Category Archives: Race and Ethnicity in the Modern World

Reproductive technology and historical power relations

Posted on by

by Isarin Furutani

First, I would summarize briefly my section that I was responsible for my presentation and I would talk further about egg donation itself and what I found interesting.

The second half of this chapter (the part I am responsible for) describes the concept of egg donation and how race and ethnicity played a role for infertile couples to choose their donors. The author discussed the existence of partial neglect on pallor skin from white women who believes that a mixed child is considered more attractive than a pure pallor person. Therefore, the white couples in the chapter chose a more tan donor, or donors who are from a minority group to create a mixed baby. The author did not talk much but showed that the clinics are cautious in representing that the donor’s phenotype is not everything and that even if you choose a light black African women as a donor, you are still possible to get a darker child. This was seen in the showing of the pictures of the children of the donor who were darker and who were lighter.

Ancestral heritage also played a huge role in some cases of Japanese recipients, in which the recipient denied the donation from a Korean ancestral person even if the person liked the person’s phenotype. Lastly was the concept of a personal preference by couples. The example was a German couple who wanted an Indian donor to satisfy their own interest in Buddhism. The clinic denied it as it was not an “honorable reproductive motive”. The author concludes the chapter with the idea that each characteristics such as skin tone are linked to the power itself (social hierarchy from historical events) and this has effects the donors and recipients ways of interpreting each characteristics and affecting the choice in choosing donors.

The concept of skin tone and preferences, as we have read in many other chapters, is manifested everywhere. We have read about Mexico’s preference of lighter partners, women in Africa buying whitening creams that can actually be dangerous and now we are attacking the concept of egg recipients valuing their donors through their own preferential indicators which can be race, ethnicity or maybe even characteristics. The chapter provided some examples which showed the existence of said preferential choosing of donors and how it is linked to the historical power relations being expressed by each race or ethnicity. What was interesting was the change in the white couples aiming for tanning their children through mixing rather than maintaining the white/pallor skin, where white women thought it was unattractive because of the wrinkles when you get old. This probably contributed to the sense of further encouraging more mixing between people in the globalized world, believing that mixed-children are attractive. I do not know much about this boom but I believe even in Japan half people (half-asian half-west) are considered to look different and better.

I researched a bit about Japan on this issue and have learned that Japan actually bans egg donation and surrogate motherhood. (However it was interesting that they allow artificial reproduction using donated sperms.) It is actually this year when Noda Seiko, the lawmaker and parliament member of Japan, gave birth through egg donation from an American person, that pushed for a law to allow egg donation and surrogate motherhood. It is also an interesting perspective to encourage more reproduction in Japan (although I am not sure whether how much can it really affect). Aki Mukai a Japanese actress had her twin baby through surrogate motherhood because of her cancer problems which destroyed her ability to reproduce. She tried to legally attain her children Japanese resident rights but the supreme court actually ruled against her and in the end she had to “adopt” her own biological child.

The concept of “biological” child is a significant differentiation to “genetic” factors. The youtube video on Dr Georgia explains the beauty of egg donation, stating that even if the egg is not “genetically” yours, because the baby grows in your own body with your own resources, what is actually creating your baby is the minerals in your body and not others. Even if the ears may not be designed by your genes (chance that it can still be from your partner’s too), what is actually creating those ears are you and not the donor. This creates the difference between genetic mother and biological mother which itself and that the mother (recipient) can still feel the process of reproduction and feel more like her real baby than compared to adoption.

The concept of egg donation can really be discussed in many ways that I probably can write a long report on it. But it is an emerging new medical field that provides reproductive opportunities to infertile individuals where social historical power relations affecting personal preferences seems to play a role in the decisions of the recipients.

Two youtube videos are attached that I believe is worth watching – One is a debate on whether egg donation is moral, and the other is the explanation of egg donation by Dr Georgia, a clinical psychologist.

The two articles are on the egg donation issue in Japan. However, I believe the article on Noda Seiko has been locked and you have to subscribe to see it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu8eBdZzTls

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704415104576065253692270070.html

http://www.eggdonor.com/blog/2012/06/11/japan-bill-legalize-surrogacy-egg-donation

How should Japan deal with egg donations?

