As a light-skinned African American, I get asked the unavoidable, "What you mixed with?" quite frequently. My typical response is an eye roll, brow lift, and "Black and some more black." If I am asked the question in front of a group, my attitude is often to deflect attention from my red-hot cheeks. It’s pretty embarrassing for my melanin-deficiency to be put on display in a room full of people.
Many African Americans are conscious of their skin in some way at almost all times. However, for those on either end of the spectrum, very light or very dark, that consciousness doesn’t go away even when you are among other Blacks. Skin color is often a primary source of ridicule among Black children.
Why should it matter to anyone whether or not I am of mixed race? Mixed race African Americans, and those who appear to be, are often exoticized by other African Americans and by non-blacks. I get tired of strangers asking to touch my hair. I have always loved how beautiful all shades of Black folks are, with all their different skin colors, hair textures, and facial features. In 2005, I can’t understand why my combination of big lips, thick hair, and light skin should puzzle anyone.
However, when I first heard that there was a DNA test that could break down one’s racial make-up, I thought, “Sure. Why not? I'd take the test.” I have to admit that this new DNA technology intrigues me. If I could find out exactly what I was made of, sure, I'd be curious.
One of the things I find most unfortunate about slavery in America is how many African Americans have no family history. What country are my people from? How could I possibly know? The results of a DNA test that could break down my racial make-up into percentages would give me, if nothing else, some knowledge to share with my family about who we are and where we come from.
I have never met a blood relative of mine who was not clearly African American. I am aware of small amounts of Creole and Native American blood in my family, but I have never thought of myself as any less than 100% Black. I would take this racial breakdown DNA test out of pure curiosity. It wouldn’t matter if the test came back saying that I was less Black than I think I am. It also wouldn’t surprise or thrill me if the test came back, as I would expect it to, saying that I am as Black as I believe.
A year ago, I probably would’ve shied away from a test like this. I would have thought that my blackness was on the line -- that somehow I would be devastated by the results. But what I've come to realize is that Black isn’t something you can find in a test tube. The African American experience is like no other.
I could take this DNA race test today, confident that the results wouldn’t have the power to change my life in any significant way. No one’s lifetime of culture and experience can be disregarded based on the results of a test. This DNA test is something that people should take for fun and personal curiosity -- not because they are looking for an identity.
==========
Sabrina Ford is a student at San Francisco State University where she also works with the Center for Integration and Improvement in Journalism.
June 01, 2005
Last edited by zsana on Mon 03 Apr 2006 12:24; edited 1 time in total
Can you imagine a person of obviously African ancestry saying that he is 100 percent white? Yet, these characters who claim to be 100 percent black when they obviously are not expect to be praised for their social lies.
Posted: Mon 03 Apr 2006 01:29 Post subject: Re: DNA
Powell wrote:
Can you imagine a person of obviously African ancestry saying that he is 100 percent white? Yet, these characters who claim to be 100 percent black when they obviously are not expect to be praised for their social lies.
Againn your animosity shows. She is clearly stating her ethnicity. Not a racial concept.
I could take this DNA race test today, confident that the results wouldn’t have the power to change my life in any significant way. No one’s lifetime of culture and experience can be disregarded based on the results of a test. This DNA test is something that people should take for fun and personal curiosity -- not because they are looking for an identity.
....and that about sums up my opinion, on DNA tests.
The only issue I have with the author of this article is the below quote.
Quote:
Mixed race African Americans, and those who appear to be, are often exoticized by other African Americans and by non-blacks.
She very wrongly assumes all mixed race people consider themselves part of the black community/"race". Many do not and instead publicly acknowledge and proudly claim both sides of their heritages and will attest to belonging to a growing and thriving bi/multiracial community. Some feel more at ease in white or hispanic environments. Others black. And some feel about equally at home in all of the various communities. Biracial and black are no longer synonymous. Strangely, some Americans don't seem to realize this fact.
