[QUOTE=cricetus]
I was simply rejecting “the one drop rule” as an explanation for why Obama is categorized as “black” because I think almost everyone who talks about him would consider the “one drop rule” to be antiquated BS.
Incidentally, I’m not convinced that the Wikipedia article is correct in saying the term originated in the early 20th Century. Casual googling reveals debate raging on the topic… some assigning it to the antebellum NORTH. I was wrong, or at least imprecise, so I wish I had merely said that the expression was an artifact of historical racism that most people don’t think much of anymore, and it isn’t the “rule” they go by in determining the cultural labels they slap on people. I think Dio’s notion of self-identifying is more to the point, although it’s interesting that even very light skinned African Americans “look black.” Not racist, but interesting.
[/QUOTE]
I think you are wrong about the way people are “assigned” a race. Look at Tiger Woods. He is half Asian and a quarter Black, considers himself mixed race, and yet in the USA he is not only considered Black…by complete strangers, no less, but expected to identify himself as such.
I don’t think that most people who are backing Obama are doing so because he’s black, and for that matter, I don’t think for the most part people are going to NOT vote for him because he’s black, but to say that people are completely unbiased in the way they view race in this country is just plain wrong.
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena]
I think you are wrong about the way people are “assigned” a race. Look at Tiger Woods. He is half Asian and a quarter Black, considers himself mixed race, and yet in the USA he is not only considered Black…by complete strangers, no less, but expected to identify himself as such.
[/QUOTE]
Slight (potentially major) hijack of a thread that is currently running off the rails: As the number of “mixed” race children increases in this country, how will census demographics be altered? I mean Tiger identifies as mixed so why should he have to choose one race over another in surveys?
[QUOTE=Liberal]
I’m afraid your white guilt is showing. You always use blacks to make your case, never Indians — a far more victimized group. And when you’re cornered, you move your goalposts to redneck versus nigger. Since you live in the Great White North where whites from Appalachia are out of sight and mind, you think whites can’t be victimized. And so since you’re not a victimized class, I can call you a dumbass whitey. 'Cause you really are.
[/QUOTE]
You’re the one who used the example of the Rodney King riots. I responded to your example. Why would I try to jam Indians into my response?
You don’t have to tell me about the plight of American Indians, by the way. My wife used to work at a reservation school. I know how bleak life is on a rez. I just don’t know why you’d expect me to bring that up in a thread about Barack Obama.
2. Moving the goalposts? WTF are you talking about? You’re the one who tried to move the goal posts. I was talking about name-calling. You jumped to violence.
3. I’m originally from Louisiana. My birthplace, Shreveport, was still in the Guinness Book of Records as the most racially segregated city in the US even after I was an adult. I’m familiar with deep south and I know that terms like “redneck” and “white trash” are classist slurs, used more by whites than blacks and do not denote race per se, but economic status. “Whites” as a class are not victimized , even in Appalachia. Poor people as a class are victimized. If you beg to differ then tell me, what color are the people who are victimizing those poor Appalachans.
4. Calling me “whitey” doesn’t bother me in the slightest, but get ready for a bunch of eye-bulging indignation from some of the others around here.
[QUOTE=Sarahfeena]
I think you are wrong about the way people are “assigned” a race. Look at Tiger Woods. He is half Asian and a quarter Black, considers himself mixed race, and yet in the USA he is not only considered Black…by complete strangers, no less, but expected to identify himself as such.
I don’t think that most people who are backing Obama are doing so because he’s black, and for that matter, I don’t think for the most part people are going to NOT vote for him because he’s black, but to say that people are completely unbiased in the way they view race in this country is just plain wrong.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=you with the face]
But he is categorized as black, so what other explanation do you have to account for this?
[/QUOTE]
I don’t think that is due to the “one-drop” rule, but rather to the other standard (I’m not sure what it was called) that identified someone as black if they were less than 15/16 white. Or simply that people see him and say he’s black. A friend of mine recently discovered that one of his ancestors was actually black, and was wondering what that meant to the way he looked at the world. I pointed out to him, “That won’t get you pulled over on Titus Avenue, though.”
[QUOTE=saoirse]
Or simply that people see him and say he’s black.
[/QUOTE]
This perception doesn’t come from a vacuum. Someone who is completely foreign to US racial ideology would not look at Obama and automatically think black. Only someone who is programmed to think a certain way would have that particular perception.
This “programming”, I contend, comes from the one-drop rule. Even if we attempt to ascribe labeling to self-identification (“BO is what BO says he is”), very often we see that self-identification is consistent with the way people were labeled in the past. So that doesn’t come from a vacuum either.
I think society is moving away from the one-drop rule mentality, but it’s still very pervasive. How could it not be? It’s been in practice since the 1700’s.
[QUOTE=Slypork]
Slight (potentially major) hijack of a thread that is currently running off the rails: As the number of “mixed” race children increases in this country, how will census demographics be altered? I mean Tiger identifies as mixed so why should he have to choose one race over another in surveys?
