Race/Ethnicity Questions 401-410

THE QUESTION:
R410: How do blacks who have hair in beads or other tightly configured forms, such as some U.S. tennis stars and other media notables, clean their hair of perspiration, oils and dirt?
POSTED AUG. 9, 1998
Robert, white <sml@tenforward.com>, Sequim, WA

ANSWER 1:
To wash my hair when it is in braids, I usually put an old pantyhose leg on my head and wash as usual. The pantyhose keeps the hair from coming undone and allows the shampoo and conditioner to get to the hair. It does not retain water, and you can blow dry your hair with it in place, which helps keep the braids neat.
POSTED AUG. 12, 1998
Leah <lilpatterson@hotmail.com>, Memphis, TN

FURTHER NOTICE:
Shampoo, which is a substance more soluble than hair, penetrates through braids to reach the scalp, thereby attacking impurities, thus rendering their removal in rinsing. Incidentally, men implement the use of hair screens rather than the alternative.
POSTED NOV. 2, 1998
Alonzo C., 32, African American, Jacksonville, FL
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
R409: Recent summit efforts aimed at bringing the races closer together seem to have yielded little actual progress. I’d like to know, from a black person’s perspective, what needs to be done to get the races to stop posturing and make progress.
POSTED AUG. 9, 1998
Roger B., 35, white <HighCommander@iname.com>, Columbia, SC

ANSWER 1:
I think people need to be more honest. For example, this forum is an opportunity to discuss real differences, and instead you see questions like “Why are black people so loud?” and “Why do black people have gaps in their teeth?” In my opinion, these are thinly disguised insults, asked only to have the questioner’s preconceived beliefs confirmed and justify the inequities in this country. When people decide to talk openly and honestly, there will be change.
POSTED AUG. 12, 1998
Telisa, black female, Sacramento, CA

FURTHER NOTICE:
I agree we all need to speak to each other more honestly, but my concern is that many times people are branded racists when they address any topic that is racial. How can we begin to have conversations that involve racial topics if we automatically accuse each other of racism? This forum is one way, and it’s easier than face-to-face conversations, so let’s not discourage anyone from asking questions – even those that might seem like criticisms.
POSTED AUG. 14, 1998
Joan, San Francisco, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
Telisa is dead right. Many people pose questions that are just slurs with question marks at the end. A national dialogue on race is a laughable concept as long as white people control the forum and demand no honesty for themselves.
POSTED AUG. 18, 1998
Max H., white Melungeon, Oakland, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
To Telisa: If you automatically see questions as “thinly disquished insults,” you’re falling into the trap of not being honest. If it is something a person is wondering about, why shouldn’t they ask? For example, in regard to the question of African Americans being loud, the English are usually considered reserved and might not understand such outward displays. They ask because they want to know if showing emotion in African-American culture is important. Asking helps them understand and in some cases “tolerate” it. This is not meant to say this action should have to be “tolerated,” but to some people who don’t like emotions expressed loudly in public, that is how they might look at it. This will hopefully shed light on the differences in our cultures and bring us closer as a nation. I try never to be judgmental of anyone, just inquisitive. It’s the differences that keep us apart. Understanding leads to respect.
POSTED AUG. 18, 1998
Kathy, 29, white, Augusta, GA

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
What is obvious to some is not to others. If a white person asks me about my locks, I am not offended. We blacks have been known to ask each other questions or make comments to one another that are less than appropriate. For instance: “Girl, why do you wear those things in your hair? Why won’t you get a perm?” Ignorance and genuine interest are no reasons to attack someone verbally. Myths and misinformation are perpetuated by all groups. So if someone asks you to enlighten them,oblige the request. Seize the opportunity to create greater understanding.
POSTED AUG. 20, 1998
Zawadi, 33, black female, Detroit, MI

FURTHER NOTICE 5:
To Max H.: The only way to get pertinent answers is to ask impertinent questions, especially when you are dealing with issues that are so charged. All of the issues raised on this forum are driven by centuries, even thousands of years, of bias and ignorance. Ignorance continues because people are not allowed to ask questions that hurt other people, even unintentionally. However, you are correct about some people purposefully asking questions and giving answers to insult and slur certain groups. An example would be saying that “white people” cannot be honest in a discussion on race. I can imagine that such a comment insults and hurts the members of the human race who happened to be born white and who are trying to solve the problems that all groups have created by continuing the hatred and ignorance.
POSTED AUG. 20, 1998
John K., 25, straight Irish-American male, <the-macs@geocities.com>, Cranford, NJ

