'Mulatto' - Brazil vs USA - acceptable word? (versus, areas, school)
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.
Right! That's what people really just don't seem to grasp with the Black experience in the US, as opposed to somewhere like Brazil.
The US only received 5% of the African Slaves during the Slave trade. The vast, VAST majority of slavs went to L America. Due to this dearth in Blacks, the American Black population is actually mulatto, especially when you consider how a paltry 500,000 Africans can balloon to a size of more than 40 million. This is an amazing feat, especially when you consider that, unlike Asians or Whites, there has traditionally never been a steady stream of Blacks coming into the country.
That growth was home-grown, not imported.
Brazil received many, many more blacks, and due to this, one can greater discern who's "black" and who isn't. This holds true especially when you consider the differences in certain rates among American slaves and Brazilian slaves. Brazilian slaves died much more quickly, had much less kids, and were treated much more callously. This was simply due to Brazil's proximity to Africa, and due to this, the fact that slaves being taken there were cheaper. American Blacks were treated better, had more children, and were more "prized." It was much more expensive of a voyage to Charleston, Virginia, than Rio de Janeiro.
This made Americans, and ironically American culture, value "Black" more than Brazil.
The expendable nature of Brazilian slave treatment, and Portugal's push to populate the HUGE land of Brazil as quickly as possible to kick out the Spaniards, made the "mulatto" more prized. He represented population growth. The US didn't have this problem. It had a problem of needing more slaves. To that end, the one-drop rule was created. It allowed a slave-owner to get his kicks for profit (the child would then be black, and thus a slave, and thus something to make profit from), while still keeping with the "Whites above all" status quo. Thus, the creation of the "Black" American was born.
Every single Black American can honestly tell you that they know they have mixed blood, but society sees them as black, because due to our slave history, we are. If we received the massive amounts of slaves that Brazil did, we would probably have just as many definitions based on color that they do. But we didn't, and yet still needed more "Blacks" to work the field.
As I said, the growth was home-grown, and not imported. Brazil's was.
You're wrong on the origins of the one drop rule. The ODR has absolutely nothing to do with slavery. Also slavery was not racial. It was based on partus sequitur venentrum. You could only be enslaved if your mother or matrilineal line were slaves. And there were slaves of all races. There were many WHITE slaves as well. Many people that were falsely put into slavery were freed because it was realized that their mothers or maternal/matrilineal lines were not slaves. If a person was free and they found out their mothers had been enslaved or their maternal ancestor or ancestors were enslaved then they were allowed to be forced into slavery.
Also a slave was a slave regardless. There would be no need to categorize a slave to a certain race or racial category to keep them enslaved or put them into slavery. To do so was illegal anyways. Most slaves were mixed race anyway, however there were large numbers of white slaves and black slaves.
Also, during colonial times, one's race was determined by and based on their physical appearance and many even had the opportunity to identify how they chose at times as well. If a person was mixed, but looked more white, most times they were classified as white.
Actually, most Black Americans are majority African blood and look it. The day that most truly embrace that incredible gift and stop denying and running from that, will truly be transforming.
Most African Americans ARE mixed race and most look it.
YES! This is actually one of the main breaks in the links between Blacks in the US and Blacks/Mixed peoples in L America. Because of American history, there is a movement TOWARD non-white, and because of this, someone with any discernible black features will be viewed and view themselves as black. The opposite ids true in L America, confusing and offending American Blacks. It's for this reason that I highly doubt a Civil Rights/Black Power movement can grow and flourish in the region. They're too busy trying to be "moreno", "trigueiro", "Taino", or "Moreno branco" to just simply be "negro."
There is this awesome PBS series called Black in Latin America that outlines the black experience in the region, and how different it was to the American response to races:
Essentially, the Casta system that Spain touted throughout the world made a racial hierarchy institutional, while the UK/America's "one-drop rule" made racial separation institutional. This, mixed with how expendable slaves were in L America made for a perfect storm of self-hate.
