Dare To Ask Talk And News About Our Differences - This topic has 8 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 23 years, 7 months ago by
.
- Posts
Why is it that a child of a black parent and a white parent is considered black? And if that child is “black,” would his/her children with a white be black or white? Why is it that Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell (for example) is considered “black” when his skin is lighter that that of many “whites”? His features are, in the main, “white.” His speech and dress are “white.” So why is he “black”?
User Detail :
Name : G. Ann, Age : 28, City : Athens, State : GA, Country : United States,Historically in the US, a person was considered black if that person had ene 1 drop of African blood. This was a legal distinction that allowed white slave owners to enslave their own children born to black slave mothers. By raping their female slaves, the slave owners could increase their slave population with little cost to themselves. I think that it is terrible that this distinction still exists, considering its origin. People should be recognized for their entire heritage, not just a portion.
User Detail :
Name : Lucy H, Gender : F, Sexual Orientation : Straight, Race : Hispanic/Latino (may be any race), Age : 24, City : San Jose, State : CA, Country : United States, Occupation : Engineer, Education level : 4 Years of College, Social class : Middle class,As you probably are aware, racial classification in this country does not follow any laws, rules, or methods that are grounded in reason-based logic. This is basically because when it comes to race classification there is no logic. It is not based on phenotypic appearance; in the US it is usually based on the classification of the parents. In the US, if at least one of the parents is black it is accepted that the child is black. This is not a rule that stems from objective criteria (such as genetic dominance of ‘black’ blood), rather it comes from a system that was formed to uphold white supremacy and consequently, dehumanize black people. Unfortunately, some black and white people still follow this rule, even though it really makes no sense when one sits down and thinks about it. In reference to Bill Campbell: yes, he physically resembles white people. But his behavior (e.g speech and style of dress) reflects more on his political and economic status than on his race, which is a function of biology and not of conduct.
User Detail :
Name : K.R., Gender : F, Sexual Orientation : Straight, Religion : Christian, Age : 22, City : Atlanta, State : GA, Country : United States, Occupation : Student, Education level : Over 4 Years of College, Social class : Middle class,How does one act white, have white speech and dress white? Is correct grammar and a suit and tie reserved for whites only? In my opinion, Mayor Bill Campbell looks black.
User Detail :
Name : Bruce, Gender : M, Sexual Orientation : Straight, Race : Black/African American, Religion : Christian, Age : 27, City : Grand Rapids, State : MI, Country : United States, Occupation : Pastor, Education level : 2 Years of College, Social class : Middle class,I think the categorization comes from the fact that historically, a person could have 1/8 of black blood in them and still be considered ‘black.’ Skin color was not the issue, nor were facial features. If one had even one black parent or grandparent or great-grandparent, they were categorized as being black.
User Detail :
Name : K. Plott, Race : Black/African American, City : Chicago, State : IL, Country : United States,The reasons go way back to how the English chose to view Africans and themselves in relation to Africans during the centuries of English exploration and exploitation in Africa. The English took the differences in color and culture of Africans as proof of the African’s inferiority to the English, going so far as to describe Africans as ‘brutish’, ‘bestial’ or ‘beastly.’ Propaganda to this effect was ruthless and relentless for generations, making it easier to rationalize enslaving blacks and treating them as ‘beasts of burden.’ The English saw themselves, whites, as umblemished personifications of purity and perfection. They saw blacks as the embodiment of imperfection, almost unhuman. We are the benefactors of those attitudes. They became so ingrained so early in this country that the framers of our constitution could not see blacks being counted as full persons. For such mindsets any mixture of whites with blacks produced an impure product. That such mindsets have held powerful sway in this country is evident through the embarrassing array of laws produced under Jim Crow, some declaring that any ‘traceable’ evidence of ‘black blood’ (even when just hearsay) rendered one black, and by implication, impure. (It also meant that somebody had committed a crime.) For though the product may not have been as black as the blackest, such products were all viewed, and continue to be viewed by many, as shades of black and therefore impure. For that mindset, white has no shades.
User Detail :
Name : Floyd L., Gender : M, Age : 59, City : Memphis, State : TN, Country : United States,I just wanted to add a little bit of nuance to Floyd’s post. Everything he says about the English attitude regarding Africans is true. However, the exact same descriptions were given to the Irish by the English during 800 years of the English occupation of Ireland. The English felt they were a separate and superior race, and that even other ‘whites’ were inherently inferior. Cromwell would describe Irish and Scots as demons with forked tongues and cloven feet, disguised as human. This attitude persisted for quite a few years in the United States, until earlier this century. It is interesting to note that the Irish in Northern Ireland had their own civil rights struggle with the English during the 1960s and 1970s. My point is, the English did not assume all whites were superior to blacks. They actually felt they were superior to everyone, and that disturbing frame of mind carried over with the colonists.
User Detail :
Name : John K., Gender : M, Age : 27, City : Cranford, State : NJ, Country : United States, Occupation : Chemical Engineer, Education level : Over 4 Years of College, Social class : Middle class,There are a lot of reasons, but I will try to be as brief as I can. This is partly a throwback to the so-called one-drop rule of the Jim Crowe days, where in our society, one drop of black blood meant you were a black person. Of course, now that scientists have proven that the first known human was a black African, and that it is almost biologiccally and genetically impossible for her parents and ancestors to be anything but, making us all black, this notion is making a disappearance. There is also the identification of black as a cultural attribute, and as an identity of pride rather than of shame, especially in the last 30 years or so. Not that there is anything shameful about being white. As for the parentage of children born to a mixed couple, I think it is partly that because there is not yet a broad acceptance of multu-ethnic parentage, the race is determined by the more dominantg enes. It could also be partly that if the child appears in any way to be black, he or she will receive all the benefits and experience all the dangers and harsh realiities of being black in America. Better to have. Whether this is a good or bad decision, I can’t say, but maybe someone of several racial backgrounds can answer.
User Detail :
Name : Tinu, Gender : F, Sexual Orientation : Straight, Race : Black/African American, Age : 27, City : Greenbelt, State : MD, Country : United States, Education level : Over 4 Years of College, Social class : Middle class,Good question, but with an obvious and historical answer. In the days of Thomas Jefferson (who had 12 biracial children with Sally Hemmings his half-black slave), the 3/4 rule was made. Basically if you had 3/4s of black blood in you you were considered black. 3/4 is not that much; it is possible to look VERY white and still have this amount of black blood in you. So thus, this is why lighter skinned blacks and ‘tommish’ blacks (blacks who act white) are still considered black. To not be considered black, you have to show absolutely NO black features. Behavior and skin color have nothing to do with what is black and what isn’t.
User Detail :
Name : Kristina, Gender : F, Sexual Orientation : Straight, Race : Black/African American, Religion : Christian, Age : 20, City : Washington, State : DC, Country : United States, Occupation : Transcriber, Education level : 2 Years of College, Social class : Upper middle class,
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.