FURTHER NOTICE 6:
We as human beings need to make real steps to understand each other regardless of race, gender, religious affiliation. We need to truly listen to what we are saying. Also, we must pay attention to what we don’t say. In other words, we need to find out how others honestly feel instead of passively listening to what is said. We must be willing to put ourselves in each others’ shoes and try to understand the other’s position. We cannot draw conclusions about another culture, religion, etc. through our own paradigms, but instead must enter another person’s visual window, and only then can real understanding and an end to racism be brought about. But for this to happen we need to trust each other. Thus, the road ahead is long and hard, but there are rewards. We need to listen to understand, instead of to respond. This is one of the possible ways to improve race relations.
POSTED AUG. 21, 1998
Joe <tmjast@hotmail.com>, Tokyo, Japan

FURTHER NOTICE 7:
To Kathy: Are you equating the English with Caucasian Americans? I have known some white Americans who are loud. I believe it just depends on the person. As a whole, people in general are biased to a certain degree. Sometimes that bias is based on your background and upbringing. It’s sad that here we are approaching a new millennium and white Americans – as a matter of fact most ethnic groups – know so little about us and vice-versa except for the stereotypes we perpetuate. If we want to be honest, stop believing the stereotypes; let’s start from a common center- point: Regardless of race, we all want good jobs, nice homes and nice cars, and we want our children to be healthy and happy.
POSTED SEPT. 16, 1998
Daquiri, female, Detroit, MI
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
R408: Is there a dictionary or some other resource that defines rap words and phrases? The beat is great, but I would like to know more of what is being said.
POSTED AUG. 9, 1998
Ruth B.

ANSWER 1:
I was wondering the same thing and eventually found a rap/hip-hop dictionary with everything in it. Go to a search engine like Yahoo, put in “rap slang,” push “search” and it will take you there!
POSTED AUG. 31, 1998
Ginger, FL

FURTHER NOTICE:
To my knowledge, there is no dictionary or anything that defines the colloquialisms used in rap. I think you have to be familiar with the culture to understand the lyrics. It’s like comedy. I can understand all implied and otherwise meanings in the comedy of Chris Rock. I like Jerry Seinfield also, but don’t always catch the meanings of things.
POSTED SEPT. 19, 1998
Whitney T., 18, Southern black <wkthomps@olemiss.edu>, Oxford, MS
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
R407: Do black people think it sounds funny when white people use typically black slang, like “You go girl,” etc.?
POSTED AUG. 9, 1998
Marcie B., 29, white female, Boston, MA

ANSWER 1:
I do not find white attempts at “slang” humorous. Most of the time it reflects an awkward eagerness, on the part of whites, to convey to blacks that “I’m comfortable with you” or “I really appreciate you accepting me.” I would rather a person be themself and present who they really are. Usually, the use of slang among minorities is not a conscious act but moreso a rhythmic encounter where there is an actual interchange of ideas, thoughts, opinions and views rather than simply “words” that are intriguing and entertaining. There is a lot of listening occurring as well, and the communication between us is both sophisticated and diverse. It is often offensive when whites take this element of black culture in jest.
POSTED SEPT. 1, 1998
Dee, black<westde@hiram.edu>, Cleveland, OH

FURTHER NOTICE:
Marcie, you made me smile. No, in general, it’s actually a compliment of sorts when one of a different race chooses to use a term (or slang) attributed to the black community. When I hear a word or term that sounds good and fits the situation, I adopt it – regardless of origin.
POSTED SEPT. 1, 1998
Mimi, 37, African-American female, Mt. View, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
Only when it’s used in the wrong context or the slang is just that, slang, but is pronounced in a politically correct manner. For example, when “Mayne, lemme as’ you somethin’.” is pronounced, “Man, let me ask you something.” Please don’t be offended. Our parents often do the same thing and we laugh at them too.
POSTED SEPT. 19, 1998
Whitney T., 18, black <wkthomps@olemiss.edu> Oxford, MS
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
R406: Is there something about the German culture that may have allowed the Holocaust to happen there, and is this something that is talked about in Germany? What are other explanations? I realize this is not the only country in which something like this happened, so culture cannot be the only explanation.
POSTED AUG. 9, 1998
Marcie B. 28, Jewish female, Boston, MA

