What was wrong with black? Im white, not “German American” or “Irish American” ot something like that. So why cant blacks just be called black? Also, what do Europeans, Asains, and everyone else call African Americans?
You’re free to call yourself whatever you like (as are African Americans), but where I’m from, most whites indeed identify themselves, when asked, using a specific ethnicity (Irish American, or whatever). “White” doesn’t cut it, apparently. And it’s not really analogous with “Irish,” I don’t think. “White” and “Black” are designations of race, not national origin.
Prior to the “African American” designation emerging, “Blacks” were the only ethnic group (that I can recall) that were identified not by their nation of origin but by a distinguishing physical characteristic–and even that was something of a misnomer, in that I have never met anyone who was actually black.
That this physical characteristic was the trait most often used to villify them by bigots was not lost on most. I have no problem with the term, African American. Why does it bother you?
I read an essay on that subject by Jesse Jackson (yes, he can be quite reasonable at times). In essence, I recall his point being that using the terms “black” and “white” continues the connotations of racial tensions that we have to get beyond. The word “black” (and its predecessors, “Negro” and others) are based on defining slaves, or at least lower-class people, while “Hyphen-American” emphasizes national origin. We Americans, or our ancestors, all come from somewhere else (even the Indians), and it’s common to use the place of origin to emphasize our diversity as well as our unity.
Furtber, as a previous poster pointed out, “Blacks” include a variety of ethnic origins and characteristics. In American, they’re even more diverse than in Africa, due mainly to the commonly-unspoken-of high percentage of European blood in today’s “black” population.
The term “African-American” puts the emphasis where it belongs. There was more to it, but that was enough to convince this German-American.
The only problem is that African-American is still used as a racial, rather than national term. Dave Matthews(emigrated from S.A. as a child) is certainly African-American if you’re going with JJ’s reasoning. More so, at least, than a black person whose family was forced here a few centuries ago.
The basic idea is great, but it’s just being used as a PC way to say, “Black.” Although my family has only lived in the United States about fifty years, I have yet to be refered to as a European-American or a German-American.
'cause they ain’t black?
When pondering Jesse Jackson’s remarks and comparing them to one’s own experiences, it is well to remember that Rev. Jackson comes from Chicago, which, like its rust-belt cousin cities, (e.g., Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Milwaukee, Buffalo), does have a large number of European-descended identifiable groups. There are large numbers of people (and a significant number of organizations) who identify themselves as Polish-Americans, German-Americans, Irish-Americans, Italian-Americans, etc,
A person who lived in those environments who wanted to modify the perception of their group from racial to ethnic would see hyphenization as the most direct way to do it. Unfortunately, such associations and terms are not widely known or used outside the rust-belt, so, to millions of people in the South and West (or in less ethnically influenced locations in the North and East), “African-American” sounds either pretentious or divisive.
I find “African-American” to be a flawed effort, but it is not a stupid effort.
People should call themselves whatever they want to, when describing themselves in a context where it is necessary to describe their ethnic/racial origin. Otherwise, I don’t see a reason to even mention it.
After last sentence should have been added: People are people. Ethnic descriptions are usually irrelevant.
IMHO “African-American” is one of the silliest PC terms. Plainly and clearly it is used to mean “black”.
Strictly speaking it is dumb. Arabs are Africans and are not black. Whites from Africa are not black. African blacks are not “African-American”.
The term is plain silly.
It’s true that “African-Americans” aren’t necessarily black, and vice versa, but I can’t think of a more precise way to say it. Few people descended from slaves are able to trace their ancestry to any specific place in Africa, they can only be sure of the continent - and it’s a pretty big continent, too, with a wide variety of internal ethnic variation that often gets overlooked.
As I see it, using the term “African-American” puts an emphasis on “American”, as it should, and focuses on their common heritage and accomplishments, rather than summoning images of slavery. It may indeed be a PC term, but I don’t have any trouble with PC-ism if nobody’s toes are stepped on by it.
The strange thing is when politicians get confused and talk about the people of African countries as African Americans.
Most blacks are just black. Most of them do not get upset at the word black nor do they insist that people use African American. Just like most people don’t get upset when they say white instead of Anglo Saxon.
Marc
>> It’s true that “African-Americans” aren’t necessarily black, and vice versa, but I can’t think of a more precise way to say it
So if a white person comes from South Africa and becomes an American you would call him “African-American”? But if a Black person comes from Haiti he should not be called African American? Rather Caribbean-American?
Forgive me but to me the whole thing sounds dumb. Not to mention, as Easy Tokyo says, when they get confused and refer to black african people as “African-American”. I have seen this happen several times and it makes the speaker look STUPID. If you mean Blacks why don’t you say blacks?
In America you should call them “2/3rds black” if you want a descriptive term.
Honestly I have no idea why this is an issue for you all. If African Americans have largely decided they want to be called African Americans, then what’s the problem? Does it hurt you? I personally think objections to this are stupid, does that mean anything?
But let us turn to some logic and facts.
(1) What’s “black” mean in a North American context? Well, it seems to mean someone with some visually identifiable African descent. Given the facts of slavery and history, we can’t get much more specific than that, although Phil Curtin at JHu among others has published some works trying to narrow things down a bit.
