Best of the Week
of April 21, 2002
Best of Week
Archives
Here are the most intriguing cross-cultural exchanges
either begun or advanced during the week of April 21, 2002, as
selected by Y? Thesepostings, as well as "Best of the
Week" entries from previous weeks, also can be found by accessing
Y?'s database using the search form, or, in
the case of answers posted before April 24, 1999, in the
Original Archives (all questions
from the Original Archives have been entered into the database as
well). In the Original Archives, as well as in the database, you will
find questions that have received answers, as well as questions still
awaiting responses. You are encouraged to answer any questions
relevant to your demographic background, as well as to ask any
provocative question you desire. Answers posted are not necessarily
meant to represent the views of an entire demographic group, but can
provide a window into the insights of an individual from that
group.
First-time users should first make a quick stop at Y?'s
guidelines pages for asking and
answering questions.
The book
on Y? is here!
"Why Do White People Smell Like Wet
Dogs
When They Come Out Of The Rain?"
Order it here!
Read the
Associated Press story on "Wet Dogs"
Question:
Last year I married a wonderful, warm, emotional, sensual
Italian male who has been in this country 11 years. Sex is the best
I've ever had - as long as it's his idea. Luckily, he gets the idea
fairly often. But if I try to start something, chances are 80 to 90
percent he will not be able to maintain an erection. Is this a
cultural difference, or just my husband? Are all Italian males
uncomfortable with sexual expectations that come from the woman?
POSTED 4/22/2002
Kathy, Cincinnati, OH, United States, 46, Female,
White/Caucasian, Straight, writer, Over 4 Years of College, Upper
middle class, Mesg ID 411200215725
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Question:
Many Indians (natives of India) in my workplace have a musty or
sweaty 'armpit' type of odor. Often the smell starts from the very
beginning of the workday, so I cannot attribute it to normal
perspiration from daily activity. Is it a cultural thing not to bathe
daily or wear deodorant? Is it something considered acceptable or
normal in the Indian culture? Or are there ritualistic/religious
reasons for this? Is it a socioeconomic/class thing, perhaps? Or is
it just an individual thing resulting from a lack of proper hygiene
instruction? Do these people not realize they smell (I can't see how,
because it is obvious to everyone else), or do they just not care?
Should I tell them? By no means am I saying all Indians smell like
this - there are very many Indian men who never smell foul and wear
cologne, etc., but I have encountered this enough to provoke the
question.
POSTED 4/22/2002
Jen, Red Bank, NJ, United States, 31, Female, Baptist,
Black/African American, Straight, Consulting, Over 4 Years of
College, Middle class, Mesg ID 4202002104756
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Question:
Why is it that whenever a minority is hired for any job besides
janitor, fast food worker, maid or traditional black-only jobs,
reverse discrimination is hollered? Does this mean that whites feel
the only jobs minorities deserve are low-paying, and that anything
other than that is discrimination?
POSTED 4/22/2002
S., Birmingham, AL, United States, 23, Female, Baptist,
black/caucasion, Straight, Professional Student, Middle class, Mesg
ID 42200230003
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Question:
Why do black people have only black, coarse hair? Never have I
seen a black person with naturally light-colored hair, or fine,
smooth hair. White people have blondes, brunettes, redheads and
black-haired people. Why don't black people have different-colored
hair, with different textures?
POSTED 4/19/2002
Taryn, Everson, WA, United States, 16, Female, Christian,
Dutch, Straight, student, Less than High School Diploma, Middle
class, Mesg ID 416200220145
Responses:
First, there is some diversity in Africa in looks. I agree that
with Europeans there is a lot of diversity in hair and eye color.
