BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 27 Jun 08 - 02:17 PM

I think if we know the country someone's ancestors came from, which unfortunately is not possible in the case of African Americans who were brought here as slaves, we should say so..like Etheopian American or Ugandan American..same as we would say Polish American or Welsh American (which we really don't..so many people just got assimilated). It would be their preference of course..but we should certainly give them the same respect and consider that some might want to be known that way...mg

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Ebbie
Date: 27 Jun 08 - 09:55 AM

A(nother) segue here:

mg, there is a current exploration in Alaska on connecting persons to the past through dna.

A few years ago - maybe five - a preserved body was found on a glacier. The body is about five thousand years old, they believe, and it was dressed in still identifiable clothing, complete down to sandals.

They are now taking dna from a number of Native Alaskans in an effort to match it with that of the 'hunter'.

So far, several people in the Juneau area have been notified that they are related to the man.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Jun 08 - 02:46 AM

Yes, Az, you may very well be right in your summary of the behaviour that you have observed among African-American students. But is the identical pattern (apart from the label of "acting white") not seen and has it not long been seen amongst all the young, or at least all the young of disadvantaged backgrounds, a pronounced inverse snobbery?

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: mg
Date: 27 Jun 08 - 12:55 AM

Quite right, Grab, about Obama's father being African (from Kenya, specifically) and not an American citizen, hence not "African-American" in any sense. Okay, so Obama is half African, half Caucasian, and all American. Maybe Rapaire's term (African-Caucasian-American) is the most politically correct... or how about this: Human Being.
----------------------------
If Obama's father came from Italy and went back, and his mother was a mixture, like most people here are, I would be inclined to call him an Italian-American. I don't know how they define it..but if he eats Italian food, sings Italian food, has a high percentage of Italian blood..I would feel safe calling someone 50% an Italian American. Now Italy is a country, and Africa is a continent..so to be consistent I would call him a Kenyan-American.

I have never ever heard the term Caucasian-American. And that is a mountain range.generally refers to lightter-skinned people of European or Asian border countries I believe...and Kenya is a country..we are mixing apples and bananas.

Now, the American continent includes Greenland. Probably not too many slaves from there. But maybe so in Viking times. The Jamacain slave population includes (I think..I am hazy..might have been another place in that neck of the woods..) Irish slaves who intermarried.

They are doing it on dogs..DNA stuff..just in USA today..perhaps they can already do people..say you have ancestors from Nigeria, Egypt, Belgium and Argentina...mg

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: SharonA
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 04:49 PM

Mmmmmmwell, Peace, sometimes Azizi talks sense. In the case of the Census Bureau discussion above, I think she was trying too hard to twist words around so that she could be right.

Sorry again, Azizi, but you (and I) quoted the Census Bureau's opening remark: "The concept of race as used by the Census Bureau reflects self-identification by people according to the race or races with which THEY most closely identify." Not necessarily the race with which the Census Bureau identifies them. The categories listed appear to be nothing more than a guideline for people to make a voluntary choice according to the government's definition. So for you to claim that "the US" (a rather broad brush with which to paint the Census Bureau) does not regard the color of their skin or other physical features, or that people who appear to be African-American are considered "White" based on their geographical origin (in your post of 26 June 11:20 a.m.) is incorrect.

The White category "includes people who indicate their race as 'White' or report entries" (including Arab). The Black category "includes people who indicate their race as 'Black, African Am., or Negro, or provide written entries..." If you're multiracial, you may check off more than one box. Get the idea? Apparently the Census Bureau says you are what you say you are. They categorize because they need to do that in order to compile data.

And they categorize Arab-Americans as "white". However, I don't see how you can conclude from this that people who live in or emigrate to the US from North Africa are classified as "white" if they identify themselves as "black".

As Hummer says, one's legal standing is an entirely different kettle of fish. Just because the guy in the lawsuit you read about somewhere came from the Sudan doesn't mean that he was (to use the old term Art cited) "Negroid" (he may have been Arab). Heck, there are "Caucasoids" in Kenya, Nigeria and Haiti (the examples listed by the Census Bureau under "Black") but they would not check off the "Black" box on their census form.

Azizi, you say, "In Arabic, 'Sudan' means the land of the Blacks.
And, in Latin 'Ethiopia' means 'burned' or Black face. Ancient Ethiopia included the Sudan and was also called 'Nubia'. 'Nubian' means 'Black'." Indeed so, and those names reflect skin-color differences that the namers observed, but that doesn't mean that Arabs are genetically "Negroid", any more than the name "Pennsylvania" means that everyone in the state is related to William Penn.

The use of the term "black" by "whites" has, historically, not been restricted to a reference to people of the race we call "black" today (as I'm sure you well know!!!). Take the term "Black Irish", for example: Wikipedia describes it as "a traditional term believed to have originated in the United States that commonly ascribes to a dark brown or black hair phenotype appearing in Caucasian persons of Irish descent. This can be distinguished in contrast to the (lighter) brown, blond or red hair color variant, the latter stereotypically perceived to personify the look of typical Irish folk."

Also see this site about the Black Irish, Black Dutch where we find this statement: "...There are strong indications that the original 'Black Dutch' were swarthy complexioned Germans but Anglo-Americans loosely applied the term to any dark-complexioned American of European descent. Some say the term was adopted as an attempt to disguise Indian or tri-racial descent. Some Cherokee & Chickasaw Indians are called Black Dutch."

So "black" is a very, very broad term, sometimes used to describe dark hair or eye color rather than skin color, sometimes used derogatorily toward people of myriad races. So it is foolish to claim that "the land of the Blacks" was so named because of a "Negroid" population therein. By the way, where did you get the information that "Ethiopia" was a Latin word? Wikipedia lists the etymology as being either from the Greek for "of burned face" (which could be simply a description of a light-skinned person's sunburn) or named after a great-grandson of Noah, or from ancient Egyptian for "land of higher peace". Likewise, Wikipedia says "Nubia" may have been derived from the Egyptian word "Nub" for "gold".

So, friend Azizi, give pause before blindly believing and quoting propaganda that presents itself as truth... and trying to "teach" it to the rest of us. I see you've exited the stage, but I hope you see this before exiting the building.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 04:46 PM

Can I sneak back just to say that I meant to write I'm havin fun right now? I didn't type what I jokingly call "Ebonese" on purpose. But I haveta say that, given the title of this thread, that typo is really funny.

Okay I'm outa here.

Be serious but not too serious.

Share! Learn! Enjoy!

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 04:39 PM

I stand by my lectern-I mean what I said.

It was interesting teaching-um I mean talking to ya'll-I mean you all.

I guess you can take the teacher away from teaching, but you can't take the teaching away from the teacher.

{Did I mention that I'm interested in astrology? Well, my sun sign and mercury sign and Jupiter sign is Sagittarius, and it's said that's the astrological sign of the teacher}.

So I guess I get it naturally*.

*That's an inside joke for any other afro wearers who might be hanging tough round these parts. It also proves that I don't like to miss any opportunity to teach. I guess sometimes I agree with pdq's 25 Jun 08 - 07:22 PM's post that "..remember, never take Mudcat too seriously. It is here for people to have fun." But usually I'm far too serious for fun & games.

Be that as it may, I emphatically agree with you, Hummer & SharonA, that this thread shouldn't be about me [well, at least it should be about other people besides me.

