Is Metro Atlanta majority-minority? (North Atlanta, White: how much, statistics, move)

[JoeTarheel]

Originally Posted by hautemomma

I hear you and often use "nonwhite" myself, but that is still a problematic term, as it casts whiteness as a norm or default.

I would only consider a term problematic in relation to your intent. I assume you don't intend the word to imply that being white is the standard, so I don't need to have an issue with it. I think our society is hyper-sensitive to word usage these days, as if there is a hidden message behind practically everything. I realize many words ARE problematic, but it feels like we are constantly looking for underlying problems when often there is nothing to find.

I see non-Hispanic used a lot...does that mean that Hispanic is the norm? I believe nonwhite is used simply because the rest of us are considered people of color - but I'm just guessing. Maybe we could just try to popularize nonblack...

[bUU]

Originally Posted by JoeTarheel

I would only consider a term problematic in relation to your intent.

I cannot agree.

One of my grandmothers was an immigrant to this country, fleeing Nazi persecution. She came replete with a suitcase full of ignorance with regard to people of other cultures. Her intent was not to disparage or marginalize others, but yet her attitudes and the things she said reflected that ignorance, and she was so set in her ways by the time she got here that even fifty years later nothing had changed. All through my childhood, my mother was careful to fastidiously correct her mother when some bit of ignorance leaked out, because otherwise my grandmother's words would have shaped ignorance default perspectives in the minds of us grandchildren. Beyond that, I'm sure when my grandmother was out and around in the world (which, incidentally, was not all that often - she never traveled more than a ten minute walk from where she was living, except to move to a new home) I'm sure her ignorance leaked out here and there. I suspect that her words, again simply ignorant rather than with intent to harm, were at times hurtful to some people with whom she came into contact. Lack of intent didn't mitigate the damage her casual comments had.

As Krista Tippett has pointed out on several occasions, words really do matter. They shape the way we understand ourselves, the way we interpret the world and the way we treat others. Moreover, they shape the way those we interact with perceive themselves and their relationship with us.

[JoeTarheel]

Originally Posted by bUU

I cannot agree.

One of my grandmothers was an immigrant to this country, fleeing Nazi persecution. She came replete with a suitcase full of ignorance with regard to people of other cultures. Her intent was not to disparage or marginalize others, but yet her attitudes and the things she said reflected that ignorance, and she was so set in her ways by the time she got here that even fifty years later nothing had changed. All through my childhood, my mother was careful to fastidiously correct her mother when some bit of ignorance leaked out, because otherwise my grandmother's words would have shaped ignorance default perspectives in the minds of us grandchildren. Beyond that, I'm sure when my grandmother was out and around in the world (which, incidentally, was not all that often - she never traveled more than a ten minute walk from where she was living, except to move to a new home) I'm sure her ignorance leaked out here and there. I suspect that her words, again simply ignorant rather than with intent to harm, were at times hurtful to some people with whom she came into contact. Lack of intent didn't mitigate the damage her casual comments had.

As Krista Tippett has pointed out on several occasions, words really do matter. They shape the way we understand ourselves, the way we interpret the world and the way we treat others. Moreover, they shape the way those we interact with perceive themselves and their relationship with us.

I never said that words don't matter, and I definitely agree that sometimes people use words out of ignorance without malicious intent. But recently there has been a tendency to apply deeper meanings to many words that I just don't believe are actually there...just because I feel like there might by negative intent associated with a word doesn't necessarily mean the intent is there. Of course there are lots of words with obvious negative intent and many words can be used out of ignorance without malicious intent - those aren't the ones I'm talking about. I'm talking about the words to which other people assign malicious intent that is often a very big stretch...I mean, the list of words that can offend people is growing awfully long.

Anyway, it was just an observation.

[bUU]

Originally Posted by JoeTarheel

I never said that words don't matter, and I definitely agree that sometimes people use words out of ignorance without malicious intent. But recently there has been a tendency to apply deeper meanings to many words that I just don't believe are actually there...just because I feel like there might by negative intent associated with a word doesn't necessarily mean the intent is there.

