|
|
| Author |
Message |
Powell
Guru
Joined: 27 Nov 2004
{Posts: 2462 }
|
 Posted: Mon 10 Nov 2008 00:51 Post subject: Latino Escape Hatch |
 |
|
| HastaLaPasta wrote: | Just to add on to Sadie's comments, this is not an issue that is strictly about denying African ancestry. Many Latinos look South Asian. or of clear Eastern Asian heritage. They don't identify that way, they identify with the country they were born and/or raised in. Yes, there is racial prejudice in Latin America, but in some ways the issue of race is so much less relevant than it is in the U.S., and that can carry over.
It's not fair to make the kind of judgment some have suggested in calling it an "escape hatch" without putting the different concepts of race into perspective. |
As I've said to many others Latinos during the days of "Interracial Voice," the point of mentioning your dreaded "black blood" is NOT to make you "black." It's purpose is to give your mixed-race Anglo and Creole counterparts the same de facto rights that you have: The right to be "mixed," "white," or what have you without being denounced as "passing" by many jealous, rage-filled American blacks and their hypocritical liberal supporters.
The fact is that many blacks and liberal supporters love to parrot the myth that "one drop" of "black blood" makes you "black" in the U.S. when they KNOW this to be a lie. You Latinos are the clearest and most obvious example of the lie. If most white Americans truly feared the alleged "inferiority" of "black blood," why would that alleged "inferiority" be neutralized by a Latino culture? One we break the tacit understanding that the "black blood" in Latinos is not to be mentioned in connection with the "one drop" myth, blacks and liberals are rendered impotent and silent.
The "escape hatch" term comes from sociologist Carl Degler, who used the term "mulatto escape hatch" in his studies comparing Brazil and the United States.
Last edited by Powell on Tue 11 Nov 2008 14:11; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Sadie
Regular User
Joined: 19 Oct 2008
{Posts: 73 }
|
| Posted: Mon 10 Nov 2008 23:09 Post subject: Re: Latino Escape Hatch |
|
|
Just to add on during the days of "Interracial Voice," the point of mentioning your dreaded "black blood" is NOT to make you "black." It's purpose is to give your mixed-race Anglo and Creole counterparts the same de facto rights that you have: The right to be "mixed," "white," or what have you without being denounced as "passing" by jealous, rage-filled American blacks and their hypocritical liberal supporters.
The fact is that blacks and liberal supporters love to parrot the myth that "one drop" of "black blood" makes you "black" in the U.S. when they KNOW this to be a lie. You Latinos are the clearest and most obvious example of the lie. If most white Americans truly feared the alleged "inferiority" of "black blood," why would that alleged "inferiority" be neutralized by a Latino culture? One we break the tacit understanding that the "black blood" in Latinos is not to be mentioned in connection with the "one drop" myth, blacks and liberals are rendered impotent and silent.
The "escape hatch" term comes from sociologist Carl Degler, who used the term "mulatto escape hatch" in his studies comparing Brazil and the United States.
/quote]
As a Latina, I don't presume to understand what mixed-race Anglos and Creoles go through. However, I want to say that Latinos don't have it any easier. We too are ridiculed if we attempt to say we are White (even if we look like it phenotypically)by all Americans. Americans have a very narrow conception of what White looks like. Any "exotic" features are immediately seen as non-White. I think thats because there are many very fair blonde and blue-eyed people in America and when you compare that to a typical Latino, we just can't come that close to being that white (although there are a few very fair-skinned Latinos). So the "passing" phenomena is not only a problem for mixed-race Anglos and Creoles.
The inferiority you mention is not neutralized by a Latino culture. Latinos are not considered on an equal level with White Americans simply because they are of mixed-race. I sense some rage here towards Latinos because they don't have to say they are black. I think that's because Latinos want to escape the racial bias people have in the USA not because they want to deny what they are. You can't hide the sun with your hands, if you are black in the Latino culture you are still Black. We Latinos use color descriptors to describe ourselves as blanco=white(and this white category is broader than the American white), trigueno=dark but not black, and moreno=black. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dragon Horse
SuperMentor
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
{Posts: 1829 }
Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
|
| Posted: Tue 11 Nov 2008 01:27 Post subject: Re: Latino Escape Hatch |
|
|
| Powell wrote: | | HastaLaPasta wrote: | Just to add on to Sadie's comments, this is not an issue that is strictly about denying African ancestry. Many Latinos look South Asian. or of clear Eastern Asian heritage. They don't identify that way, they identify with the country they were born and/or raised in. Yes, there is racial prejudice in Latin America, but in some ways the issue of race is so much less relevant than it is in the U.S., and that can carry over.