So, that said, I'mma take my bow and exit stage left, draggin my lectern behind me.

{Somehow that line reminds me of "She'll be comin 'round the mountain when she comes". Which I think is totally apt given where I live}

Oops! I did it again, didn't I? I made this thread be about me.

Now that you mention it, I guess I do talk a lot about myself. And to make matters worse, I having fun right now-on a coulda been awfully contentious thread.

Sorry 'bout that [I mean the "talking about myself" part].

[She says as she really exits this time-stage left].

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Peace
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 03:11 PM

Yeah. Maybe it is, but the gal talk sense and she ain't no politician.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: SharonA
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 03:06 PM

Get used to it, Humbucker! That's the way Azizi often (um, usually) posts.

Sorry, Azizi, but Hummer's right: your soapbox is showing. Not saying that that's a bad thing, necessarily; just saying that it's there.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: GUEST,Hummer
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 02:33 PM

Azizi, I am not trying to make this personal and about you.

However, with just a little more self-awareness and a look back up this thread at your own posts, you might come to understand why I, a relative newcomer around these parts, alluded to this thread having a lecture hall feel, with you standing at the lectern.

Let's remember it is all fair in love and war.

Love,

Brother Hummer

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 02:06 PM

I want to take this opportunity to thank Bruce for his comments about me in his 26 Jun 08 - 10:49 AM post.

Bruce said that I am "justifiably proud of her culture and heritage".

Actually, I don't think that I would describe myself as being proud of my culture and heritage. Instead, I'd say that I'm very interested in learning about and sharing information about African American cultures and African heritage. But I'm interested in a lot of subjects and I'm fortunate that I have the time and energy to devote to learning about those subjects.

Fwiw, I don't believe that everything great came from Africa. There are customs, and historical events, and political problems and challenges in ancient and modern Africa that I don't like at all [and that's a mild way of putting it]. That said, I do collect African musical instruments, and tell African stories, and sometimes wear West African clothing. Nonetheless, I don't believe that I live an Afrocentric lifestyle-whatever that phrase means.

I agree that we are all human beings and I vehemently believe that race and ethnicity should be an unimportant, valueless descriptor.

Bruce is right that I like sharing information about the subject of African American history and culture, particularly the rhymes, and songs, and colloquial word meanings. However, most posters on Mudcat might agree that I don't always like to talk about the experience of race and racism in the United States and elsewhere.

Guest Hummer is correct that he doesn't know me. I think that those who have come to know me on this forum know that I may talk overlong, but I also like to listen and learn from other people.

And in my opinion, Hummer is also wrong that this thread is "a lecture hall". Instead of describing this thread as a lecture hall, I would describe it as a wide ranging discussion.

And if this discussion ends right now, I can still say "Thank you" to all of its participants-including Hummer, as I have learned some things in the process, and maybe other people have too.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: GUEST,Hummer
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 01:51 PM

And I apologize, Azizi, if you didn't catch the White Talkin reference to John Waters in my last post.

I'm sure most of the White people here didn't catch it, either.

Yours in solidarity,

White Brother Hummer

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 01:28 PM

Since the subject of school discipline was raised in this wide ranging thread, I'd like to post a link to an article on that subject, and share portions of that article.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/specials/chi-070924discipline,0,3317185.story

School discipline tougher on African Americans
By Howard Witt | Tribune senior correspondent
September 25, 2007

..."In every state but Idaho, a Tribune analysis of the data shows, black students are being suspended in numbers greater than would be expected from their proportion of the student population. In 21 states—Illinois among them—that disproportionality is so pronounced that the percentage of black suspensions is more than double their percentage of the student body. And on average across the nation, black students are suspended and expelled at nearly three times the rate of white students.

No other ethnic group is disciplined at such a high rate, the federal data show. Hispanic students are suspended and expelled in almost direct proportion to their populations, while white and Asian students are disciplined far less.

Yet black students are no more likely to misbehave than other students from the same social and economic environments, research studies have found. Some impoverished black children grow up in troubled neighborhoods and come from broken families, leaving them less equipped to conform to behavioral expectations in school. While such socioeconomic factors contribute to the disproportionate discipline rates, researchers say that poverty alone cannot explain the disparities. "There simply isn't any support for the notion that, given the same set of circumstances, African-American kids act out to a greater degree than other kids," said Russell Skiba, a professor of educational psychology at Indiana University whose research focuses on race and discipline issues in public schools. "In fact, the data indicate that African-American students are punished more severely for the same offense, so clearly something else is going on. We can call it structural inequity or we can call it institutional racism."

[Italics added for me for emphasis]

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: GUEST,Hummer
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 01:28 PM

Put me down as having attended the artbrooks school of racialized realities, please.

Azizi, what I balked at in utter frustration was your conflating the *classification* of racial identities by the Census Bureau with *legal standing*. They are two entirely different kettles of fish.

In my opinion, that shows either ignorance, or a tendency to operate with a hidden racial agenda in internet forums. Since I don't know you, I'm perfectly happy to assume it is the former in your case.

But frankly, I find your preaching tendencies about "the race" pretty off-putting in a condescending, patronizing way.

Hence, my invocation of Chapelle.

The United States no longer has laws that define a person's legal standing based upon their race, except in affirmative action. Which is why affirmative action is such a lightning rod in conversations about race.

There is plenty of irony here. The ways the Census Bureau chooses racial identity categories is one, but so is the fact the Census Bureau (a bad ironic joke in itself) isn't allowed to ask what religion it's citizens self-identify with. The bottom line for everyone though, is none of us lives in that sort of disturbingly bizarre, neat and orderly, highly categorized world, regardless of what our background or community is.

A horse of a different color in a horse race is still a horse, isn't it? That was Nader's point. And this sort of obfuscation of that point causes people to lose the plot entirely.

It really is that simple for most folks. But if you want to continue to torture and twist Nader's words to fit this level of outright absurdity, just so you can give the class yet another lecture on race, you go right ahead.

But I'm skipping out, and choosing truancy over boredom in the face of some really didactic shit talking (that is a play on the words of your thread title, Azizi) in your lecture hall.

Thanks for not smoking.

Hummer

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: artbrooks
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 01:24 PM

Sharon, when I said "geographically based", I was referring to the 3-race system in use when I was in grade school (a long time ago, now). That is White=Caucasoid=Caucasus (as defined above, apparently because the Turks thought that Caucasian slave girls were the definition of perfection), Asian=Mongoloid=Mongolia and Black=Negroid=Niger River (that's what I was taught it meant!). American Indians/Native Americans were considered Mongoloids.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: SharonA
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 01:07 PM

Artbrooks: I was definitely, definitely speaking in jest. Waitaminnit... "Geographically-based racial pointers of yesteryear", you say???? Guess again: everybody seems to have a geographically-based pointer right now... except the "White" folks. I think it's time for me to post the lyrics to a song I wrote a few years ago, with tongue firmly affixed to cheek, after a conversation with a friend similar to the one we're having now (he's the "Jewish-American" in the song):


WHITE (A Song of Color)

You've got your African-American, your Asian-American,
A name for every color of skin.
You've got your Indian-American, your Native American,
A name for any ethnic group that you might be in
Except for the one that I'm a member of. There's no name that I would love
To use 'cause nothing sounds quite right
And yet it would seem that every other race is called by its starting place.
So whydaya have to call me "white"?

