exists in both Canada and America for which minori- ties are systematically denied loans, insurance and essential fi- nancial services. Redlining is the practice of marking neighbour- hoods off as “risky” based on how frequently people would default on their loans. Investigations in the 1930s identified how banks were still loaning to poorer caucasians and excluding African Americans at an alarming rate leading to the enactment of the Community Reinvestment Act in 1977 to correct this malpractice. Redlining is a stark example of how structural racism operates as it demonstrates how authorities can knowingly coordinate plans to target minorities on the premise of race at a macro level to set them back financially. This concept differs from racial bias and bigotry as both of these concepts apply discrimination on the ba- sis of race individually and can be better described as micro ag- gressions.

3. State and briefly explain three main factors that con- tributed to the emergence of capitalism in Europe. Medieval era feudalism established early capitalist systems in Eu- rope as ruling classes and lower classes operated within a clearly defined social hierarchy. The totalitarianism of the monarchy pro- vided an exceptional setting for an aristocracy in the form of no- bles that possessed land and acclaim to subjugate and exploit the labour of serfs. In return for a very modest abode serfs were com- manded to commit to the tough rigours of agriculture at the be- hest of lords. Following the collapse of the feudal system in the late 14th century as England assembled a formal military to com- bat the rise of mercenary hiring by aristocrats, the inception of capitalism provided an enormous opportunity for Europe to assert itself as a global power. According to Marx, early developments of capitalism took place in Italy in the late Middle Ages as capitalist agriculture began to bear fruit in response to a demand for labour and agrarian goods. This period is typically described as the Ital- ian Renaissance and a labour market was developed as the peas- antry reminiscent of feudalism began to diminish and aristocrat landowners became invested more in being merchants. The first major factor contributing to Europe’s capitalist evolution was international trade. Trade truly propelled mercantilism into capitalism as foreign nations began to participate in economies of scale which improved production and efficiency exponentially as well as offer an abundance of resources that didn’t exist domesti- cally. European powers that benefited the most from trade began seeking wealth and resources beyond their means through the second major factor — colonialism. The Dutch East Indian Com- pany and several other colonial tools of capitalism were invented to exploit the labour of foreigners to reap resources and consoli- date land. The partition of Africa lead by France and England es- sentially provided the engine for economic growth in Europe through the systematic division of land, people and goods for pur- poses of wealth accumulation and imperialism. An example of this in terms of capitalism was the Royal Africa Company, the British organization responsible for the transportation of thousands of Africans for indentured slavery. That necessarily leads to the third

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

major factor being the transatlantic slave trade which essentially thrusted the American economy into the industrial era and ex- panded Europe’s dominion over sea commerce as they build sea- port towns responsible for this very task alone. 4. Richard Lee debunks two commonly held wrong beliefs about hunter-gatherers in his article “The Hunters: Scarce Resources in the Kalahari”. What are these beliefs and how does Lee disprove them? Richard Lee reigned in on two anthropological views of hunter gatherer societies, the first being that these societies rely primar- ily on hunting game animals and the second being their mode of existence is naturally a dangerous struggle for survival. Through analysis of the King Bushmen of the Kalahari Desert, Lee debunks these widely held beliefs by examining subsistence data that fo- cus on abundance of resources, diet, labour force, population den- sity and relative ratio of work to leisure. Relative assessments of these nature do a better job in assessing the social hierarchy and dynamics of Hunter gatherers as it provides a clearer contextual picture of what is happening in these societies. That being said, in terms of relative abundance based on availability of food within their living area, the hunters enjoy abundance in that their food is plentiful. An example for this is the mongongo nut which com- prised 50% of the hunters’ diet, already contradicting the claim that they necessarily rely on hunting game animals for subsis- tence. The very existence of this nut has driven this hunter soci- ety away from agriculture since the crop is drought resistant and may be harvested for up to 12 months after falling to the ground. In addition, Thomas Hobbes characterization of the state of na- ture as “nasty, brutish and short” suggests a survival of the fittest narrative for which the elderly would not be fit to contribute to these societies. Yet this is not the case for the Bushmen as 46 of the 466 hunters were over 60 years of age, a proportion that is relatively comparable to the industrial world. Rather than aban- don the elderly the youth provide for them and hold them in high esteem as respected leaders with wisdom beyond their years and possessing valuable technical skills that necessitates their exis- tence. Lee concludes by declaring quantitative measures as more

