I really had never considered it one way or the other, nor had I noticed the missing census box. (He was stationed overseas when the census was taken.) That’s why it came as a shock to me to have someone insult SeaHubby.
I’m not at all trying to say that my one incident is in any way equivalent to lifelong racism that others have been through. But being expected to act “________” and the oft-implied insult that underlies that? It makes no damn sense to me, whether the incident be large or small.
“Hispanic” is no more a “race” than “American”…but once again a lot of what we think about race is in our perceptions.
Anybody who has lived in Mexico, or travelled to different areas there knows that there are Mexicans that are white (esp. in Guadalajara), black (esp. in Veracruz), or very Indian (all over)…but in the Southwest, for the last 150 years, Mexicans have been ** treated** as a racial group, seperate from whites, blacks, or even Indians.
Technically I am a “Latino” even though I am pretty much all white, with maybe an Arab ancestor from 15 generations back. I am half Portuguese from my mom, a fourth German, a fourth Italian from my Brazilian dad…I just say I’m “Brazilian-Portuguese”, instead of Latino or anything else.
We look white (I’m usually asked if I am Italian), but we can’t fit into the “Anglo” category well, as we have “axé” records, eat bean and rice dishes every 2 days, and get the cops called on us when we argue…and I have a cousin who was arrested in New Jersey for using a chickens for spriritual enlightenment instead of frying 'em up like a Good American.
Shelby Steele, John McWhorter and others have written a great deal about the problems that have arisen, and are continuing, in various black communities because of the fact that scholarly achievement is viewed as a “white” endeavor. They have been roundly criticized in many quarters for their statements, but I think that they at least have a good argument.
As to whether “acting white” or “acting black” really means anything (other than as a fancy way of saying other not so nice words), I agree with the OP. Words are powerful, and the way you use them affects the way you perceive the world. Stereotypes are the lazy way out. I think that part of the problem people have is that it takes a real effort to see stereotypes for what they are. It involves first questioning, and then changing, the way you perceive the world, and that is hard to do. Once you’ve done it, it’s hard to remember that you once perceived the world in a different way. Like the hidden face in a picture, it is hard, initially, to see it. But, once you’ve seen it, you can’t un-see it. This leads to vehement, sometimes angry discussions, because each person so strongly believes their own postion (there is no face there! yes, there is, it’s plain to see!). Biggirl’s seen the face in the picture, she knows it’s there, she wants us to see it too. It’s destructive to view the world through stereotypes, and, though it’s hard, it’s possible to do without them.
Milo, that’s always been something that really bothered me too. I can’t remember any exact quotes, but Larry Elder (Judge Elder from Moral Court :)) addressed this issue in one of his books. Something like “It’s not acting white, it’s acting smart.”
I don’t like to think of cultures or behaviors as solidly tied to race. The idea above of saying acting “urban” seems a little better, but it’s still too broad. Maybe we just need a new word for that specific set of behaviors that doesn’t reference race. “Ghetto” and “country” seem to be pretty popular terms around here, but I’m sure that some people in those respective places would be offended to hear that. So, does the word I’m looking for exist?
Let me echo stuffinb and thank Biggirl for starting this thread. I must confess that in the other thread SO MUCH was going on I was just getting really confused about what was going on. [sigh]
To answer the OP, one doesn’t act white or black; one acts human.
Ooner, you ask if the word you’re looking for to describe cultural/class trends/stereotypes perpetuated by the mass media exists? I would have to say NO. I wonder if we really need one. All stereotypes do is limit folks. Yet they are comfortable because they create for the user an easy way to cram folks into nice neat little packages. The problem is that individuals don’t conform well to artificial constructs of behavior that are imposed on them. Yes, some buy into the artificial constructs, and that is a problem because it indicates either a non-critical acceptance of what mass media feeds us that I find frankly frightening, or a fear of accepting, celebrating, and exploring one’s individuality. Some folks use the stereotypes to make money. For example, the commodification of gangsta culture is big business now, but they are selling nothing much that has to do with blackness or whiteness, and I really wonder just how much the gangsta rapper image reflects the reality of gangsta life.
