POLITICS Origins of Racism, Sexism, Other “isms”?

You know, we deal with a great many issues involving race and sex, but I don’t recall that we’ve ever covered their origins, or those of other “isms”.

So that makes me wonder - would our current arguments / debates be better clarified and enhanced if we tried to cover the original ground, again, and perhaps for the first time? It might be well-trod ground for many or even all here, but it may be completely unknown to others.

So...

What is racism?

What is sexism?

Is it wrong to be either racist or sexist?

If so, wrong according to who, or what?

How wrong is it? Is it more like “white lie” wrong or like “commit genocide” wrong?

 

As far as racism, I will say that as a kid I was naturally distrustful of people who were different than me that I had never met. I didn't trust northerners or Catholics or Church of Christ. I sure didn't trust (or like) Europeans. I did trust latinos though because I went on medical mission trips to Latin America so was exposed to them and respected them. I think it is very natural for us to ascribe positive traits to people we see as being like us and negative ones to those who are different. Going back 1000 years, when there was limited or no interaction, it was really easy to think of others as barbarians or savages or whatever. Especially if they looked different.

Now sexism is a bit different. It self-perpetuated for a long time because women were less educated (so seemed dumber). I guess that originally arose because education was designed for training leaders and because leadership was reserved for those that are good fighters and men do have some biological advantages when it comes to that.

 

“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.”

― Mark Twain, The Innocents Abroad / Roughing It

Most 'isms' are brought about by our delusion that we are separate from everyone else. I am a Buddhist, you are not. I am white, you are not. I am almost 50, you are not.

And because we simply believe that I am a separate being from everyone else, our ego does all sorts of contortions and vile deeds to reinforce this illusion so that it doesn't die.

Most 'isms' are bad, really. Racism: we are all humans, our dna is identical save for a very, very few superficial strands that make my hair brown vs yellow. Sexism is a byproduct of fear and desire for power, where women are generally smaller and weaker and the male of the human species has been able to dominate it, but also about protection for our young, where the women must be sheltered and protected from other tribes and all signs of danger. But in modern society, where it isn't about chucking a spear but about typing on a keyboard, it is all moot.

That said, we do tend to favor people that think and act like we do. I don't want to hang out with someone that seemingly is unread and has no desire to educate themselves on as much as possible. I just wouldn't have much in common with them. But that doesn't mean I should hate them and dehumanize them, just the opposite. I should love them the more, because they make life worth living.

 

I think sexism is far older than racism, if racism is narrowly defined.

Sexism is a product of the reaction to men controlling the reproduction decisions of women to guarantee that offspring had known paternity. It's from the dawn of agriculture and pastoralism. Before that, human societies were often matrilineal and paternity wasn't the dominant factor of social order.

 

Racism as we know it may be less than 1000 years old

 

That is an interesting take. But I look at it more along the lines of the Athenians vs the Barbarians. Everyone not Athenian or Greek was a barbarian. But did they think the barbarians were inherently inferior to themselves? That would be an interesting thing to research. We see that the Romans, for instance, integrated all those conquered into their Roman society. Slaves were not limited to those of dark skin, or blond hair, but simply to conquered peoples as well.

Does the rise of modern racism also lead directly into the modern notion of nationalism (my personal worst ism of them all)?

 

That's what I'm trying to get at. What made one a barbarian wasn't phenotype, but rather cultural. Do they farm? Do they build permanent structures? Do they read/write?

 

It goes back further than that. The males run the show among other primates, as well. I don't think it's a construct of civilized societies.

 

Were the Egyptians racist toward Semites? Seems like that would be hard to put down in hieroglyphics.

 

I agree, this is pre-civilization I'm talking about. Sexism is really only possible when there are defined occupational roles in which to restrict by sex. Women were/are allowed to hunt in some subsistence cultures and not others. To lead in some and not others. I'm saying broadly, the change has to do with ensuring you aren't spending your resources on another male's offspring without knowing it--or ensuring you really have offspring.

 

It seems like you were saying sexism arose from agriculture and pastoralism.

 

Sexual dimorphism. Of course you knew that

 

In the sense that pastoralism shoves paternity in your face as you selectively breed docile sheep and goats, and creates roles where people either wonder off alone for long periods or stay close to base. Kinda hard to fully flesh out what I'm saying without going full tenny. Sexism became the norm as civ formed, but surely existed prior in some places. We so know that subsistence societies today tend to be egalitarian and organized matrilineally. Such as SA indians, Papua new Guinea tribes, and such.

 

Also, consider how women found their way in the workforce and on equal footing increasingly as contraceptives grew in efficacy and availability.

 

I think preoccupation with sexual dimorphism is part of sexism today.

 

I think the dimorphism in humans is pretty minimal, same as chimps. Gorillas, for instance, I believe the female is significantly smaller than the male.

 

Anaxamander and those that think like him bring about the logical conclusion that some humans are superior to others based on biology. Islam allowed one set of Africans to sell another set into slavery. One must have some sense of superiority to own another human being. Then there was Darwin and the eugenics movement. Tomorrow it will be transhumanism. That won't involve race but it will involve discrimination based on "biology" if you could even consider it biology at that point. See Mr. Kurzweil of Google for further clarification on the Utopia that is to come or watch Altered Carbon to see the true nature of such "progress" if it is ever technically possible to achieve.

In short, its the human condition.

Ye shall be as gods. Some gods are more powerful than others.

 

Pound for pound on average a male is going to be significantly stronger than a female. Throw in the difference in size and you dont even have pound for pound. It would probably be more out of whack except that a man does have to sleep.

 

I get what you're saying. Too slutty to make it without drugs.

 

On a loosely related note, I've been reading recently about ideas that our views of monogamy were formed during the same timeline of agriculture, property rights, inheritance, etc.