Some people think that I should say I am Caucasian-American
But they don't know what "Caucasus" means.
Then others want me to proclaim I am an Anglo-American
But England's not the only land where I got my genes
'Cause I'm a descendant of some German men, some French, Scots, and Irishmen
And Welshmen, too, so here's my plight:
That's too many places to put in a name that claims that they're all the same,
So whydaya have to call me "white"?

Bridge:
A Jewish-American friend of mine says he thinks what fits
    me would be a name that starts with "European"
But I think it sounds 'way too much like that old riddle for kids
(Spoken: "You know the one... If you're American in the living room, what are you in the bathroom? Yer-a-peein'!")
    so I wanna pick another group to be in!

No one should use a color as a slur at people. No moniker
Like "red" or "black" or "yellow" or "brown"
Because we're more than mounds of melanin. We're humans beneath the skin
That's got a pigment based on where our ancestry's found
So don't you insist that it's PC to call me "white". Take a look at me!
Just use your eyes and see what's right!
Forget about what your closed-up mind might think. My skin's kinda peachy-pink...
...sorta...
So what if it's just a few shades light?
Oh, whydaya have to call me "white"???



Copyright Sharon Abbott All rights reserved.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 01:01 PM

I see that I posted some of the same information as you did, SharonA.

**

I read somewhere recently about a law suit about an African business man who became an American citizen and wanted to be considered an African American [and thus be entitled to some of the benefits that come with being a member of that "protected class" in affirmative actions laws] but the courts found against him because he was from the Sudan and therefore was North African and therefore was considered to be "White" in the USA.

In Arabic, "Sudan" means the land of the Blacks.
And, in Latin "Ethiopia" means "burned" or Black face. Ancient Ethiopia included the Sudan and was also called "Nubia". "Nubian" means "Black".

But no matter how Black these people are in skin color, they are considered White by the US census. At the same time, African Americans who are light enough to pass for White are considered Black.

This just shows how crazy racial definitions are in the USA-and elsewhere, I'm sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 12:48 PM

Here's an excerpt from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/meta/long_68176.htm

Definition:

The concept of race as used by the Census Bureau reflects self-identification by people according to the race or races with which they most closely identify. These categories are sociopolitical constructs and should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature. Furthermore, the race categories include both racial and national-origin groups.

The racial classifications used by the Census Bureau adhere to the October 30,1997, Federal Register Notice entitled,"Revisions to the Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity" issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "White" or report entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish.

Black or African American. A person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "Black, African Am., or Negro," or provide written entries such as African American, Afro American, Kenyan, Nigerian, or
Haitian.

[Italics added by me for emphasis]

**

Also, here's an excerpt from http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?id=409

"Arab Americans are the immigrants (and their descendents) from the Arabic-speaking countries of the Middle East and North Africa. Under this classification, Arabic-speaking countries include the members of the Arab League and range from Morocco in the west to Iraq in the east (see sidebar). Individuals from Iran and Turkey, where the predominant languages are Farsi and Turkish, respectively, are not considered to be of Arab origin even though these countries are part of the Middle East.

According to the US Census Bureau, Arab Americans are those who responded to the 2000 census question about ancestry by listing a predominantly Arabic-speaking country or part of the world as their place of origin. The main Arab-speaking countries cited in the 2000 census included Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, and Syria...

Unlike Asian, white, or black, "Arab" is not a racial category for the Census Bureau. Rather, Arab Americans are considered white, defined by the Census Bureau as "a person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa." This distinction dates back to court decisions from 1913 to 1917 on the "whiteness" of Syrian and Palestinian immigrants.

Arab Americans who received only the short form of the 2000 census, which is sent to all US households, could check the "white" box for race; if they self-identified as "other" and then identified themselves on the long form as a person from the Middle East or North Africa, the Census Bureau reassigned them to the "white" category. This classification system is in line with other federal guidelines on race and ethnic standards, as set out by Directive 15 by the Office of Management and Budget, and therefore is present in many administrative forms.

[Italics added by me for emphasis]

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: SharonA
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 12:33 PM

Hummer: Yes, it is an interesting claim that Azizi made there about the official US definition of "White", isn't it? The first part is true, but I'm not so sure about the second part ("They may look 'African American' but legally they are White in this country"). Apparently the official "White" group includes people with North African ancestry but not ancestry in "any of the Black racial groups of Africa" (which is under "Black or African American"). The following is excerpted from the US Census Bureau website:


Race

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census of Population, Public Law 94-171 Redistricting Data File. Updated every 10 years. http://factfinder.census.gov.

Definition:

The concept of race as used by the Census Bureau reflects self-identification by people according to the race or races with which they most closely identify. These categories are sociopolitical constructs and should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature. Furthermore, the race categories include both racial and national-origin groups.

The racial classifications used by the Census Bureau adhere to the October 30,1997, Federal Register Notice entitled,"Revisions to the Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity" issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "White" or report entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish.

Black or African American. A person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "Black, African Am., or Negro," or provide written entries such as African American, Afro American, Kenyan, Nigerian, or Haitian.

Two or more races. People may have chosen to provide two or more races either by checking two or more race response check boxes, by providing multiple write-in responses, or by some combination of check boxes and write-in responses.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: artbrooks
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 12:31 PM

Friend Azizi has embraced the "African-American" culture of the US and its African roots, as is her right, even though her own heritage is mixed - in fact, based on absolutely no data whatever, I'd guess that there is nobody out there who is "pure" anything. She says that, "'African American' is a cultural referent", and [IMNSHO] so are all of the other hyphen identities.

SharonA suggests (hopefully in jest) that we return to the geographically-based racial pointers of yesteryear and call a person of the "white" [bah!] "race" [bah!] a Caucasian-American. From Wiki: "The Caucasus comprises Georgia (Abkhazia and South Ossetia), Armenia, Azerbaijan (Nagorno-Karabakh) and part of Southern Russia (Chechnya)." So, in keeping with the rest of the hyphen identities, wouldn't a Caucasian-American be a person who has one parent from that part of the world or who identifies with that culture? Bah!

If my great-great-howevermany-great grandmother who came North from Georgia in 1867 and married into the Brooks family of western New York was, as I mildly suspect, a very light-complected former slave who could "pass" there, does that make me an African-American, even though I have no connection to that culture? Double-bah! My wife is as proud of, and interested in, her Russian-Jewish heritage [50%] as she is in her English roots [also 50%].

Cultural referent is exactly right, and none of these things should ever be considered to be anything else. I should be able to dislike the urban-street-rap culture without being accused of disliking "black" people, and I should be equally able to like General Powell, Senator Obama and Mr. Poitier (and respect but dislike Secretary Rice) without these people somehow being transmutted into "whites".

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Rapparee
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 12:15 PM

My youngest brother was dancing in a club in Vietnam when good friend of his said, "Sheee-IT, you dance like a white guy!" Said friend was from Harlem and taught my bro how to DANCE. My brother married into an Irish-American family from the South Side of Chicago. Wedding receptions, including his "bridal dance", are...interesting...since he can no longer "dance like a white guy."

As for Obama, Nader, and everyone else: you're mostly red inside, mixed with yellow, gray, pink, brown, green, and other colors.

We're all human. Suck it up and live with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: GUEST,Hummer
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 12:00 PM

"I also understand that people from North African nations such as Ethiopia, Egypt, and the Sudan are considered to be White by the United States regardless of the color of their skin or their other physical features. They may look "African American" but legally they are White in this country."