ANSWER 1:
In the wake of the Holocaust, many people have tried to find a pattern of anti-Semitism in German history. And certainly, there has long been anti-Semitism in Germany, just as there has been in most of Europe. But there is nothing unique about Germany that explains why the Holocaust should have happened there, and not in another country. At the turn of the century, most observers would have said that France (witness the Dreyfus affair) was much more a hotbed of anti-Semitism, as was Russia (with its mass pogroms) and Spain (given the long history of the Inquisition). Jews were, on the whole, quite well-integrated in German society, and Jews throughout the world tended to view Germans very sympathetically. In fact, during World War I, the U.S. government censored numerous Jewish publications, because Jews tended to be so pro-German! So, until the rise of Hitler, there was little to suggest Germans had any desire to exterminate the Jews.
POSTED AUG. 10, 1998
Astorian, 37, Catholic <Astorian@aol.com>, Austin , TX

FURTHER NOTICE:
See what I believe is the definitive book on this question, Daniel Goldhagen’s Hitler’s Willing Executioners – Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust. Through German history, anti-Semitism was well-established – every political party, even the most liberal, assumed there was “a Jewish problem.” Jews were parasitic, subhuman, unable to be integrated into the new nation. Most proposed exiling Jews from Germany. Life for Jews was made impossible so that they’d leave, and during World War II, much effort was put into killing Jews in German territory – even at military expense. Goldhagen examines a Police Unit assigned to kill Jews. He finds the men to be ordinary, not brainwashed. Many were cruel – but some were not. They saw their job as necessary, if distasteful. Given the opportunity to opt out of the killing (without recrimination), almost none did. They just didn’t think Jews were human. It seems to me that only the Germans could have conducted genocide against the Jews.
POSTED AUG. 10, 1998
Ben S., 30, white <bscaro@hotmail.com>, Hobart , Tasmania, Australia

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
Genocide has occurred in many places – Rwanda, Uganda, Bosnia, Russia and many other countries. Even Americans killed thousands of Indians and Africans. The methods are different; the malevolence is not. No country should feel safe from such an occurrence. The same sense of superiority that gave rise to racial and religious hatred in WWII Germany has caused and still may cause Nazi-type horror almost anywhere in the world. As some Jews say, “never forget.” And we shouldn’t, unless we want the Holocaust to happen again.
POSTED AUG. 11, 1998
Diane, 44, black, Durham, NC

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
To Ben S.: To state only the Germans were capable of the Holocaust is flat-out wrong. The Russian Pogroms and Spanish Inquisition are examples I am pulling off the top of my head, so who knows how many others are hidden in history. I feel the Germans have received an overly large stigma due to the Holocaust. I believe no ethnic group can say they have never persecuted a people during their history. What separates the Holocaust from other genocides, both of the Jewish peoples and all others across the globe, is that the instrument of its destruction was a modern industrial war machine. WWII reset all of the records for numbers, size and devastation. War atrocities should not be exempt from that list. Do not think, though, that I am trying to rationalize or play down the brutality of the Holocaust, and I am not denying that 6 million Jews died at the hands of the German army and people. I am just trying to add a few arguments not taken into account by other people, and also I am trying to dispel the misconception that the Germans are Satan’s gift to man.
POSTED AUG. 11, 1998
Brian S., Albany, NY

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
Ben S. responds: Many races have committed similar atrocities. We all have that capacity. But only Germans of the 1930s could have committed genocide against Jews in this particular way. Some things made the Holocaust distinct and particular to 1930s Germany. I doubt modern Germans could act the same way. Germans of the ’30s had a government that legitimated their anti-Semitism and gradually converted Jews to “socially dead” beings, making it easier by degrees for them to kill Jews without question. Most pogroms, etc. were not conducted so systematically, nor with the same unanimity among the persecuting population. By the way, the Spanish Inquisition is now thought to have killed only 300 people over 250 years, rather humane by standards of the time. Images of thousands being killed were largely created by Dutch Protestants who had developed printing presses – allowing propaganda campaigns to be undertaken.
POSTED AUG. 12, 1998
Ben S., 30, white male <bscaro@hotmail.com>, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia

