From what I gather dahlin is of a variety of mixed ancestries, doesnt consider herself "black" in Trinidad and so wouldnt in the USA, unless forced to. Note my comments about "mixed" vs. "black" in the Caribbean.
I didn't gather that - maybe you read some of her other posts, where she indicated a mix, but I haven't. Right here, she's saying that she doesn't identify as black because she's Carribean; she didn't say that she's not identifying as black because she was mixed.
caribj wrote:
You for instance would gbe considered mixed there and may see no reason why you should identify otherwise in the USA, though you will gladly wave your "national colors" at every opportunity.
That's because I AM - I am a mulatto. However, that doesn't mean that upon setting foot into another country, that I'm going to say that I'm not mulatto, and then use the fact that I'm American to back that up - see what I'm saying?
Identify how you will, I'm just noticing that there are alot more immigrants of predominant SSA ancestry resisting the black label than those of predominant European ancestry resisting the white label.
Dahlins point of view is exactly like yours. She doesnt consider herself "black" because in the Caribbean, with a her varied ancestry she probably wouldnt be. I dont know what she looks like so I wont debate whether her identity reflects some bias that she might have or whether ,using the standards of most TRinidadians, she is indeed mixed.
Just like how you feel that a change of location shouldnt change how you identify, regardless as to whether such classification fits into the rules conecrning ethnic/racial identity of that nation, apparently she feels the same. Now I dont mean to speak for her because she is well capable of doing so for herself but I assume that, she puts herself in the "Caribbean" box because this reflects her nationality (I think she is Trini) her culture and her values, which differ from those of AAs.
Now that we have put dahlin aside and have established that she isnt, or doesnt perceive herself to be of predominant SSAfrican ancestry, what proof have you that large numbers of SSAfricans and Anglo/Franco Caribbean people of predominant African ancestry (I use as a benchmark people who look like Denzil W or darker) refuse to be called "black"?
Joined: 26 May 2007 {Posts: 425 } Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posted: Mon 16 Jun 2008 23:00 Post subject:
caribj wrote:
Now that we have put dahlin aside and have established that she isnt, or doesnt perceive herself to be of predominant SSAfrican ancestry, what proof have you that large numbers of SSAfricans and Anglo/Franco Caribbean people of predominant African ancestry (I use as a benchmark people who look like Denzil W or darker) refuse to be called "black"?
I dunno, I said I "noticed," nothing more - now, I have no clue how to prove my personal observations out on the street to someone on the internet, but if you can show me how, I'd be glad to do it.
Now that we have put dahlin aside and have established that she isnt, or doesnt perceive herself to be of predominant SSAfrican ancestry, what proof have you that large numbers of SSAfricans and Anglo/Franco Caribbean people of predominant African ancestry (I use as a benchmark people who look like Denzil W or darker) refuse to be called "black"?
I dunno, I said I "noticed," nothing more - now, I have no clue how to prove my personal observations out on the street to someone on the internet, but if you can show me how, I'd be glad to do it.
All you need to say is that you perceive this but have no way of proving it so cannot express a definitive opinion.
Joined: 26 May 2007 {Posts: 425 } Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posted: Tue 17 Jun 2008 00:19 Post subject:
caribj wrote:
All you need to say is that you perceive this but have no way of proving it so cannot express a definitive opinion.
Thanks, but an "I've noticed x" should suffice, at least for those who are willing to educate or refute in other ways besides, "Show me proof" - because after all, I have nothing to prove unless I state it as fact.
None of my roots are African-American. Neither am I comfortable being referred to as such, and will correct someone for mislabeling me. Because black and AA are generally considered the same in the U.S. is one of the reasons I don't care much for the black label either. I'm of Caribbean descent...
I've always wondered this:
Why is it that so many Caribbean and African immigrants are so reluctant to being considered black in the US, yet European immigrants have no problem whatsoever being considered to be white?
Wutdafuxup?
I don't think they don't have a problem being Considered "Black " but unfortunately their seems to be a negative Image of the North American "Black " which they don't want to be attached to.
Europeans would desire to be considered white probably because of what they believe would be the privileges associated with being white.
Joined: 26 May 2007 {Posts: 425 } Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posted: Tue 17 Jun 2008 16:59 Post subject:
Spiral wrote:
I don't think they don't have a problem being Considered "Black " but unfortunately their seems to be a negative Image of the North American "Black " which they don't want to be attached to.
Europeans would desire to be considered white probably because of what they believe would be the privileges associated with being white.
I think caribj was tip-toeing around having to say this.
I don't think they don't have a problem being Considered "Black " but unfortunately their seems to be a negative Image of the North American "Black " which they don't want to be attached to.
