I'm Really Discovering Los Angeles (living, military, title)

[disgruntled la native]

Originally Posted by nickdahammer

'Armenians, Persians, and Arabs are not white'.

Really?

'Middle Eastern' is not a race. White (Caucasian) is. Is 'Far Eastern' a race? Not hardly.

My Armenian friends are as Caucasian as the rest of 'em. To suggest otherwise is asinine. When I travelled to Turkey, the 'natives' were WHITE. Big surprise.

Here are your race choices:

African
American Indian
Asian
Caucasian
Hispanic American
European American

Armenians and Turks are not white. caucasian maybe, but not American white. they have nothing in common with John Smith from oklahoma who has scotch irish descent. Most armenians and turks look darker features, different features from typical American european whites.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by disgruntled la native

Armenians and Turks are not white. caucasian maybe, but not American white. they have nothing in common with John Smith from oklahoma who has scotch irish descent.

But much more in common with Tony Rossi or David Epstein from New York, New Jersey, or Pennsylvania.

Most armenians and turks look darker features, different features from typical American european whites.

The "darker side of white" is still white (due to having some Rom ancestry I sometimes get mistaken for Latino or Armenian). In fact there is NO country in the world where the majority of people have blonde hair and blue eyes, not even Sweden, nor has there ever been.

Armenians have always been considered white in the US, even the Supreme Court said they were. The Turks I've known are pretty indistinguishable from most Southern and many Eastern Europeans. Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey, had blue eyes.

And yes many Latinos, including in L.A., are white. Latinos can be of any race. As for the "mestizo" issue: many Americans commonly regarded as "white" have indigenous ancestry. Burt Reynolds, Johnny Depp, Angelina Jolie, Megan Fox, the late Elvis Presley, and the late Johnny Cash were/are regarded as white.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by Pacific Swell

Those homes in Hancock Park are gorgeous. Love the Westside, but we don't have much architecture like that.

Thanks for sharing these wonderful pics.

Because most of the Westside was developed much later.

90 years ago, Hancock Park and Los Feliz were the "Beverly Hills" of that era. The westernmost fringe of L.A. proper was the area from West Hollywood on the north to East Culver City on the south (and that area was just beginning to be developed). Between there and the beach areas of Venice and Santa Monica was farmland. One of the leading Chicano activists of late '60s/'70s L.A. (I forget his name, but he was someone pretty important) was actually born in Beverly Hills, in the 1930s when most of it was farmland and his family worked in the fields.

[disgruntled la native]

Originally Posted by majoun

But much more in common with Tony Rossi or David Epstein from New York, New Jersey, or Pennsylvania.



The "darker side of white" is still white (due to having some Rom ancestry I sometimes get mistaken for Latino or Armenian). In fact there is NO country in the world where the majority of people have blonde hair and blue eyes, not even Sweden, nor has there ever been.

Armenians have always been considered white in the US, even the Supreme Court said they were. The Turks I've known are pretty indistinguishable from most Southern and many Eastern Europeans. Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey, had blue eyes.

And yes many Latinos, including in L.A., are white. Latinos can be of any race. As for the "mestizo" issue: many Americans commonly regarded as "white" have indigenous ancestry. Burt Reynolds, Johnny Depp, Angelina Jolie, Megan Fox, the late Elvis Presley, and the late Johnny Cash were/are regarded as white.

It's a matter of opinion in the end. But we're talking about LA ethnic politics. And the vast majority of Latinos are not "white" here. No one considers places like Maywood and Huntington Park "white"

Almost every Armenian I've met looks distinctly Middle Eastern. While Ashkenazi Jews and WASPs sometimes look indistinguishable. So Armenians are different.

[BlankVerse]

Originally Posted by disgruntled la native

Armenians and Turks are not white. caucasian maybe, but not American white. they have nothing in common with John Smith from oklahoma who has scotch irish descent. Most armenians and turks look darker features, different features from typical American european whites.

Disgruntled. All due respect. That is YOUR opinion.

The U.S. Census Bureau defines "white people" as those, "having origins in any of the original peoples of EUROPE, the MIDDLE EAST, or NORTH AFRICA. It includes people who write in entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Arab, or Polish."

So yes, we are talking Caucasians in the broadest sense (Europe, No. Africa, Middle East, etc.).

Perhaps for YOU, white should mean European-American. But where do you draw the line? Northwestern Europe only? or do you include Italians or Greeks as white or are they a special sub-category of white?

I just saw a rerun of MASH last night. It had the blue blood Charles (a WASP from New England) VERY UPSET that his sister was engaged to an ITALIAN. He saw that as a major step down. And to a guy like Charles Winchester, an Italian could never be considered white.

[Frank.O´Hara]

I loved those pictures! Damn I can´t wait to explore it by myself, as soon as possible.

By the way, have you heard about that game that was relased just a few days ago? LA NOIRE. I´m telling it because it´s a really revolutionary project - they used original maps of LA from 40´s and transformed it into a virtual city. They used planes, photos and people really claim that it really looks like LA in 1940´s. So, old native angelinos could recognize places that were demolished years ago and maybe even places they live in right now. I think it would be really interesting to play this game. Although I don´t have any time for this kind of entertainment... The city looks so different comparing to it´s 1940´s version.
If it comes to PC I´ll buy anyway.

Here´s the map they did. From donwtown to Hollywood. It´s an era before highways so don´t be confused.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by disgruntled la native

It's a matter of opinion in the end. But we're talking about LA ethnic politics. And the vast majority of Latinos are not "white" here. No one considers places like Maywood and Huntington Park "white"

You'd sometimes be surprised which "whites" are Latino and which aren't.

Being "white" and being "Latino" are not mutually exclusive. This isn't even going into people with one non-Latino/a white parent and one Latino/a parent. Many of the kids of the non-Latino whites I grew up with who stayed in SoCal would count as "Latinos" or "Latinas" in statistics.

Almost every Armenian I've met looks distinctly Middle Eastern. While Ashkenazi Jews and WASPs sometimes look indistinguishable. So Armenians are different.

Politically speaking, is a Supreme Court ruling enough for you? In re Halladjian, 1909.

This article should answer your questions: Definitions of whiteness in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[4sankofa]

Great pics showing the multi diversity of the city - THANKS

[tweetybird11208]

Originally Posted by Trillion

Uh...

Is that the Mexican side of LA? LA is said to be very diverse, but based on those pictures, LA is basically Mexico with a few white people sprinkled in.

Thats what i'm saying

[disgruntled la native]

^Not really. Even counting actual whites (not middle easterners or "white latinos") , they are still around 1/3 of the population