Posted on by

by Mari Ryoha

I think egg donation represents the variety ways of life in these days. Women have the right to give birth to children. However there are women who can’t be pregnant for some reasons. Egg donation, sperm donation, and in vitro fertilization (IVF) work important role of infertility treatment. These treatments give couples who suffer from infertility hope that they can have children. I agree with egg donation in this aspect.

Japan doesn’t have laws about reproductive technology or treatment for infertility. In 2003, Japanese government decided to preparation of laws about reproduction. However it hasn’t progressed since then. Japan Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (日本産婦人科学会) published individual statement that they admitted using reproduction technology or treatment for infertility in 2009. Also other organizations, such as the Ministry of Health (厚生労働省), Japan Society for Reproductive Medicine (日本生殖医学会), Japan Federation of Bar Associations (日本弁護士連合会), published each opinion about reproduction technology, and these organizations had different opinions about reproduction technology. Of course Japanese people have various opinions about reproduction technology. However I think Japan has to make laws about reproduction technology and treatment for infertility. We Japanese have to make environment for treatment for infertility. For example, we have to manage the quality of treatment for infertility, take statistic of the number of children by egg donation or something reproduction technology. Also we have to support women and their family after birth of children, and educate other people in order to make discrimination toward children by birth of egg donation. Also we have to prevent the illegal business of egg donation for moneymaking. I’m worried that egg donation may lead to new discrimination. In Korea, there were incidents about illegal egg donations. The brokers who were arrested graded eggs by the donors’ face, figure and school career. In Japan, if egg donation becomes common, such incident may happen. Then we have to think how we prevent such illegal incidents, and new discrimination. If we make laws about egg donation, there are a lot of problems.

We have to discuss these problems. The state of family is changing all over the world. Of course Japan is not expected. Each Japanese people have each opinion. In these days we can’t help avoiding make laws about reproductive technology and treatment for infertility.

References

Adumi,T. Retrieved December 12, 2012 from Nikkei BP net : http://www.nikkeibp.co.jp/article/column/20090526/155420/?ST=business&P=1

Asahi Newspaper Retrieved December 12, 2012 from: http://www.asahi.com/special/hug/TKY201011060166.html

Seoul Kyodo Retrieved December 12, 2012 from 47NEWS: http://www.47news.jp/CN/201106/CN2011061501001398.html

Valuing Lightness and Darkness

Posted on by

by Karen Mori

This week’s reading might seem a historical fact of the rise and fall of the skin lighteners, but I think this history of the skin lightener is not so important. To me, the most essential part is the hidden desire for people to improve themselves for socio-economic reasons or embedded idea of beauty that can be seen through the use of skin lighteners. The author of the reading (Lynn Thomas) states that the spread of skin lighteners across the world is a result of U.S. commodities and ideologies of race which became a motivation to sell those products. This skin-lighteners market eventually became entangled with economic relations, and racial hierarchies gave a meaning to “whiteness” that it is better than being darker. The reason why the use of skin lighteners were so popular despite the fact that it is symbolizing whiteness=better is because of how society was structured and how society pushed the ideology of skin color through advertisement. As a result, Black women’s concept of beauty became deeply affected by Whites.

The author mentions that “it is difficult to discern whether such valuing of lighter colored skin was rooted in pre-colonial conception of beauty, a product of racial hierarchies introduced through colonialism and segregation, or entanglement of the two,” despite the fact that the author think the concept of skin color is affected by structural forces from advertisement and social hierarchy. When I read the reading, I definitely thought yes, the concept of “being white is better than being darker” is socially created through colonialism. However when I reflected to Japan, my country, I feel little uncomfortable when I think about valuing “Bihaku” (whiteness) is affected by the West.