FURTHER NOTICE 5:
National Socialism was exactly that – a version of socialism, with a strong nationalist component. It is no coincidence that German anti-Semitism and anti-capitalism came from the same place and had the same result. Germans tend, even to this day, to believe in the state above the individual, and in the overwhelming importance of authority rather than free will. Capitalism and religious freedom hold the individual above the state, and thus under National Socialism, Jews, and especially well-off Jews, were considered the enemy. Collectivism, it seems, is our culprit – the Holocaust came from the same nation that had produced Karl Marx.
POSTED AUG. 31, 1998
Chris R., 20, Germanic descent <g-patton@nwu.edu>, Chicago, IL

FURTHER NOTICE 6:
I think it just happened that Hitler was the last one who attempted such a large-scale murder. Thus he was able to use the newest technologies to achieve his goals. If someone else were to attempt to bring the “final solution” again in, say, the 21st Century, the Holocaust of 1939-1945 would be nothing compared to the new one. Fortunately, Stalin, who planned such a thing for the Soviet Jews (you may not know that there is still a Jewish Oblast in the Far East of Russia organized by him) died in 1953. I believe there is no guarantee that a dictator in the Middle East will not organize the Holocaust II for the Israeli people in the future.
POSTED SEPT. 14, 1998
Vladimir, Russian Jew <vgurevic@cisco.com>, Fremont, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 7:
For a chilling account of how Germans in particular were capable and willing participants in the Holocaust, read The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William Shrirer, the definitive historical account. But be warned, as you read you may see parallels to the United States, and not just concerning anti-Semitism.
POSTED MARCH 15, 1999
Jason, 29, Jewish male <jessetr@jps.net>, Brooklyn, NY

FURTHER NOTICE 8:
There was a study done years ago on this. I am not sure of the man’s name who conducted it. His plan was to prove that Germans were more obedient than Americans. He started his experiment in America but was so shocked at the results that he never made it to Germany. He pretended to be a scientist doing an experiment about the mind. The people being tested thought they were helping in the research and that they were not the subjects. He had actors pretend to be the subjects. The real subjects were supposed to administer an electric shock if the actor pretending to be the subject got a question wrong. The actors sometimes screamed in pain, but the people kept shocking them. Even when one of the actors said he had heart trouble, the people still continued to shock him, as instructed. It shows how authority can control. What happened with the Holocaust could have happened anywhere.
POSTED MARCH 18, 1999
19, Italian female, college student <haylie79@hotmail.com>, NY
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
R405: Why do black people have high blood pressure problems more than white people? (Director’s note: Y? would prefer a person with medical qualifications answer this question.)
POSTED AUG. 9, 1998
J. Lindsey <lindsey@vnet.net>, Lincolnton, NC

ANSWER 1:
Although I’m not a doctor, I believe I’m more than qualified to expound on your question. As we all know, black people were brought to this country, against their will, in the bottom of slave ships. While on this journey, they were given just enough food to sustain life for the incredibly long journey. This food was the worst kind imaginable. Most people wouldn’t feed the food the slaves received to pigs. Their digestive system regurgitated most of it, but some of them managed to hold down just enough to survive. Upon their arrival to America, this tradition of being given food that wasn’t suited for animals continued. Although the menu increased a little, the food was very high in fat and had a high salt content. After 300-plus years of that kind of abuse to the body, black people are inundated with all kinds of heath problems.With education and time, hopefully we can begin to reverse the process.
POSTED AUG. 12, 1998
H.K. <yafeu@aol.com>, Fresno, CA