Europeans would desire to be considered white probably because of what they believe would be the privileges associated with being white.
I think caribj was tip-toeing around having to say this.
\
No I was not. I am black. I am not AfricanAmerican. 100% of the West Indians who I know who considered themselves to be black prior to migrating still consider themselves to be black. Most would object to being called African American. Some because they despise them, or feel superior to them. Others because they feel that they have a different culture, history and values.
Your problem is you link "black" with African American. Many foreign blacks dont.
Now if you say that many foreign blacks have a poor image of AAs and wish to distance themselves I will agree with you. This being especially true of newer immigrants or those lower down the social ladder who are over exposed to the ghetto AA.
But this is very different from those who considered themselves to be "black'' back in the Anglo and Francophone Caribbean changing their minds about that when they arrived here.
As you have pointed out you dont consider yourself to be black even though in the USA most would so consider you. Similarly if you met some one like you who objected to being black their reasons for that are similar to yours.
Some info for you. There is widespread excitement about Obama. Al Sharpton is hugely popular at the West Indian Labor Day carnival. This doesnt look as if most dark skinned Anglophone caribbean people deny their blackness. Indeed I would argue that most kind of sort of identify with AAs as half brothers who they sometimes sympathize with and at other times dont like.
Pick up CaribNews or any other US Caribbean (Anglophone) publication and its full of black this and black that.
None of my roots are African-American. Neither am I comfortable being referred to as such, and will correct someone for mislabeling me. Because black and AA are generally considered the same in the U.S. is one of the reasons I don't care much for the black label either. I'm of Caribbean descent...
I've always wondered this:
Why is it that so many Caribbean and African immigrants are so reluctant to being considered black in the US, yet European immigrants have no problem whatsoever being considered to be white?
Wutdafuxup?
There is a reluctance to being referring to oneself as African American not black. If I were to refer to myself as an African American I would in essence ignore my culture, the struggles (successful as well as unsuccessful) of my family, my ancestors and my people. I am neither a descendant of nor is my ethnicity is a subset of the African American one - it is on the same level. That is not necessarily the case of white Americans and Europeans.
Joined: 26 May 2007 {Posts: 425 } Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posted: Wed 18 Jun 2008 03:14 Post subject:
anonymouse wrote:
There is a reluctance to being referring to oneself as African American not black. If I were to refer to myself as an African American I would in essence ignore my culture, the struggles (successful as well as unsuccessful) of my family, my ancestors and my people. I am neither a descendant of nor is my ethnicity is a subset of the African American one - it is on the same level. That is not necessarily the case of white Americans and Europeans.
From my observation, those born of immigrants (and if not, then definitely the next generation) will assimilate into their respective "race" here in the US, whether it's somone with parents from Europe assimilating into mainstream white American culture, or someone with parents from the West Indies or Africa assimilating into African American culture (as an example of the latter, you'll notice that Colin Powell is the son of two Jamaican immigrants, yet is considered to be the first African American to do "this and that," and doesn't dispute it.)
Either way, it seems to me that things like accents and other mannerisms that mark one as foreign are the necessary tools to distinguish oneself.
I'd been to St. Thomas before (and no, not the resort part either), and see no reason whatsoeever why anyone from there would be in a position to look down on African Americans.
I'd been to St. Thomas before (and no, not the resort part either), and see no reason whatsoeever why anyone from there would be in a position to look down on African Americans.
A friend of mine (AA female) went to the Bahamas on vacation. Her experience was that the locals looked up to AAs and treated them like any other American tourist or better.
Class differences also influence whether a given immigrant group feels superior to a homegrown ethnic group. It is interesting to hear the opinions of Cuban Americans or Haitian Americans who speak of the new "riff raff" allowed to immigrate. Some of this is because previous immigrants tended to come from the upper classes on their respective islands. The same thing happened with European Jews - first came the well-integrated Western European Jews from Germany and Holland, then came the more provincial and poorer Eastern European Jews.
My Haitian side immigrated and went to NYC in the 60s/70s and, while they don't have any disdain for AAs as a group, definitely do not understand or relate to southern AA culture. I think my father experienced more culture shock moving to FL than he did moving to NY to hear him talk.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 {Posts: 119 } Location: Somewhere...
Posted: Wed 18 Jun 2008 13:38 Post subject:
Richard Miller wrote:
dahlin wrote:
None of my roots are African-American. Neither am I comfortable being referred to as such, and will correct someone for mislabeling me. Because black and AA are generally considered the same in the U.S. is one of the reasons I don't care much for the black label either. I'm of Caribbean descent...
I've always wondered this:
Why is it that so many Caribbean and African immigrants are so reluctant to being considered black in the US, yet European immigrants have no problem whatsoever being considered to be white?
