I know. My point is that the sort of racist who is suspicious of Italians & Greeks isn’t going to be any less suspicious of other non-European Christians, regardless of actual skin color.
Yes. An Asian friend of mine is an actor here and he constantly posts about the lack of roles and lack of hiring of POC in Chicago theatres.
I was going to say this, but make allowances for orange.
Both of my children are Asian(Korean) and while their skin is very similar to my wife and me(both white), I guess they are supposed to be “people of color”.
I defnitely could see a white person having skin the same color as theirs. It’s lighter than my wife and me, though my son gets a tan like nobody’s business.
I’m not really sure what all that has to do with the question the OP is asking. If an Italian-American politician tried to sell himself as “a person of color”, he’d be largely derided for doing so, even if a few racist Americans might might not consider him “white”.
Of course. I’m sorta surprised there are people who don’t.
I also am surprised. What is the definition of the term that would exclude Asians? As far as I know, it just means non-white people living in a white dominated culture.
I have noticed a strange tendency of a lot of demographers or statisticians to make a “All minorities except Asian” category, especially in academics. They will measure SAT test scores, GPAs etc. and say, in essence, “Minorities (except for Asians) have high dropout rates or low SAT scores,” etc. It’s as if they are afraid that including Asians in minorities will skew their desired statistic or number that they want to present in the chart.
It’s like Catholics who say they eat fish on Fridays because meat is not allowed on Fridays.
A visible minority, is those who cannot hide their difference from the majority.
In America all Asians are a visible minority, as are native Indians, even though it’s their homeland.
Clearly, in Asia it is the Caucasian that is the visible minority.
Hope that helps with your confusion.
Is that a sexual euphemism?
Are we only talking about Asians from China, Japan, the Koreas and Southeast Asia? Or are we also including Russia, India, and the 'stans?
These discussions are why the concept of “race” is such bullshit. All there are, are phenotypes. Phenotypes are different combinations of facial features (and to a lesser extent, body types) and skin pigmentation. Certain phenotypes predominate in certain geographical regions, but even in those cases there is a wide variety, and there are infinite number of phenotypes created as people create new children. That’s all there is. The idea of dividing humans into discrete “races” is, firstly, arbitrary, and secondly, rather recent.
What “race” is this man? Try to ignore the bizarre eyebrow. I know, it’s hard. The guy is from Uzbekistan. Most people, if they didn’t know that, and they saw his face in isolation of the uniform and nametape, would be totally unable to tell you what the hell “race” he is. Is he “white” or “Asian”?
My mother’s family comes from the Baltic region of Europe. Well, there are people on her side of the family who almost look like that guy. Anyone who has Finnish, Estonian, or Icelandic ancestry can wind up with eyes like that. So can Eastern Europeans with ancestry from the “stan” areas that the above poster mentioned. You have any idea how far into Europe the genetics of the Central Asian and/or Mongol peoples go? Very far.
All this racial shit is going to be less and less relevant in the next hundred years as the world gets smaller and the “races” start mixing more, and hundreds of thousands of new phenotypes are created that blend features from all the geographical regions of the world. And finally someday people will accept these phenotypes for what they are: solely cosmetic. Cosmetic features can be interesting, they can be intriguing and alluring and they can generate interesting discussions and endless taxonomical classifications. But in the end, they’re still just cosmetic.
It’s also endlessly ridiculous to me that the concept of “color” is somehow applied to people who are literally the same color as Europeans and differ only in the shape of their eyes and nose.
What’s “recent”? Slavery started in the Americas like 400 years ago.
Since the beginning of time, humans have always sought to identify other groups of humans as “inferior” so they could stick them with the shit jobs no one wants to do.
That’s recent as hell in the long term human timeline.
Heck, I don’t consider anyone a person of color unless the news points them out as such. But in truth, I am white, of european descent. I do notice that someone is south asian, far east, east African, or unidentified African or otherwise, but that’s just heritage. It says very little about the person themselves and I find it an unreliable indicator of who the person really is.
This.
I never classify people based on ethnicity or skin color or whatever. People are people.
The full-blooded but basically white Siberian in me wants to ask “Do you mean all Asians or just the Oriental ones?” but I decided to just say yes.