I personally prefer being white for no reason but I don’t think being tan is not so bad because maybe I lived in America and Americans valued being tan. When I met my friend after summer break, she was really tan, and I said “Kurokunattane” meaning you got darker (not so offensive in Japanese) and she got so upset said “hidoi” (how mean you are). I was so surprised that darkness is considered bad in Japan. Anyway, saying that whiteness is valued in Japan, some people say that Japanese adoration toward the West since Meiji period to become modernized is still affecting our value of whiteness or taller nose or longer legs. I cannot believe that Japanese are affected by historical social structure. However, when I go back to the reading what I am saying is that Black Africans prefer to have light skin not because they are affected by White.

Miss Bronze: Double Consciousness of Black Women

Posted on by

by Ayano Tsukada

On June 9, 1961, a California black newspaper announced the beginning of the very first major beauty contests for black women held in Northern California. This beauty pageant, however, was not like one of normal beauty pageants that you would think of. To become Miss Bronze, African American women couldn’t just be beautiful. They had to be more than that: a representative of the African American race. It doesn’t sound very difficult, however, for the contestants of the pageant, it was.

In the United States, features of bodies are given meaning by culturally diffused “systems of representation” and two systems of representation circulated within black communities. One big system is a nationally dominant system of representation corresponding to dominant standards of beauty; beauty from the white point-of-view. The other system is a black system of representation that is used only among blacks. Historically white systems of representation excluded black women in general, but put some light-skinned women as “exotic” types. Light-skinned women were considered beautiful in black system of representation as well, but were not considered “exotic” within the black content. Light skin was a representation of economic and social privilege. Because there was more than one system existing in black communities, black women were made to look at themselves through the two systems of representation, which made it very difficult to be both beautiful and representative of their race at the same time. The contestants had to be beautiful enough in the white system of representation but had to be black enough so that they can represent their race. For example, a light-skinned contestant cut her hair short because long hair represents whiteness. Not too black, but not too white, this was their challenge.

Though African American women had never been and will never be considered as White, they still have to be judged in the white system of representation. This was what was happening in the Miss Bronze contest. However, Black women are not the only ones that have double consciousness. Black men have double consciousness, too. For example, the President of the United States, Barack Obama, changes the way he speaks and acts in front of white audiences and black audiences. Women also see themselves through both women’s point-of-view and men’s point-of-view. We know how to act in the society where men are dominant. We internalize dominant views of ourselves and at the same time, we criticize them. This may not sound good, but I would like to think of double consciousness as a gift. The double consciousness allows them to step back and take an objective view of themselves. Like it or not, we are living in the world with different people and we cannot run away from that. Then isn’t better to have the eye of others inside of you?

The Color of an Ideal Beauty Queen

Posted on by

by Cherry Zhou

This chapter discusses how skin color matters in a beauty contest. In the hope of challenging racial exclusion outside of contest and colorism within it, the Miss Bronze contest was held first in 1961. One must not ignore a strong social background during the period, when the American society was in the middle of a transformation in black consciousness that emerged from the Civil Right and Black Power Movements. By crowning dark-skinned beauties, dark-skinned women come to realize that they can be seen as beautiful! Miss Bronze’s attractive face and body shape could refute disparaging representations of black women. Such contest encouraged dark-skinned women to be proud of whom they are and created the climate for media to look at black beauty. However, it is because that the black beauty standards were shaped by social movements, when the movements decline, the meanings that they supported weaken. Mass media could then redefine the concept of beauty as social background changes.

Moreover, I believe a beauty pageant is not only just about appearance (including skin color), but more importantly, it could be seen as a major event that celebrates and honors ethnic values. The winner usually serve as a role model of female and through training and education, the beauty is more like a symbol of a certain group and she has the power to unify the group and thus to strengthen it. For example, in Miss Bronze contest, the assumption seems to be that with a little make-up, a home-sewn gown, and charm school courses, any daughter of the striving African American working class could perfect the performance of middle-class, heterosexual, femininity. The winner usually claims positions of exemplary middle-class femininity for black women.