It's not fair to make the kind of judgment some have suggested in calling it an "escape hatch" without putting the different concepts of race into perspective. |
As I've said to many others Latinos during the days of "Interracial Voice," the point of mentioning your dreaded "black blood" is NOT to make you "black." It's purpose is to give your mixed-race Anglo and Creole counterparts the same de facto rights that you have: The right to be "mixed," "white," or what have you without being denounced as "passing" by jealous, rage-filled American blacks and their hypocritical liberal supporters.
The fact is that blacks and liberal supporters love to parrot the myth that "one drop" of "black blood" makes you "black" in the U.S. when they KNOW this to be a lie. |
"raged filled jealous American blacks". Is that a generalization?
| Quote: | 2.7 Do not generalize to a U.S. “racial” or ethnic group in the political advocacy forums. (Generalization is allowed in the comparative studies or technical and scholarly forums, where moral judgment is forbidden.):
xample 1: You may narrate personal experiences of bigotry or mistreatment, and you may name the group membership of the perpetrators. But you may NOT generalize by opining that a group shares collective guilt for members' evil acts.
Example 2: You may narrate personal experiences of compassion or wisdom, and you may name the group membership of the role models. But you may NOT generalize by opining that any group shares collective honor for members' good acts.
Example 3: You may express pride in your personal achievements. But you may NOT express pride in your membership in any U.S. "racial" or ethnic group.
Example 4: You may write: "John Smith is stupid, cruel, and bad-smelling." But you may NOT write: "It is my personal opinion, based upon my own personal experiences, that White [or Black] folks are [any adjective at all]."
|
Can you please provide a study that shows the average African American is hate filled or jealous of mixed race people/light skin blacks, etc.
If not, please withdraw this disgusting statement. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fwsweet
Administrator
Joined: 26 Nov 2004
{Posts: 5380 }
Location: Palm Coast, FL
|
| Posted: Tue 11 Nov 2008 01:37 Post subject: Re: Latino Escape Hatch |
|
|
| Dragon Horse wrote: | | "raged filled jealous American blacks". Is that a generalization? |
I share Dragon Horse's concern regarding rule 2.7. A.D. might want to clairify whether (1) the message is suggesting that most A-A's are rage-filled and jealous, or (2) the message is talking about only those few A-A's who are rage-filled and jealous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dragon Horse
SuperMentor
Joined: 07 Feb 2007
{Posts: 1829 }
Location: Lookin DC Metro, Feelin Geneva
|
| Posted: Tue 11 Nov 2008 01:47 Post subject: |
|
|
| Thank you Frank. I don't object to a statement saying "some black Americans are..." because I do not think anyone on this board would argue that is not true, but that type of qualification is important. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Powell
Guru
Joined: 27 Nov 2004
{Posts: 2462 }
|
| Posted: Tue 11 Nov 2008 14:13 Post subject: "Many" Blacks |
|
|
| I've modified the message to refer to "many blacks" rather than "blacks." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HastaLaPasta
New User
Joined: 08 Mar 2008
{Posts: 15 }
|
| Posted: Sun 23 Nov 2008 02:49 Post subject: Re: Latino Escape Hatch |
|
|
| Sadie wrote: | As a Latina, I don't presume to understand what mixed-race Anglos and Creoles go through. However, I want to say that Latinos don't have it any easier. We too are ridiculed if we attempt to say we are White (even if we look like it phenotypically)by all Americans. Americans have a very narrow conception of what White looks like. Any "exotic" features are immediately seen as non-White. I think thats because there are many very fair blonde and blue-eyed people in America and when you compare that to a typical Latino, we just can't come that close to being that white (although there are a few very fair-skinned Latinos). So the "passing" phenomena is not only a problem for mixed-race Anglos and Creoles.
