Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
30 years ago, yes. Not in the modern USA. There is still some residual effects, but its getting better than its getting worse. I've been around this country, and America definitely is more classist than racist in 2014
It has gotten better but a lot of assumptions are still made based on color.
It has gotten better but a lot of assumptions are still made based on color.
Assumptions will always be made based on color. it's more of a question of the impact of such assumptions. In 2014 there is no way many people can honestly say a black person would be denied a job because they are black anymore. 30 years ago thqt was reality but not anymore.
Assumptions will always be made based on color. it's more of a question of the impact of such assumptions. In 2014 there is no way many people can honestly say a black person would be denied a job because they are black anymore. 30 years ago thqt was reality but not anymore.
If that was the case, then in none of the Latin American countries a mulatto category would even exist.
Care to explain why so many country's official demographic data does show this segment, especially in countries with large mulatto populations?
Pretty easy. It depends on your definition of mulatto and black........while generally, mixed African/European people are considered mulatto in Latin America, those who are more African than European are usually seen as black as well. That has always been the case in places like Brazil, where recognizably African but technically mixed people such as Gilberto Gil are identified as and self-identify as black. Same thing in Cuba.
Of course, people who look like Gil in, say, the Dominican Republic, would probably run from the "black" designation.
Assumptions will always be made based on color. it's more of a question of the impact of such assumptions. In 2014 there is no way many people can honestly say a black person would be denied a job because they are black anymore. 30 years ago thqt was reality but not anymore.
You are going a bit far. No one will TELL you that you aren't hired because you are black, because then you will immediately go to a lawyer and sue.
They can find many euphemisms which achieve the same goal. Not having the right "fit", being a common one.
Having said that the reality is that people hire those who know, and those who fit the image which they think is appropriate. So while this doesn't prevent blacks from being hired, it does present them with additional challenges.
Some of those are totally off, some so laughable to be the stuff of fantasy. Cuba is not 26% mestizo (European/Amerindian), and definitely not 64%white. More like 30% white, 60% black/mulatto, 9% mestizo, 1% Asian (Chinese and Vietnamese).
Pretty easy. It depends on your definition of mulatto and black........while generally, mixed African/European people are considered mulatto in Latin America, those who are more African than European are usually seen as black as well. That has always been the case in places like Brazil, where recognizably African but technically mixed people such as Gilberto Gil are identified as and self-identify as black. Of course, people who look like Gil in, say, the Dominican Republic, would probably run from the "black" designation.
Gilberto Gil
Similar looking well known Dominican artist (colloquially known as el negrito de Villa Altagracia):
That type is often known as negro/moreno among Dominicans.
Like I said before, the mulatto category is real both genetically (everywhere) and socially (especially in the countries with large mulatto populations). Case in point, I'm not the one lying in the other posts.
Similar looking well known Dominican artist (colloquially known as el negrito de Villa Altagracia):
That type is often known as negro/moreno among Dominicans.
Like I said before, the mulatto category is real both genetically (everywhere) and socially (especially in the countries with large mulatto populations). Case in point, I'm not the one lying in the other posts.
My question to you is why does this matter. Especially when such categorizations are arbitrary any way. Brazil puts pardos in a catch all category, while the treatment that individual pardos gets varies on how they look. Those with more visible African ancestry treated worse than those with less. Many indeed getting treated no better than the blacks. The pardos who look like Obama as an example.
And in case you don't know, there is a biracial category in the US census where people can enter as many categories of "races" as they wish, or can just check "other". Obama prefers to check "black" as is his right, because as he says, he doesn't get treated any different from a black person whose Euro ancestry is more distant. In this the USA and Brazil are alike despite all the pretense that it isn't.
Of course the Obamas in the USA can query why blacks are under represented in certain situations. They can't in Brazil, as it runs contrary to the "myth" which Brazil tries to peddle. Should they do so they will be damned as introducing US racism......ditto in Cuba....Colombia......well you get the drift.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
