The Study of Racialism Discussion of U.S. Racialism Please read The Rules before posting.    FAQ   Search     Register     Log in  ' How West Indians perceive "racial" categories Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next          The Study of Racialism Forum Index -> Caribbean Basin Author Message caribj Suspended Joined: 14 Mar 2007 {Posts: 612 } Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:01    Post subject: Actually Hoetink does not contradict anonymous. Hoetink says that in the nonHispanic Caribbean there is a 3 tier system of classification. Anonymous isnt denying that this exists. However what complicates Hoetink is that Trinidad and Guyana are much more ethnically diverse than most other countries in the English Caribbean and because some one is "mixed" it doesnt mean that they fit into Hoetink's 3 tier rule. This is because their mixture can be drawn from African, Amerindian, Chinese or East Indian roots). Also if what anonymous says is true that the women doesnt know whether she is white or "Spanish" then her claims might seem to be unusual given that she doesnt fit the phenotype of those who are so classified. Now one can argue whether she is "black" or "mixed" but "white" or "Spanish" within the Trini connotation of what thsoe mean, she clearly is not. Back to top fwsweet Administrator Joined: 26 Nov 2004 {Posts: 5380 } Location: Palm Coast, FL Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:09    Post subject: caribj wrote: Actually Hoetink does not contradict anonymous. Hoetink says that in the nonHispanic Caribbean there is a 3 tier system of classification. Anonymous isnt denying that this exists. On the contrary. Anonymouse repeatedly insisted that the woman was "black" and nothing but "black." Furthermore, he insisted that any West Indian (any West Indian!) would consider her to be "black." Moreover, he was unwilling even to contemplate the possibility of a 3-tier system that saw anything other than "black" or "white." Anonymouse's notion that anyone who is not "white" MUST be utterly "black," with no possibility of in-between (no possibility of in-between!) is alien to the West Indies. In fact, this notion is found in the general population only in the United States of America. That Anonymouse refused to cite sources, that he is unfamiliar with the scholarly literature on the subject, and that he repeatedly insisted that PR, Cuba, and Hispaniola are not in the West Indies (not in the West Indies!) is just icing on the cake. I stand by my assessment that Anonymouse's claim of being a Trini is fraudulent, and that he has never set foot outside of the United States. Last edited by fwsweet on Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:20; edited 7 times in total Back to top Beauty Experienced User Joined: 02 Jun 2007 {Posts: 102 } Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:10    Post subject: caribj wrote: Beauty wrote: [. Therefore I am unsure if coloured means someone of mixed ancestry or refers to all people of colour. "Coloured" can be used in either context. Some older people think that the word "black" is vulgar and an insulting way to describe some one, especially one who they respect so they use the term "coloured". "Coloured" can also be used to describe some one of mixed EUROPEAN and African origins (note; fwsweets not Indian and African and most might perceive that woman to be if indeed they do consider her to be "mixed") but it is not frequently used these days. In every day conversation to describe some one of mixed African and European ancestry the terms "brown", or "mixed" or more colloquially "red" (the latter not always positively accepted) are used. I dont know anyone of my age range (35-55) who uses the term "coloured", though I know older people who came of age in the colonial pre Black Power Caribbean who do. It is reasonable to suggest that people who came of age in an era when the subtle distinctions of color mattered much socially and even economically and occupationally would be more sensitive to subtle gradations than some one coming of age in an era when it matters little. So the age of the person being asked is avery important factor in determining attitudes to color. BTW your reference to your friend's grand mother who thought that the term coloured was better than black reminds me of an aunt of mine who would be considered "brown/red/coloured/mixed" who told me that I am not "black" because black is a vulgar word. That I should refer to self as "coloured" or even "negro" (though that has lower class connotations to her). She would clearly not consider me to be "mixed" in the same sense that she would consider herself to be given that I am significantly darker and much more SSAfrican in phenotype than she is. I think maybe this is why "coloured" is less often used because it can be confusing as to what is meant. Whereas within a West Indian setting every one knows what "brown" or "red" means. Now I am seen as "black" or "dougla", but never referred to as "red" because while it is conceded that there might be European ancestry its not seen as significant. Ironically I am more European in ancestry than East Indian, though this is not how most people see it. I am familiar with the terms red, brown, lightskinned and yellow denote some of mixed ancestry or someone who is light skinned black. In addition people with black and Indian ancestry are often called called by I know some island call them douglas. Back to top Beauty Experienced User Joined: 02 Jun 2007 {Posts: 102 } Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:18    Post subject: fwsweet wrote: caribj wrote: Actually Hoetink does not contradict anonymous. Hoetink