The future of Washington Heights (New York, Boston: law school, university, living in)

[DAS]

First let me say that your post are very informative, even though they are long and I think we have gotten totally off the subject of Washington Heights. It also seems that everyone puts to much emphasis on being white. I guess white is right. I am going to use some politically incorrect racial and ethnic classifications now so be prepared.

I am a NYer so I don't share the ideas that some of the people out west and some southern states share concerning racial identity of certain groups. But I knew my white grandfather very well and his side of the family out there, and alot of them live in quite a few of those western states and the midwest. I see them and talk with them on the phone pretty regularly, in private conversation that is some of what they say. I was sharing this because I see that some people may feel that you are saying that they will be forced into a group of either black or white and they don't feel as though they belong to either one. Someone mentioned other groups that are considered white but have people in that group that look similiar to people in Latin American groups for example Italians. Since I know for a fact that some people in other parts of the country don't consider some people of some groups as white, like we do in the NE, FL and CA I was just pointing that out.

Just look at the politicians you mentioned that are Italian. Are they popular outside of the northeast or Florida which has many Northeastern transplants? Tancredo married an Italian American woman and became an Evangelical I'm guessing that his reasons for doing so are personal and it is definitely his choice and there is nothing wrong with these choices. However, it does help him in the area of the country that he lives.

In the northeast, California, and Florida an Italian American is considered an all white person. But in other regions of the country they are not. They are not considered black, just other, that is the only way I can put it. People go out of their way to put them in their own catagory, unlike the way a person of Irish, Scottish, or English desent is just white. It really is not important because they are considered white, if that is important to them as an individual, in the most heavily populated areas of the country.

It is true that most people in North Dakota don't have exposure to Jews. They don't have much exposure to Italians, Latin Americans, or black Americans either. There are areas in this country like North Dakota and some southern states where there are few Catholic churches and few Synagogues. We don't think about this in NY because this is common.

The whole country doesn't think and act as we do in NYC, as you have pointed out.

[nyc0127]

''I don't doubt that there are many that may see a "white" cuban, PR, or Dominican, but that does not make them anymore "white" than a "white" person who LOOKs Puerto Rican is Hispanic or Non-white.''

Guywithacause, this is the main quote I'll respond to in your post. One thing I've noticed about all of you is that you speak well and are well-acquainted with this issue. I respect that. However, we all need to understand some basic core social facts. There is no such thing as ''looking Puerto Rican.'' Nor Dominican. Nor Cuban. If there is, provide me a description and put hard evidence behind it. After that, tell me what an American or Canadian looks like. These are secondary cultures that have been influences by many cultures and continents. What you believe looks ''Puerto Rican'' actually doesn't exist. To those who have gotten in this habitual habit, stop it. You're making yourselves sound like idiots to the intellectual world. The media doesn't even teach you how to do that. It's you trying to blend all of Puerto Rican descent into one while neglecting the fact that it's a secondary nation. You'd be basing your information off of what you've seen with your eyeballs in an enclosed box.

Argentina, Uruguay and many other countries in the southern half of South America are areas of recent Spaniard immigration. Argentina doesn't have the demographics most of Latin America does. They're almost all white. They also are not as much of Spaniard descent. Argentina is about 50% of Spaniard descent with Europeans. I'm not sure if they had slavery or not, but if they did it was statistically insignificant because there are few blacks in that country. There are also few people of indigenous descent.

Argentina was originally established by Spain in either the late 1700's or early 1800's. The large wave of immigration came nearly a century later though. Some believed that Argentina was seen as hopeful as America in the beginning of the twentieth century. However, through corruption, political turmoil and bad economic conditions, things changed. They do share many of the common characteristics that countries like the United States and Australia (and other countries that had predominate mid-to-late 1800's immigration). One is that almost the whole entire population of the southern half of South America is literate.

''where as the VAST MAJORITY of Cubans, PRs, and DR are mixed racially, with small groups being white.''

You have proof for Cuba. You have proof for the Dominican Republic. Where the hell is your proof or evidence that Puerto Rico is not a white place? Other's on here have acknowledge that in between 60-80% of the island is white. Why would Puerto Rico be so off, yet not the Dominican Republic or Cuba? There are multiple statistical resources for this on both the mainland and places to where people from Puerto Rico immigrated to (like NYC). 81% said they're white alone in Puerto Rico. 62% said they're white alone in New York City. Why would they lie? What is your reasoning?

There is an explanation for why there is a variety of different Cuban statistics. I haven't found any on Dominicans racial classifications in New York City (although I'll continue to look for it), but I couldn't imagine why it'd be a whole different than the Dominican Republic. And if it wasn't, than it would prove along with my theory that those of Puerto Rican descent are correct about how white they are in New York City (excluding a 5-10% window).