The problem with this “acting white/black” business is that it is indicative of the larger problem of cultural identity in America, a country comprised of multiple cultures that really don’t interact with each other in any kind of meaningful way nearly as much as they should, YET dichotomizes itself along artificial lines of black and white that to some extent denote the class of whites vs. the class of blacks, or seen another way rich vs. poor. At the heart of the acting black/white business is American uneasiness over the fact that we cannot really define what American culture is. To do that we have to examine some hard truths about the historical oppression and subjugation of one group of folks by another group of folks, for built into the fabric of that history is the prejudice that one group of folks who fit a certain physical appearance is better than another, and the manifestation of this prejudice that resulted in the racist practices of segregation. It’s not logical, yet that is how Americans have structured their identities. And this is sadly ironic considering that America has some noble goals for tolerance, freedom, and plurality. The Constitution is one of the most brilliant documents of governance ever written, but we have not really lived up to it, and we won’t until we resolve our differences of how we perceive each other. Folks need to get away from the comforting yet unrealistic notions of conformity that stereotypes offer and really look to see folks as the individual human beings that they are. The best way to do that is for folks from one cultural group to get out there, meet, and interact with folks from other cultural groups ON THE OTHER CULTURAL GROUP’S OWN TURF, OR ON NEUTRAL TURF. If you want to get rid of stereotypes, get to know people as human beings, and promote more communications among different cultural groups, then have multicultural neighborhoods. Revise the school curriculum so that it is multicultural on all levels and in all subjects to teach children how the different cultures/nationalities of the world contribute to the body of knowledge we have now. If you’re in college or out on your own, live with someone from a different culture than your own, or do study abroad. We need to stop isolating ourselves and feeding that isolation with stereotypes and challenge ourselves to find our similarities and celebrate our differences. If we do this, we won’t be as likely to get ignorant generalizations of what it’s like to act black, white, yellow, or red. We may actually get productive inquiry into the fascinating and complex socio-cultural dynamics of human interaction.
Something told me not to get involved in this one…
I didn’t mean to imply that the phrases were accurate, or that they weren’t based on stereotypical ideas. They obviously are. But to say that the phrase is meaningless is simply not true.
If I say the word “tree”, do you get a general idea of what I mean? I may be picturing a pine, while you may be thinking of an oak, but it’s not like you have no idea what I mean. Your idea of a generic tree can’t possibly encompass every possible tree that exists, and in fact may not correspond to any particular tree. Does that mean that the phrase “I saw a tree” is meaningless? No. It conveys a valid, if not precise, idea.
I’m sorry if it offends your personal beliefs, but it is my experience that there is a general belief by both black and white people that there are differences in generic black and white cultures. Ever watch Def Comedy Jam? The vast majority of comedians base at least part of their routine on some variation of “Ain’t it funny the way white people do activity X this way, while black people do it this way?”
If you want to argue that this perception is a bad thing, OK. That wasn’t the point I was making. I was merely saying that the language used to make this point is not meaningless, in that it conveys a mutually understandable, if not laser-precise idea.
I think that people here are just talking past each other. I understand the offense that some have with the phrase “acting B/W”. I also understand why other folks are saying that denying that such a thing exists is denying the obvious.
Maybe we could agree to use a different terminology. How about this instead:
acting white = acting mainstream or conventional
acting black = acting non-mainstream or unconventional
Of course what is mainstream or conventional would depend on the geographical area being described. Nation wide vs. rural, rural vs. urban, Park avenue vs. South L.A. and so forth.
Or maybe this would be better:
acting white = acting anal
acting black = not acting anal
I know a professional black man who often acts pretty “mainstream”. But at an earlier point in his life, he lived in (his words) the most dangerous part of L.A. and was a very, very bad person. Now, sometimes (often after drinking), I would say that he acts non-mainstream. I think this is what people mean by “acting W/B”. For those that think that characterization is racist, is my proposed terminology better? If not, what would you propose? Just as some people are “nice” when sober and “jerks” when drunk, I think people are just trying to use “something” to label different behaviors. Or is it just rude to even notice that this one individual exhibits significantly behaviors at different times?
Ya know, I, like most folks, ‘act differently’ depending on the circumstances.
When I’m at a business conference, I can pretty much guarentee I’ll be wearing a bra, pro’lly won’t say ‘fuck’ etc. when I’m with my elderly conservative father, I don’t talk about sex or politics. When I’m with my 17 year old, he doesn’t want to hear about my sex life either. When I’m with my contemporaries in a social setting, the bra’s off, I swear and talk about sex and anything else on my mind.
