Week+12

http://telltalechart.org/data-visualizations/ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=ask-gini http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/01/stop-using-the-word-caucasian-to-mean-white/

With the publicity Vandana Sharma earned from her stand against her would be in-lands raise on her dowry and the anti-dowry media resulting, will this further push the tradition of dowries toward unpopularity? In addition, will the police be further encouraged to enforce the law against dowries as well as will the people be encouraged to follow it more?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1qbalfTPBE

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/all-let-off-in-nisha-sharma-dowry-case-after-9-years/235004-3.html

http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/nisha-sharma-dowry-case-noida-court-acquits-all-accused/1/176012.html

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-10-14/dinesh-khanna/34450123_1_dowry-prohibition-act-legal-terrorism-section-498a

While I was reading "Ten Facts about Human Variation," there was a part that I disagreed with. Number seven says: "People are similar to those nearby and different from those far away." In this day and age of increasing globalization, can we really say this is true? I mean, the new generation is similar to the people nearby, assuming families settle down, but people move all over the world today, and so demes might actually be scattered across the globe.

Throughout the essay, "Ten Facts About Human Evolution," by J. Marks, many <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">examples were discussed in which more modern cultures (Europe, American, etc) <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">see race as a difference among individuals. While biologically, peoples' <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">genes are relatively similar in that people as whole are not inherently <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">biologically different. There were no examples, at least that I noticed, for <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">when less developed societies view people with different skin tones. Do they <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">also view race in the same way that western society has/does? Is there <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">possibly a biological system within humans that forces us to group people <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">within categories simply by outward appearance, or is it simply a product of <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">the environment people grow up in?

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">The article about human variation talked about how variation was mostly <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">brought on due to difference in geography not difference in biology. The <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">author made an important point that knowing about different groups allows for <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">classification in relation to other groups. however I was confused about when <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">the author talked about genetic "racial studies". What does the author means <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">when he say that the studies focused on "a mythological past rather than a <span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">real present?

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">In the article, “Ten Facts about Human Variation” by Jonathan Marks, the US Census has separated the question of “Spanish/Hispanic/Latino” from the idea of race because it designates a linguistic category, however, some people still identify with Hispanic as a race based on the cultural basis of the group. Towards the end of the article it states that “bein Ashkenazi Jewish, Penssylvania Amish, “not northern Euporea, a football player… do not designate groups we would identify as races”. I was wondering why certain labels are considered races but other are not even though there are people who identify with these labels and these labels have a certain culture within them?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Raza

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: arial,sans-serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">Throughout history, there has been different definitions and classifications to "determine" race, from outward appearance to scientific/biological means. But there has been evidence that shows that there can be greater differences in the genes of two people of the same race than those of to two people of different races. This suggests that race cannot be scientifically or biologically determined. Does race exist or is it something that is constructed by humans? Who usually has the power to set the factors to determine race? With more people being multi-racial each day, are we heading towards a post-racial society? What kind of anthropological research can be done to determine that?

<span style="background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222; font-family: Cambria,serif; font-size: 12.800000190734863px;">In Michael P. Muehlenbein’s Human Evolutionary Biology, section 10, it is explained that racism and racial inequalities are social-political-economic factors, but not biological. He states “racism is independent of science, and is simply one of many anti-democratic political discourses that function to rationalize social inequalities.” Does this mean that racism is derived from a human beings need to justify why some people are better off than others? Does this mean that social inequalities caused racism or racism caused there to be social inequalities? That is- (according to the stereotype) were African Americans at a lower socio-economic status and that is why people began to treat them so poorly? Or was it that wealthy Caucasians noted that a specific group of people physically looked different then themselves so they treated them differently and then because of being treated differently, the African Americans were forced into a lower socio-economic status?