FURTHER NOTICE:
Answer 1 is inconsistent with the mechanics of evolution. First, 300 years isn’t nearly long enough to produce such a widespread change. Second, people can not pass on acquired characteristics, so slaves eating high fat/high salt diets would not cause their descendents to have high blood pressure. In fact, just the opposite would happen – slaves who were better able to survive the bad diets and conditions would be more likely to reproduce, and their descendents would be more likely to be immune to high blood pressure from high fat/high salt diets. Finally, if this theory were true, then African blacks would not have similar rates of high blood pressure. As strange as it sounds, it is more likely that the tendency to high blood pressure confers some unknown benefit that helped African blacks survive and reproduce – like sickle-cell anemia. While inheriting this terrible genetic disease from both parents results in suffering and early death, people who inherit the gene from only one parent are less likely to die if they become infected with malaria. This resulted in such a strong evolutionary advantage for people in malaria-infested parts of Africa that it outweighed the disadvantages. The disease still persists in American blacks 300 years later.
POSTED AUG. 14, 1998
Molly, 47, Costa Mesa, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
Although I am not a doctor, I do believe I can shed some light on this issue as I am an African American who was born and raised in the South and have taken many African-American history courses in college. I think the answer to your question can be summed up in one word: Diet. To expound on H.K.’s answer: The food given to slaves was the food that would have been thrown away (pigs’ feets, tails and intestines, for example). The slaves were very creative in their desire to make the food more palatable. Various spices brought to America during the slave trade, as well as newly discovered spices, were combined in an attempt to make this otherwise horrible food more edible. This was the beginning of soul food. Most soul food consists of fried meats (chicken, fish, pork chops and beef), highly seasoned vegetables and rich desserts. Obviously this food is very high in fat and colesterol.
POSTED AUG. 14, 1998
Tony W., 36, African American <tonyway@yahoo.com>, San Francisco, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
In my opinion, there is nothing medically sound about H.K.’s answer. If the moderator of this forum is going to request a medical practitioner answer this question, why was this answer posted? All I can see in that response is another version of the blaming and finger-pointing that seems to be pervasive in this forum. There may be a genetic reason for the higher incidence in blood pressure, or that observation may be incorrect. Why not let a doctor or nurse answer the question correctly?
POSTED AUG. 14, 1998
John K., 25, straight Irish-American male <the-macs@geocities.com>, Cranford, NJ

FURTHER NOTICE 4:
You could also add as a contributing factor the fact that it is extraordinarily stressful for an African American to live in white American culture.
POSTED AUG. 14, 1998
Al, 59, white <alarose@ncwc.edu>, Rocky Mount, NC

FURTHER NOTICE 5:
Y? was able to contact Dr. Clarence E. Grim, professor of Cardiovascular Medicine at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee. Dr. Grim offers the following:

“There are two major hypotheses:

1) The stress of racism hypothesis: This posits that the stress of living in a racist society like the United States activates neuroendocrine factors that raise the blood pressre (cortisol, adrenaline). The major counter argument to this is that high blood pressure is as common in non-racist societies – Haiti, Barbados, Jamaica – as it is in the United States.

2) The selective-survival-during-slavery hypothesis: I am the one who has developed this hypothesis and written extensively on the evidence, pro and con. This hypothesis states that the greater rates of high blood pressure in Western Hemisphere blacks are a consequence of selective survival during the slavery period of the African Diaspora to the Western Hemisphere. The physiological survial mechanisms that were selected for in this history were the ability to survive under conditions of extreme heat and lack of access to adequate salt and water intake. As these factors are controlled by our genes (both in blacks and whites), selective survival of this genotype would persist in the descendents of the survivors of this history. When this genotype is exposed to today’s high salt intake, high blood pressure develops.”
POSTED AUG. 17, 1998

FURTHER NOTICE 6:
Dr. Grim: As a scientist, I would be very interested to hear more about this. How could this survival selection, which you say is genetic, have occurred so quickly? Evolution does not work that quickly, nor would it explain (as mentioned in other responses) the high blood pressure in African blacks who were not exposed to slavery conditions. Also: How could diet (a behavioral trait) and high blood pressure (an acquired trait from diet) be passed down through genetics? I can see how the behavior of eating foods high in fat, sodium and cholesterol would be passed down through cultural means, but I cannot see how it could have been passed down genetically. As you state that this is your hypothesis, I assume you can provide a short list of some of your sources of data, so those of us who are interested can check into it ourselves?
POSTED AUG. 24, 1998
John K., 25, straight Irish-American male, <the-macs@geocities.com>, Cranford, NJ

FURTHER NOTICE 7:
As a physician from another country, I found that like in the United States, black patients here have increased chances of having high blood pressure, but this is not the only factor that contributes to the disease. Hereditary factors, obesity, high cholesterol, lack of exercise, the presence of other diseases such as adrenal tumors, stress and many other reasons besides the racial factor contribute. Each person has a group of characteristics that can make possible the development of the disease, not just one. The historical background seems to not make any difference.
POSTED AUG. 31, 1998
Rosi, physician, Brasil