There’s no doubt in my mind that folks will act differently in different circumstances. What I object to, is calling one ‘acting white’ and another ‘acting black’.
Smitty is giving you all a snapshot of reality. He’s not talking about the way things SHOULD be or the way he WISHES things were. He’s talking about the real world that you and I step into every day.
I, for one, do not find a hint of implicit value judgement one way or the other in Smitty’s naked observations. I believe it is well possible to NOTICE such things as racist beliefs without internalizing them.
Celestina, I applaud your “broaden one’s horizons” suggestion. You have the right idea about this.
Since we’ve been directed over here from the thread in IMHO, I’m going to copy and paste a couple of the posts from there, since replying to those posts without proper reference would appear out of context. The following was originally posted by gooti. Since it’s relatively long, I’ll make these all separate posts, just as they appear in that thread (with permission from TubaDiva).
I think this is getting to the heart of the matter. wring would quite rightly object to having the different behaviors she described as “acting proper” versus “acting slutty” (not that anything she described is actually “slutty”). I think the people that are defending “acting black” may be thinking that there is no bad connotation to “being” black, so why should “acting” black be considered offensive. OTOH, “acting black” is implying a stereotype (or at least a generalization).
After thinking about it, I realized that I would never actually say “acting black” myself. In the case of my black buddy that I described in an earlier post, I would probably describe his behavior as “acting like he was back in L.A.”. That’s probably a bit more factual and doesn’t imply a stereotype of black people or even black people in L.A. It is describing his usual behavior when he was in L.A.
So I come down on the side of the those who think that people shouldn’t say “acting black” since I wouldn’t say that IRL. Having said that, using it as a shorthand in a thread called “Ask the Black Woman” is not something I would feel the need to call someone on, as long as the poster was clearly using it as shorthand and wasn’t implying any negative connotations.
Before these particular threads, I scoffed at people who said “African-American” instead of “black” as PC.
Now I think it should be used more often. Now it can be misused, as a film reviewer I once saw who called (the British) Thandie Newton a “wonderful African-American actress”.
But if I said “someone speaks in an African-American manner”. Would that make me accurate from people who say " someone talks black"?
Or would I be just a more polite bigot?
DADGUMMIT! I had almost my whole reply composed and this stupid computer lost the browser window. And now my boss is here demanding my attention (how dare he make me work at work! ;)), so I will have to come back later and reply. <sigh>
I really appreciate your consideration in avoiding stepping on my penis - Spiny Norman
Jeg elsker dig, Thomas
When someone says a person is “acting black” what is this a shorthand for? When vivian said white people who date black people “start acting black”, what particular set of behaviors is she talking about? (I did ask her and she told me like a character in a T.V. show).
Smitty said that I was being disingenous because “we all know” what acting black is, but he still did not describe what these behaviors are. Is Smitty’s “acting black” the same as vivian’s “acting black”?
People tell me I sound white. I do not sound white. I have a distinct black/spanish/NY accent. I use the verb “be” to mean an action that has happened and continues to happen on a regular basis.
“Don’t be following me.” Means don’t come out for a cigarrette break every time I come out for a cigarette break. I speak like this. This is a distinctive American Black usage. And yet many, many people (both black and white) tell me I talk “white”. Why? gooti, do you think your definition of acting black (the most thought out one I’ve heard so far) is the same as nickc’s. (Lots of baggie clothes, dripping diamonds and jewlery, smoking blunts and drinking 40s).
When someone says “he was acting black” to me, I honestly do not know what they mean. And I think many times even the person saying it doesn’t know what they mean.
I have to chime in the side of “acting black” is meaningless. I understand (I think) why some people are asserting that it has meaning – it’s certainly something that people say, I’ve come across it in person and in the media, I’m not claiming that the phrase doesn’t exist.
It is not meaningless in the sense that “sgkjhgdoifu slf gjucvb” is meaningless – I know what “act” means, and I know what “black” means.
But, I think this phrase is meaningless in the sense that it seems to mean different things to different people, and thus it’s not a very useful tool for conveying any sort of clear concept. I would compare this to the often mocked response of “fine” to the question “how are you doing?” Fine doesn’t really convey a heck of a lot of information, and could mean anything from “ok” to “horrible, but I don’t want to talk about it” to “I’m not really listening to you, so I’ll say fine and hope you will let me get back to my book.”
How can one phrase have so many interpretations? Because it is void of any actual information or substance.