valuable than qualitative assessments that presuppose the con- clusion that hunter gatherers reflect the brutish nature of primi- tive life. A shift towards understanding rather than dramatizing and politicizing can lead to a better understanding of the origins of social hierarchy according to Lee. 5. In her article, ‘The Egg and the Sperm: How Science has Con- structed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles,’ Emily Martin argues that “the picture of egg and sperm drawn in popular as well as scientific accounts of reproductive biology re- lies on stereotypes central to our cultural definitions of male and female.” Drawing on Martin’s analysis, discuss the ways in which “scientific” knowledge produced about sex is culturally filtered and structured. Emily Martin delves into the language that scientists use to de- scribe and depict the egg and sperm and how it has become cor- roded with cultural interpretations of gender roles and attributes. She draws on the early insights of Ruth Hershberger who ob- served how scientific accounts often portray a picture of eggs as “biologically interdependent” in contrast with male sperm cells which are seen as independent. Ruth goes on to explain how this romanticization of biology largely ignores the reality of depen- dence that sperm cells similar to eggs have on other processes such as the “reflex shutting off of the bladder connection” and “secretions which mitigate the urine in the urethra before ejacula- tion to protect the sperm”. Martin similarly observes this trend

across scientific literature as she continues to quote and com- ment on the double standards of language and its profound ef- fects on our view of the fundamental differences between male and female organs. This can be seen in descriptions of the men- strual cycle as a means to an end for its necessary function is to fertilize eggs and produce babies. Beyond that menstruation is of- ten seen as useless or as one scientist puts it “ceasing and los- ing”. The stark juxtaposition is evident in descriptions of male re- production literature as a new form of enthusiasm with a tone of astonishment is attributed to the development of sperm cells as many scientists marvel at the sheer amount of sperm produced on a daily basis by men. Even if one were to argue that menstruation can not be seen as a means to an end similar to sperm cells are in terms of reproduc- tion, this same pattern can be observed with descriptions of ovu- lation with mainstream scientific sentiment deride how the major- ity of women’s germ cells are produced at birth and henceforth continue to age until death. In marked contrast with their male counterparts, women’s ovaries were described by a scientist in a paper as “old and worn out from ripening eggs every month, even though the woman herself is still relatively young”. The depiction drawn of the useless eggs whose production are finalized at birth versus the sperm cells which compound from the beginning of pu- berty present an unfair picture of both male and female reproduc- tive organs as it shines a light on the vast amount of germ cells men produces while largely ignoring the amount that go unused and hence wasted. This point is oddly emphasized for women as their “ripening eggs” produce on average one egg a month yet logically must be seen as less wasteful, assuming scientists are logically deriving these conclusions rather than presupposing the nature of our reproductive organs. Martin further points out in a scientific journal called the Cell the behavioural psychological assessment made to describe the jour- ney of sperm cells to fertilizing eggs. Described as an “existential decision…..sperm are cells with a limited behavioural repertoire, one that is directed toward fertilizing eggs, to execute the deci- sions to..…”. The use of language to depict sperm cells as inde-

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

pendent, decisive and intentional is apparent as expressions like “to execute” imply directional authority applied by free will. Yet, such expressions and metaphors premature scientific literature and textbooks with such stereotypes. Martin likens this insistence on drawing a romanticized dichotomy between male and female reproductive organs to Ludwik Fleck’s concept of the “self con- tained nature of scientific thought” as "the interaction between what is already known, what remains to be learned, and those who are to apprehend it, go to ensure harmony within the system. But at the same time they also preserve the harmony of illusions, which is quite secure within the confines of a given thought”. This astute observation poses legitimate questions to whether the pro- gression of biological knowledge may further deepen the cultural divide or work to reduce its influence on scientific depictions of our male and female biology. Revelations as to the weak force ap- plied by sperm cells to make its way to the egg and the preva- lence of digestive enzymes at Jons Hopkins University demon- strate a break with traditional ideas of sperm cells being a “pene- trative force” that “sweep” eggs for fertilization. Regardless, the narrative continues as sperm cells were still describes as the ag- gressor that binds itself to the eggs independent of other sources and produces the embryo. 6. Discuss what is meant by “race is a myth or illusion”? Does the idea that “race is an illusion” mean that race does not have any effects in our actual lives? [Relate your discussion to the article “Mixed Blood,” the film “Race: Power of an Illusion,” and our lecture on Anthropological Approaches to Race.] W.E.B Du Bois, a prominent black sociologist, commented on what he observed as a disturbing inclination for which society deemed race a biological rather than a social construct. He found the very concept of separating groups of people into social strata such as