Diversity exists among Africans, too, but not to that extent. Black
hair, just like skin, gets its color from an excess of melanin. The
coarse hair acts like a carpet to protect Africans living in the hot
Savanah, hence protecting overheating of the brain. Coarse hair
provides better ventilation. The melanin also protects from excessive
ultraviolet rays, and the black color also provides camouflage in the
dark rainforests of subsaharan Africa. Now let's consider Europeans:
They evolved in the harsh north. In those days, the world was in the
grip of the Ice Age, and most of Eurasia had conditions like Northern
Alaska. A person with a lot of melanin would not get a lot of UV
rays, thus hampering Vitamin D production in the gloomy, cloudy
climates in Europe. Hence, such people would develop weakness in the
bones and die out. This is proved by the large number of cases of
rickets in children of Africans and some dark Asians in Northern
European countries. Hence the drive here would have been toward
having all types of fairer skin and wavy-straight hair. Besides,
white skin and fair hair would provide camouflage in the snowy
background, proving advantageous for Europeans in hunting game and
also preventing attacks from animals like wolves, bears, sabre-tooth
tigers etc. Just like white skin is better in preventing frostbite,
black skin is advantageous in preventing sunburns. East Asians
evolved in frigid Eurasia, too. But their genes handled the cold in a
different way. Instead of growing white, they developed a short
stature, thus preventing loss of heat from the body, because less
skin area would be exposed. Some scientists believe that because
Nordics actually evolved in Central Asia, blond hair might have
helped in the camouflage effect in the dried, hay-colored backgrounds
of the grasslands of the southern Urals-Black sea area. So you see,
it's all a matter of evolution shaping the looks due to environmental
conditions.
POSTED 4/22/2002
Abdul A., Cairo, NA, Egypt, 34, Male, Muslim, Middle-Eastern,
Straight, Professor, Over 4 Years of College, Upper class, Mesg ID
421200271231
Actually, with African Americans you see a wide range of hair
textures and colors. Most of us have some white blood, and many of us
have some Native American blood (I have some of both). This is the
same reason our skin tones and textures vary so much.
POSTED 4/22/2002
Wayne C., Parsippany, NJ, United States, 41, Male, Baptist,
Black/African American, Straight, Marketing, Over 4 Years of College,
Middle class, Mesg ID 422200255828
How about Asians? Arabs? Native Americans? Eskimos? Australian
Aborigines? They all only have natural black hair (not to mention
brown eyes). Sounds like we whites are the odd ones out on hair (and
eye) color, not blacks. As for textures: Asians, Eskimos and American
Indians only have straight hair, though Arabs, Aussie natives and
South and East Indians vary a little in texture. As far as why:
Geography is my best guess, but that explains little, especially the
color issue.
POSTED 4/22/2002
Ridley S., Chambersburg, PA, United States, 22, Male, Agnostic,
White/Caucasian, Straight, Mesg ID 422200274712
That's the way God made us. Just the same way Asians have only
straight, black hair, or whites have light skin and narrow features.
The hair is coarse because blacks originally came from Africa, and
our physical characteristics had to adjust to the hot weather. There
are blacks who have hair that isn't short, coarse or black, and that
is because they are mixed with another race(s) somewhere in their
family. For example, my hair is dark brown, gets reddish in the sun
and is long and curly (not kinky). There is nothing inherently
inferior about kinky hair. It's just different, the way every person
on this planet is.
POSTED 4/25/2002
Joann, New York, NY, United States, Female, Black/African
American, Mesg ID 419200240255
Hair protects the head from the elements. Frizzy/coarse/dark hair
protects the head from strong sun (i.e. in Africa, Middle East,
etc.), and smooth/light-colored hair does the opposite by allowing as
much sunlight where there may be little available (i.e. in Norway,
Sweden, Northern Europe,etc.). Black people originate from very hot
places and need the protection their hair provides, whereas white
people are from hot and cold places (i.e. Greece/Russia) and so their
hair varies according to the climate of their origin. As with eye
color, skin color, shape of eyes, height and level of body fat, it's
all part of the evolutionary process that makes people more 'fit' for
the conditions in which they live.
POSTED 4/25/2002
Jay, New York, NY, United States, Female, 4 Years of College,
Middle class, Mesg ID 423200290107
Why do you not ask the same question about Asians or Hispanics? By
the way, most black people have dark brown eyes and hair, not black.
Caucasians are the only race with varied hair colors.
POSTED 4/25/2002
Redeemed One, Newport News, VA, United States, 53, Female,
Black/African American, Over 4 Years of College, Middle class, Mesg
ID 4232002111445
It's because the artificial demographic 'white' is composed of
Saxon people with Saxon features, Germanic people with Germanic
features, etc.