Oh my. Now there is ahhh, uuum, errr...an interesting claim.

I will anxiously await the next installment of "I Know Black People", and hope we all can come together to learn why they smoke menthols.

;););););)

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: SharonA
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 11:43 AM

When I'm Queen of the World, my first decree will be that everything make perfect, literal sense! :-)

Till then, thanks, Azizi, for taking the time to clarify the terminology (as much as it can be clarified!). I guess I'll just have to go on calling my cousin's son "my second cousin"... or is it "my first cousin once removed"... or...?? Sheeeesh.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 11:20 AM

SharonA, my maternal grandmother came to the USA from Barbados and my maternal grandfather came to the USA from Trinidad.

My biological father was adopted. I believe his family was from New York state. I know that he was lighter skinned than my mother {whose mother's mother was White}. But I don't know anything about my father's ancestry. I can presume that my father had some White ancestry only because of his appearance.

I believe that I don't have any Southern Black ancestry-or any other ancestry that I know of-from the American South. It's possible that I have some ancestors who were enslaved in the American North or the South {from my father's side of the family}, but again, I don't know that for sure.

All this to say, I believe that all persons who are African Americans don't have to be descended from people who were enslaved.
And I believe that just like other words and phrases, "African American" doesn't have to make perfect, literal sense.

Imo, "African American" is a cultural referent, much more than it is a geographical and/or biological referent.

Also, SharonA, here's my comments regarding your question about whether your relative who is of mixed racial ancestry "just get stamped as "black" or "Black American" without taking the other half of his heritage into consideration?" :

On a number of threads including the one whose link I provided, I wrote that I consider the "one drop of Black blood" rule to be racist. I hope your cousin's son learns about and celebrates all of his heritage.

In the USA, people have a certain degree of free will about what race/ethnicity they say that they are [in the census and on applications and forms]. However, a person's physical appearance will largely determine whether people in the real world accept his or her racial/ethnic self-identification. If a person is of "ambiguous race or ethnicity} {meaning other people can't readily tell which race or ethnic group that person "belongs to"}, then that person may have some difficult experiences in everyday life [then again the person may not have such difficulties depending where he or she lives. I seems to me that the more multi-cultural and multi-racial his or her community, the better and easier it would be for a person of ambiguous ethnicity.

With regard to who is or is not African American:
I know a number of people who have one birth parent from the continent of Africa and one birth parent who is African American. These people consider themselves to be African American [and are considered African American by other folks including those who are African American].

I've known Black people with two Black birth parents who could easily pass for White. I've known Black people who have one Black birth parent and one White birth parent who are darker than me [and I have two Black birth parents]. I've also known people who physically appear to be African Americans who identify themselves as Native Americans because that was the primary culture they were raised in.

I also know some people of African American/Filipino ancestry. These people consider themselves to be African American, probably because they live in the United States and they understand that most African Americans are a mixed race people.

And I could cite other examples.

I also understand that people from North African nations such as Ethiopia, Egypt, and the Sudan are considered to be White by the United States regardless of the color of their skin or their other physical features. They may look "African American" but legally they are White in this country.

And I'm aware that non-Black people {for example, White people and East Indians} who were born in Africa or who live in Africa and now live in the USA could also call themselves "African Americans". But that is a different than the standard meaning of that referent in the USA.

I believe that with regard to racial referents, particularly mixed racial referents and referents like "half-African Americans" times, they are a-changing. This may be a good thing, and it may not be all that good. But it will be what it will be.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: GUEST,Hummer
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 11:08 AM

The context missing is this, from the Rocky Mountain News, where the original article appeared:

"In Monday's interview at Nader's Washington, D.C., campaign headquarters, Nader was asked if Obama is any different than Democrats he has criticized in the past, considering Obama's pledge to reject campaign contributions from registered lobbyists."

After describing how Obama was the same as Kerry, Gore, et al, Nader's response was Obama's racial identity was the only real difference.

That was the context, and Nader said a number of things about Obama related to the "corporate candidacy" Nader says Obama is running, as well as Obama's decision not to use public financing of his campaign.

Obama has said virtually nothing about the poor and working class during his campaign, either in the primaries or the general. What happened to Obama's pledge to John Edwards to keep the issues of importance to them front and center in his campaign? Nader pointed out that contradiction between Obama's rhetoric, and his actions on the campaign trail.

These are important questions that should be asked about Obama's stands on issues. So far, Nader is one of the few visible political figures on the left who has challenged, much less commented on Obama's actual stands on the issues. Ishmael Reed is another voice from the left questioning Obama's stands, and his betrayal of the African American community that put him over the top in the primaries.

So what does the media focus on when Nader gets down to brass tacks? An illusory tempest in a teapot, manufactured by cable news spinners and party hacks on the partisan political blogs with a self-interest in manipulating white racial guilt for their own purposes--low ratings in the case of the cable pundits, and keeping a racially and religiously neutered Obama in the news cycle, so no one will talk about race issues in a meaningful way and expose Obama to racist backlash in the voting booth.

The Obama camp exploits the moment because it presents a sensational smokescreen for him to further obfuscate his 180 on campaign finance, and deflects the discussion away from him single handedly dismantling the public campaign finance system.

Obama must feel threatened by Nader--otherwise, why would Obama feel it necessary to call a press conference to address Nader's comments and wind up the cable news punditry? Why not just ignore Nader and let him fade away, if he is so irrelevant?

I'm with Ishmael Reed, who recently wrote about what a tremendous disappointment Obama is turning out to be. As someone who voted for Obama in the primary, the fact I feel so bitter and betrayed in June doesn't bode well. I can't imagine how much farther to the right he will run to pander to the electorate, but I find it totally disheartening. I feel suckered by yet another political opportunist.

The only thing more disheartening than Obama's running to the right of Bush and pandering to white racists to get elected, is the number of black and white Americans who are voting for Obama based upon his race, instead of his political stands on the issues and his character as a leader.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Big Mick
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 11:03 AM

I know what you mean, Bruce, with regard to the influences. My best friend for some 25 years, was an African American. He is my daughters Godfather. He passed away two years ago this July 5. Even now I find tears welling up in my eyes just thinking about him. Together we often explored the traditions and customs of our peoples. We also laughed till tears ran down our faces at the similarities of his family and mine, our grandmothers and grandfathers, the discipline meted out, the love, the cooking, the music. We had such an effect on each other, that Joe could affect a perfect Galway accent, and many of my mannerisms even today are unmistakeably African American, at least to African Americans. They are subtle things in speech, but they are there. My life has been so much better for Joe's having been in it. Even my singing has been touched by Joe and his family.

Dear Lord, but I miss that man. He was my chosen brother, and the richness of culture and family he introduced will be with me always.

Sorry for the digression.

All the best,

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Peace
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 10:49 AM

"I didn't stay in the fight for 30 years to elect a black man or woman. I stayed in the fight so that black men and women could be free to compete in the arena with no more attention paid to their colour or gender than is paid to mine."

That is a great statement, imo.

#################################################################

Regarding the Black thing. This has nothing to do with Obama. (I understand from remarks on this thread that he's a Black man. IMO, that's just a coincidence because of genetics.)