The inferiority you mention is not neutralized by a Latino culture. Latinos are not considered on an equal level with White Americans simply because they are of mixed-race. I sense some rage here towards Latinos because they don't have to say they are black. I think that's because Latinos want to escape the racial bias people have in the USA not because they want to deny what they are. You can't hide the sun with your hands, if you are black in the Latino culture you are still Black. We Latinos use color descriptors to describe ourselves as blanco=white(and this white category is broader than the American white), trigueno=dark but not black, and moreno=black. |
In my experience, most phenotypically white Latinos don't identify as a white, although I suppose this is more prevalent among the first and second generation Americans, than it is with the more recent immigrants. I think people tend to just associate white with white American, just as some associate black with black/African American. In this country people often blur the lines between race and ethnicity. I guess that's the only real melting that gets done in this pot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Evan Bourne
Suspended
Joined: 31 Jan 2009
{Posts: 18 }
|
| Posted: Mon 02 Feb 2009 20:25 Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | In my experience, most phenotypically white Latinos don't identify as a white |
True. I remember a few years ago watching an episode of 20/20 where the discussion was on Hispanics in America, and one of the co-hosts is Elizabeth Vargas who is Puerto Rican. Anyways there was a moment in the show where she referred to herself as a person of color, even though her phenotype falls within the range of European looking.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fwsweet
Administrator
Joined: 26 Nov 2004
{Posts: 5380 }
Location: Palm Coast, FL
|
| Posted: Mon 02 Feb 2009 20:31 Post subject: |
|
|
| Evan Bourne wrote: | | Quote: | | In my experience, most phenotypically white Latinos don't identify as a white |
True. |
Objective evidence contradicts your personal experience. In the 2000 census, 90 percent of those who answered "yes" to question 7 ("are you Hispanic?") checked off "White" (only) on question 8 (the "race" question). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Evan Bourne
Suspended
Joined: 31 Jan 2009
{Posts: 18 }
|
| Posted: Mon 02 Feb 2009 21:07 Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Objective evidence contradicts your personal experience. In the 2000 census, 90 percent of those who answered "yes" to question 7 ("are you Hispanic?") checked off "White" (only) on question 8 (the "race" question). |
"For certain purposes, respondents who wrote in "Chicano or "Mexican (or indeed almost all Hispanic orgin groups} in the "Some other race" category were automatically re-classifed into the White race group."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_American#Race_and_ethnicity |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fwsweet
Administrator
Joined: 26 Nov 2004
{Posts: 5380 }
Location: Palm Coast, FL
|
| Posted: Mon 02 Feb 2009 21:35 Post subject: |
|
|
Try to avoid passive voice. We were talking about the U.S. census, which captures self-identity. When you say "were automatically re-classifed into the White race group," (passive voice) it suggests that you are talking about the Census Bureau. In fact, the Wikipedia article that you cited is talking about the National Cancer Institute's SEER program, which re-classifies some Hispanics (Puerto Ricans) as White and other Hispanics (Dominicans) as Black. I suggest that how the National Cancer Institute's SEER program tabulates Hispanics is irrelevant to the issue at hand ("racial" self-identity). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Powell
Guru
Joined: 27 Nov 2004
{Posts: 2462 }
|
| Posted: Tue 03 Feb 2009 06:50 Post subject: reclassification |
|
|
| fwsweet wrote: |
Try to avoid passive voice. We were talking about the U.S. census, which captures self-identity. When you say "were automatically re-classifed into the White race group," (passive voice) it suggests that you are talking about the Census Bureau. In fact, the Wikipedia article that you cited is talking about the National Cancer Institute's SEER program, which re-classifies some Hispanics (Puerto Ricans) as White and other Hispanics (Dominicans) as Black. I suggest that how the National Cancer Institute's SEER program tabulates Hispanics is irrelevant to the issue at hand ("racial" self-identity). |
Wasn't automatic reclassification of Hispanics into the "white" racial group the past practice of the U.S. Census Bureau? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fwsweet
Administrator
Joined: 26 Nov 2004
{Posts: 5380 }
Location: Palm Coast, FL
|
| Posted: Tue 03 Feb 2009 13:25 Post subject: Re: reclassification |
|
|
| Powell wrote: | | Wasn't automatic reclassification of Hispanics into the "white" racial group the past practice of the U.S. Census Bureau? |
Yes. It was the practice in 1960 and 1970. It was not the practice in 1980. The Bureau has not made public their policies for 1990 or 2000, but from looking at the numbers, most analysts believe that the Bureau has not done this since 1980. The best historical explanation is here. The most recent data source is here. The most detailed analysis of the bizarre overlap/underlap between U.S. census "race" and U.S. census "ethnicity" is Mary C. Waters, Ethnic Options: Choosing Identities in America (Berkeley: University of California, 1990). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