POSTED 4/25/2002
Benny, Lablanc, AZ, United States, 65, Male, White/Caucasian, 2
Years of College, Middle class, Mesg ID 424200294418
Black people come in every shade, and have all kinds of hair
colors, textures and styles. Also eye and skin color is varied. I'm
not even talking about the folks who color their hair or wear colored
lenses!
POSTED 4/25/2002
Samm B., Boston, MA, United States, 37, Female, New
Age/Metaphysical, Black/African American, Straight, artist, 2 Years
of College, Middle class, Mesg ID 424200211839
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Question:
Do non-government employees (or people in general) really
believe that government employees are lazy, dumb and/or rude, or is
this just a media stereotype that gets perpetuated? If people believe
this, why?
POSTED 4/2/2002
Janet E., Atlanta, GA, United States, 50, Female, Unity School
of Christianity, Straight, Trainer, Over 4 Years of College, Middle
class, Mesg ID 3262002113122
Responses:
I'm a school teacher and my father was a postal worker. There is
a grain of truth to the stereotypes. Most civil service jobs require
a test. Jobs like teachers require a college degree and license. If
you get the highest score, you get the job. If person who is
antisocial gets a high score on a civil service exam, he/she can get
a job in customer service. Government jobs also offer strong job
security. You cannot be fired easily. This is supposed to ensure you
got the job because you're qualified, not because of your uncle's
influence. Strong job security makes sure you can do your job without
being influenced by others. Does this system protect boneheads who
are lazy and incompetent? Yes. I've met a couple of bad teachers who
could not be fired because of tenure. All the principal could do was
assign something outside the classroom. My father also has similar
stories. Most government workers strive to do a good job, but you
know the saying about one bad apple.
POSTED 4/4/2002
Steve, New York, NY, United States, 28, Male, African Methodist
Episcopalian, Black/African American, Straight, teacher, Over 4 Years
of College, Lower middle class, Mesg ID 42200245332
I think many people feel this way, because (particulary here in
mostly-white Minnesota) the people they see working in the government
offices are more diverse (minority or disabled) than their co-workers
at non-governmental jobs. They carry over their bias against these
people and assume they are less-desirable employees and would not
have a job if the government didn't give them this handout.
Concerning the idea that they are rude, in my experience, government
employees are allowed to be much ruder to citizens/customers than
workers in the private sector who would lose their job over bad
behavior. An effect of unions?
POSTED 4/4/2002
Thora, St. Paul, MN, United States, 33, Female, Agnostic,
White/Caucasian, Straight, database programmer, Over 4 Years of
College, Middle class, Mesg ID 422002113557
I was a civil service (government) employee for 15 years, six of
those as a union steward. I can tell you that many government
employees work long hours, sacrifice family time and work in far less
than glamorous conditions to do an outstanding job. Unfortunately,
there are a number of employees who call in sick every Monday and
Friday, do substandard (or worse) work, file grievances at the
smallest inconvenience and are verbally abusive to everyone they come
in contact with. Those knotheads are the reason the stereotype you
mention is alive and well. They are also the reason so much
government work is now being contracted out.
POSTED 4/4/2002
Alma, Kempner, TX, United States, 48, Female, Methodist,
White/Caucasian, Lesbian, education, 4 Years of College, Lower middle
class, Mesg ID 422002123840
My sister is an undersecretary to the Department of something in
DC. I have heard her stories. It isn't that government employees are
lazy, it's just that whole departments have no competition and no
profit motive, and therefore no reason to be efficient. Huge amounts
of energy are spent in turf wars between departments within the same
agency or between agencies to get the Congressional budget lottery. I
don't think it is the average employee's fault; afterall, if you can
gravy train it, why not. It is a management system problem.