I have been writing songs of late and when I drift into a blues-rock area I often find myself using some Black speech (locutions or diction). And some vocal intonations. Despite being a White guy (for the most part), many of my earlier musical influences were Black musicians and singers: Odetta, Chuck Berry, Bernice Johnson Reagan, Lonnie Johnson, John Lee Hooker, Richie Havens. I met most of the aforementioned and they did have a big impact on me. My time living in south Harlem (NYC) brought me into contact with many 'ordinary' folks, some of whom spoke a 'different' English. Add to that the many friends of colour from a summer camp at which I worked and I am not surprised that in my dotage so many things from that past life are coming back to me.

Thanks to Azizi, some of my inaccurately remembered phrasing has been corrected in a few of the new songs. She has been a God-send in terms of talking straight across to me about wordings, phrase origins, reasons Black English (in some areas) has taken a turn from what many call the mainstream. She is an awesome researcher and justifiably proud of her culture and heritage. Just thought I'd mention that.

I'm gonna be away for a while, so y'all take care.

######################################################

Guest,Hummer. You HAVE to change that name.


BM

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: SharonA
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 10:29 AM

Hmmm, if a Caucasian person who is a citizen of an African country comes to America and has a child with an American citizen, is that child "African-American"?

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: SharonA
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 10:25 AM

Azizi, I appreciate the link to your previous essay, but for me it still doesn't clear up the confusion. I need some definitions, if there are any. Americans whose ancestors were brought to America from Africa as slaves are African-Americans (some write it as African Americans, without the hyphen), right? Does this apply to all of the American continent, or only to the US?

What about Americans whose ancestors came to America from Africa as freemen and/or freewomen, as Obama's father did? Looks like people are using the same term, but is it correct?

My cousin's son is one-quarter Caucasian-American, one-quarter Italian-American (from his mother's side) and half African-Jamaican on his father's side. My cousin is an American citizen, so her son is also, so I guess he's an "African-American" but is he the same "sort" of African-American as a descendant of slaves on a Georgia plantation? Does it depend on whether his father came from Africa or was born in Jamaica to descendants of sugar-plantation slaves? Or does he just get stamped as "black" or "Black American" without taking the other half of his heritage into consideration?

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Big Mick
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 10:18 AM

I didn't stay in the fight for 30 years to elect a black man or woman. I stayed in the fight so that black men and women could be free to compete in the arena with no more attention paid to their colour or gender than is paid to mine. I don't give a damn what Mr. Obama sounds like anymore than I would if he spoke with a northeastern accent, or a southern accent. His racial make should be interesting, just as mine is interesting to me. But it certainly isn't a barometer of his fitness to be President. These, and many more, are statements of principle to me. It is my belief that with the emergence of Mr. Obama, and Ms. Clinton, means we are at the beginning stages of what could be a wonderful time in the history of this country. For all that has been right (yes, I know..... there has also been much wrong, just as in your countries..) it has been accomplished using less than half of the available brain trust. Imagine what we can accomplish using the sacred principles our form of government is based on, if we can use all of our talents instead of just white, middle aged males. It won't look the same, and it will even evolve in ways that some will resist. As I said, these are principled statements.

Now for some statements of reality. Of course he identifies himself as being a black man. Only white folks that operate on theoretic levels wouldn't understand that. It's the old, "if you have one drop, you are....." rule. Mr. Obama apparently had influences from strong folks of principle on both sides of his family, and they all had their impact. But one thing you can be sure of. He was never allowed to forget that he was black. It is a sign of his intellect and strong upbringing that he comes to us as the perfect standard bearer for an American strongly steeped in where he came from, and adamant that he move forward paying no more attention to it than any Irish, Italian, German, Dutch, whatever, American would. Yet doing so very cognizant of the economic inequalities that continue to trap our youth, whether of colour or not. He knows who he is, and he is committed to trying to change the conditions that imprison a young person based on nothing more than melanin in the skin, or economic background.

Whether he speaks "black" or not should cause no more, and no less, consternation than when Kennedy tried to speak German, Bush tries to speak Spanish, or some politician on St. Pat's Day wears green or affects some phoney stage oirish accent.

Nader is a megalomaniac. While I applaud his causes, he long ago embraced his own legend, and has become a caricature of himself. His comments show me that he believes the struggle was about putting up a black person as a symbol, instead of creating the conditions that allow our country to finally move ahead using the talents of all its peoples. The ignorance, and pavlov's dog style, of evaluating the potential of our candidates first on the basis of a visual trait that has nothing to do with intellect, must disappear. Then we will be on the road to our next level. If not, then we are headed back down the mountain.

In short, I just don't give a damn if he talks black or white, and I wish Nader would be quiet before he destroys whatever is left of his legacy.

All the best,

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: SharonA
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 10:00 AM

As long as we're talking about Obama's appearance, I need to ask something that's been bothering me for months. Maybe someone out there knows the answer; at least it's worth a shot:

Obama's face looks "lopsided" to me. The left side looks higher than the right side. His right eye droops off toward his right ear, his right ear looks lower than his left ear, and his mouth seems to droop a little on the right side. Look at his Senate photo for an example of this: current Obama pic. I've noticed this on video, too, particularly when he appears to be tired (as in his last debate with Hillary), and he often tilts his head to the right, presumably to make the droopiness less noticeable. So my question is: is this the result of a stroke, or a fight in his youth, or some sort of nerve damage, or has he always looked like this?

There's a little of that eye-droop in this pic of him as a young man -- younger Obama pic -- but it seems to have gotten more pronounced.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 09:48 AM

SharonA, I appreciate your comments about racial referents. Rather than repeat what I've previously written in this forum, here's a hyperlink to a recent thread that I started on the subject of Black racial referents in the USA":

thread.cfm?threadid=111488#2349412
Racial Referents-Negro, Quadroon, etc


That hyperlink takes you to a post that I wrote on how "African American" became the formal referent for Black Americans.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: SharonA
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 09:33 AM

Quite right, Grab, about Obama's father being African (from Kenya, specifically) and not an American citizen, hence not "African-American" in any sense. Okay, so Obama is half African, half Caucasian, and all American. Maybe Rapaire's term (African-Caucasian-American) is the most politically correct... or how about this: Human Being.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 09:25 AM

dianavan, I've also just re-read your 25 Jun 08 - 02:35 PM post on this thread and feel the need to clarify what I was saying about formal and informal communication styles.

You wrote that "As a teacher, I had to monitor the use of my own language on a daily basis because I worked with children and because I had to use standard English as a professional. Now I can talk any way I want to and the more I speak my own language, the more I feel more like my own self. Language is the expression of who you are and when you come from a mixed cultural background, you learn to monitor your speech according to your audience".
-snip-

If I understood you correctly,dianavan, you are saying that people of mixed race {or of any other "minority" culture} are being less authentically themselves when they speak or write formally than when they speak or write informally. If I understood you correctly, this is your experience, but it's not mine.

I feel that I'm being authentically me when I speak and when I write more formally and when I write informally. Although I hasten to say that I'm not talking about writing in a research article mode when I refer to writing formally. That I don't like to do, because I'm still learning how to do it.

I'd agree with you more if you presented this in terms of the style of communicating that an individual prefers. However, I still don't think that every member of any cultural, racial, ethnic, religious group would agree. I personally love writing and speaking in public to small or to "largish" groups [not to crowds]. I love to sprinkle my conversation with slang and "street sayings". And I love using witty word plays. However, I still feel authentically me if I don't do any of that.

