I live in Texas and I notice that the local media is increasingly using the term “Anglo” when “white” used to be used, even in a national context.
The term originally was used, if I am not mistaken, to distinguish the English speaking, mostly British descended and Protestant people who came into Texas and the Southwest in the 1820’s onward from teh Spanish speaking “Hispanos” who lived in the area as well as later Mexican immigrants.
From there, Anglo has become a general term implying “white” as opposed to “Hispanic”, which is actually tantamount to saying “Mestizo”, as there are quite a few very “white” Hispanics around in Spain, Argentina, Chile, and so on, (some even with “Anglo” ancestry).
But it just strikes me as odd when someone of say Italian, Greek, or even German descent is called “Anglo”.
Anyway, so this doesn’t become a general rant…
Is the term “Anglo” current outside of the Southwest or areas with a large Hispanic population? Is it som
What do “white” people feel about this label?
Would it be appropriate to call someone an “Anglo” if they don’t have a drop of English blood? I presume some French-Canadians or Irish Catholic would bite your head off if you called them an “Anglo”?
4, African-Americans are culturally every bit as American as anyone else? Could there be a label such as “Anglo” that embraces them as well?
Where I live (which is 80% Hispanic) it sometimes seems that African-Americans and “Anglos” are closer than in many other places, because they feel that they share a common “minority” culture.
Any time you try to categorize a certain ethnic group with one word, you are bound to run into inconsistencies. For instance african-american for blacks who have never been to Africa or born there or calling them black when most are actually shades of brown or calling caucasians white when they are actually different shades of tan.
Well. the meanings of words change over time. For instance girl in the middle ages could mean a child either a boy or girl.
Some words definitions expand while others contract over time.
It seems the meaning of “anglo” has grown to include anyone in america of cacuasian ancestory.
Especially since what we call “blacks” or “African-Americans” are an incredibly diverse group. If you trace back the ultimate geographic origins through geneology, this is not just one people, but many people of different cultures. I mostly studied West Africans (my focus in college was the antebellum South, a particularly good slave community for historical study happened to be mostly of that origin), but I’m aware of a number of unique cultural traits to those folks that first arrived here from there. Not all would be shared with East Africans, certainly.
All racial/ethnic categories are ultimately illusory, and the labels affixed to them are thereby ultimately worthless.
But as for “Anglo”, I think it’s root origin means that part of the world we call England today, so we could make that really specific if we want. The period of history that I studied for Texas, they drew the distinction between “tejanos” and the new arrivals from the eastern seaboard, we’re always drawing distinctions and inventing labels and they tend to be inaccurate and serve poorly whenever in history we are.
Caucasian: of or relating to the Caucasus or its inhabitants.
That doesn’t describe me, but I am (basically) a WASP. So on forms if they say list race, and Caucasian is my only choice, that’s what I choose. But my ancestors weren’t from “the Caucasus” as far as I know. So I guess my question is, when/why did WASPs become Caucasians?
(Sorry about the slight hijack, but I figured my post was in the realm of the OP.)
It’s quite common in parts of Canada, but it has a different meaning. It’s not tied to ancestry, but to language, as an abbreviation for “anglophone”, i.e. someone whose native language is English. Other terms are “francophone,” someone whose native language is French, or an “allophone”, someone whose native language is neither English nor French.
I’ve very rarely heard the term in the Chicago area, but it’s usually in the Hispanic neighborhoods (and some of the “Hispanic” folks are now insisting on Latino/Latina. Most days, if it becomes necessary to use such terms, I prefer to ask the person(s) in question “what’s your preferred term today?” rather than start an argument)
On a somewhat related note - the Amish community down the road refers to all non-Amish as “the English”. So, in some towns in Indiana a Hispanic person from Texas could be properly referred to as “English”, as could those of African or Asian descent. This can cause much confusion among those unaware of why the term “English” came to used in this manner.
As long as it’s not used as an insult or in a deroggatory manner I don’t mind. I’ve been called much worse on occassion!
I don’t have any English in me, but in the context of “non-Hispanic” the word Anglo doesn’t bother me. As pointed out in another post, “Anglo” in some places refers to language rather than ancestory. Although I speak an American dialect, my native tongue is English so to that extent it is entirely accurate. Perhaps it’s because I grew up near the Canadian border, but “Anglo” to me has always referred as much to language as to ancestory.
“non-Hispanic” might work - except there are black folks of Mexican/Central American ancestory who speak Spanish as their first language.
This sort of thing is why I try to ask folks how they identify themselves.
What if you were in Pennsylvania and some Amish called you “English”? You’d bite their heads off, too? (For those who aren’t aware, it’s the Amish word for basically everyone else.)
Or if you were in France and you were referred to as “anglo-saxonne”? (French expression for English speakers.)
In both cases, that’s the vernacular for people like you. It’s their language, not yours.
Yeah, well, it wouldn’t be the first time somebody detonated in my face because I attempted to use my own frickin’ language in a plain, non-offensive, manner.
Admittedly, since I’m part Scot and part Irish, I should probably be wildly offended at being called “English”…
…but my kin came here a long time ago, and we’ve been eating California Dip and Wonder Bread long enough that we’ve forgotten any grudge we ever had against the Lobsterbacks, if indeed we ever had any.
…but, then, again, we all know that one must possess pigmentation in order to experience TRUE oppression. And once oppressed, one is justified (if one wishes) in hanging onto it for centuries, regardless of whether it goes away or not…
…and throwing it in the face of anyone who even resembles the folks who, at one long-ago point, oppressed your ancestors.
When I lived in Laredo, TX (a truly shitful place, BTW) the locals, 97+% Hispanic used the term anglo to simply mean “white American.” The preferred term when they wanted to be insulting was “gringo.”
I used to work for a Puerto Rican community agency in New York State. All of the non-Puerto-Ricans who worked there were referred to as Anglos.
Realistically, all cultures have a term for people who don’t belong to that culture. That the term is often derogatory isn’t surprising - that’s been true since the term “barbarian” came into being.
Anglos is a fairly neutral term. But it can have all shades of meaning depending on context and tone. And it’s certainly better than some of the terms that Anglos use to lump all Hispanics together.
In France some people say anglo-saxonne when they should (out of respect of their language) say anglo-phone
Everytime someone calles me an anglosaxonne I correct them as it doesn’t describe me (Irish) and I know that what they want is a word for someone who speaks English.
While it’s true that it can mean both;
a) a person descended from the Anglo-Saxons
b) a white gentile of an English-speaking nation.
in Ireland it normally refers to (a) while in France (b)
And vernacular does not prevent it being factually wrong. I probably wouldn’t do much in the way of head-biting, (not until I’ve been to the dentist anyway ) but it would not exactly make my day.
As ruadh suggests, it would not be hard to find examples of offensive terms defended by their users on the grounds of local vernacular usage (though probably only of some of the local community).
No offense intended and I may not recall correctly, ruadh, but aren’t you an American who just happens to LIVE in Ireland? Or am I mixing you up with somebody else on this board?
) but it would not exactly make my day.