“white” and “black” troublesome and deplored it as a practice that ignored true biological diversity. Geneticists favour Du Bois’ view on race as they’ve uncovered the truth regarding race and its relationship to biology: it is irrelevant since genetic diversity has no bearing on social constructions of race. Yet, given how deeply embedded race realism and social hierarchy is within North American discourse and in modern history, genetic research is still riddled with variables designating blacks and whites into their own separate categories. America especially, during the era of Jim Crow and segregation, devolved into speculation of hypo descent which theorizes that anyone with even a drop of blood of an inferior race, most notably Africans, were dismissed as mem- bers of that race, regardless of physical considerations or genetic markets that beg to differ. To this day, there are still scientists and sociologists that peddle race realism pseudoscience such as the infamous Charles Murray and his publication of “The Bell Curve”. Regarded as his flagship production, it promotes an agenda of racial division by attempting to demonstrate differ- ences in intelligence between black people and white people, largely focusing on the average differences in test scores as a ba- sis reference. Furthermore, Murray purports that this difference in intelligence is both hereditary and environmental and that genetic differences may explain the variance between whites and blacks in terms of intelligence. The very premise of these findings oper- ates under the assumption of genetic homogeneity within racial classes as a prime source of reference to understand racial differ- ence, a claim that has been debunked by scientists with legiti- mate credibility. That being said, while race realism may not be a driving anthropological force, race in and of itself certainly is. In the three part series “Race, the power of an illusion”, the narra- tor further expounds on the general consensus that there are no significant genetic traits that justify dividing people along racial lines. That is the underlying message of “race is a myth”, that the concept of race as we know it is superficial and very much socially constructed based on our history and cultural indoctrination. In the second episode of the series titled “The Stories We Tell”, the audience is acquainted with how ancient civilizations did discrimi- nate on the basis of religion, language and tradition but never race, a much more novel concept that may be attributed to Euro-

pean colonialism and the transatlantic slave trade that essentially casted off those with darker skin as akin to livestock and as such useful resources to plunder. The south seceded from America dur- ing the civil war primarily over the issue of slaves as slave owners sought to defend their rights to owning black people as property and objected to modernized notions of liberty brought on by the drive for dire social change. As full blown white supremacy and racism began to go underground and more institutional rather than apparent, we begin to see the impact of socially ascribed perceptions of biological inferiority. Structural racism is better fleshed out in the third episode titled “The House We Live In” as the politicization of race materialized in the form of discriminatory policies with redlining and Jim Crow right at the forefront of it all. Concentrating wealth into white neighbourhoods became a prac- tice of virtue rather than a product of free markets as lenders rou- tinely refused to lend to credit worthy minorities and employers refuse to hire minorities for the fear of scaring business from white folk away. Even with the Civil rights movement and modern day activism, many social inequities have yet to be fully healed such as the massive difference in wealth between blacks, hispan- ics and whites even amongst poorer whites comparative to mi- norities. Any assertions of race being irrelevant to social welfare, especially in America and even in Canada, willfully ignores these realities as even in a proclaimed “post racial society”, race and identity politics continues to remain front and centre in political discourses concerning our rights under the guise of the state and class conflict. While the biological data impressed upon us a truth that our genetic variety cannot be defined along lines or race, any claims of race being an illusion in terms of public opinion and poli- tics falls short if it doesn’t recognize these structural impediments that minorities deal with to this day.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

anthropaper

Related Documents