FURTHER NOTICE 8:
Y? obtained the following further explanation of possible causes of high blood pressure among African Americans from Stephen G. Rostand, professor of medicine at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, who has published extensively in this area:

It is important to stress that there is no precise answer. Data from the National Center for Health Statistics show that in the United States, depending on age, African Americans have a 30 percent to nearly 100 percent higher prevalence of hypertension than whites, with the largest differences noted in women. A similar increased prevalence of hypertension is noted among Afro-Caribbean peoples living in the United Kingdom. Possible reasons for this higher prevalence have been much discussed, but thus far there are no definitive answers. Possible explanations:

Genes and Heredity: There does seem to be modest association between intensity of skin pigmentation and level of blood pressure, although attempts at finding specific genes that cause hypertension using linkage analysis have not been successful.

Hypertension and Physiology: Elevated blood pressure can be related to alterations in the body’s physiology. The most discussed factor is altered sodium metabolism. In African Americans the number with salt-sensitivity is much higher, about 70 to 75 percent. It has been suggested that inefficient renal excretion of salt may be the principal reason for the higher prevalence of hypertension in African Americans, who like the rest of us eat American diets typically high in salt.

Another factor that contributes to high blood pressure is inadequate dietary calcium intake. When urinary calcium excretion is used as a marker for dietary calcium intake, it has been found to be low in African Americans. Given the high prevalence of milk intolerance in this population it is not surprising their calcium intake is low.

Environmental and Social Issues: There is a large body of evidence that suggests changes in social structure owing to “Westernization,” whether the result of contacts with Western society, migration from rural to urban areas or to intercontinental migration. Such changes in social structure can produce stress due to altered family structure and support, cross-cultural conflict, changes in values and suppressed hostility. As a consequence of the changing social structure, it has been observed that there are changes in work style, job security, altered educational levels, and in the case of some reduced access to medical care.

All of this has physical and biological consequences. Among the most important have been reduced levels of physical activity, dietary changes leading to increased body mass and ultimately to hypertension. Increased body mass has long been associated with higher blood pressures. These social or environmental forces play an important role in the genesis and maintenance of hypertension in African Americans whose diets and lifestyle, body mass, salt intake and social structure changed dramatically following their arrival in the New World.
POSTED SEPT. 4, 1998
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
R404: How much do people think discrimination involving college acceptance and jobs occurs from legacy, athletic admissions or the “old boy” network, as opposed to affirmative action?
POSTED AUG. 9, 1998
Diane, 44, black, Durham, NC

ANSWER 1:
Very little. The problem seems to be the quality and number of applicants themselves, rather than the admissions people. In fact, I think the admissions system is rigged in favor of “minorities,” especially in the higher-level schools. The problem seems to consist of the generally poorer educational levels (we talk about averages, here, and not every case, thankfully, falls under this) and family structures in many black homes. Controlling for high-school education, test scores and family structure, I feel blacks are favored in the admissions process.
POSTED AUG. 31, 1998
C.P.R., 20, observant college student, Chicago, IL

FURTHER NOTICE:
To C.P.R.: You need to check yourself. I feel you are just spouting ignorant propoganda from conservative racist policymakers threatened by a few non-white faces on campus. People say Asian Americans are not discriminated against because they are well-represented on college campuses. In fact, the ratio of Asian Americans accepted to college and those who apply is larger than for white Americans – which means Asians are rejected in greater percentages than whites. This is racial discrimination and has to do with the admissions office feeling it has filled its quota for Asian Americans and is worried about having “too many Asians” on campus. If you think non-white people are favored in the admissions process so much, how do you explain their invisibility on college campuses? Affirmative Action is a necessary Band-aid solution to larger racist institutional problems in this country. A lot of colleges don’t practice Affirmative Action and many Affirmative Actions programs are being shut down, so fewer and fewer people are being affected by it.
POSTED DEC. 2, 1998
Eva O. white female <sedo8692@oberlin.edu>, Boston, MA
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
R403: Why do critics of multiculturalism say blacks cannot claim Egypt and its history as theirs? Doesn’t its location on the African continent and the black African features of people like Anwar Sadat prove something?
POSTED AUG. 9, 1998
D.J., black, Durham, NC