says that in the nonHispanic Caribbean there is a 3 tier system of classification. Anonymous isnt denying that this exists. On the contrary. Anonymouse repeatedly insisted that the woman was "black" and nothing but "black." Furthermore, he insisted that any West Indian (any West Indian) would consider her to be "black." Moreover, he was unwilling even to contemplate the possibility of a 3-tier system that saw anything other than "black" or "white." Anonymouse's notion that anyone who is not "white" MUST be utterly "black," with no in-between is alien to the West Indies. In fact, this notion is found in the general population only in the United States of America. Fsweet, I agree the Caribbean differs greatly from the USA. However, I think the English speaking Caribbean has a similiar racial ideology to the US but with a difference. I think there may be more flexibility in Caribbean than than in the US. I think this is also true for the UK. Many mixed race people in the UK are reffered to as black. However having a mixed race identity is more accepted in the UK than in the US. Back to top caribj Suspended Joined: 14 Mar 2007 {Posts: 612 } Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:22    Post subject: fwsweet wrote: [(not in the West Indies!) is just icing on the cake. I stand by my assessment that Anonymouse's claim of being a Trini is fraudulent, and that he has never set foot outside of the United States. Now anonymous seemed to be offended by her not knowing whether she is white or Spanish. I suspect if she has said she is mixed he might have found that less problematic as the term mixed can mean anything. I will not speak for him though. BTW its your opinion that anonymous isnt Trini. Based on his previous posts and his insights its quite clear that he is from the English speaking Caribbean. Back to top fwsweet Administrator Joined: 26 Nov 2004 {Posts: 5380 } Location: Palm Coast, FL Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:29    Post subject: caribj wrote: I suspect if she has said she is mixed he might have found that less problematic... Except that the only word he used was "black." Over and over again. Not mixed, not coloured, not dougla, not bukra, just "black." caribj wrote: Based on his previous posts and his insights its quite clear that he is from the English speaking Caribbean. I disagree. His knowledge of the islands sounds like something he learned from parents and relatives. On the other hand, his starkly dichotomous racialism (his absolute refusal even to contemplate the existence of something between Black and White) is 100 percent USAmerican. I would bet good money that he was born and raised in the United States of West Indian immigrant parents. We will never know for sure, of course, since on the internet you can claim to be a Martian if you wish. Back to top caribj Suspended Joined: 14 Mar 2007 {Posts: 612 } Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:33    Post subject: Beauty wrote: [ Fsweet, I agree the Caribbean differs greatly from the USA. However, I think the English speaking Caribbean has a similiar racial ideology to the US but with a difference. I think there may be more flexibility in Caribbean than than in the US. I think this is also true for the UK. Many mixed race people in the UK are reffered to as black. However having a mixed race identity is more accepted in the UK than in the US. What Mr Sweets needs to know is that with our high degree of contact with the USA, both in terms of its heavy media penetration, and in terms of the high levels of two way migration we are not unaffacted by US views on race even though the two societies differ. Its not always clear as to who is considered mixed and who is black and so arguements can occur (for those who think such trivia is important). We arent dealing with a solid social barrier here and the two groups (black and mixed) no longer exist in isolation. So I can well see some one arguing the way that anonymous is. Especially a younger person who grew up post Black Power and in a society where color is not very important to determine socio-economic status. But I can also imagine an older West Indian who grew up pre 1970 being very obsessed with color classifications given that prior to this era it was very important, as any one who saw who worked in the banks or were hired as cabin attendants on BWIA would have known. I have observed that some people who would have been highly insulted 30 years ago if called "black", no longer seem to be, even though I suspect they still see themselves as mixed. In fact my "coloured" mother said recently, to quote her, "these days everybody is black". What she was saying is that it really doesnt matter anymore what some one calls themselves or is called. Back to top caribj Suspended Joined: 14 Mar 2007 {Posts: 612 } Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:38    Post subject: fwsweet wrote: [(his absolute refusal even to contemplate the existence of something between Black and White)h. Where did he refuse to admit anything other than black or white? I believe he found offense because he found her claims of not knowing to whether she was white or Spanish to be ludicrous. I really dont know any one any where in the world who would consider her to be white so why she doesnt seem to know that is what confused him. Among some younger people "mixed" and "black" in the English speaking Caribbean are now interchangeable classifications as it really is less socially significant than it used to be. In fact I personally know people who classify themselves both ways. What they never say however is that they are white. Back to top caribj Suspended Joined: 14 Mar 2007 {Posts: 