I definitely don't think that I'm talking White if I don't use any African American slang or if I don't use African American speaking & writing styles, such as repetition and culmination. Furthermore, I definitely am not talking about the use of grammatical constructs such as "I ain't got no" which is one part of AAVE {African American Vernacular English}. That said, I {and other African Americans who don't speak like that} have been known to occassionally purposely use non-Standard American grammatical sayings that are associated with AAVE. For example, I've been known to say "It bes that way sometime". I say what I wanna say in this way to give my writing a "Black flavor" {in "hip-hopese" that word is "flava"}. And when I do this, I'm still being authentically me, that is to say, this is just another facet of me...

I believe that every person is multi-faceted and can be "for real" in many different ways. That's not to say that a person can't be fake. But being fake is against my nature {I'm alluding to astrological info but I won't go there right now}.

dianavan, I hope this clarifies the points that I made in my first post to this thread, and I hope that you still agree with me 100%. If not, "it's all good."*

*loosely interpreted in this context as "either way, it'll be alright".

:o)

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Grab
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 09:19 AM

By now, most people know that Senator Barack Obama has an equal amount of White ancestry as he does Black ancestry. Yet, he identifies himself as an African American.

Thing is, Obama really has more right to call himself an "African-American" than black Americans who call themselves "African-American" but were atually born to parents whose parents were born in America (and their parents were born in America, and *their* parents were born in America, and so on back to 1800 or so). Obama's not "half African-American" - he's half African, and half American. I don't discount the desires of black Americans to rediscover their forcibly-erased history - that's perfectly valid. But there's a big cultural difference between a black American seeking to rediscover their historical roots and a black American who genuinely did grow up in Africa.

If Nader can't see the difference here, and it seems he doesn't, then in trying to appear sensitive to "black issues" he's actually showing his lack of cultural awareness.

And as far as Obama having a "strong crackdown on economic exploitation in the ghettos" goes, maybe Nader wants to have a think about what's the biggest problems facing America today. An apparent inability to conduct foreign policy without everything ending in bloodshed, a war in Iraq which is turning into Vietnam Mark II, over-reliance on ideologically-opposed countries for national energy supplies, failure to fund aid organisations (foreign and domestic) if the aid organisations don't match the fundamentalist-Christian ideology of the current President, failure of a market-driven national grid - boy, the list just goes on and on, and that's just the top few I can think of off the top of my head as a Brit who doesn't even live in the country! Compared to those, is economic exploitation in the ghettos top priority? Possibly not.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: SharonA
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 09:05 AM

Azizi says, "By now, most people know that Senator Barack Obama has an equal amount of White ancestry as he does Black ancestry. Yet, he identifies himself as an African American.... [Nader labels] Obama as a 'Black candidate' who is 'tryin to act White'.... [Nader says] that Obama is 'half-African American'. Maybe times really are changing, but in the United States, if not elsewhere, saying that a person is half-African American is like saying that a woman is somewhat pregnant. Either you are or you aren't."

I see the "half African-American" quote on the page you linked to, and I also see on the Rocky Mountain News site that Nader calls Obama "a black American", so it would seem that he does understand that, in the US, a person of mixed cultural heritage is most often categorized as "black" if one of the components of that heritage is African-American.

Personally I think it is a shame that that is so. The terms "black" and "white" are instantly polarizing, and imply that two races (among the many) are somehow opposites. "African-American" would seem to imply mixed race (whether voluntarily or involuntarily on the part of the person's ancestors); however it's my understanding that "African-American" could also refer to a person of purest African ancestry who is an American citizen. Please correct me if I'm mistaken about that. But if I am correct, the term is fraught with danger of misunderstanding.

"White", on the other hand, is a complete inaccuracy because there's no such thing as a "pure" white race (although white light contains many colors of the visible spectrum -- that, at least, may be racially descriptive of "whites"!). We "white" people ought to be as insistent on acquiring a politically-correct label for ourselves as we are careful to address others by their PC terms. Is "Caucasian-American" taken?

Anyway, I don't see a problem with someone's describing a person with one African-American parent and one Caucasian-American (or European-American, or whatever the PC term ought to be) parent by saying that that person is "half African-American" and/or "half Caucasian-American". Of course I see a problem with Nader's using it to say that it's "the only thing different about Barack Obama when it comes to being a Democratic presidential candidate" and to use it to denigrate the man (if you'll pardon the pun), but Nader's an offensive bigmouth and that's old news. I heard him speak in 1975 at the university I attended, and he was offensive then, and he's never ceased to be offensive. However, if the term "half African-American" is used purely as a descriptive term for one's immediate ancestry, I don't see it as equivalent to "half pregnant". I don't even see it as an indiscretion when describing a public figure who has made his ancestry plain.

Actually, Nader's use of it may signal some social progress (slow progress, but progress nonetheless). It's certainly a step forward from the term "mulatto"! I don't remember the press parsing the sections of the family tree of Thurgood Marshall or even Colin Powell -- they were just labeled "black" and that was that -- but nowadays people seem more aware of and more interested in cultural background in general, like fans' curiosity about the ancestry of Tiger Woods or Keanu Reeves or Mariah Carey for example. Seems that the nation's "race dialogue" is gradually becoming more of a dialogue than a rant. Those who still do rant -- like Nader -- are becoming the ones whom society wants to control.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Rapparee
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 08:56 AM

I didn't know that Nader was Arab-American and I don't really care, anymore than I care that Obama is African-Caucasian-American or that McCain is Something-American. Either they have good ideas and express them well or they do not. If someone cannot communicate well (vide the current President), how can they lead?

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 08:56 AM

I believe a look back will show that I said: "'Way back in the 60s, when personal computers were just creeping into the colleges …"

Although some of the youngsters here may not believe that anything useful existed before they got their first "gameboy," to some of us who watched it all develop "personal computer" does not mean exclusively an IBM PC.

In the middle part of the 1960s there were some few people "building their own" and writing their own "operating systems." Since there was a lot of handwork to setting up a program that took only a few minutes to run, a computer shared within a small group, as within a university department could be considered "personal" if it belonged to those who used it rather than to a separate organization whose only concern was keeping it running for others to use.

The big jump in numbers of academics with access to computing power can probably be said to have come with the March 22, 1965 official introduction of the DEC PDP-8, but progress in "microcomputers" (not "PCs," but still to a degree "personal" within academia) followed fairly rapidly.

The articles to which I made reference were probably from somewhere between about 1968 and 1974, but might have been a very few years later. Most of the contributors cited their computer methods in testing their theories. Efforts to find the articles again ca. 1986 were unsuccessful because I couldn't find an accessible archive that went back far enough.

JiK, isn't that divorced from reality, when in the real world most political elections are two-horse races?

I dunno about that. When's the last time we had an election when Nader didn't run?

Obviously a minority candidate has to have enough followers to have a measurable effect, but the point is that he/she can be a "spoiler" even without making a big dent in the numbers. A vote for a candidate who has no chance of winning takes your vote away from the viable candidate who would most likely have been your "next choice." It is thus effectively a vote for the one you least like.

And my impression is that elections worldwide are about evenly divided between "three or more candidates" and "only one."

John

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 08:51 AM

Richard Bridge, in re-reading my response to your comment about problems that children have with authority, I feel the need to clarify that I definitely believe that some African American students have real problems with accepting authority.