[/QUOTE]
I think it was in the last census that the government allowed people to identify as more than one race. And we should see in Tiger’s own family how this pays off. His ancestry is (at most) 25% African, and his daughter is (at most) 12.5%. Will she be considered Black? My guess is that she will self-identify and be regarded as mixed race. Tiger still gets heat even from some Blacks about not self-identifying enough with the Black community. The recent flap over the “lynch” comment by the Kelly Tilghman is a perfect example.
You’re the one who used the example of the Rodney King riots. I responded to your example. Why would I try to jam Indians into my response?
You don’t have to tell me about the plight of American Indians, by the way. My wife used to work at a reservation school. I know how bleak life is on a rez. I just don’t know why you’d expect me to bring that up in a thread about Barack Obama.
2. Moving the goalposts? WTF are you talking about? You’re the one who tried to move the goal posts. I was talking about name-calling. You jumped to violence.
3. I’m originally from Louisiana. My birthplace, Shreveport, was still in the Guinness Book of Records as the most racially segregated city in the US even after I was an adult. I’m familiar with deep south and I know that terms like “redneck” and “white trash” are classist slurs, used more by whites than blacks and do not denote race per se, but economic status. “Whites” as a class are not victimized , even in Appalachia. Poor people as a class are victimized. If you beg to differ then tell me, what color are the people who are victimizing those poor Appalachans.
4. Calling me “whitey” doesn’t bother me in the slightest, but get ready for a bunch of eye-bulging indignation from some of the others around here.
[/QUOTE]
Well, all right then.
Um, never mind-I missed the last post. (but um, Lib, I hope you’re not trying to start the “MY group is more oppressed than YOUR group” bullshit. Okay? If not-as I said above-never mind).
Another point: wouldn’t it be fair to say that as far as “white” people go, it was more targeting specific ethnic groups, like say, Italians were wops, or greaseballs, Polish were polacks-or anyone from Eastern Europe were bohunks/hunkies?
[QUOTE=Guinastasia]
Are we going to start this “MY group is more oppressed than YOUR group?” bullshit?
[/QUOTE]
Oh bugger off, Guin. How many times must we put up with your coming late into a thread, reading one or two posts, and dropping a stinky turd? If we decide to discuss the plight of dumb women, we’ll call you.
[QUOTE=Liberal]
Oh bugger off, Guin. How many times must we put up with your coming late into a thread, reading one or two posts, and dropping a stinky turd? If we decide to discuss the plight of dumb women, we’ll call you.
[/QUOTE]
Read my last post-I didn’t see your reply to Dio. Okay? So I edited.
[QUOTE=Guinastasia]
Read my last post-I didn’t see your reply to Dio. Okay? So I edited.
[/QUOTE]
Well, all right then. See that you keep your wits about you in the future.
[QUOTE=Jackmannii]
I don’t think white voters supporting Obama can be equated with “white guilt”.
[/QUOTE]
Agreed. While we’re at it, can we stipulate that white voters who do not support Obama should not be equated with racism?
[QUOTE=Guinastasia]
Another point: wouldn’t it be fair to say that as far as “white” people go, it was more targeting specific ethnic groups, like say, Italians were wops, or greaseballs, Polish were polacks-or anyone from Eastern Europe were bohunks/hunkies?
[/QUOTE]
Hey, I’m part Czech but even if I wasn’t I always thought of myself as a hunk!
[QUOTE=ArizonaTeach]
Agreed. While we’re at it, can we stipulate that white voters who do not support Obama should not be equated with racism?
[/QUOTE] Good idea
[QUOTE=cricetus]
I don’t think white voters who do not support Obama are racists. I do think they’re dumb, though.
[/QUOTE]
Great, intelligence bashing. You, you….brainist!
[QUOTE=Slypork]
Hey, I’m part Czech but even if I wasn’t I always thought of myself as a hunk!
[/QUOTE]
snort When I was little, my Uncle Bob and my Uncle Craig used to call me the “little hunky.” (In a friendly, affectionate teasing way).
Not knowing what it meant, I told them I was a SUPER Hunky. Heh.
[QUOTE=Slypork]
Slight (potentially major) hijack of a thread that is currently running off the rails: As the number of “mixed” race children increases in this country, how will census demographics be altered? I mean Tiger identifies as mixed so why should he have to choose one race over another in surveys?
[/QUOTE]
I think it was in the last census that the government allowed people to identify as more than one race. And we should see in Tiger’s own family how this pays off. His ancestry is (at most) 25% African, and his daughter is (at most) 12.5%. Will she be considered Black? My guess is that she will self-identify and be regarded as mixed race. Tiger still gets heat even from some Blacks about not self-identifying enough with the Black community. The recent flap over the “lynch” comment by the Kelly Tilghman is a perfect example.
[/QUOTE]
I think we already moved beyond the one drop rule in most cases. I think very few people look at Derek Jeter, Mariah Carey or Jessica Alba and think of them as black. As a society we seem to be accepting people as mixed race, more and more.
[QUOTE=What Exit?]
I think we already moved beyond the one drop rule in most cases. I think very few people look at Derek Jeter, Mariah Carey or Jessica Alba and think of them as black. As a society we seem to be accepting people as mixed race, more and more.
Jim
[/QUOTE]
Jessica Alba doesn’t have any African-American ancestry, does she? I thought she was “mixed” European and Mexican (ie, Hispanic).