[nyc0127]

''Yes clearly there are flaws...and the reality is we are ALL mixed..just to different degrees and in different variations.''

In the sense of recently socially constructed racial identity, that isn't completely true for Latin America. For all human-beings under biological reference, that is entirely true.

[nyc0127]

First, I'll respond to this quote. ''NYC0127: I stick with everything I've said, including my comment about thinking that someone on the street is Hispanic due to their appearance.''

Explain to me the method of possible correctness you're looking to acquire through this. I'm an open-minded person who is always willing to listen. You're making assumptions that our corrupted media has taught you to do. You are doing nothing more than being a product of this pathetic system if you are to psychologically depict people like this.

There is no such thing as looking ''Hispanic.'' The media has taught you what to think. You couldn't even independently come to this conclusion on your own. You shouldn't stoop to this level, because you know better. I understand it might be a habit, but you should break out of this.

That mentality promotes ignorance. That basically states that it's okay for the New York media to describe a criminal or missing person as ''Hispanic.'' For those who are stupid enough to believe there is something such as ''looking Hispanic'' (who don't know better), they ever have a wide variety of what they think looking it means. In California, they might believe it means Spaniard/Native Indian or Native Indian. In New York City, your way is likely half black/half white. What about a place that has large populations of both like Chicago?

So you'd expect someone who people might think look's like the stereotypical indigenous Mexican at one moment, yet might think someone who's half black/half white the next. How would you not know if they weren't just half non-Spaniard European-American/half African-American. What your doing is trying to cram everything into one little box, but simply can't. And you know you can't.

To myself, I'm a bigger man than this or this system we live in. I don't believe in it. If you believe this, I'll respect that. Don't expect intellectual people to understand nor agree with you on that though. You are a well-spoken intelligent person, so I'm surprised that you'd belittle yourself by doing this. I could honestly see myself leaving this country in the future if this country continues to get worse and worse. I'm not a person who stays inside a little box, waiting for it to burn down.

To myself personally, if someone beat the crap out of my mother, and the suspect was described as ''Hispanic'' and wasn't caught and it was a reason why people didn't know who looked like what, I'd blame the instituted system for permitting this rather than the criminal.

''I've learned to be attentive to people who have typical Spanish/Mediterranean features and those who have typical northern European features.''

That sounds kind of amusing. What are you feeling their hair? Or staring at them like Robert De Niro looked at Ben Stiller in Meet the Fockers? lol Come on man. You don't know who's what within white. Yes, people have their ''general'' ideas, but it isn't that easy. You know what they say about the word assume. Ass-u-me lol Basically, you just can't know. And even if do got a nose for that kind of thing, you can't expect others to.

''I can often guess by their facial features, accent, dress, mannerisms whether or not they are of Latin descent.''

Maybe you being from Miami has a different way of looking at this than a New Yorker life myself. For one, those who assume what people are in this city are regarded as trash (regardless of ethnicity). Maybe in Miami, it's more accepting. I don't know. I'll break down your quote though.

Accent - Check. Accents aren't associated with physical features. Different countries have different accents. If you're acquainted with that kind of thing, than I can understand.

Dress - More so no. For foreigners, that is partly true. For a kid who is born in this country who goes to high school though, what do you expect? All people born in this country dress the same. There are different fashions within the American culture. For those who try to attach collectivism to it usually are attention-needing and trashy (i.e. some lower-class African-Americans wear their boxes below their waist - I heard it was a sex-call for males in prison).

If you expect parents and/or grandparents from Puerto Rico to pass on anything to their children/grandchildren, than you're out of your mind. You aren't understanding the complexity of their former culture in this city. Believe me, if they dressed ''differently'' than anyone else in high-school, they'd be regarded as a freak. Any kid would. No kid wants that. You might be associating the environment you grew up in with this city though. South Florida is much warmer. This city is cold half the year. In the Miami area, the climate works along with much of Latin America's.

Mannerism - Yes for foreigners, no for Americans. For Dominican-Americans who are first generation, a little bit. For Puerto Rican-Americans, hell no. There is no idiosyncrasy. If there was, it would be completely a self-imploded forced title likely resulting in people considering them a piece of trash (i.e. Rosie Perez). The same could be said to the former Italian-American culture. Remember Marisa Tomei in the movie my cousin Vinny? That accent is forced upon and regarded as trash. That is not culture. That is not a mannerism. By considering people of those former cultures to still have something is doing nothing more than insulting well-cultured New Yorkers (i.e. Chinese, Dominicans, Arabs).