612 } Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:40    Post subject: Beauty wrote: I am familiar with the terms red, brown, lightskinned and yellow denote some of mixed ancestry or someone who is light skinned black. In addition people with black and Indian ancestry are often called called by I know some island call them douglas. This is what is used these days (not yellow though unless an insult is intended). Not Coloured and definitely not mulatto. Back to top caribj Suspended Joined: 14 Mar 2007 {Posts: 612 } Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:46    Post subject: fwsweet wrote: caribj wrote: I suspect if she has said she is mixed he might have found that less problematic... Except that the only word he used was "black." Over and over again. Not mixed, not coloured, not dougla, not bukra, just "black." [. Sometimes "black" is used carelessly and as short hand to describe all those mixtures involving black. Especially among younger people. Too much to describe, black, red, dougla, chigro, and all the various black, part black permeatations. I dont see that he categorically denies a "mixed" category being recognized in the English speaking caribbean. He specifically referred to her confusion about not knowing whether she was Spanish or white. Now if she said she is mixed with African, Spanish and white and anonymous took offense to that I would agree with you. But that is not what I (and apparently anonymous) understood her to mean. Back to top caribj Suspended Joined: 14 Mar 2007 {Posts: 612 } Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:50    Post subject: fwsweet wrote: That Anonymouse refused to cite sources, that he is unfamiliar with the scholarly literature on the subject, and that he repeatedly insisted that PR, Cuba, and Hispaniola are not in the West Indies (not in the West Indies!). Two points to that. 1. Few people from the English speaking Caribbean consider any cultural similarities with the non Englsih speaking islands and especvially with teh Hispanic islands. Few academics wold cite attitudes in the Hispanic caribbean to explain attitudes in an English speaking Caribbean island. 2. Its very unusual to describe PR and DR and CUba as West Indian islands. Indeed when people talk about West Indians it normally assumed to mean from the English speaking Caribbean. This is evidence that anonymous is very West Indian with his lack of identification with anything coming out of PR or DR or Cuba. Back to top fwsweet Administrator Joined: 26 Nov 2004 {Posts: 5380 } Location: Palm Coast, FL Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:51    Post subject: caribj wrote: I really dont know any one any where in the world who would consider her to be white Anyone any where in the world? Surely you jest. Ninety percent of the four million Puerto Ricans (most of whom look as African as her) check off "white" on the census, and this is accepted by the federal Census Bureau. She looks less African than Rosie Perez, for Pete's sake. "Anyone anywhere in the world"? Give me a break. Last edited by fwsweet on Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:58; edited 1 time in total Back to top caribj Suspended Joined: 14 Mar 2007 {Posts: 612 } Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:52    Post subject: fwsweet wrote: caribj wrote: I really dont know any one any where in the world who would consider her to be white Anyone any where in the world? Surely you jest. Ninety percent of the four million Puerto Ricans (most of whom look as African as her) check off "white" on the census, and this is accepted by the federal Census Bureau. She looks less African than Rosie Perez, for Pete's sake. "Anyone anywhere in the world"? Give me a break. Well I will modify that. In the ENGLISH speaking Caribbean were she to claim to be white she would be viewed with pity. Back to top fwsweet Administrator Joined: 26 Nov 2004 {Posts: 5380 } Location: Palm Coast, FL Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 21:57    Post subject: caribj wrote: Its very unusual to describe PR and DR and CUba as West Indian islands. You have 24 hours to provide a source for this outrageous claim. Back to top caribj Suspended Joined: 14 Mar 2007 {Posts: 612 } Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 22:00    Post subject: OK Mr Sweets I stand corrected on anonymous's attitide towards mixed categorization now that I have looked specifically at his remarks about who is and who isnt mixed. These remarks seem more inflexible than most West Indians might feel, though we do have our share of Afrocentrists, some of whom looker "whiter" than this woman. However my views still stand on how her claim to her not knowing whetehr she is white or Spanish still stand. The debate for those who think its important will be whether she is "black" or "mixed". And a good deal will consider her dougla. Back to top caribj Suspended Joined: 14 Mar 2007 {Posts: 612 } Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 22:07    Post subject: fwsweet wrote: caribj wrote: Its very unusual to describe PR and DR and CUba as West Indian islands. You have 24 hours to provide a source for this outrageous claim. When people talk about the West Indies cricket team its quite clear to what they refer to. The University of the West Indies (UWI) is quite clear in what its mission is. When people in New York refer to West Indians its (almost) always understood to whom they refer. When people want to refer to the Caribbean as a whole the term CARIBBEAN is used. West Indies was a term used by the British to describe their former colonies. I think that most others considered "Indies" to be Columbus's mistake. In fact West