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'm not seeking to divide..the concept of a LATINA Beauty Pageant is divisive in and of itself. Again, if you have an issue with the concept then that is fine and a much more principled argument than what the OP is spouting off about.
Overlooking potential caveats is one thing...but we can only scrutinize the CLAIMS MADE by the entrant. We can also scrutinize the promoters of the event for accepting their entry fee before throwing up red flags about her criteria.
But, if we go by face value here (which the OP and others are doing for Ms.Jakiyah McKoy)...the other entrants questioned McKoys credibility due to events that materialized AFTER THE FACT. So, why do these people not get the benefit of the doubt like Jakiyahs mother?
How is Jakiyah's mother getting the benefit of the doubt (BOTD)? who's not getting the BOTD?
And I agree with all you have said here. All aspects need to be called out and looked upon. If they need to have documented proof they should have gone through all that at registration or application time or in the beginning.
I have a feeling something is being left out that we the public are not hearing.
I'm not seeking to divide..the concept of a LATINA Beauty Pageant is divisive in and of itself. Again, if you have an issue with the concept then that is fine and a much more principled argument than what the OP is spouting off about.
Overlooking potential caveats is one thing...but we can only scrutinize the CLAIMS MADE by the entrant. We can also scrutinize the promoters of the event for accepting their entry fee before throwing up red flags about her criteria.
But, if we go by face value here (which the OP and others are doing for Ms.Jakiyah McKoy)...the other entrants questioned McKoys credibility due to events that materialized AFTER THE FACT. So, why do these people not get the benefit of the doubt like Jakiyahs mother?
The term Latino/a and Hispanic and especially more specifically it's usage and the way it's used is just so wrongly used and at times is incorrect that it becomes confusing and even more divisive.
How is Jakiyah's mother getting the benefit of the doubt (BOTD)? who's not getting the BOTD?
And I agree with all you have said here. All aspects need to be called out and looked upon. If they need to have documented proof they should have gone through all that at registration or application time or in the beginning.
I have a feeling something is being left out that we the public are not hearing.
So let me get this straight....
Many in the Latino community are marching and protesting because THEY do not have the proper documentation to prove that they are citizens of any country, let alone the United States. But still they DEMAND all of the rights, social services, benefits, welfare and aid that America has to offer...without being "documented" but these same people have the audacity to demand that a little Afro-Latina girl "prove" that she is Latina for a beauty pageant...that she won. Perhaps this girl's Dominican grandmother was undocumented, as many of them are; so now Latinos want to be the documentation police?
What you posted here is completely false. Slavery had nothing to do with race. Slavery was MATRILINEAL. This was based on the sexist mysoginistic rule of matriliny or rather the rule of PARTUS SEQUITUR VENENTRUM. That means that you were only allowed to be a slave or be a potential target or candidate for enslavement if your MOTHER was a slave. There were slaves of ALL races, including large numbers of WHITE slaves. It was illegal to have race based slavery or to enslave someone for because of their race. Such was punishable and one would receive notable severe consequences for such. Also colonial documents don't even refer to a blacks as slaves or vice versa or that such is equivalent to such. During slavery, a person's race wad determined based on what they looked like. So if a person was mixed race during the colonial period but looked white they most often times would be considered WHITE. If they looked very mixed or identified as such they'd be labelled as mixed etc.
Not all race mixing was from rape. There were lots of complex arrangements and circumstances, unions and relationships that occurred between people of different races. In fact many WHITE woman even had children with BLACK men.*
If during the early colonial antebellum era, they had enslaved people based on their race the WHITE fathers would have been held more responsible or been and acknowledged and possibly chastised. Under partus SEQUITUR ventrum support could be provided behind the scenes and under hush hush agreements, with sole focus and onus, focus, and blame being put on and centered on and around the woman.*
Btw, there were masters, "massas", slave traders, captors, colonists, settlers etc of all races and race mixtures. There were also enslaved peoples of all races and racial admixtures and mixes.