Facial features - Some yes, some no. I'd say more so inappropriate than anything else though. You could assume who's Jewish in this city by hair texture, the sizes of people's noses or what ever other ''stereotypical'' idea. That wouldn't be respected though. People don't like people assuming. They see it as invasive. If you want me to buy you a microscope to look at peoples cheek bones, let me know lol

''I also use this method also to judge if a person who appears to be mixed race is Hispanic or not. It's not a science; it's simply using intuition and years of growing up around Hispanic people to guess whether someone is Hispanic or not without even knowing that person''

What makes you believe this is appropriate or accepted? If you were apart of the low-class world, what you'd be doing is fine. Being that you attended Boston College though, you're representing an idea that is a counterculture to educated Americans and others in this modern world. Why are you trying to cram everything into one little box? And why are you using a term that has been so tainted by the political interests of this country's government and media? The key words in that sentence is ''without even knowing that person.'' If they knew you were ''assuming'' their whole lineage in 3 seconds, they'd probably a mouthful for you.


''I just guess, and with Hispanic people I often am correct.''

First off, there is no such thing as Hispanic people unless you're an American with low-intelligence or a man that lives in his own world. Secondly, would you know if you were correct about those who you don't though? Are you even asking? I hope you don't, because people aren't that kind to stranger's invading them in this city. And if you asked, is there a notepad and calculator in your pocket?

''Walking the streets and observing people and their company is all it takes for me to guess whether or not someone is or is not Hispanic, and by doing this in NYC, I would be shocked if 62% of Puerto Ricans here were relatively non-mixed white. The majority of Latin Americans I see around here appear to be clearly mixed, but a substantial minority appear to be non-mixed white.''

Put hard evidence behind that. Why would they lie? We've both already acknowledged that people have an anti-white psychology in this city. If anything, shouldn't it be more white because of people's reluctance to being ''dry.'' I don't believe it's more though. I believe it could be a little less. Others on here acknowledge who are of Latin American descent have told me they believed 2/3 of Puerto Ricans in Puerto Rico are non-mixed white. Why would they lie? They'd know their own background. Who are you to challenge them to the point of saying they're off by 40 to 50 percent? It is reasonable that it might be off 10 to 20% in Puerto Rico, and 5 to 10% in this city.

Why would it be more here? Was there like a special check you'd receive if you were mixed when coming here? As I noted several times, it couldn't have been that because blacks in the island were poorer and lower on the social hierarchy. They didn't come more. They came as much as they were supposed to. That 62%statistic is from 2000. Considering the reluctance of whiteness the New York media imposes on people, why would people lie in the opposite direction?

''2) I know that many Puerto Ricans and Dominicans in NYC are either white or black, not mixed. However, the majority of BOTH of these groups appears to be mixed to me and to most people in this discussion.''

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but where is the hard evidence behind the percentage of mixed Puerto Rican descendants? I got hard evidence. You don't The exact people I'm talking about are the same people who recorded these statistics in this city.

I agree that most people believe Dominicans appear to be mixed. There is hard evidence that supports that. I'll agree with that notion. I believe within the mixed there is more black blood than white, but I know I could be wrong. I'm not going to sit here and say it's concrete. What I can say is that the Dominican Republic is at minimum 47.5% of African ancestry though, because I got hard evidence to support that.

What makes you believe that people think the majority of Puerto Ricans are mixed? After reading all these messages, I can tell you there is not one unified feeling. Some agreed with the notion of believing that 60-80% are white in Puerto Rico. Some didn't. Many of us are divided on how we feel about this issue. The

''3) I have no statistic to counter your 62% white figure for Puerto Ricans in the city; my response is that the number reflects many mixed Puerto Ricans choosing one race (in this case, white) instead of indicating that they are mixed race, resulting in an inflated "white" figure.''

How inflated though? I wasn't sure if it was you who said it, but one on here said it's 1/3 to 1/2 off. The 10% black hasn't really been disputed by anyone. Within that 62% though, if it was a 25% (kind of in the middle of 1/3 and 1/2 - 40.3%) off, it'd be saying that 57% of Puerto Rican descent in this city are mixed. It would be saying that about 1/3 of Puerto Rican descent are white alone. That just isn't true.

You say that the numbers are being inflated because they aren't saying they're of mixed race. Why? America (and New York especially) has a way of making smaller percentages seem a little bigger. If that was true, it would make them feel mixed. Why don't these people feel ''mixed'' if they actually are though? Why would you believe people in Puerto Rico not indicate this either? It's there country. I think they could handle their business properly.