POSTED 4/4/2002
Steve, Houston, TX, United States, 45, Male, White/Caucasian,
Corporate Cubicle Person no Longer on Sabbatical, Over 4 Years of
College, Upper class, Mesg ID 42200211458
Prior to coming back to journalism, I worked in management in a
government agency and found most of those stereotypes to contain
kernels of truth. Government work generally pays less than its
private-sector counterparts. This doesn't necessarily make employees
lazy, but instead attracts people not motivated by money. This leaves
personal satisfaction or love of society their sole motivation. After
a short time of working for the public as 'servants,' they lose that
motivation. The public is rude, mean and generally uninformed about
the role of government. Once the person has no motivation to 'serve'
the ungrateful public, and they're safe in their job by seniority,
they fit those stereotypes. The flip side to this phenomenon is that,
in my opinion, it's the lazy, dumb and/or rude public that makes
these people respond in that manner. Imagine a time when you went to
a government agency. You were probably not in a good mood anyway,
depending on the agency, and you wanted out as quickly as possible.
You demanded answers to questions such as 'Why do I have to have a
photo ID with that?' or 'Why do I have to fill out this form?' or
'Why can't you process that in less than 24 hours?' While this was
the first time you had EVER acted in this manner, it was probably the
100th time the employee had dealt with a similar person.
POSTED 4/4/2002
Brian, Peru, IN, United States, 26, Male, Christian,
White/Caucasian, Straight, journalism, 4 Years of College, Middle
class, Mesg ID 42200283317
Having spent three years working in a county hospital and three
years working for municipal government, I can't say I believe
government employees are lazy, dumb or rude. Although working in
these environments put me in the position of dealing with brutal
politics on the part of clerical staff (upper management was pretty
clean), people could be dedicated, helpful to the public and perhaps
disappointed that they did not go on to higher levels of education. I
saw a lot of sadness in my fellow government employees. A lot of
boredom. A lot of people who made career choices based on security
rather than interest or talent. However, in general, there are three
areas that may influence the way government employees are perceived:
1) I have heard that the less an organization depends on customers,
the more politics you will find. 2) Government employees do their
work on budgets that are miniscule compared to what you'd find in the
private sector. 3) Government employees make an average of half the
salary they would in the private sector. Maybe the best and brightest
move on?
POSTED 4/4/2002
Mary, Minneapolis, MN, United States, 40, Female, Christian,
White/Caucasian, Straight, administrative, Over 4 Years of College,
Middle class, Mesg ID 44200222145
Being an employee of the government, I can say there are some very
dedicated workers in the government, and some lazy ones who are
waiting for their pension. Becaue there is a less-strict work
environment and the focus isn't on production of a good as private
industry might have it, there is need of greater personal integrity.
Supervisors are less likely to clamp down on their unproductive
workers. On the whole, the environment is great because a person can
grow in the area of his or her interest, be it science, accounting or
business skills. In an environment requiring personal integrity, some
people thrive, while others take advantage of the system.
POSTED 4/15/2002
Ronald V., Edmonton, Alberta, NA, Canada, Male, Mesg ID
4152002113110
I have yet to visit the DMV, post office, etc. without dealing
with rude, obnoxious, unpleasant and unhelpful staff. Maybe those
kinds of jobs are unpleasant to do, or maybe there are little
educational requirements and the government kind of gets the worst of
society. I've been in other countries and government employees are
very helpful and friendly, so it seems to be a US thing.
POSTED 4/22/2002
Jay, New York, NY, United States, Female, White/Caucasian, 4 Years
of College, Middle class, Mesg ID 49200260717
As a British government employee, I'd like to know the answer to
this one, as we have the same stereotype here, too. There was a time
when the British Civil Service was overstaffed, but that's not the
case anymore. Maybe the once (partly) accurate view of bowler-hatted
gentlemen spending their days drinking endless cups of tea has just
stuck. The British Civil Service has a very high proportion of
Oxbridge graduates, so we're certainly not stupid as a bunch.
However, having worked in a job that had contact with the public, I
can see how we can get the reputation for being rude. The public come
in already hating us before they've even met us, and of course we
react accordingly - we're only human. Everyone also seems to think
that the law should be written to suit their particular circumstance,
never mind how it might affect other people. They never stop to think
that when they say they can name 10 people who lose out from one
particular policy, we can name several thousand who benefit from it.
I've had friends who say they're appalled by the 'easy time' I have
at work, but as soon as I suggest they come and join me, they say,
'low pay and poor conditions - no thanks!' Just about says it all,
doesn't it?