Wutdafuxup?
Maybe that is what you have been exposed to, but have met European immigrants who certain do have issues with being considered white. They state that white is an American classification and consider themselves by their respective ethnic background.
Actually, that you equated African-American with black is just what I am referring to. The term "black" in the U.S. is generally linked to one culture alone. It usually describes African-Americans, unless conveniently used otherise. In a sense, an American mulatto (American parentage) is more black than an Ibo from Nigeria.
Joined: 26 May 2007 {Posts: 425 } Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posted: Wed 18 Jun 2008 14:34 Post subject:
dahlin wrote:
Maybe that is what you have been exposed to, but have met European immigrants who certain do have issues with being considered white. They state that white is an American classification and consider themselves by their respective ethnic background.
I've been to various countries in Europe, all Mediterranean. And yes, they all consider themselves "white" as opposed to "black" - even in the southeastermost Turkey; even in Malta, a country that is geographically closer to Africa than Europe; whose inhabitants are linguistically and culturally related to Tunisians, they consider themselves white.
Although, that doesn't mean you're wrong - I've seen what you've seen on a few occasions myself, however, I think it has less to do with what country their from, or how their cultural mannerisms differ from that of white Americans; and more to do with who they associate with when get to the United States.
For example, I've noticed that German women who come to the US via marrying a African American man in the military who was stationed in Germany, are more likely to consider themselves non-white than other German immigrants.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 {Posts: 119 } Location: Somewhere...
Posted: Wed 18 Jun 2008 15:01 Post subject:
Richard Miller wrote:
dahlin wrote:
Maybe that is what you have been exposed to, but have met European immigrants who certain do have issues with being considered white. They state that white is an American classification and consider themselves by their respective ethnic background.
I've been to various countries in Europe, all Mediterranean. And yes, they all consider themselves "white" as opposed to "black" - even in the southeastermost Turkey; even in Malta, a country that is geographically closer to Africa than Europe; whose inhabitants are linguistically and culturally related to Tunisians, they consider themselves white.
Although, that doesn't mean you're wrong - I've seen what you've seen on a few occasions myself, however, I think it has less to do with what country their from, or how their cultural mannerisms differ from that of white Americans; and more to do with who they associate with when get to the United States.
For example, I've noticed that German women who come to the US via marrying a African American man in the military who was stationed in Germany, are more likely to consider themselves non-white than other German immigrants.
There may be a difference in how they see themselves when living in their respective countries and then how they feel when immigrating to the U.S., and being around White Americans. That, of course, is actually a similar to many immigrants of African descent when they come to the U.S., and are around African-Americans. The Europeans who I spoke about were more Eastern Europeans, and then a few Western. Some Italians do not consider themselves "white" though - which is probably moreso in the U.S.
I don't understand the "white" as opposed to "black" part of your post though. Why would they even think to consider themselves "black"?
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 {Posts: 119 } Location: Somewhere...
Posted: Wed 18 Jun 2008 15:12 Post subject:
Richard Miller wrote:
I didn't gather that - maybe you read some of her other posts, where she indicated a mix, but I haven't. Right here, she's saying that she doesn't identify as black because she's Carribean; she didn't say that she's not identifying as black because she was mixed.
That's because I AM - I am a mulatto. However, that doesn't mean that upon setting foot into another country, that I'm going to say that I'm not mulatto, and then use the fact that I'm American to back that up - see what I'm saying?
Identify how you will, I'm just noticing that there are alot more immigrants of predominant SSA ancestry resisting the black label than those of predominant European ancestry resisting the white label.
Why would you identify with a culture than isn't yours? Plenty Americans tend to understand that Europeans have different cultures/heritage. On the other hand, plenty Americans have a difficult time grasping the fact that every person of African descent is not an African-American. If you use the term black, it is also equated with African-American. If you are of African descent from another place, why then would you identify with that, regardless if you are of mixed heritage or not?
[Either way, it seems to me that things like accents and other mannerisms that mark one as foreign are the necessary tools to distinguish oneself.
I'd been to St. Thomas before (and no, not the resort part either), and see no reason whatsoeever why anyone from there would be in a position to look down on African Americans.
They might because they look at the opportunities available to people in the mainland USA and feel that some AAs fail to take advantage of them.
Sagascends comments about West Indian attitudes to AA tourists to the Caribbean and those towards AAs resident in the USA are quite valid. They link AA tourists to wealth and then experience shock on encountering levels of poverty and hopelessness in the US Ghetto. Why do they ask themselves when they feel that opportunities exist to do better.