As for the one drop rule no such thing existed during the antebellum colonial era or during slavery. One drop rule was a legal rule instituted on the books and in practice beginning in the 1930s. Mulatto and various other mixed race identities were recognized in the USA and on the censuses for virtually all of USA history. 1930 was the last year that mulatto and mixed race identity was legally recognized. After 1930 many ppl that identified as or were usually listed as mulatto or other or mixed had to get used to the risk of being possible mistaken for or listed as Negro or black etc. Many still weren't used to it and many still identified as mixed even during the one drop rule period. In some aspects it was also some black and mixed race black individuals that helped to support and boast/bolster the racist one drop rule, and many sectors of white and mixed race white elites didn't want a one drop rule, however some people of African descent grew arrogantly proud of their ethnic African American identity so they one dropped themselves and others. But this was only a tiny minority of ppl of color that advocated onr droppism. Most people were anti one droppist. One drop rule was put in place because of white supremacy and economic and social CLASS distinction and protection and to increase further division and create further competition. The one drop rule was a legal rule that sought to target people of mixed ancestry, and those whose ancestry was questionable. There was also a racist one drop rule that was applied to target Native Americans although it was not as severe as the hypodescent one drop rule method that was used to target blacks.*
In states like Oklahoma and Ohio legally someone like Obama would have been considered a WHITE man.
One drop rule was only implemented from 1930 to 1967. The successful 1967 Sulreme Court Case ruling of Loving V. Virginia helped eradicate and dismantle the racist one drop rule. In 1967 mixed race and multiracial identity and conciousness was further restored in the USA.
So mixed race identity faced paper genocide because of the implementing of the one drop rule in the South from 1930 to 1967. It did a lot of damage. Had there not been a one drop rule the USA probably would not have the racial controversies and hang ups in the manner that still seems to permeate USA society.
1 drop rule against American Indians: Virginia, though it had that "law" against Black people, there was something called the Pocahontas Exemption since so many of Virginia's "WHITE" leaders had her in their family trees. Race hypocrisy at its worst.
Many in the Latino community are marching and protesting because THEY do not have the proper documentation to prove that they are citizens of any country, let alone the United States. But still they DEMAND all of the rights, social services, benefits, welfare and aid that America has to offer...without being "documented" but these same people have the audacity to demand that a little Afro-Latina girl "prove" that she is Latina for a beauty pageant...that she won. Perhaps this girl's Dominican grandmother was undocumented, as many of them are; so now Latinos want to be the documentation police?
Hypocrisy at its finest.
You and I butt heads a LOT. Not this time; I agree with you 100 percent here.
Belizeans are not Latino. I guess it depends on which Belizean you talk to because I have met and know of Belizeans that dont identify with Latino label and I know some that do. The official language of Belize is English so it's not a Spanish speaking country. Many may know or understand Spanish because of it's proximity to other neighboring Spanish speaking countries and immigration from Spanish speaking Central American nations.
As for Panama, most people including black Panamanians in Panama have Spanish surnames. In the USA most or a lot of Panamanians that have migrated to the USA have been those with English or more Anglo/Brittanic like surnames
There is a substantial percentage of black Panamanians who have English surnames.
Brazil's black population is only about 6%. If you are speaking of Afrodescendants in Brazil that's a different story. Brazil has the largest population of people of Afrodescent outside of Africa (NIGERIA to be exact).
So how do you determine which Brazilians are black and which ones are merely Afrodescendants?
White Latin American looks are not uncommon. It's no different than the USA. Each nation has all races and groups.
Some for black Latin American looks.
Ppl are just ignorant and it's funny how Latin Americans come to the USA and act all oblivious like there are no whites or blacks in Latin American countries! Blah lol
In some societies- Guatemala, DR, Bolivia - the white look is certainly uncommon. In Argentina, Paraguay and Chile, the black look is certainly uncommon. Hence my use of the term "relatively" uncommon to encompass Latin America in general.
UH; it seems if a "Hispanic" makes la raza look real bad, they don't claim people like Phillip Garrido who kidnaped and raped Jaycee Dugard. I don't think la raza would claim Leander Perez, he was 1 of Bull Connor's pals during Jim Crow and so on.
Many in the Latino community are marching and protesting because THEY do not have the proper documentation to prove that they are citizens of any country, let alone the United States. But still they DEMAND all of the rights, social services, benefits, welfare and aid that America has to offer...without being "documented" but these same people have the audacity to demand that a little Afro-Latina girl "prove" that she is Latina for a beauty pageant...that she won. Perhaps this girl's Dominican grandmother was undocumented, as many of them are; so now Latinos want to be the documentation police?
Hypocrisy at its finest.
I absolutely agree with you. I can't stand identity police. It's often times people who have been oppressed that end up hurting and oppressing other people. It's ridiculous.
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.
Perhaps this girl's Dominican grandmother was undocumented, as many of them are; so now Latinos want to be the documentation police? 