''4) I believe that the way people identify ethnically and culturally is far more important than saying that a person of a certain group is x% white and y% black.''

I agree with that.

[SuperMario]

Originally Posted by nyc0127

There is an explanation for why there is a variety of different Cuban statistics. I haven't found any on Dominicans racial classifications in New York City (although I'll continue to look for it), but I couldn't imagine why it'd be a whole different than the Dominican Republic. And if it wasn't, than it would prove along with my theory that those of Puerto Rican descent are correct about how white they are in New York City (excluding a 5-10% window).

It's actually very different. According to Wikipedia:


Demographics

Since 1980, the Census Bureau has asked U.S. residents to classify their race separately from their Hispanic origin, if any. In 1990, 29.2% of Dominican Americans responded that they were white, while 30% considered themselves black. A plurality chose the "other" category--39.8% of the total.[9] The prevalence of the "other race" category probably reflects the large number of people with mixed African, European and Amerindian ancestry, usually grouped under the folk term indio in the Dominican Republic (73% of the Dominicans are mixed African, Taino Amerinidan and European descent)

Dominican American - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[SuperMario]

What I can say is that the Dominican Republic is at minimum 47.5% of African ancestry though, because I got hard evidence to support that.

Were did you get that from?

[nyc0127]

''Puerto Ricans started coming in numbers in the 1950's to the 1970's. Most who came to cities like New York, were poor in Puerto Rico in the first place, and they tend to be of mix race. But I will probably say that half of the ones that came here, where either mix, or white.''

This was a good message. I am in total agreement that most came in between the 50's and 70's (some in the late 40's and the early 70's). The bulk was in the 50's and 60's though. It might be different for places that aren't New York City though. For people in New York City and it's metropolitan area, likely 5% came before 1950, 40% came in the 50's, 40% in the 60's, 10% in the 70's and 5% post-80's. I'll reply to some of your points.

Yes, they were poor. However, the blacks on the island (and especially back than) were poorer. Many of those places were more isolated. The blacks on that island haven't always been treated well. Just a few years ago, the U.S. government wanted to test bombs in Vieques, Puerto Rico. That place has a higher black population than the island. That place also has some barrios. I remember Al Sharpton went to the island to participate in the Navy-Vieques protests. He somehow managed to break the law. He winded up getting thrown in prison for 90 days and tried going on a ''hunger strike'' (as if anyone cared if he died). With that being said though, the mixed were still not the worst.

Around 20-25% of Puerto Rico is significantly mixed of both white and black. 2/3 is solid white. 1/10 is solid black. I'm trying to figure out why people think mixed people would come as just exploding rates though. I'm trying to figure out there like some magical check or something. Either that, or I'm just not seeing this clearly.

In that statement, you said half of Puerto Ricans who came to New York are white. Our opinions aren't far off. 62% of their descendants claim their race is white. I acknowledge a 5-10% window. It could be 50%, but I believe it's a little more than that.

Many of the Cubans who came to the New York area did so before 1959. The reason why is because it would become complicated to get here after 1959. Miami is 90 miles away. There is a law that says once a Cuban immigrant sets foot on our soil, they're immediately legalized (unless they have a criminal record). The reasoning to that is linked to America's opposition to communism and they know if they were send back, they'd be punished very badly. In fact, many of the relatives who escaped get punished.

Why would an upper-middle class person from a relatively advanced country want to move to a place like Union City after 1959? Although statistically insignificant, there was a little post WWII Italian immigrant. Most went to the northern California. Italy's economy was growing at that time. Many came with business aspirations and liked the environment. Similarly to Cuban immigrants with out of state residents re-locating to Florida, they were able to grow together ; rather than completely assimilating to the status quo.

I doubt a post WWII Italian immigrant would have wanted to move to an enclave like Union City too. However, I could have seen them moving to more suburban or streamline/competitive places that is affluent. It was environmentally destroyed. It's over-crowded and disgusting. Some chose to move north, but most didn't. Although north Jersey has never been a pretty place, it was likely to have been even more environmentally destroyed after 1959. South Florida was growing and had a more favorable climate that was similar to their's. People in Cuba are aloud to legally immigrate to countries in Europe. It is limited and their reasoning has to be good though. A popular country is Spain. Many do this when attending universities.

I do agree that the whitest didn't want to leave Puerto Rico. The people who live the best everywhere wouldn't want to go. Life wasn't bad there, even when the economy was sluggish. Even if they could have made more money moving to a place like New York or New Jersey, they'd know they could be stereotyped into being poor and blue collared like the majority. Many people take offense to being tied into a face that doesn't represent them.