Latin America has a serious race problem. It's funny how at first glance, you would think the US got it wrong, but history has proven otherwise.
I remember watching a documentary about Brazil, and a Brazilian said (I'm paraphrasing) that all this talk of a racial democracy is just a way for white guys to more openly have sex with a non-white girl. I believe this is true.
The Civil Rights Movement was an anti one droppist movement and sought to unite Americans of all colors and eradicate Jim Crow.
The Black Power movement was racist and counter productive and sought to seperate Americans of all races and was really the inverse of white supremacy. In fact, many people in the Black Power movement world in collusion with KKK and other white supremacist organizations.
Karyn Parsons father is French Canadian, and her mother is Trinidadian
I once watched this video where Parsons says a few things about being mixed. I thought it was interesting.
If anyone wants to skip straight to the action, click at minute 1:55 in the timeline. You will definitely skip all the introduction from the host of the video.
Maybe the problem is that different groups classify/view race in terms of purity, while others don't. I think this is where the socialization comes in and can vary due to socio-historical factors. What I think many people miss in regards to African Americans is that there isn't is aspect of racial purity or even supremacy. So in turn, African Americans historically viewed themselves in a social lens, while taking in and embracing, generally, those of at least substantial degrees of African descent. That's why you have a range among those that identify as African American/Black.
In terms of Latin America, I think that the history in terms of formation plays a big role in identity in such terms.
The Civil Rights Movement was an anti one droppist movement and sought to unite Americans of all colors and eradicate Jim Crow.
The Black Power movement was racist and counter productive and sought to seperate Americans of all races and was really the inverse of white supremacy. In fact, many people in the Black Power movement world in collusion with KKK and other white supremacist organizations.
Can you find or post information in regards to this collusion with the KKK? Also, can you explain the involvement of Asians in the Black Panther Party, as well as the formation of the White Panther Party and other groups that weren't Black that worked together with the Black Panthers?
Maybe the problem is that different groups classify/view race in terms of purity, while others don't. I think this is where the socialization comes in and can vary due to socio-historical factors. What I think many people miss in regards to African Americans is that there isn't is aspect of racial purity or even supremacy. So in turn, African Americans historically viewed themselves in a social lens, while taking in and embracing, generally, those of at least substantial degrees of African descent. That's why you have a range among those that identify as African American/Black.
In terms of Latin America, I think that the history in terms of formation plays a big role in identity in such terms.
It boils down to this:
In the USA its an identity with all the cultural baggage that usually comes with that.
In Latin America its a descriptor, that's it.
To understand this in the American sense, think of descriptors such as tall or short, fat or skinny, handsome or plain. All those terms are descriptors in both the USA and in Latin America, and as descriptors they don't really have an identity attached to them. People don't expect skinny people to think a certain way, handsome people to vote a certain way, or even short people to identify a certain way. Why? These words are mere descriptors of an appearance.
The same takes place in Latin America when it comes to physical descriptors in terms of racial mixture. Mulatto in the USA may be seen as an identity all in itself and this is probably why many people that are African Americans feel uncomfortable with the resurgence not just of the mulatto word, but also biracial or even just mixed. They see it as a challenge to the African American culture and the African American political power, because the African American label currently applies to blacks and mulattoes. And to top it, it has a host of cultural baggage because in the USA this is not just some descriptor, its an identity.
In Latin America these things are taken with the same grain of salt as are other physical descriptors such as handsome, tall, muscular... there's no identity baggage attached to it.
When it comes to Latin America, identity baggages are attached to socioeconomic class, region of birth/residence/grew up in, and nationality. In Brazil, you can do whatever you want, but please don't ever confuse a Carioca (native of Rio de Janeiro) with a Paulista (native of Sao Paulo.) Believe me, you will get more than earful. Its a mistake you will only make once. lol
They look in the mirror and they see a category with no identity attached to it, while you look in the mirror and every facial feature is an identity statement. That's the difference in its purest form.
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.