Speaking as a person who worked {and will continue to work} as a substitute teacher in a public elementary school {ages 5-12 years}that is located in a poor/working class Pittsburgh, PA neighborhood that is predominately African American}, I think that teachers, school administrators, and school staff have problems with many of these students because the students have very fragile egos and consequently have low self esteem.

It seems to me that because these students' self-esteem is so low, any perceived "assault" or any actual 'blow' to that self-esteem causes immediate counter-measures by the student to shore up her or his self-esteem. These "counter-measures" include "talking back" to the teacher or staff {to reinforce a tough guy or tough girl stance that "nobody can tell me what to do} and/or pushhing or hitting back because "he [or she] hit me first". Another way of "saving face" is when students show off or clown around in front of his or her peers to gain their approval and further show that what was going on didn't "phase him or her". I believe that some students have learned these "counter-measures" by imitating their peers. In addition, I believe that some of the responsibility {perhaps a better word is "blame"} for this comes from these students' parents, guardians, and/or older brothers, sisters, and who have taught them to value acting {or being} tough.

In my experience, the smaller the classroom, the less need some "problem" students felt to show off or pretend to be "tough guys or tough girls". Of course, there are students who need psychological or medicinal intervention to help them manage their behavior. But I don't think that is needed by most of the "problem" students I have had [and as a substitute Art teacher I had students from the entire school]. Given the behavior of the children, {and my knowledge of these children from my previous contact with many of them because of my after-school programming, as well as as a result of knowing some of them because they were in my daughter's kindergarten classes}, I would say that the problems with children rejecting authority can start to occur as early as 1st grade {ages 6, 7 years years}.

In the case of African American children, this can have something to do with why other Black children are teased or taunted for "acting White". If so, it's because these children/teens "who are acting White" aren't acting tough, and aren't acting defiant or in other ways are acting counter to the norms set by other children/teens. {I add this in part to clarify and expand on my previous statements about what I think is the meaning of "acting White"}. However, I can state without hesitation that "acting White" wasn't an expression that I've heard in the elementary school in which I worked and volunteered. The few White students in the school {only seven out of about two hundred} appeared to be treated as just another student by their peers. In contrast, a number of times I have heard other Black studens tease and taunt darker skinned Black students, calling them "Blackie" or African. And I also have heard some darker skinned African American students in the upper grades taunt lighter skinned African American students {who may or may not have been of mixed racial ancestry} "White boy", Puerto Rican, or Filipino.

All of this to say, there's a lot of work that needs to be done in these schools and in these communities to help children and teens feel better about themselves, to feel better about others, and to learn how to manager their anger and other emotions.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 02:50 AM

LOL! I just noticed that I spelled French "Grench". That was a "legitimate" typo and not a subliminal comment about how the Grinch stole Christmas.

My sincerest apologies to the French.

[Also, my apologies for any other typos that I've made. Also, thanks to the forum moderator who fixed my html tagging mistake in the first post].

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 02:42 AM

Hummer, for your information, I did read the original article/interview about Nader's comments. And I stand by what I've said on this thread about those comments.

I agree with you that "Obama doesn't control the race dialogue in this country, nor do his supporters, and nor do African Americans."

Furthermore, I've never believed that Barack Obama is infalliable. I very much support his presidency, and echo what was said on this thread-that Obama will be the President of all people in the USA not only of African Americans. That doesn't mean that I agree with every position he has taken, or will take, or every statement he has made or he will make.

That said, I'm not going to use this thread or other threads on this forum to list what I agree with Barack Obama about. I also have chosen not to focus on this thread or any other thread on any of Barak Obama's issues and statements that I don't agree with.

You can take issue with these decisions that I have made if you want to. However, these are my choices to make, and I've made them.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 02:23 AM

Richard Bridge, with regard to this comment that you made in your 25 Jun 08 - 10:06 PM:

"Azizi, while the study you cite provides argument, I do not see it as refutation. I also think it focusses on the wrong thing. IMHO the rejection of "acting white" and the associated labels (coconut, bounty bar, etc) are not related to success, but to the acceptance or rejection of authority. Academic failure may follow, but it is cause, not effect".

Let me clarify that I think that some Black students, and some other non-White students, use "acting White" and "talking White" as put downs of other Black and non-Black students who do well academically. I don't think that this has to do with a rejection of authority. I think it has to do a devaluation of academic achievement. In my previous post to this thread, I pointed out that those students who equate doing well in school with being White generally attend all Black or predominately Black schools and thus have very little direct experience with how White students do in schools. I believe that Dr. Rhymes [whose article I quoted and provided a link to] raised valid points about this subject. But I stand by my view that some Black students diss other Black students with these "acting/talking White" accusations.

I'd love to read any research studies or summaries of such studies that surely are out there that provide information about whether these "acting White" insults occur with lesser frequency in integrated Black/White or Latimo/White public schools that don't segregate students according to test scores. I added that other variable because I believe that dividing students by test scores will in effect segregate those students. I'd have to go back to Dr. Rhymes points and other reasons such as institutional racism in housing and schools to provide reasons why I think this is so.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: GUEST,Hummer
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 02:20 AM

If you don't mind my asking, have you read the actual interview with and article about Nader in question, in it's entirety?

Also (again, if you don't mind my asking), what was your motive/intent for cutting and pasting from two Democratic party blogs, the Huffington Post & Daily Kos, rather than the original article, which is freely available online, and posting your own opinion?

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 02:09 AM

Btw, my sense is that the reason why other posters added "White men can't jump" and White men can't dance comments was also to lighten the vibe in what could be a heavy duty thread. And that's cool and the gang with me [not that it matters what is okay with me more than what is okay with anyone else on this thread, except for the fact that I'm the thread starter. I think that being the thread starter may give me a few "Brownie points" [bad joke]. But seriously, I definitely believe that being the thread starter for these kinds of threads confers a certain degree of responsibility to help ensure the thread stays relatively on topic, and also to help ensure that the thread stays relatively civil, even if that means reminding people to stay civil.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: GUEST,Hummer
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 02:07 AM

Also, Nader himself wouldn't be such an easy target for African Americans and the neo-liberals if he weren't Arab American. Tune into the rabidly anti-Arab and anti-Muslim cable news programs any night of the week, and you will see what all the fuss is about.

Why are Obama and his supporters so rabidly anti-Arab and anti-Muslim?
Because they fear their candidate being associated with the American Muslim community--especially the Black Muslim community--in any way.

Why would that be? Easy answer. Widespread xenophobia and religious bigotry among Americans (like the neo-liberals supporting Obama) against Arab Americans and the American Muslim community.

They fear that Obama being associated with either community would result in him losing the election.

Because he is African American?

Hell no.

Because he might be Muslim. That is a far greater sin to Americans nowadays, than being African American.

So is that bigotry and intolerance rooted in race or religion or ethnic origin or what?

Does Obama stand up for Arab Americans and the Muslim community, which any US president damn well ought to do, and denounce that sort of intolerance and bigotry?

No.

Instead, he is exploiting it, and hoping he can spin his personal narrative history in a way that spins away from the Muslim community completely.

At the expense of the community that Nader is, by ethnic origin, a member of--but I guess Obama dissing Nader's community doesn't count.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 02:01 AM

Thanks, Jeff.

I see that I forgot to add the comment about "White men can't jump" or the related comment about "White men [or White people] can't dance". But those comments are part of a general discussion of race in American and the world. I'm sorry, I should have put that topic in the first category.

