Ok, I’m going to try this again.
gooti, the dictionary I used was The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company,, which defines consensus as, “An opinion or position reached by a group as a whole.” And that’s where it leaves the definition - with no room for even so much as one dissenting voice amongst the group.
And actually this really illustrates my point about using reference books as the be all and end all of supposed facts. There are often different versions, different theories and different conclusions that can be found in different sources regarding the same information. Just because something is written in one particular source material, doesn’t make it so.
With regard to the sociology text you quoted, I can say this; school text books have been found over and over and over again to contain misinformation and inaccuracies. Just because the particular text you learned from was used in several schools, doesn’t make it correct.
I have no idea when that book was first published, so I won’t deny that socioligists at one time might have thought that subcultures could be divided into racial groups. Even if that were ever true, it most certainly isn’t today - especially now that we are no longer even defining “race” in the way that it was once perceived. While the text may present itself as “generally recognized information,” that still doesn’t make it right. It used to be generally recognized that blacks were inferior to whites. Hardly makes it true.
Obviously I agree that occupations can be a subculture within themselves, which is why I used them as an example. However, when you define subcultures as sharing norms, values, and life styles, you can never, ever make race a subculture for this very reason! NO race (gah - I hate that word, but it’s the way the book referenced it, so I have to go with it here) shares all norms, values, and life styles within it. None. Ever. Period. That make their entire premise nothing short of a crock of hooey.
And no, I didn’t misunderstand you. I never assumed you meant that subcultures can only be divided along racial lines. However, you do contend that they can be divided along racial lines and I say they cannot.
And I don’t say this because I’ve been crashing in Mongolia my whole life, nor do I “pretend” not to know what any of the subcultures that exist in the U.S. are. You are the one that suggested we “gather up 100 representatives from each of the subcultures in America,” to which I replied that we couldn’t possibly define each one - there are simply too many to count. I apologize if that wasn’t clear to you in my original reply.
I am also not denying anybody their identity. Where you get off claiming that, I’ll never know. What I’m saying is that black people “identify” with other black people based on a lot of things that only sometimes include race, but most often include things like socio-economic status, geographic location, education, common interests and goals, etc.
And since you brought it up specifically, I’ll expand on the ridiculous notion that I’d be “denying the identity of the Jewish-Americans who celebrated the recently observed Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur.” I am Jewish. I just celebrated those holidays. However, I cannot say that I “identify” with every other Jew in America as a Jew, because I don’t. An orthodox Jew is as foreign to me as a Muslim. I completely don’t relate to the concept of putting women in the back of the synagogue behind a partition (and yes, that is still done today - perhaps not in the U.S (though, perhaps so, I don’t know) - but it certainly was the practice when I visited an orthodox synagogue in Israel). I cannot relate to keeping two entirely separate sets of dishes in my kitchen, not turning lights on and off on shabbos and covering my hair in public. So, if you want to define the “Jewish subculture” by those terms, I definitely don’t identify. That hardly means I’m denying anyone their right to identify with that particular subset of Jews. I’m just not one of them. So if you were to say to me, “You’re acting Jewish,” I’d want to know just what the heck you mean!
I’m sure there are many Chinese-Americans who equally cannot relate to the subculture that exists in the Chinatowns of our society, as well. Same goes for Italian-Americans and every other kind of American, be they Jewish, Irish, Polish or black.
Simply put, there is no black subculture because, by your definition, not all black Americans share the same norms, values, and life styles. I should think this would be a very simple concept to grasp and I’m stunned by the fact that you are failing to do so.
To those who claim that when we say there’s no such thing as “acting black,” we’re purposefully ignoring the meaning behind it because we “know” what is meant by that, I will flat out deny that. Yes, I know exactly what you mean. But you don’t mean what you think you mean. (hang on, I’m having a Princess Bride moment :).)
I’m fully aware that what you mean when you say someone’s “acting black” is that they’re acting in a way that you perceive black people to act. But because all black people don’t act that way (hell, not even a majority of them), making a blanket statement like that is completely false. There is no such thing. Just because there has come to be a (somewhat) universal understanding of what one means when they say it, doesn’t bring validity to the statement.
Stereotyping is dangerous. It leads to people making false presumptions about people based on completely irrelevant things (like the color of their skin or the religion they practice). It would be really nice if those of you who think that there is a way to “act black” would stop for a second and think about how harmful that notion is. Throw those thoughts out just like we did with the thought that whites were better than blacks. We should all know better by now.
This was my point. “Acting black” is hangin’ with the homies in the 'hood. “Acting white” is working for “the man,” getting a lot of education, and wearing a suit. I don’t understand why people will not just admit that “black,” when used in the context of “acting black,” generally means “poor and ignorant,” while “white,” as in “acting white,” means “rich and smart.” Why the heck would anyone want to perpetuate such stereotypes?