For example, Mets 1B Carlos Delgado was insulted by how Mets general manager Omar Minaya approached when he was a free agent after the 2004 season. He felt that Minaya used ''street Spanish.'' Minaya (50 years old) came to this country at 8 from the Dominican Republic. Delgado is very educated and well-spoken. He has participated in humanitarian activities, opposed the bomb testing in Vieques and has opposed the war in Iraq. Minaya was one of the older Dominican immigrants. Because of this, Delgado signed with the Florida Marlins (for the same offer). The Mets winded up trading for him one year later.
Although Minaya is educated, the necessity to speak Spanish at every single moment wasn't necessary.

If you make decent money in Puerto Rico, you could own a nice house and have nice weather. Although you won't get paid a lot there, it doesn't cost that much to live there. Some who were middle class (and non-blue collared) in Puerto Rico (because of the money they could make here) chose to move to the United States to make some good money and eventually move/retire back to Puerto Rico.




A good example I could give for this is former Seattle Mariners designated hitter Edgar Martinez. His family was middle-class in Puerto Rico. He's obviously white. I'd have a difficult time believing he's mixed. His family was middle class. His family owned an embroidery business. Both of his parents were from Puerto Rico. They got divorced. I'm not sure which parent he moved with, but he moved back to Puerto Rico in 1965. Like him, you'd have to contain a well-established connection with the island though. That takes money. Some who came who didn't like it went back. A large advantage Puerto Ricans had was that any who immigrated had United States citizenship.

[nyc0127]

''Were did you get that from?''

It doesn't have to be the exact 47.5% number, but it's in that neighborhood. I used common sense.

I divided that 73% mixed population into two categories (white/black).

With that, you get 36.5%. I added 36.5% to white number and 36.5% to the black number. With that, I added the 11% black to 36.5%. You get at an minimum 47.5%.

Than I added 36.5% to the 16% white. That gives you 52.5%. I acknowledge that there is probably a one percent of indigenous ancestry within both of those populations too. So I'd shave a half a percent off both ends. There is also a minimal non-Spaniard descended European population. It's likely 2-3%. So about half of the D.R. is of Spaniard descent if you took into effect the probability of the divisibility of the mixed citizens of the D.R.

[nyc0127]

''that's on the island...any explanation?''

This illustrates much of my point. To start off though, I said about 52% of the bloodline of Dominican Republic is white and about 47% is black. Those numbers are close. That explains why the white number is so close to the black number.

This proves my theory that ''making a choice'' will be inevitable though. I'm sure about 73% is mixed just like the Dominican Republic, but many have come to make a choice after assimilating in this country. Within the mixed portions of the population, some chose the white racial classification, as some chose black. The American social structure and media influences people to make a choice. Remember, that was the 1990 census too. That was when Dominicans were at the peak of their immigration generation.

Considering that much more are assimilated now, it wouldn't surprise me if that 40.8% continues to decrease. It's likely that for every percentage point it does go down, half will go white, half will go black. To those who chose black, likely look black. To those who chose white, likely look more white. It's possible that the one's who look more white could lean to 3/4 white and the same thing could be said to blacks. Each of those 30 percent's will mesh into the identity of blackness and whiteness in this country.

Remember though, 73% is a large number. 32.2% chose not to identify. It's likely that about 16 percent of each group leans towards three quarters white or black. America (and New York) has taught them to choose. Those who are apart of that identified 40.8% are likely to be about 50/50 white/black. They represent the most versatility.

What they should do is making categories within mixed. They should include a 3/4 white ; 1/4 black and 3/4 black ; 1/4 white categorization. I guarantee you that 40.8% would go back up to at least 2/3.

''Back to the topic. 22% of second generation Dominicans graduate with degrees, higher than Mexicans (11%) and Puerto Ricans (9%)......with this success means migration to wealthier areas. So basically even without gentrification, Dominicans in Wash Heights are numbered.''

What ever number you are to receive about the college education percentages of Puerto Rican-Americans will be insignificant. They have lost their ethnic label. Many are entering their third-generation now, so I'm sure it's much more than 9%. In fact, it would be impossible for it to be that low. For Mexican-Americans, many live in rural areas in southern Texas. 11% graduating with a bachelor's degree is likely the same rate for European-Americans too. However, I can guarantee you that southern California would be much different.

It doesn't shock me that many Dominican-Americans have assimilated this quickly though. The places they live in are expensive. If they didn't intend for their children and grandchildren to become more educated and affluent, they wouldn't have come to this city or country.

[cyrusjul]

nyc0127 nice stories, but it will help alot, if you actually quoted the person who said what. It is sort of hard to know who you are responding to.