(2) What’s African American mean? It seems to mean a group of self-identifying at least partially African descended Americans with ‘black american’ or ‘African American’ culture(s). Objections regarding recent African immigrants and white South Africans seem fairly contrived as (a) they are very few (b) both have their own ethnic labels which they prefer (e.g. national labels, or cultural labels, such as Ibo, Afrikaaner, South African etc.). Not much genuine confusion that I’ve found.
Living in high immigration cities as I have most of my life, I’ve heard people claim Carribean American, Jamacain American and so on. African American emerges as I’ve heard it as a specific phrase meaning ‘Black American’ in some distinction from other “blacks” from outside of America, and seems to be largely adopted by ‘native born’ “blacks” who probably are mostly descended from the original slaves and our other component parts from the good old days (some sarcasm).
It seems to be to be a kind of catch phrase for “Native Born American Black of Long Residence.” But that’s just what I’ve seen. Of course, I’m on the road a lot now, so pehraps I’m missing out on the latest usage.
(3) Other Ethnic Identifiers: My apologies, but some of the posters here seem to be a bit innocent on ethnic labelling. Maybe because they live in homogenous areas. I’ve also, thanks to living in non-homogenous cities, heard white folks such as myself claim further identifiers, such as WASP, Italian or Irish (American implied since those saying so are native born, and their grandparents likely were too). The fact of a more complicated population seems to make people feel a need for more specific identities.
Frankly there is no such thing a strictly logical and coherent ethnic label. For those who find African American so illogical, why are you attached to black? Few blacks approach the color, it in fact covers a culturally bounded and really unclear group of people from dark brown to not some folks who are quite pale but happen to have some features and culture that are percieved to be “black.” What is logical about being called “white” for that matter?
Ah well, more race nonesense in the end.
If I were black, I wouln’t want to be called “african-american” (or in my case, african-canadian). I’d just rather not be associated with any country in africa. Think about it; what pops into your head when you think of africa? Poverty, corrupt dictatorships, famine, and disease (in some parts of africa, a whole quarter of the population is HIV positive). Who wants to be associated with that? I’d rather just be referred to as black (I don’t mind being called white as it is). I don’t mean to insult anyone, but that’s how I feel. Why anyone would prefer being called “african-american” baffles me.
I would think people who want to be called African American are thinking of the culture from which their ancestors came, and not what’s presently going on over there (although I could be wrong about this).
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Bob Cos *
** but where I’m from, most whites indeed identify themselves, when asked, using a specific ethnicity (Irish American, or whatever*
If I may ask, just where is this place?
**Prior to the “African American” designation emerging, “Blacks” were the only ethnic group (that I can recall) that were identified not by their nation of origin but by a distinguishing physical characteristic–and even that was something of a misnomer, in that I have never met anyone who was actually black. **
Have to disagree here. Historically speaking, this is wrong. I base this on, in large part, on the ‘seperate but equal’ markers from the old South. The ones that said ‘White/Colored’ for different schools, bathrooms, and water fountains.
Prior to the “African American”, I had never heard any whites refer to themselves as otherwise. Nor were we refered to differently in the press. By and large, we still aren’t.
My roomate my first year in college was Jamaican. I once heard her say something like, “We’re black, but we’re not African-American. We’re Jamaican. We don’t have the same culture as Americans.” Before that time I was always perfectly happy to call American blacks African-Americans, but I hadn’t realized until then what a useful term it was. Americans of African descent are culturally distinct from black people in other countries, and it makes perfect sense to have a term that recognizes this distinction: African-American.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by spooje *
**
**
I was born and raised in Philadelphia. To be more specific, I was a product of what was referred to as the “rowhouse Catholicism” of the Manayunk/Roxborough section of the city.
We actually had ethnic parishes–actually they still do. St. Lucy’s is the Italian parish, St. John’s is the Irish one, St. Mary’s is German, St. Josaphat’s is Polish. Some one mentioned this earlier, but we didn’t use the “American” suffix often, since everyone knew you were born here (though my grandparents were not).
That’s my frame of reference (though not the only one, of course). To me, ethnicity–say, Italian–did not equate with race (white or black). That might help to explain to you my interpretation of “black” as the only ethnic designation that used a physical characteristic as the principal identifier, since for African-Americans, “Black” had to serve both as ethnic and racial identifier.
I would still hold that as an ethnic name, it’s unique in this regard. Those of us from the Italian parish, for example, didn’t refer to ourselves as “the swarthy guys with wavy hair.” And I would likewise hold that those of us who refer to ourselves simply as “white” are indicating a race, not an ethnicity. That’s just my take on this issue.
And, while terms like “Italian-American” might be more common in some areas, I am surprised to hear some posters indicate it’s practically unheard of (I’ve heard it locally and nationally in the press). I don’t question this reaction, I’m just surprised (you learn something new every day). spooje, your comment that you had never heard it from any individual white, nor in the press–not even once–prior to the emergence of “African-American” seems unlikely to me, but I’ll take your word for it.
And I’ll close by saying that it’s not that I’m hung up on ethnic names (you asked, so I told you). But to the extent it comes up, I still have no problem with the term “African-American” and am bewildered why it seems to often provoke such ire (not that that has been the norm in this thread).