POSTED 4/22/2002
Gellybean, London, NA, United Kingdom, 35, Female,
White/Caucasian, Government employee, 2 Years of College, Mesg ID
415200224319
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Question:
Why are some people more comfortable discussing personal issues
in the workplace and not accepting of those who choose not to?
Specifically, women who hold an entire office hostage to their
personal issues, such as a quest to become pregnant, sexual matters,
family problems, etc.? When you are uncomfortable or shy away from
such topics, you are then perceived as 'anti-social or
unsympathetic,' which leads to a belief that you are not a team
player or unfriendly. Have others encountered and/or been victimized
by such comments and behaviors? How do you combat it?
POSTED 4/2/2002
Serene, Chandler, AZ, United States, 43, Female, Christian,
Black/African American, Straight, Self-employed, 2 Years of College,
Middle class, Mesg ID 326200275244
Responses:
Don't you hate that? I'm betting, though, that for every twit who
labels you 'unsympathetic,' 'uncooperative' or 'not a team player,'
there's someone who sympathizes with your predicament but who's
keeping her mouth shut to stay out of it. It depends on how big your
office is, but my strategy is to look very busy when these annoying
people come by. You can "mhmhh" sympathetically but distractedly
before you pick up the phone to make a business call or you can jump
in surprise in the middle of her conversation,
'Ohmygoshiforgottoaskthebosssomething,' and split. Why do people do
this? I don't know, but I know it's not just women. Some are just
arrogant; they think they're the center of the universe and everyone
else should think so, too. Some are superficial and look for friends
in everyone they see. Some are lonely, and I believe it's important
in a karmic sense to have compassion for these, but after all, you
are at work. Why should you be discussing people's personal lives on
work time? Especially if you don't want to. I'm hoping it's not the
boss 'labeling' you and that it's the twits themselves.
POSTED 4/25/2002
Amber, Barrow, AZ, United States, 29, Female, Agnostic,
White/Caucasian, Mesg ID 44200231502
I understand your dilemma completely. By choice I work for pretty
much exclusively an all-white male company in a predominantly
all-white industry - building products/construction. I also moved to
a medium-sized city in Georgia. I'm a native Texan. Not only am I the
first woman, but the first black in a management position, although I
don't have any direct reports. I was in a high-pressure blue chip
corporate environment and decided to simplify and drop salary for a
less-stressful work environment so I could focus more on family (just
me and my husband at this point). Anyway, I am in what most would
call a small 'redneck' town, and everybody knows everybody's
business. At first I tried being friendly with everyone, and it was
clear they were uncomfortable. I wasn't telling my business, just
talking generalities and 'nice -ities.' Clearly you are not in the
'in' crowd unless folks know how much money you got, what kind of
house you are living in, etc. Bottom line, anyone asking these
questions is trying to get in your business. There are all sorts of
ways to try to build a friendly relationship with someone without
asking personal questions. I prefer to keep my personal business out
of my working environment as much as possible. I would not tell
anyone at my job - I don't care how friendly they are - anything I
wouldn't want everybody in the plant knowing about. I socialize
within the boundaries of the work, but as far as lunch and outside
activities, I choose not to participate. Since I have a full
spiritual life with God and my church family, and a rewarding
relationship with my husband, I'm not missing much.
POSTED 4/25/2002
Calm, Augusta, GA, United States, 34, Female, Christian,
Black/African American, Straight, Engineer, 4 Years of College, Upper
class, Mesg ID 412200291714
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Question:
I understand the need for 'people of color,' or any people for
that matter, to make strides in areas they previously haven't. I
think it's good for society. But these delineations make my head
hurt. What exactly is an 'African American'? I think the term is
over-used and sometimes even abused. To be accurate, shouldn't Halle
Berry have been the first 'Mulatto-American' best actress? Also, if
she had gotten more of her mom's genes than her dad's, would I even
be writing this? I have a friend who looks 'white,' but is so many
things melded into one it's not even funny. Which box should she
check? And more importantly, why does it matter? Frankly, I think all
this categorization is divisive and sad. We should get over it.