Another point I would like to make is that the social media has a great influence on promoting the image of beauty. What is beauty? It appears that the definition of beauty changes through time as the social climate changes. As I was googling information for this presentation, I found many examples claiming that mass media somehow communicate false/unrealistic image of beauty especially for women to follow. Does media has the power to define beauty in this information era? Few would argue that media defines beauty, but the reality is all we see on TV, magazines, the internet and etc. are sending messages that what kind of look is considered as attractive. The media assaults us daily with images of “beautiful” people and articles on how to make ourselves look just more like them. In Japan, pick up any women’s magazine and there must be articles on how to have a more balanced diet, how to wear better makeup … Society always has an expectation of what is considered attractive. The Miss Bronze Contest challenged the expectation of beauty at that time, but what about now? At the end of the day, it’s not just about appearance. Everyone is beautiful in their way but no one is perfect. Human bodies come in all shapes and sizes and yet the fact is only a few are just like those who are on TV or on magazine covers. Body image can be a very deceptive realm that we all are susceptible to and if people all strive to look like the “beauty” that media creates, which to a large extent very hard to replicate, it is without doubt that they will end up with low self-esteem. There are so many reasons behind the model “beauty image” that media creates such as advertising and other commercial benefits that they are getting; however, I think it will be helpful to build up people’s self-esteem if more positive images and the portrayal of more realistic and healthy instead of pencil-like skinny body types are presented in the media.

Skin color and discrimination

Posted on by

by Nurussakinah Mahmud

African American history of discrimination can be traced back since early 1600s when they were brought in as slaves for white people. Although slavery has been made illegal for centuries, the discrimination against them while can be said as somehow are now more discreet, it is sadly nowhere near any ending.

While racial discrimination is not something new in this world, I admit that discrimination because of skin colour or skin tone is quite new to me. The first thing that I thought of was why would people who know how hard being discriminated against, want to discriminate each other still? The documentary of students in Hampton University showed that even in black society, the tone of your skin can also causing you to be judged by people. Suddenly, it is not just a matter of black or white anymore. It is now how dark is your skin tone; is it very dark brown, dark brown, medium brown or lighter.  But this is all happening in the African American society. Are they, after so long of being discriminated by whites, start to subconsciously thinking that they ought to become nearer to whites too in term of skin tone? Is the mass media responsible for this kind of thinking?

The portrayal of black people in television can reflect a lot to this way of thinking. For example, black is always been stereotypically portrayed as the villains or the ugly ones, thus, to not be associated with being bad, they try not to look like that, ergo they want to lighten their skin. While it is said that African Americans do have higher self esteem than whites, especially women as they are always portrayed as strong and independent, the study by Keith shows that having lighter skin tone boosted the self esteem of the women. Thus we can probably say that while they are not ashamed of being black per se, having lighter skin tone is still thought as being fairer and healthier than being darker.

Another point we discussed during the presentation was the connection between skin tone, achievement and self esteem. We pointed out that Michael Jackson for example, had a quite successful career before turning ‘white’, therefore skin tone and achievement cannot be said to be in a direct relation to each other. But after discussing it, we do found the point to be a weak one since the number of successful black men is just too few in comparison to the much lighter ones. And because the focus of this chapter is on women, the scale is definitely more imbalance.  In a world where the perception of beauty is equal to having a fair skin and physical appearance is also quite an important factor considered when looking for a job, women with lighter skin tone do get higher privileges.

Furthermore, marriage, however pathetic this may sound, is also an important socioeconomic factor or an achievement in a woman’s life. Thus, to get a good husband, a woman has to put herself at par with the others in term of beauty. This is where the self esteem (as well as good whitening products) comes into equation. Even though one can be successful without having a high self esteem, self esteem definitely can boost up one’s chance to be successful and if being lighter skinned can make a woman self esteem to increase, her chance to get a good husband is also indirectly increased since she is now what people generally assume to be a beauty.

Skin Color and Self-Esteem

Posted on by

by Marina Sata Khan

The chapter presented research that showed that those with lighter skin tone had been able to “achieve” more, in terms of income, jobs (even within the “Black” race), yet Black women have overall high self-esteem. To be honest, I was not surprised at all with the latter discovery.

