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.
The above is the latest report about another shooting of innocent "white" people by someone identified as a "light skinned black male".
Why is it that people who are partly "black" and partly "white" are almost always identified, when race or color of skin is specified, as "black"? (Or at least this has been my observation.) It seems to me that this goes back to the 1800's when in some sections of the U.S., anyone with ANY black ancestry was considered black, period, and therefore often discriminated against.
And now, with so much racism still in existence, it seems that identifying someone who has done something wrong as black just fuels the hatred displayed by racists. This is highly evident on many current threads on City Data.
I think we should stop identifying people by skin color unless it is absolutely necessary -- such as when a description of a missing person is issued -- and then the person should only be described as "light skinned", "darker (or perhaps medium?) skinned", or "dark skinned", with the gender, color of hair and eyes, approximate height and weight, and description of clothing also given.
Of course, if someone wants to self-identify as "black", "white", "Latino", "Vietnamese", or whatever, that is fine -- but I just think that news agencies and law enforcement agencies should not arbitrarily assign any ancestry labels to people.
That is just my opinion, of course. What is yours?
In a Police BOLO a description is absolutely necessary. Height, weight, body type and skin color are obviously needed for identification.
My objection is when I have to fill out an application form for whatever and I am asked to fill in a Blank space for my RACE. That is none of your damn business. Especially if it is for a job or an official document.
I see him as a mulatto. White liberals and democrat swayed blacks see him as an African American brother, which he is not. He may be American but he is not African American in the classic sense of descending from slaves. True African, or black, Americans may have ancestry which goes back 300-400 years on this continent. Obama does not have that going for him but he will play the 'brother' aspect up when it benefits him. He has the "bro hug" handshake down and it looks unprofessional at times. The POTUS is supposed to be pure business, man to man - nothing more, nothing less. A firm handshake given while looking the other person in the eye means more than a ritual fist grabbing hug which establishes nothing; specially when he will bow to leaders of other countries.
Obama's mom, while white, is a direct descendant of one of the first BLACK slaves in what would later become the United States.
I'd imagine he's a shade more than 50% "black." Honestly, if no one knew who he was, we'd all assume he's a medium-toned black man.
The U.S. followed the racial rule of "hypodescent" regarding black/white offspring. It essentially means that a biracial black/white child would be placed into the 'subordinate' racial group. Whites are the numerical majority by a sizeable margin, so assigning biracial kids to the "black" side would have no obvious political consequences.
In Latin America, they followed the rule of "hyperdescent." Whites (Spanish) were vastly outnumbered by native Indians and black African slaves. The Spanish could not afford to allow the Indios, Mulattoes and Negroes to unite and coalesce as a single political entity. It's why blacks in the U.S. typically have no problem saying "I'm black" without any qualifier. The idea of being "just black" in Latin America doesn't really exist.
The U.S. followed the racial rule of "hypodescent" regarding black/white offspring. It essentially means that a biracial black/white child would be placed into the 'subordinate' racial group. Whites are the numerical majority by a sizeable margin, so assigning biracial kids to the "black" side would have no obvious political consequences.
In Latin America, they followed the rule of "hyperdescent." Whites (Spanish) were vastly outnumbered by native Indians and black African slaves. The Spanish could not afford to allow the Indios, Mulattoes and Negroes to unite and coalesce as a single political entity. It's why blacks in the U.S. typically have no problem saying "I'm black" without any qualifier. The idea of being "just black" in Latin America doesn't really exist.
This is so true. I have traveled all over Latin American and was surprised that mulattoes do not like it when you call them black. I was in Colombia for 3 weeks in June of this year and when we went to Cartagena the taxi driver who was a mulatto started to tell us to be careful of blacks in the city. That driver who otherwise be "black" here in the states clearly separated himself from the non-mixed blacks. Dominicans usually do not like to be called black either. I do not see it changing in the USA anytime soon.
The one drop rule, basically backward American culture that stems back to slavery. White American culture treated African heritage like a stain, such that if one had even a small amount, polluted/destroyed everything else. That ideology still permeates American culture today...
I think it has to do with the fact the majority of black mixed people tend to look "black" as the black gene is dominant. I have never met a black mixed person who looks like their white or non-black parent. I have seen blaxicans and blasians who look completely black. The black gene tends to overpower all other races. They also usually inherit coarse curly hair as I have never met a black mixed person with naturally straight hair.
Nope, not at all. The perception above is a backward one that is only focused on picking out the African traits. The children almost always appear a mixture of the different backgrounds.
That's why those same people are often classified as mixed in plenty other places in the world.
The one drop rule, basically backward American culture that stems back to slavery. White American culture treated African heritage like a stain, such that if one had even a small amount, polluted/destroyed everything else. That ideology still permeates American culture today...
Let me add to this something I pointed out earlier that the "one-drop rule"--which was merely traditional earlier in American history--became codified into many state laws in the 20th century and remained so codified in many states until I started dating.
So although it has roots in slavery, it's very much a modern American legal artifact, and the last generation that was raised with it is still running America.
Let me add to this something I pointed out earlier that the "one-drop rule"--which was merely traditional earlier in American history--became codified into many state laws in the 20th century and remained so codified in many states until I started dating.
So although it has roots in slavery, it's very much a modern American legal artifact, and the last generation that was raised with it is still running America.
Wow...had no idea. That is crazy. In fact, I decided to look it up and found this.
"In the United States, the “one-drop rule” — also known as hypodescent — dates to a 1662 Virginia law on the treatment of mixed-race individuals. The legal notion of hypodescent has been upheld as recently as 1985, when a Louisiana court ruled that a woman with a black great-great-great-great-grandmother could not identify herself as “white” on her passport."
The old "one drop of colored blood makes you colored" is still hanging on. The degrees of sanguinity are mulatto, quadroon, octaroon and "high yellow," the last being the term for someone who is 1/16 or less black.
I just found out that Dwight D. Eisenhower had a black grandmother, so Obama is not America's first black president after all. Who knew?
Not quite, it had to be known by the state or the general population so that Jim Crow and segregation could be applied. Just saying if you were able to pass for white you became white
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.