ANSWER 1:
Even though the ancient Egyptians were dark-skinned, they were not Negro. True, there was a certain mixture of Negro blood, but they were mainly Caucasians of the Mediteranean type. Indians (from the Indian subcontinent) are also Caucasian, though they can be almost black. Since many ancient Egyptians are preserved, as mummies, their race is not open to dispute.
POSTED AUG. 12, 1998
Reuben, 38, Jewish <rhayat@xplorenet.com>, Denver, CO

FURTHER NOTICE:
Reuben, your response is very interesting and while I do not dispute it, I do wonder if those of the Indian culture consider themselves Caucasian. I don’t think all races fit into Black/White/Asian categories. I have an Egyptian friend who checks “black” on the ethnicity forms, simply because there is no selection for Egyptian, and he does not consider himself white.
POSTED SEPT. 1, 1998
Mimi, 37, African-American female, Mt. View, CA

FURTHER NOTICE 2:
To Reuben: Egyptians were dark-skinned and had some Negro blood, but are not black? Say what? So the one-drop rule does not apply in a situation like this? I’m not entirely comfortable with that old slaveholders’ rule either, but since most Americans – black and white – accept it, your Egyptian exception is interesting.
POSTED SEPT. 4, 1998
D.J., Durham, NC

FURTHER NOTICE 3:
I come from North Africa. Egypt is in North Africa, and you cannot assimilate that part with the rest of the continent. That region is a mixture of Arabic, Turkish, local tribes (referred as the Berbers) and a few hints of the ethnicities surrounding the Mediterranean region. Black Africans come from the sub-Saharan region, i.e. the central and south part of the continent. However, if you travel further south in Egypt, up the Nile, you will encounter the Nubian tribes. They differ fron other black Africans because they have an extremely dark complexion, but their features are very thin, as though chiseled out of rock. They are very tall, with a very noble stature. To give an idea of what they look like, think of the great Pharaoh Ramses II. They live in the extreme southern part of Egypt and in the Sudan area. I think the general assumption that “Egypt equals Africa equals black” is simplistic and reflects the lack of general knowledge Westerners and especially Americans have about the rest of the world. I, for instance, am white but nonetheless consider myself African, and some of my relatives are fair-haired with green eyes and also consider themselves African. Not all Africans are black.
POSTED OCT. 24, 1998
Zornatan, 24, white straight North African, <kyser_sose@hotmail.com>, Paris, France
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
R402: Whenever I see a movie, TV show or video targeted to black people, there seems to be an underlying stereotype that all whites are racists and bigots. How accurate do people (of all races and backgrounds) think this is?
POSTED AUG. 9, 1998
RocketMan <OldsRocket455@yahoo.com>, Akron, OH

ANSWER 1:
Most races do think white people are racists who discriminate based on color. Because what race is running this nation? What race came to this continent and made the Jewish holocaust look like a day at a church picnic when compared to the near genocide of Native Americans? What race brought African Americans from their homeland and made them slaves for hundreds of years? I am a Native American who moved to Akron, Ohio, last week, and I must say I feel like a fish out of water. But I will say that each individual has a choice to give into the prejudice or not to give into it. I prefer not to give into it or to live in the past.
POSTED SEPT. 4, 1998
Shon J., Native American <shonj@hotmail.com>, Akron, OH

FURTHER NOTICE:
I and most black people I know do not believe all white people are racists and bigots. What you see on movies may be over-emphasized (Hollywood with Southern accents). On the other hand, perhaps it’s just what we go through everyday, and what is portrayed is just that. We don’t view all white people as racists and bigots, but we experience our share of both (racism and bigotry) everyday. Well, I do. And hey! You’re not in either category, so don’t let it worry you.
POSTED SEPT. 19, 1998
Whitney T., 18, Southern black <wkthomps@olemiss.edu>, Oxford , MS
To respond
BACK TO TOP

THE QUESTION:
R401: How come Dominicans get offended when you call them Puerto Rican, and vice versa? POSTED AUG. 7, 1998
D.M.V., 35, Italian

ANSWER 1:
Probably for the same reason you would be offended if someone called you Mexican or German or French: Because you are not!
POSTED AUG. 31, 1998
Jane, 27, African American <dj_garrett@hotmail.com>, Birmingham, AL