POSTED 4/2/2002
Ed S., New York, NY, United States, 29, Male, Agnostic,
White/Caucasian, Straight, Over 4 Years of College, Middle class,
Mesg ID 328200273233
Responses:
I have to agree with you. There is no need to have separation. I
am a mix of four different races, so I usally check the 'other' box.
POSTED 4/4/2002
Hollie, Ft. Riley, KS, United States, 28, Female, Baptist,
Black/Indian/Irish/Caucasian, Straight, Student, 2 Years of College,
Lower middle class, Mesg ID 432002111732
It's easy to say 'get over it' when you don't have to deal with
all of the negativety that comes with being a person of color. Does
anyone know how many roles Halle Berry may have been refused because
she wasn't white? No, you don't. If she wants to consider it a
triumph for black women, who is anyone to say differently? Race seems
to matter when I 'fit the description' of a criminal or I'm stopped
in my car for 'driving while black' or can't get a cab, but it's a
crime when we don't acknowledge all of humanity when accepting
awards. I wonder how many times Jesse Owens was called the N-word
before he won the Olympics. After that he was a great American.
Things like that just make me laugh.
POSTED 4/4/2002
Sherman, Richmond, CA, United States, <sjack916@aol.com>,
33, Male, Christian, Black/African American, Straight, contractor,
Technical School, Lower middle class, Mesg ID 432002123309
Why is it even an issue to so many whites that she is half-white?
Why is it that a black man can win, but if a black woman wins or a
woman who looks black wins, society is so offended that they would
ask questions such as yours? First, most blacks are mixed. My mother
is only about a quarter black, but because she looks black (even
though she is much lighter than Halle), society has always treated
her as black - and more importantly, just like Halle and so many
other 'mixed blacks,' they FEEL black. Even if there was no racism to
make them choose one race, I believe people such as Halle and my
mother would still define themselves as black, because usually black
genes dominate, and so these people look like other black people. Get
it? You say classification is divisive and sad. What's sad is that
it's needed to ensure equality. As for your friend, just like Halle
and my mother, she or he should define themselves however they like.
POSTED 4/4/2002
Alea, New York, NY, United States, 22, Female, Christian,
Straight, Mesg ID 43200272331
What you are suggesting has been tried by quite a few individuals
of mixed heritage (especially with those who are half black half
something else). Tiger Woods is one example that comes to mind.
People do not accept this, because if your features look more black,
then you are black; it doesn't matter what you are mixed with. And it
is not blacks who are to blame for this; it is whites, because THEY
are the ones who feel the need for a categorization of races. With
this categorization, there can be no in-between -- you are either one
or the other. And because blacks for the most part have the strongest
genes in comparison to other groups, when they mix with a non-black,
the child is going to look more black by white standards. This is why
people like Halle Berry are more likely to check 'African American'
than 'white' or 'other.' As far as the term African American, I see
nothing wrong with it. In fact, it is the only term that gives us
some identity (unlike 'black,' which is more negative). I mean,
African is what we, are isn't it? We may not have been born there,
but most of black America's ancestry originated from Africa.
POSTED 4/4/2002
Kristina, Washington, DC, United States,
<kfount500@aol.com>, 21, Female, Christian, Black/African
American, Straight, Transcriber, 2 Years of College, Middle class,
Mesg ID 442002114453
In the United States, historically, if someone had any 'black
blood,' they were considered black. And we accept them. In the past,
no one else would. Your friend who looks white but is really mixed
would be considered black. In fact, this was coded into most (if not
all) states laws. Furthermore, if they had any 'black blood' but
looked white and claimed to be white, but were discovered to have a
black relative, they were severely persecuted. Terms like 'Mulatto'
and 'Octoroon' were terms created by whites in the United States to
further classify and divide blacks among themselves. Only recently
has someone like your 'mixed' friend had the luxury of claiming they
are white when they have a mixed ancestry.