Indies is often used instead of the term English Speaking Caribbean as it is brief and to most means the same thing, whereas the latter term is a mouthful even if more accurate. In any case if you want to use anonymous's claim that DR and PR arent part of the West Indies to say he cant be West Indian then quite clearly you dont understand the first thing about West Indians. Hey there are some of us who will define the term Caribbean to exclude the Hispanic islands even though I would agree that is inaccurate. Back to top punjabtrini Mentor Joined: 04 Sep 2007 {Posts: 253 } Location: USA Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 22:23    Post subject: Quote: However, I think the English speaking Caribbean has a similiar racial ideology to the US but with a difference. I think there may be more flexibility in Caribbean but being born in T&T (Trinidad) Diego Martin area (NW Peninsula area-8 miles from Venezuela), we do not use USA definitions of race or ethnicity! It is a recent phenomenon this USA similarity of ethnic designation (last 20 years, I am guessing) because most of us, though we belong to the French Creole remnants (we are neither French nor Creole) but because we have less of African phenotype and less of black pigmentation we (at least some of us) fit the profile (French Creole through non Anglo-Saxon surnames). we are treated with respect and scorn! We have better jobs, access to education, etc and this is not o say others do not have access to education! Just a reality! Back to top fwsweet Administrator Joined: 26 Nov 2004 {Posts: 5380 } Location: Palm Coast, FL Posted: Mon 31 Dec 2007 22:30    Post subject: caribj wrote: OK Mr Sweets I stand corrected on anonymous's attitide towards mixed categorization now that I have looked specifically at his remarks about who is and who isnt mixed. These remarks seem more inflexible than most West Indians might feel, though we do have our share of Afrocentrists, some of whom looker "whiter" than this woman. You miss the point. I do not care about Anonymouse's racialism or Afrocentrism. I do not care what that woman calls herself. This site is not in business to end racialism or Afrocentrism or White supremacy. This site is in business to inform, nothing more. It has a reputation for accuracy. Thousands of students come here every month, many sent by their professors. Neither I nor the moderators will allow someone to make implausible statements here unless they provide a source. Anonymouse made an outrageouly implausible claim. He did not provide a source. He did not retract it. Simple as that. Your claim about "anyone anywhere in the world" was of the same type. You retracted it. Your claim that "Its very unusual to describe PR and DR and CUba as West Indian islands" is also of the same type. If what you actually meant was, "It is very unusual for English-speaking people of the West Indies to refer to Spanish-speaking people of the West Indies as "West Indians," now is the time to clarify (and provide someting other than simply re-iterating the claim). The way you stated it (and your subsequent detailed re-iteration) makes it sound as if the English invented the term "Las Indias Occidentales," which is still in use. Back to top OTHER Moderator-at-Large Joined: 14 Sep 2007 {Posts: 958 } Location: Florida Posted: Wed 02 Jan 2008 23:01    Post subject: caribj wrote: When people talk about the West Indies cricket team its quite clear to what they refer to. The University of the West Indies (UWI) is quite clear in what its mission is. When people in New York refer to West Indians its (almost) always understood to whom they refer. When people want to refer to the Caribbean as a whole the term CARIBBEAN is used. West Indies was a term used by the British to describe their former colonies. I think that most others considered "Indies" to be Columbus's mistake. In fact West Indies is often used instead of the term English Speaking Caribbean as it is brief and to most means the same thing, whereas the latter term is a mouthful even if more accurate. If what you are saying is true, then why do people sometimes use the term "British West Indies" to make a distinction? If West Indies = British West Indies, then isn't it redundant and useless to say "British West Indies"? Now, don't get me wrong, I understand where you're coming from* when you state that when people say "West Indian" they mean a certain thing and that it usually does NOT include Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Hispaniola. However, popular usage does not negate the fact that those islands are in the West Indies. *I understand because I am from NJ and some of my own "West Indian" family members have lived in Jamaica, Queens since my grandmother's parents came over from Jamaica. She is 3/4 Jamaican and 1/4 Bajan, by the way. Of course, the list of ALL that she's mixed with is LONG! Back to top OTHER Moderator-at-Large Joined: 14 Sep 2007 {Posts: 958 } Location: Florida Posted: Wed 02 Jan 2008 23:08    Post subject: Speaking of which, I'm glad to stumble upon this thread because for the past several months I've been having discussions with a couple of relatives trying to discern how my grandmother must have viewed herself. (She died when I was only 2. ) Here is her pic. To those of you familiar with West Indian culture, what would she have been considered in Jamaica, Barbados, and in the West Indies (Caribbean! ), in general? Thanks! Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         The Study of Racialism Forum Index -> Caribbean Basin All times are GMT Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next Page 2 of 5 Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group