Watching USA TV shows, Black men tend to be portrayed as criminals, gangsters, and rappers from the ghettos (other than the President). But on the other hand, I recall that Black women were portrayed simply as successful “strong” women on TV that are confident, well-spoken with an outgoing attitude. Such examples are Oprah Winfrey, Tyra Banks, Naomi Campbell, Whoopi Goldberg and Beyoncé. All these women tend portray an image of the “Strong independent black woman”, a certain identity that seems to promote and encourage high self esteem amongst black women.

Not having ever been to the USA (except for the state of Hawai’i), it was not until recent that I was truly aware of a Black and White divide. As a young child, I had been engrained with the image of ‘Sesame Street’ where to every blonde ponytail girl there was a boy with a black Afro. They lived in the same flats and played with each other on the stairs along with their Hispanic and Asian friends. ‘Arthur’ was also such TV show, although they were all animals – I believed that Arthur, a smart loveable mouse with glasses, was a Black boy, and he had many friends of different races. As a child, I thought that the USA was a perfect multiracial country.

But as I grew older I realized that this was all “just a lie”, around the time I became familiar with rap music and began to watch more than morning children shows. At school I learnt about Black slavery, but along with the Civil Rights Movement, making it seem that there was something in the past, but that did not matter anymore as things were all mended now. However, I continued to become aware of the discrimination that still existed, especially through exposure of US media. I began to think about if Britney Spears or Lindsay Lohan was African American… I hardly doubt their court cases would simply be written as some “naughty party girl” issues under the gossip column. I remember hearing Naomi Campbell’s cases of assault on the afternoon news, and the image around was that she was completely “evil”, everyone conveniently forgetting her efforts that even led her to be referred to as an “honorary granddaughter” by Nelson Mandela.

The chapter went even deeper, into the issue of skin tone even within the Black community. This was the point that was shocking to me rather than the part about self esteem. As long as there is a group that benefits from a certain characteristic in society, i.e. fair skin color, I feel as though people who have lighter skin would be advantaged and the darkest of the darkest pushed to the bottom. This is certainly another form of discrimination, and doesn’t this need to be addressed alongside racism?

Mestizaje and skin color

Posted on by

by Jun Sakakibara

According to the reading, “mestijaze” is a racial concept and national ideology lies in Mexican society. Mexican people understand that Mexico is such a multi-race nation and since everybody is mixed race, there should be no discrimination against racial differences. They prefer to use the word of “color” than “race” when they describe other people.

The reading also brought the fact that it may not be a complete racism, however, at least a sort of preference towards lighter skin color exists in society. People want to be their offspring white, people think white people are more attractive, and some seeks whiter skin colored partner for marriage. Mexican women try to whiten themselves and being white could be a part of beauty for them.

I guess Japanese people also have same kind of preference towards white as Mexicans do. For instance, many Japanese women are addicted to get whiter skin (“bihaku”) and they put a lot of medical efforts to get it. Since in Japan there is only one race, even though we hold preference to whiter skin people, it never is a serious problem and it never is a source to judge people. While Japanese its tendency can be seen just as “preference”, I think Mexico’s case goes a bit further than that. There would be status exchange issue behind. The image of white people can be such as “good people”, “socially better status” or “wealthier”. As I mentioned above, if you are not white and if you have dark colored skin, you want to get married with whiter skin colored partner not only for you own benefit of getting higher social status but also for your offspring. In this sense, it goes over the preference.

The discussion point was whether Mexico should have affirmative action and change to white supremacy. The book of psychology, which I am reading these days said we create oneself by interacting with other people in society and we see ourselves as how others see us. Thus it is a normal thing that we always want to be better than others and we want to be seen better and higher by others. Also, in my opinion their preference is too strong but I do not think they do as much racists’ discriminations compared to US, for instance. So I am not sure if I agree to take affirmative actions in Mexico. In addition, it sounds such a contradiction that Mexicans say they are not racists at all and in reality they do things, which seem like a racist, though, can we say Japanese people are not racists at all? We think we are not racists either, but for example, none of us would be happy to marry with burakumin unless you are burakumin. Isn’t it same kind of discrimination as Mexicans do? In fact, Mexican people’s preference can be much more stronger than Japanese’. However, for me it seems that Japanese society has contradiction of national race concept as well. I feel if we say Mexico needs change, Japan needs change too. The difference is that In Japan, this kind of racial topic is a taboo to talk whereas in Mexico it could be an open topic to discuss. In this sense, I think Mexico has a bit more process towards race issue than Japan.

