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.
A lot of people saying "it doesn't matter, let them identify as them please", so can Chinese Americans identify as white now, can a white Norwegian American identify as black, can a alien identify as human. Seems like a lot of city-data users are ok with people using their imagination when its comes to racial identity over genetics, but hey to each their own. Out in the real world, in good ole American society, most Hispanics wouldnt be considered white.
In the real world, there are actually many examples of mixed-race Hispanic siblings who look to be of different races. One sibling may look 100% Native American while another sibling may look 100% white. Why should a person who looks fully white have to self-identify as anything but? Isn't that how YOU define a "white" person, by their physical appearance? As has been noted elsewhere in this thread, some "white" people aren't fully white.
This might be due to the lack of real choices on the census. I think that the Hispanic population almost mirrors the Latino nations in LatAM. For instance, I think the Latino population is 50% Mestizo or Amerindian, 40% White, and 10%Afro Latino. There is also a really small amount of Asian in there too. Since there is no category for mixed/mestizo or Amerindian, they check the fictional Hispanic category or white.
That would be hard to implement it into the census since the term Mestizo in the US might be seen as racially insensitive such as how many African Americans resent the term "mulatto" due it's colonial past. In Canada, though they have the term Metis which is French for mestizo.
But under the current guidelines of how we classify Native Americans. Couldn't many Latinos especially of Mexican, Central American or Peruvian descent classify themselves as Native American or Amerindian? Essentially, that is what many mestizo Latinos are, Amerindians no different than our Apaches or Navajo.
They could but that would be just as incorrect as calling themselves plain old white. They are usually mixed and I see nothing wrong with putting the words Mestizo and Mulatto on the census form for racial catagories.
In the real world, there are actually many examples of mixed-race Hispanic siblings who look to be of different races. One sibling may look 100% Native American while another sibling may look 100% white. Why should a person who looks fully white have to self-identify as anything but? Isn't that how YOU define a "white" person, by their physical appearance? As has been noted elsewhere in this thread, some "white" people aren't fully white.
No, skin color has nothing to do with it. Race is genetics not skin color. There are varying shades of skin color within any race.
They could but that would be just as incorrect as calling themselves plain old white. They are usually mixed and I see nothing wrong with putting the words Mestizo and Mulatto on the census form for racial catagories.
This might be due to the lack of real choices on the census. I think that the Hispanic population almost mirrors the Latino nations in LatAM. For instance, I think the Latino population is 50% Mestizo or Amerindian, 40% White, and 10%Afro Latino. There is also a really small amount of Asian in there too. Since there is no category for mixed/mestizo or Amerindian, they check the fictional Hispanic category or white.
That would be hard to implement it into the census since the term Mestizo in the US might be seen as racially insensitive such as how many African Americans resent the term "mulatto" due it's colonial past. In Canada, though they have the term Metis which is French for mestizo.
But under the current guidelines of how we classify Native Americans. Couldn't many Latinos especially of Mexican, Central American or Peruvian descent classify themselves as Native American or Amerindian? Essentially, that is what many mestizo Latinos are, Amerindians no different than our Apaches or Navajo.
I agree with you up to the bolded part. I think Native American or Amerindian for the purposes of classification in the US should requires one to be native and a tribe member of to one of the identified tribes of the US. I agree Indians are within the same race or subrace probably separate from Asian, but they were all divided tribes and even the Aztecs and nearby mexico Indian tribes were enemies. Classifying those of mostly Indian decent not native to the now US as "Native Americans" would make the whole thing more troublesome than the "Hispanic" classification does. There is already "Native American or Alaskan" category and I suspect a lot of people from latin America are already checking that box.
In the real world, there are actually many examples of mixed-race Hispanic siblings who look to be of different races. One sibling may look 100% Native American while another sibling may look 100% white. Why should a person who looks fully white have to self-identify as anything but? Isn't that how YOU define a "white" person, by their physical appearance? As has been noted elsewhere in this thread, some "white" people aren't fully white.
They don't look 100% native. They tend to look more mixed but not native. For instance Jennifer Lopez has a very Caucasian looking sister but JLO looks a little mixed but she doesn't look native.
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.
