All argument and snide commentary (though there’s been less of that than I would have imagined) aside, can I just take a second to thank both MrDibble and The Poster About To Be Formerly Known As for a truly interesting peek into a history I was utterly ignorant of? I honestly think I have learned more in the last two days than I have otherwise in the last two YEARS.
Thank you Chronos, and Ivory. I have always considered all Blacks in Africa (wide nose, thick lips, kinky hair, dark skin) to be Black. I see that some people make the distinction of blacks being the descendents of slaves, but I always thought that was a strange line to draw. Before my ancestors were brought here, were we not Black Africans? I am the ‘child’ of the ‘black africans’ that were there. Why would I not consider them Black like me, now?
I am not referring to the Khoi, just blacks in Africa in general. This is confusing to me, because it seems sometimes that Blacks in America have no history before slavery in America. If only we are Black, then our history begins with slavery. What of the language and culture we brought with us before it was taken away? Do the people that have that language and culture now no longer consider us their people? All the Africans I have known have treated me as a sister, knowing that I don’t really know where my people are from.
Fine, educate me. Give me other resources. You’ve mentioned one - how it is viewed by some members of the board. Any others? I will say that in my humble opinion M-W is a better “cite” than a group of folks at the message board saying “I find that term insulting.” Merriam-Webster has a pretty good reputation in the dictionary world - at least I have read several articles that list its collegiate dictionary as a reliable, accurate, reputable resource.
Agreed!
Oh, and Una Persson - my previous post should have been in the conditional. That’s what I would have said if I were asking you to justify my taking some moderator action in respect to a potential offensive word at the message board, and you and I disagreed on the offensiveness of the word. Like I said, I’m not really interested in debating any particular word.
I’m of the opinion that that term is quite offensive. I’m not in favor of an Oppression Olympics, but it certainly is a race and class pejorative. I’ve never been called white trash, so I don’t personally have experience about the impact of being called that name. I don’t think it’s that hard for me to understand how that would be hurtful.
…however I did once have a White teacher shriek at me about using the word “redneck.” I thought it wasn’t a big deal, but she did. I wonder if she gives Jeff Foxworthy a pass?
I have chosen the name Nzinga, Seated.
I do wonder why you say this, MrDibble:
Then, go on to suggest Khoi Venus as my user name.
As I said, I didn’t feel that connection as Khoi, I felt the connection with her because of many of her other characteristics. I don’t think that the connection I feel is misguided at all.
I may be totally off-base here, but I imagine it’s something similar to the politics that surround Asian Americans. A lot of Asian Americans feel some kind of solidarity with one another because they think of themselves as having a common bond (i.e., being Asian) but to a Korean, a Japanese person is just as foreign as, say, a German. In other words, thinking of Asians as a collective group may work in the US, because many of us are 2nd - 3rd or even 4th generation and no longer really identify with whatever country our ancestors came from, but to people actually living in Asia such a label is ridiculous. There is no thing as a common Asian culture, although there may be such a thing as a common Asian American one. Likewise, Africa is a continent made up of many different countries and cultures, and I strongly doubt that people living there today think of themselves as African rather Egyptian, or Ethiopian, or South African, etc.
As for the latter part of your question… again, I can only speak from my own experience, but most Koreans don’t even really think of Korean Americans as “their people,” and we’re talking about a gap that is maybe two or at the most three generations.
I’ll stop hijacking this thread, but I’d be happy to continue this conversation elsewhere if you’re interested. 
I’d certainly support you if you wanted it excluded from usernames. Other uses, I’m personally not so sure, but I’ll support you if you find it objectionable. Use this post as your cite, though, don’t expect me to post in every thread where you make the complaint. I think the operative offense in “White trash” is the emphasis on “white”, no? Making it a racial slur - here, it’s “Poor Whites”. And “Redneck” has an entirely different meaning in Afrikaans (basically, “British-as-pejorative”). I’ve tried to stop using “hillbilly” after the Transvaal Twins thread, too. So I’m all about accommodating other people’s racial sensitivities, now. I may have been more lax in the past.