The Dynamics of Color

Posted on by

by Marina Sata Khan

Christina A. Sue writes on the perceptions of Mexican people regarding skin color, making apparent the tones of racism under the surface of their “mestizaje” society.

In her interviews, many Mexicans responded that they would like a lighter skinned partner, finding “white” features to be attractive. Many expressed their want to have a fairer partner lying in the fact that they wanted their children to have lighter skin. The preference towards whiter skin was more than obvious.

I grew up in Australia, a so-called “multicultural” nation. I would say “race” probably does not play a role as big as it does in the United States, however, I would find it more than wrong to say racism does not exist in Australia. I think it could even be said that it has one of the most legally racist histories in the world, especially to the indigenous Aboriginals.

The Stolen Generation refers to the Aboriginal children who were removed from their families and placed in missionaries and foster families. The idea behind this was to eventually eliminate the Aboriginal people, by encouraging intercultural marriages. If a “half-caste” married a White, and so did the next generation, eventually there will be no full-blooded dark skinned Aboriginals (although they were believed to die out anyway due to the popular belief of Darwinism). We see today that many Aboriginal cultures and languages have disappeared, and the Aboriginal people still continue to be underprivileged despite the apology by Kevin Rudd (then Australian Prime Minister) in 2007 for such actions by the government.

Although in the case of Mexican society people are simply ‘preferring’ to marry whites, there seems to be something similar. If all Mexicans choose to marry lighter skinned partners, would darker skinned African descendant Mexicans eventually disappear? Is this right? Is this natural? Is this wrong? Or is it simply something that would never happen with absolutely no similarity with the Stolen Generation example?

I think this would be a very interesting topic to discuss and think about, as not only does it apply in Mexico, but in most parts of the world where the undertones of white supremacy still seem to play a large role in societies today.

Shifting Identities

Posted on by

by Karen Mori

The new type of racial approach which ignores the salience of race, claiming that there is no such thing as race and racism can be observed in Latin America and the author is predicting that this “Latin Americanization” can occur in the United States.

This Latin Americanization will form a complex racial stratification system developing a triracial system with whites at the top, an intermediary group of honorary whites, and the nonwhite group at the bottom, according to the author. Rank ordering of groups and members of groups are defined according to phenotype and cultural characteristics. As a result, these groups of races are not cleanly delineated, and unlike biracial system, intermediary group will play a role as buffer of racial conflicts. Nevertheless, the idea of racial mixing or racial democracy adopted by this racial approach does not challenge the white supremacy in colonial or post-colonial Latin America. For example, the social practice of whitening, gives a goal to move upward in hierarchical movement, instead of showing racial flexibility, so the result is white supremacy.

The authors are arguing that America will become like Latin America because racial minorities have increased, and race relations are becoming globalized in United States. While some analysts welcome Latin Americanization as a positive trend, others questions that if it is to maintain a white supremacy.

On the other hand, Japan is now believed that it is a homogeneous country, but this is an illusion. Japan used to have extended definition of Japanese during the time of Japanese colonialism. Under Japanese empire, all people in colonized country became Japanese. Japan educated Korean and Chinese to be Japanese, and gave Japanese citizenship. However, some people claim that there were racial stratification discriminating Chinese and Korean.

After the Japanese Empire collapsed, Japan started to claim Japanese uniqueness and homogeneity of shared blood, culture and language, so definition of Japanese became narrow. What we call Nihonjin-ron is a product of the war and increased a sense of Japanese identity and pride as well as the visibility of “Others”, particularly resident Koreans. Kana and I think this definition of Japanese(ness), either prewar definition or postwar definition, has some similarity to the situation of Latin America or the United States.