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.
I think I'm going to ask the powers that be to create a Sociology/Anthropology forum. I would appreciate your support
But going back to the topic, I think there is a difference between race from a sociological perspective and race from an anthropological perspective. Race is used across the world in ways that may not coincide with anthropological definitions. The former was what I was more referring to with social constructs though with mixed races it is the same exact thing.
In some countries, and to many peoples, race is nothing more than an anthropological classification. In the US, race seems to have a whole other dimension. That said, the definition of race does not rely on the social constructs of race in the US.
In some countries, and to many peoples, race is nothing more than an anthropological classification. In the US, race seems to have a whole other dimension. That said, the definition of race does not rely on the social constructs of race in the US.
But you do admit that the anthropological definition of race doesn't always coincide with cultural definitions of race?
Do you notice that CNN selected Makayla "Angela Davis" as a commentator for this piece on Rachel, instead of an actual black woman, yet they made certain to include an actual black man. This is the classic tactic that is often used to replace the identity of actual black women. They often use very fair skinned mixed race women like Makayla, and label her as "black." This is not done, by accident.
I alluded to this as a problem in an earlier post. The inadvertent creation of a "new" race--"biracial" is problematical in that it has no real culture, but it's got an artifical recognition that can be used for such negative purposes.
Make no mistake about it--darker-skinned blacks, especially women--definitely do notice this. What they don't notice, though, is that there is a distinct difference between being light-skinned and being biracial.
The difference is that in today's social environment--very different from that of earlier years--it's possible todayfor a biracial child to be raised as "not black," which was impossible in earlier generations.
This phenomenon is not going in a positive direction.
I alluded to this as a problem in an earlier post. The inadvertent creation of a "new" race--"biracial" is problematical in that it has no real culture, but it's got an artifical recognition that can be used for such negative purposes.
Make no mistake about it--darker-skinned blacks, especially women--definitely do notice this. What they don't notice, though, is that there is a distinct difference between being light-skinned and being biracial.
The difference is that in today's social environment--very different from that of earlier years--it's possible todayfor a biracial child to be raised as "not black," which was impossible in earlier generations.
This phenomenon is not going in a positive direction.
What I've also noticed is that a biracial child raised with a white mother has a better chance at success than one raised with a black one.
This has just been an observation I've seen over the years.
Or I could be imagining things.
If you look at the biracial celebs, almost all of them, except for a few (i.e., Lenny Kravitz is one) are products of ww/bm or any race woman/bm.
I have a question for you - YOU were raised in a segregated society and therefore are a product of that society. How did that influence the way you use your own judgment about people of different races?
Good question. I came to realize the reason I joined the military and spent as much time as possible overseas was to get away from the racial turmoil of the early 70s. The military is not a perfect society, but it is a better culture than American civilian culture. At least it was then--I think it's gotten worse since 9/11.
I still assert, "As the sapling is bent, so grows the tree," however this is learned behavior that can be unlearned...but only with deliberate intention.
I have been shocked in the last six years of the long-time white acquaintances of mine, people I thought were "cool" back in the 70s, who seem to have reverted to what their parents were. It's like seeing a friend turn into a werewolf before your eyes.
But at the same time, I know others who deliberately overcome their upbringing.
So for me, it's a case-by-case issue.
Quote:
By the way, I just want to point out something that many people would prefer to overlook. I was still "stigmatized" to some extent by marrying an AA man and having four biracial kids. Many people over the years have assumed that I was "defective" somehow or didn't have good self esteem, or was raised in a lower class environment yada yada yada (all of which was untrue). After my AA husband and I got divorced (not due in any way to our different skin tones) I found my dating pool limited to those men who weren't prejudiced - which actually was a positive and a GREAT way to rule out some serious jerks! But still - that prejudice was obvious.
When my kids grew up and moved away to start their own lives, and I moved as well, I've had some comedic relief (that's a nice way of putting it) when people who have no idea my kids are biracial are suddenly SHOCKED when my kids walk through the door, or when they see their picture on my desk or whatever. Honestly, there's no way to work this into casual conversation (I've tried): "I'm really looking forward to going to that concert with you, and by the way...my kids are biracial. Just sayin'." Nope, that doesn't work.
When I started dating - THAT was a real hoot. I mean, HOW do you say this to someone? "Yes, I'd love to go out Friday night...by the way, my kids are biracial - is it still a date?" It was a real adventure in separating the wheat from the chaff.
I actually had some yahoo tell me that this didn't matter at all (I think he saw some picture of my kids after the second date or something) and then he TEXTED ME while I was at the freaking dentist's office enduring a major dental drama to tell me that he had thought it over and just couldn't deal with it and so he was breaking up with me. OMG it was so ridiculous that I burst out laughing with my mouth full of gauze and actually showed the text to the dental team, who got a pretty big kick out of it. I managed to text back, between procedures, "Hey, the only reason I didn't break up with you first was because I had more important things to do." Or something like that.
And so, your experiences, too, belie an earlier post that the Boomer Generation "embraced" interracial marriage.
This is a transition that IMO won't be over until at least Boomers are dead. During this transition, we approach a very unfortunate stratification of race--merely adding more racial layers--rather than reemphasizing the concept.
In some countries, and to many peoples, race is nothing more than an anthropological classification. In the US, race seems to have a whole other dimension. That said, the definition of race does not rely on the social constructs of race in the US.
Those were very much definitions created in Europe. Europeans even saw each other as distinctly different "races" in the early 20th century.
The baby boom generation--my generation--did not so much embrace interracial marriage as we stumbled into it.
The vigorous suppression of interracial marriage ended at the same time that white women "took control of their own bodies" and much greater control of their own destinies. The "second wave" of feminism, the legalization of abortion--all these things contributed to young white women deciding that they controlled their bodies, not society.
Integration began to take hold in the high schools and colleges at this same time, putting whites and blacks of "mating age" into natural contact with each other in a way we had never been before.
All of these things were happening at the same time, which certainly created a spike in interracial marriages beginning in the 1970s. Even then, it's a "spike" only in comparison with the dearth of previous years.
If you look at the approval rates through the years, you see the sudden spike in approval in what is today the 50-64 year old group--those who were kids in high school and college around 1974. Those who were already in the work world by then--who had largely already chosen their mates by 1970--still disapprove of interracial marriage significantly more than those who were still looking for mates in 1970.
My point is that the Boomer Generation transitioned into interracial marriage, but it would be erroneous to say that we "embraced" it. At this point, "acceptance" is probably a better term. To put it into a real context, Boomer parents accept mixed grandchildren whereas our parents would have rejected them outright.
I know well that the parents of baby boomers discouraged mixed race children because of the stigma that was attached (they knew it from their generation). Two of my siblings are in mixed race marriages. Their children have managed just fine - no stigma, mostly because it seems to be so common today.
What is the cultural definition of the Mongoloid race?
Well I'm sure you know that people who have "Mongoloid" genes are present in South America where they are most certainly not categorized culturally or officially as Asian, apart from immigrant communities.
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.
