Fallacies that Ring True

Introduction  

The book Race, Monogamy, and Other Lies They Told You: Busting Myths about Human Nature by Agustín Fuentes elucidates on some lies that have been told for so long that they eventually rang true. These are the lies that Fuentes dubs myths and then proceeds to present substantive evidence that they are based on fallacies. The fourth chapter of the book evaluates lies told about human races. This subject has been discussed by scientists, philosophers, and even lawyers. Fuentes goes through a majority of these arguments showing that those that support the existence of biological differences based on race are lies (Fuentes, 2015). Chapter six relates to the fallacies about sex and the difference between sex and gender issues. Fuentes calls out the myth about the existence of major biological differences that control the physical appearance and behavioral attributes between the two sexes. Many similarities are shown between the two sexes with the differences being explained. This research paper evaluates chapter 4 and 6 of the said book as they proof false common myths about race and sex. 

The Myth about Races

According to Fuentes, the myth about race has changed over time since it began in the middle of the second millennia BCE when global travel began in earnest. Around 1758, race was shown as divided between continents, leading to the existence of four races. Carolus Linnaeus commonly referred to as the father of modern taxonomy is credited with this definition. His four races indicated as sub-species included Homo sapiens americanus , Homo sapiens europeaus , Homo sapiens asiaticus and Homo sapiens africanus (Fuentes, 2015). His definitions were, however, limited to social characteristics and not science. The definitions exponentially favored the europeaus sub-species and were extremely unkind to the other three. 

By the 21st century, this has been reduced to three main racial classes, to wit the black, white and Asian, more so within the USA. Among the evidence provided for these differences included the appearance. The blacks are generally dark-skinned, tall, and athletic, the Orientals are generally short with reddish skin with the Whites having no melanin and psychically between the blacks and Orientals. In most characteristics from confidence, criminality and being outgoing, the blacks are depicted as the extreme, the Orientals on the extreme lower side and the whites as just right. Psychologist Phillipe Rushton has published seemingly scientific write-ups that seek to give credibility to the existence of biological differences between the Blacks, Whites, and Orientals (Fuentes, 2015). However, the American Association of Physical Anthropology’s (AAPA) has published to the contrary. Fuentes, therefore, seeks to prove Rushton and his school of thought wrong, and the AAPA right. 

In his argument, Fuentes delves into the difference between nature and nurture and seeks to establish that most of the differences between races are bred by nurture and not biology. Issues such as propensity for crime, disease prevalence, and behavioral trends are clearly shown to be social trends that do not have a genetic premise. Indeed, when individuals of the same race are placed in different social environments, their eventual prerequisites from a social perspective ape those of the environment and not the race they have emanated from. The next major argument is from an evolutionary perspective. There has been an argument that the differences in race are based on the level of evolution, which makes some races to have a higher genetic congruence to apes (Fuentes, 2015). However, this argument also fails based on the fact that it would easily be discernible through genetic testing but no such evidence has ever been found. Fuentes concludes by indicating that Homo sapiens is definitely biologically divided into many subgroups. This includes DNA traits such as blood groups and susceptibility to disease. However, these divisions cut across racial lines (Fuentes, 2015). 

The Sex Myth 

It is an indisputable fact and one that even Fuentes admits that among humans, males and females have biological differences. However, Fuentes moves to dispute the fact that these differences are diverse and that behavioral differences between men and women result from biological changes. First, Fuentes lists the grounds upon which these myths have been built. He quotes a book by Marshall Brain that states that from a very young age, boys are designed to be fathers and girls are made to be mothers based on their anatomy (Fuentes, 2015). This anatomy determines their character, behavior, and references. Similarly, the arguments by John Gray about men being from Mars while women being from Venus are used to show the prominence of the myth. The subject of dimorphism as well as sexual organs has also been used to further cement this myth (Fuentes, 2015). All these issues and more are a response to arguments by Fuentes in the sixth chapter. 

For a start, Fuentes makes the momentous argument that male and female are not in black and white and in many cases are amorphous. The genetic difference between men and women lies in the chromosomes with women having an XX combination while men have an XY combination. However, at a ratio of 1.7 per every 1000, humans have an amorphous combination that makes them not quite either male or female (Fuentes, 2015). For comparison purposes, Fuentes uses albinism whose ratio is 1 out of 20,000. There are, therefore, millions of people in the world who do not biologically conform to any gender. Further, genitalia between men and women may look different from a psychical perspective but is not so biologically. Indeed, an embryo’s genitalia grows in a similar manner for the first 10 weeks and only begins changing after that (Fuentes, 2015). Even then, the two sets of genitalia are extremely congruent in nature and function. This contention minimizes the physiological differences between men and women. 

On the subject of dimorphism, Fuentes argues that when looked at from the perspective of averages, men and women are almost equal. The main differences in physical appearance can be explained by the differences in the fat deposit. Men deposit their fat in their tummies while women deposit theirs around the middle and chest. Due to gravity, these fat deposits create the visible differences between men and women and that is why these differences are more pronounced with increased weight (Fuentes, 2015). With regard to character, contemporary research on sex and gender has shown that there is no calibrated behavioral characteristics between men and women. Women tending towards monogamy and men towards promiscuity are all social attributes that have not biological basis. The behavioral differences have emanated from social trends, beliefs, and presuppositions that cause a boy to aspire to be a certain kind of a man and girls to aspire to be a certain kind of a woman (Fuentes, 2015). Without these social interferences, the behavior and character of men and women would not be controlled by biological sexual characteristics. 

Conclusion  

It is clear from the foregoing that Fuentes is able to use actual scientific research to clearly show that some of the well-established concepts in life are actually based on myths. Racism is an important social subject and the source of much discrimination as well as prejudice. In some quarters, it has been believed that some behavior and mental attributes are associated with the biological differences between different races. Through scientific data, however, Fuentes is able to show that this is not true. Similarly, a lot of prejudice and discrimination has been associated with the gender issue. Women and men have been thought to be exponentially different physically and also psychological based on genetics. Scientific research has also been used by Fuentes to show that this too is a fallacy. 

Reference

Fuentes, A. (2015).  Race, monogamy, and other lies they told you: busting myths about human nature . Berkeley, California: University of California Press.