Joined: 11 May 2005 {Posts: 84 } Location: New York
Posted: Wed 18 Jun 2008 20:31 Post subject:
Richard Miller wrote:
dahlin wrote:
None of my roots are African-American. Neither am I comfortable being referred to as such, and will correct someone for mislabeling me. Because black and AA are generally considered the same in the U.S. is one of the reasons I don't care much for the black label either. I'm of Caribbean descent...
I've always wondered this:
Why is it that so many Caribbean and African immigrants are so reluctant to being considered black in the US, yet European immigrants have no problem whatsoever being considered to be white?
Wutdafuxup?
Interesting question. Here are three levels of answers.
European culture is admired and welcomed in America. Third world culture is not. The European does not have to reject himself in America. The person from the Third World is expected to reject his heritage because it is deemed substandard. Comments on this thread see Third World people as looking down on African-American heritage (tapping into the history of discrimination). No one mentions the equally common First World history of prejudice toward the Third World which both black and white Americans tap into, and which the Third world immigrant has to deal with. In other words, the same forces that tended to preserve African-American identity will tend to preserve Third World identities.
In addition, Europeans have more of a shared culture (literature, art, technology) than do people from the “Third World”, or even than a more comparable geography, sub-Saharan Africa. It’s probably true that white Americans and Europeans have more of a shared culture (the basis for a common identity) than do African Americans and black West Indians.
On a deeper level, it may have to do with the basic definitions of the identities. The criterion for white identity is physical type, not culture, so it accepts less variation in phenotype, but more in culture. Black identity accepts greater variation in physical type (“blacks come in all colors”), but cannot accept much variation in culture precisely because it is based in culture.
Joined: 26 May 2007 {Posts: 425 } Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posted: Wed 18 Jun 2008 20:59 Post subject:
caribj wrote:
Richard Miller wrote:
[Either way, it seems to me that things like accents and other mannerisms that mark one as foreign are the necessary tools to distinguish oneself.
I'd been to St. Thomas before (and no, not the resort part either), and see no reason whatsoeever why anyone from there would be in a position to look down on African Americans.
They might because they look at the opportunities available to people in the mainland USA and feel that some AAs fail to take advantage of them.
St. Thomas is in the US Virgin Islands. They have the same opportunities.
[Either way, it seems to me that things like accents and other mannerisms that mark one as foreign are the necessary tools to distinguish oneself.
I'd been to St. Thomas before (and no, not the resort part either), and see no reason whatsoeever why anyone from there would be in a position to look down on African Americans.
They might because they look at the opportunities available to people in the mainland USA and feel that some AAs fail to take advantage of them.
St. Thomas is in the US Virgin Islands. They have the same opportunities.
No they dont and I know this because I have loads of cousins who were BORN or grew up there. Ask how many still live there. ONE. She was born in even porer St Kitts. Ask how many of her kids are still in St Thomas. Only the ones too young to leave.
The USVI has some of the lowest wages, highest cost of living and worst educational and health care facilities under the US flag.
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 {Posts: 119 } Location: Somewhere...
Posted: Thu 19 Jun 2008 00:40 Post subject:
caribj wrote:
Richard Miller wrote:
caribj wrote:
Richard Miller wrote:
[Either way, it seems to me that things like accents and other mannerisms that mark one as foreign are the necessary tools to distinguish oneself.
I'd been to St. Thomas before (and no, not the resort part either), and see no reason whatsoeever why anyone from there would be in a position to look down on African Americans.
They might because they look at the opportunities available to people in the mainland USA and feel that some AAs fail to take advantage of them.
St. Thomas is in the US Virgin Islands. They have the same opportunities.
No they dont and I know this because I have loads of cousins who were BORN or grew up there. Ask how many still live there. ONE. She was born in even porer St Kitts. Ask how many of her kids are still in St Thomas. Only the ones too young to leave.
The USVI has some of the lowest wages, highest cost of living and worst educational and health care facilities under the US flag.
Joined: 26 May 2007 {Posts: 425 } Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posted: Thu 19 Jun 2008 04:16 Post subject:
dahlin wrote:
caribj wrote:
No they dont and I know this because I have loads of cousins who were BORN or grew up there. Ask how many still live there. ONE. She was born in even porer St Kitts. Ask how many of her kids are still in St Thomas. Only the ones too young to leave.
The USVI has some of the lowest wages, highest cost of living and worst educational and health care facilities under the US flag.
True, very true...
I can only speak for what I saw in St. Thomas, but I'd rather live there than some parts of San Antonio, heck many of the place I've seen in the Gulf states.... I'd choose St. Thomas over them as well!
You know as well as I do, that there are much worse places in the US to be than St. Thomas - if presence of opportunity is why they may look down on African Americans, would they still look down African Americans from places like, say, Prichard, Alabama?
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