POSTED 4/8/2002
Wayne C, Parsippany, NJ, United States, 41, Male, Baptist,
Black/African American, Straight, Marketing, Over 4 Years of College,
Middle class, Mesg ID 482002114416
I wonder about this, too: if a person is a mixed racial heritage,
and one of the those is white, the 'white' designation is dropped. To
me, this reminds me of how racial classifications were designated
during the times of slavery and after, where if a person had one drop
of black blood they were considered black. It seems that to ignore
one's white racial heritage when one is multiple is to acquiesce to
this racist standard. Maybe 'African-Caucasian' would make an
interesting ethnic tag.
POSTED 4/22/2002
Teresa, Austin, TX, United States, 42, Female, Atheist,
White/Caucasian, Straight, 4 Years of College, Middle class, Mesg ID
420200292040
The reason I refer to myself as an African American is that I
refuse to let the wider American society strip me of my identity. As
long as I can remember, I have heard people say that 'we are all
Americans' and such. But these are the same people who sneer when
they imagine me dating their daughters, or cross to the other side of
the street as I walk. Contrary to much opinion, we are not a melting
pot. I will not label myself as black. Traditionally it denotes some
sort of evil force. My people have had their identity torn from them.
We became just 'black' while others were able to remain Italian,
French or English. My being African American is a way to reidentify
with my heritage, but on my terms. I will encourage my family to do
the same. Until we are equal, you have chosen that I will be
different.
POSTED 4/25/2002
Jeremy H., San Antonio, TX, United States, 30, Male, New
Age/Metaphysical, African American, 4 Years of College, Lower middle
class, Mesg ID 45200265719
'What exactly is an 'African American'? An African American is a
black American of African ancestry. The Oxford English Dictionary
contains evidence of the use of black with reference to African
peoples as early as 1400, and the word has been in wide use in racial
and ethnic contexts ever since. However, it was not until the late
1960s that black (or Black) gained its present status as a
self-chosen ethnonym with strong connotations of racial pride,
replacing the then-current Negro among blacks and non-blacks alike
with remarkable speed. Equally significant is the degree to which
Negro became discredited in the process, reflecting the profound
changes taking place in the black community during the tumultuous
years of the civil rights and Black Power movements. The recent
success of 'African American' offers an interesting contrast in this
regard. Though by no means a modern coinage, African American
achieved sudden prominence at the end of the 1980s when several black
leaders, including Jesse Jackson, championed it as an alternative
ethnonym for Americans of African descent. The appeal of this term is
obvious, alluding as it does not to skin color but to an ethnicity
constructed of geography, history and culture, and it won rapid
acceptance in the media alongside similar forms such as Asian
American, Hispanic American and Italian American. Why does it matter?
Most everyone cosiders nationality, heritage, culture, geography and
history to be a part of their individual identities. Referring to
ourselves as simply 'American' would severely belie these factors.
Likewise, the title 'black' says only that: The bearer is 'black,'
which is not even a fact for a very large portion of African
Americans. In contrast, 'mulatto' is neither a race, nationality,
geographic region, or history of any group of people, but rather a
combination of African-American and another race - usually assumed to
be Caucasian. You may also note that 'mulatto' is considered by many
of mixed race to be a derogatory term, originating from the latin
word for MULE, being the offspring of a horse (presumably the white
parent) and a donkey (...). The term is becoming less and less
acceptable in 'politically correct' society. Hope this answers your
question.
POSTED 4/25/2002
Tania S., Montreal, Quebec, NA, Canada, 26, Female, Black/African
American, Self-Employed, 2 Years of College, Upper class, Mesg ID
4232002102743
I agree we should all get over it, but who is the 'we' you are
referring to? You do understand that black people didn't make the
'rules' or the names and titles, we just have to live with them. Let
me break it down like this: I am old enough to have been born
'colored', but then rapidly became 'negro,' which then became
'black,'and just when I was comfortable with that, I discovered I was
African-American. Now I am confused because my mother has only called
me by the name she gave me, and that is who I am. Until we get to the
point where we can all be just who we are, there will always be
titles enforced upon us all.
POSTED 4/25/2002
Serene, Chandler, AZ, United States, 43, Female, Christian,
Black/African American, Straight, Self Employed, 2 Years of College,
Middle class, Mesg ID 424200250421
To
respond
BACK TO TOP
Copyright
and disclaimer