**

Btw, as some of you may have noted, I really like categorizing things. I think that is because of my Virgo rising and my Virgo Mars placements. {Which adds astrology to the list of subjects people have raised in this thread. I raised it for informational purposes, as well as to "lighten" the mood {no pun intended Ha! Ha!}. But I hope that this won't result in any off-topic discussons about astrology on this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: Azizi
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 01:55 AM

This thread has diverged into three different topics......oops, make that four.
-bobad

Fwiw {and I realize that it's not worth much}, as the thread starter, let me say that I don't mind sidebar discussion as long as those side bar discussions don't stray too far from the main topic of the discussion, or don't stray too long from the main topic of the discussion, and as long as discussion is made without intent to PIP {pee in the pool}*.

As far as this particular thread goes, when it started there were more than one main topic of discussion. Imo, those original topics were

1. Ralph Nader's specific comment about Barack Obama
"talking White" **

2. A general discussion of talking White; talking Black **

3. A general discussion about Barack Obama's Presidential candidacy

4. A general discussion of Ralph Nader's third party candidacy for US President

So far, posters have commented civilly on those subjects, and, hopefully more civil comments will occur on those topics.

Some posts to this thread have as their theme, these subjects that I think are very related to those three "main" topics:.

1. Comments about the efficacy of third parties in past and present US Presidential elections

2. Comments about "acting Black"; "acting White"

3. Comments about the ethnic background of Ralph Nader

4. Comments about theories of determining which Presidential candidate may win or lose based on their unfavorable rating {or something like that?}

In addition, imo, there are more tangential comments on this thread about:

1. the decade individuals in the general public people first began using personal computers.

2. computers being computer savvy in general.

While I consider those two topics to be off-topic [okay, much more off topic] than the other subjects I have listed, I can see how it came from a point that was made earlier in this thread. And I don't think that discussion was done in an uncivil manner or that it was done to derail the main discussion. However, I confess that when there were a number of posts about computers/being computer savvy, I felt that I [or someone else] had to intervene to return the discussion to its primary and/or secondary topics.

That's how I see the discussion thus far. Thanks to all who have posted on this thread, and thanks for being civil about what can be highly contentious subjects.

Keep the comments coming, and please don't "pee in the pool".*


* In the first [and, as far as I'm concerned,perhaps the only non-infamous] "Name That Mudcatter" thread, a Mudcatter {I think it was Jeri, but I'm not certain} used the phrase PIP {pee in the pool} to as a referent for bad "spirited" or otherwise, toxic behavior from a poster or posters which is intended to, or results in the thread being polluted.

**I capitalize "Black" and "White" when they are used as racial referents. I recognize that most people don't. As to why I and why other people may also capitalize these referents, the short story is that this is based on the history of the referent Negro in the USA, and the hard fought but eventually successful effort to get the first letter capitalized in that group referent, rather than using a small "n". Not capitalizing the first letter in this group name when the first letter of all other formal group names were capitalized such as Grench, Jewish, Native American, Chinese, Polish, Italian etc] served to reinforce the prevailing position of the nation that "Negroes" were not as good as other people. When the group referent "Negro" was retired in the 1970s, the position was that "Black" and "White" should be capitalized for the same reasons that "Negro" was capitalized.

That said, I consider this capitalize or don't capitalize decision to be a personal choice, largely because "White" and "Black" are informal racial group referents. On the other hand, the general rule in the print media is to always capitalize the group referent African American. Failing to capitalize "African American" is seen by the general rules of mainstream print media to be a definite error and is also seen by many African Americans to be a serious put down.

Btw, some contemporary African Americans use "Negro" as an insult toward "Uncle Tom" Black people. That referent is even more insulting when the first letter is purposely not capitalized.

**

Given these comments, I'd add this discussion to the second set of topics that have been raised on this thread. And if people continue to post to this thread, I'm sure that there will be more topics discussed.

And, btw, though I admit that I raised the topic, I'm not at all interested in discussing the Name The Mudcatter threads any further than I've discussed them already on this thread. Of course, ya'll can do what you want, but ,in my opinion, any further discussion of those threads on this one would be pip.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: GUEST,Jeff
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 01:35 AM

Charles Barkley didn't say 'I can't jump." He said, upon his retirement fron the NBA, "I can't jump, anymore. I got 'white man's disease." There's a substantial difference. C.B. was one of the best players in NBA history and in his early career could dominate a game from the power forward position at 6'4". He said he was 6'6", but was proven wrong when a 'stand in' was needed to be the same height as Charles for a commercial being shot and the 6'6" guy was too tall.

He also said, " Larry Bird, Larry Bird...why does everybody keep talkin' about Larry Bird? Kevin McCale was much tougher for me to defend...all elbows, knees and that sweet 'step-back' jumper. Man, he used to give me nightmares!" Quoted from the Jim Rome show.

Sorry to have digressed...just a point of clarification.

As always Azizi, right on the mark.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: GUEST,Hummer
Date: 26 Jun 08 - 12:56 AM

Bringing it back to the topic at hand.

I see no problem with what Nader said. He not only speaks with the authority of a person of color as an Arab American, but also with the authority of a decades long political leader and advocate for the poor and working class of all racial and ethnic backgrounds.

African Americans don't own the rights to public dialogue on race issues. How predictable that people like Al Sharpton leap to their feet and insinuate that Nader is being racist by calling it as he sees it from his perspective as an Arab American political activist.

Nader is right. Obama has been quite hypocritical. On the one hand, his candidate narrative has him talking about how proud he is of his African American identity in the primaries (the now famous speech on race in Philadelphia), then turning all "oreo" (as lots of black folks might say) or "white" (as Nader said) in his general election commercials showing him with his white relatives, to pull in the Middle America vote.

The appalling remarks Obama made on Father's Day should have been widely denounced by Democrats, progressives, and especially by the African American communities his remarks were directed squaarely at. He said some simply god awful stuff in that speech. And what did we hear from African Americans, progressives, and Democrats? Silence.

That is just plain wrong.

Ditto his remarks on the Israeli Palestinian troubles.

What Nader said about Obama is quite accurate, and isn't anything you don't hear being said on the streets every day about Obama by many progressives and people of color--including many people who voted for him in the primaries.

Anyone who spends any time at all living in communities of color hears people making these sorts of complaints about Obama quite frequently, actually.

I also note it doesn't appear as though the originator of this thread, or most those commenting on the story, actually read the original article/interview from which Nader's comments were lifted out of context. I think all the "shame on Nader" reactionary opinion mongering amounts to little more than the same old circle the wagons tactics we've seen from Obama supporters all along.

Nader is right to raise the issue of how Obama is spinning his racial identity in the election, and has been playing race cards right and left throughout the primary and into the general. The only thing that appalls me is that Nader is the only public figure to date to stand up and say some things that desperately needed to be said.

Obama doesn't control the race dialogue in this country, nor do his supporters, and nor do African Americans. Nor are they right to try and control it. If, as they claim, race is a subject that needs to be raised in this election (and most of his supporters seem to hold to that opinion), then they need to be tolerant of racial views being aired that make them feel uncomfortable, that push the race dialogue forward, and move it out of the nearly exclusive realm of the African American political and religious leaders dictating what the parameters of the dialogues about race are going to be to all other people of color.

Subject: RE: BS: Talkin White. Talkin Black
From: bobad
Date: 25 Jun 08 - 10:34 PM

This thread has diverged into three different topics......oops, make that four.