Race/Ethnicity
Questions 401-410
Feel free to browse the following questions, some of which may
still await answers. You can then post an answer or counter an answer
that has already been posted. Please read the
guidelines for answering questions
before making a posting.
Previous 10 this topic
area 
Next
10 this topic area
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
To respond
BACK TO TOP