Their made-up offenderati religious sensitivities (e.g. Lib fundie bugbear), not so much.
I was trying to be accommodating.
I was referring to the whole “Black brotherhood/sisterhood” thing you said. As has been pointed out repeatedly, Khoikhoi are not Black, as you seemed to think.
I do appreciate the other connectedness you may feel about looks and about being oppressed. Those are still valid, I was pointing out the one that wasn’t.
Not even that - people see themselves as Zulu, Xhosa, Sotho before they even see themselves as Black South Africans, never mind South Africans. IMExperience it’s the same in the rest of Africa, too. Very tribal. There’s a move away from that in SA, but it gets fought tooth and nail by traditionalists.
To answer the question, I don’t think I have much commonality with African Americans at all. Hell, I feel I’ve got more in common with an Indian farmer or an Australian urbanite than anyone from the US.
Everyone seems to be using a different definition of “black” than I am. Is “black”, when used about humans, really taken to mean “member of one of the groups whose members were taken to America as slaves”? I’ve always had it mean “ethnically African person with dark skin”. Come to think of it, I’ve heard it used about Australian natives too. That must be a whole new category of wrong.
I mean, there are clearly cultural, linguistic and physical differences between me and a Greek, but I would consider both of us white Europeans.
I am using Black here in the sense of “Bantu African or descendant of same”. Pygmies, Khoikhoi and Bushmen are specifically excluded.
In a different context, I might use it to mean “African Blacks and descendants, plus Pygmies, Australian Aborigines & Micronesians”, but I can’t offhand think of a time I have used it as such. There, it’s almost equivalent to the old “Negroid” as a racial descriptor, and ignores actual genetics to be more about a commonality of physical appearance.
A third way I’d use it is locally, in a political context, where I’d use it to mean “Those South Africans formerly oppressed by Apartheid”, in which case it would include Coloureds and Indians too, regardless of how light-skinned they are. This is the sense in which the local “Black Power” movements used it, if not the sense the Black Panthers used in the US.
No need to do that. This post is quite sufficient. Thank you.
What a superb name to pick! It, like this thread in toto, has been immensely educational for me. I’d never known of Nzinga till now, have Googled her, and am awed. What a magnificent woman! Her story ought to be taught in American schools.
I’m going to excerpt this to simply say: what makes you think that all Sub-Saharan African peoples are generally wide-nosed, thick-lipped, kinky-haired? To the extent that that set of features is at all common, it is common over a very limited area of Africa. It’s not even a valid descriptor of African Americans.
As to “black,” the meaning of that term as a “racial” descriptor (it would be nice if someday we simply accepted that everyone is part of the human race) varies from country to country. It had a much more specific meaning in South Africa than it does in the United States, where, sad to say, almost anyone with very darkly colored skin and anything resembling any Sub-Saharan African physical features would be called “black.” See, for example, the interesting discussion we had about Melungeons recently.
Their skin is a noticeably different color, lighter and with a yellowish cast.
It really would be an interesting thread. You should start it:) I’ve wondered about this (what, if any, connection people from other countries feel to the descendants of emigrants),. and also, what makes some feel the need for a connection to their relative’s native areas, while others don’t.
Also epicanthic folds (otherwise an East Asian trait) and peppercorn (not just frizzy) hair.
Thing is “Black” can be a meaningful term, but only when it is clear from context what the person is talking about.
As a general term, sure, “Black” is incoherent, same as “White”.
But in the US, “Black” means someone who can be visibly recognized as having any fraction of ancestry from people who were transported from west africa as slaves. Except when it doesn’t, like when talking about people from Africa. Or it could simply mean anyone with really dark skin, regardless of ancestry
So expecting there to be a principled way to classify one person or another as “black” is fruitless. That doesn’t mean the word is meaningless, just that it isn’t rigorous. Because the concept surely is very meaningful to many people, especially here in the good old USA, even in 2007. Being perceived as black or white can be enough to get your ass kicked if you’re in the wrong place at the wrong time, never mind that it’s all in our heads.