Have you seen the images of how the “average American” will look in 2050? I saw the image of the beautiful woman featured in the National Geographic magazine all over the internet, but as I read the title of the article, I was overcome by an uneasy feeling.
As a New Yorker, I particularly appreciate and love diversity. I enjoy walking down the block and encountering people from different backgrounds, ethnicity, and religions. It adds to the culture of New York City and makes it a wonderful city to live in. As a result, I am not too fond of outlandish statements visualizing what the “average American” will look like.
I found this article’s diction to be particularly disturbing. These are some quotes from the article, “National Geographic Concludes What Americans Will Look Like in 2050, and It’s Beautiful”:
“It’s no secret that interracial relationships are trending upward, and in a matter of years we’ll have Tindered, OKCupid-ed and otherwise sexed ourselves into one giant amalgamated mega-race.”
“Wow. These are obviously not Photoshopped projections, but real people, meaning tomorrow’s America lives among us now in every “Blackanese,” “Filatino,” “Chicanese” and “Korgentinian” you meet at the DMV, grocery store or wherever it is you hang out.”
Although the intent of the author and National Geographic might have been to applaud diversity and present “statistics”, I think it adds to the detriment of racializing society. The article was particularly vain and materialistic.
I found another article on this matter, “Mixed of Not, Why Are We Still Taking Pictures of “Race”‘? I was attracted to the provocative title and agreed with Sharon Chang’s views on this issue.
This is a quote by Chang, verbalizing the hidden racism behind the National Geographic’s insensitive project:
“Not surprisingly, the Net erupted in controversy/debate; some standing by and championing the purported beauty of race-mixing as hope for a post-race future; many others pointing out the absurdity of a multiracial=postracial equation, angrily accusing the article of privileging light-skinned mixes thereby centering whiteness and upholding an age-old white dominant race hierarchy.”
What do you think? Do you support the National Geographic’s “The Changing Face of America” Project? Is there racism embedded in it or is it merely a lighthearted, informative presentation?
Ledia, this is an extremely smart and sophisticated post and thanks so much. I agree wholeheartedly about the insensitivity you mention — it’s like multiculturalism run amuk.
Please, everyone, weigh in. The intent of the original article may have been commendable, but it certainly landed in an odd and unsettling fashion. cr
I saw this National Geographic article as well and I thought that it really was more shallow than beautiful. Usually National Geographic is such a thought-provoking, beautifully done magazine, and this particular article shocked me. As far as mixed races go, there will always be some people who are fully Mexican or German or Chinese. There also might be mixes of all of those. Why are we still basing beauty on race? Purely Dominican people can be just as beautiful as a Dominican-Asian mix. What matters is who you are, not how you look. While the article tried to make a point about how mixed-race people are more common than before, it seemed more like the article was promoting a “mega-race” of different white-washed interracial people, instead of celebrating the diversity of Americans. A person’s skin color or eye color does not shape who they are, their beauty comes from their thoughts and actions.