You're missing the point:

You meet someone named Deborah. Later in the discussion you call her "Deb". She stiffens a little, and politely asks you to call her "Deborah". The discussion continues, and you call her "Deb" again. She reiterates her request for how you refer to her. At what point does your referring to her as "Deb" go over the line from excusable error to inexcusable disrespect? If you say, "never," then you're (morally) wrong.

The only legitimate defense for use of words that marginalize others, especially in a case like what we were talking about in the previous reply, where we were talking about such usage marginalizing the reality of institutionalized oppression that society afflicts on some people, is - explicitly - ignorance. Once you can no longer claim ignorance, or do not wish to claim that you're ignorant, misuse of such words is commission of an offense.

Originally Posted by JoeTarheel

I mean, the list of words that can offend people is growing awfully long.

And you can exploit your privilege to put other people's experiences into a box of your choosing, and by exploitation of that privilege force those other people to live with the offense you choose to impose on them, if you wish, but just be aware that that's what you're doing.

Originally Posted by JoeTarheel

Anyway, it was just an observation.

Ditto.

[arjay57]

Generally speaking I'm more than happy to refer to people by whatever term they choose.

However, it's helpful if they can make it clear what that preference is.

[goillini8]

I'm always surprised to read that Blacks (AAs) only make up around 13% of the population nationally. And that percentage has essentially stagnated or declined slightly. I think the highest black percentage of the population was maybe in the high 14 percent range a couple of decades ago.

It really doesn't make sense that I'm surprised, as I've traveled a lot across the U.S. and encountered many places with minimal black people. But, still, it sounds low.

[hautemomma]

Originally Posted by goillini8

I'm always surprised to read that Blacks (AAs) only make up around 13% of the population nationally. And that percentage has essentially stagnated or declined slightly. I think the highest black percentage of the population was maybe in the high 14 percent range a couple of decades ago.

It really doesn't make sense that I'm surprised, as I've traveled a lot across the U.S. and encountered many places with minimal black people. But, still, it sounds low.

The black population is undercounted. I know I am not alone in this view.

There are black Hispanics, who are not counted in the black population necessarily. Additionally, biracials and multiracials who would have formerly been classified as black. Then consider the blacks who do not participate in or are not counted by the Census. I estimate the the US black population is close to 20 percent.

[JoeTarheel]

LOL! It's a constant conspiracy of the white man for some people. I seriously doubt black people are anymore undercounted than other races...I have never heard the "black population is undercounted" theory before (other than historically), but it sounds like paranoia to me. There are definitely undercounts/overcounts at times but I just don't believe it's racially motivated in 2016.

[goillini8]

Originally Posted by hautemomma

The black population is undercounted. I know I am not alone in this view.

There are black Hispanics, who are not counted in the black population necessarily. Additionally, biracials and multiracials who would have formerly been classified as black. Then consider the blacks who do not participate in or are not counted by the Census. I estimate the the US black population is close to 20 percent.

I can see it being slightly undercounted, but 7 percentage points? That sounds like a lot. Census isn't an exact science, but they extrapolate numbers from given information - meaning they do know that a certain number of people don't participate and adjust numbers based on other data.

As for biracial people, the census provides numbers or that category, so if someone believes all biracial people who are part black should be included among the black population, then I guess it's as easy as adding the two numbers together. Or not, since the biracial stats might not break down exactly how someone is biracial.

Latinos/Hispanics - that's an interesting area. You often see the demographic statistic "Hispanic of any race" and "non-Hispanic whites." I guess they could have a stat for "Blacks of any ethnicity."

[hautemomma]

I'm not going to sit here and debate about "conspiracy." I merely said the black population is undercounted in the U.S.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/...ack/55140150/1

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/...al-in-america/

http://kut.org/post/minorities-under...2010-us-census