IMO Sabrina Ford has every right to consider herself black/African-American while having knowledge of non African ancestry. It's her life and her choice. Just like Americans of mixed ancestry who consider themselves bi/multiracial, or white. It's their choice as well and they shouldn't be denigrated for it. Obviously Ms. Ford has not done this. However, there are legions who do. Plenty of articles right here on this website attest to this despicable behavior.
IMO Sabrina Ford has every right to consider herself black/African-American while having knowledge of non African ancestry. It's her life and her choice.
Ms. Ford did not have knowledge of non-African ancestry (with the exception of some "Native American"), and only has black family members/relatives , so she is not "choosng" to call herself black in spite of being "mixed"; its simply what she is.
Ms. Ford did not have knowledge of non-African ancestry (with the exception of some "Native American")
That "Native American" ancestry is precisely the non-African ancestry I was referring to. There are Americans of African/Native-American heritage who do not consider themselves solely black.
Just because you have a visibly mixed (or white) phenotype, and you were born and bred in a black/African-American identifying family, doesn't mean you yourself have to consider yourself the same ethnicity as your relatives. People have to - and will do - what's most comfortable for themselves when it comes to this racial identity business. Slavery at least in America is over. People can call themselves whatever they wish. Whether the label corresponds with what society sees or not.
I bet you there are families where there are "white branches" and "black branches" with both sides acknowledging each others existence. Different "racial" designations SAME blood.
Both of these young women are genetically of white/black heritage but Kim is making the choice to identify as white, while Lonnae feels more comfortable with a black identity and is therefore making that choice. So what? Life goes on and it's their business. Happens every day...
Last edited by zsana on Wed 05 Apr 2006 12:24; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Tue 04 Apr 2006 03:44 Post subject: Who is who
zsana wrote:
..Just because you have a visibly mixed (or white) phenotype, and you were born and bred in a black/African-American identifying family, doesn't mean you yourself have to consider yourself the same ethnicity as your relatives. People have to - and will do - what's most comfortable for themselves when it comes to this racial identity business. Slavery at least in America is over. People can call themselves whatever they wish. Whether the label corresponds with what society sees or not.
..
Hi,
Is it too difficult to understand that a "white" person can have "black" ancestors and viceversa?
Why don't reserve the terms black, brown, ligh-brown, white, etc, to describe COLOR OF SKINS only? And use the terms African, European, Italian, New Yorker or whatever, to define ancestral cultures.
Ethnicity is the tribe or club one belongs. A tribe is a group of persons, and nothing else. Colors of Skin are related to phenotype. Not necesarily to groups.
Relatives usually belong to the same "tribe" we do, so they belong to the same ethniticity, no matter they have the skin green with yellow spots.
If so, we could say "those white ladies belong to the African-American culture". And nobody will be surprised at all.
Is it too difficult to understand that a "white" person can have "black" ancestors and viceversa?
Why don't reserve the terms black, brown, ligh-brown, white, etc, to describe COLOR OF SKINS only?
It's not hard for me personally to understand this at all. BUT, it obviously is VERY hard for North Americans in general to understand this or rather agree with it. This is not Latin America after all.
Here, peoples racial SELF concept - which may contradict what the mirror says and society sees - is tied into this. Heavily. This self concept for a lot of people is more important than genetic realities.
Did you read the article? Cousin Lonnae claims Kim is "passing as white" (despite her looks) because she's "half black" and is offended because she is not adopting the ODR and applying it to herself. Lonnae fails to mention that she herself and her family of successful blacks are actually black identifiying mixed race people. How else could Kim come out so white looking if this wasn't the case?
Oevega wrote:
Quote:
If so, we could say "those white ladies belong to the African-American culture". And nobody will be surprised at all.
Again this is not Latin America. This statement is hard to rationalize and understand to most North Americans because "white" is still generally associated with racial purity (when it comes to "black blood" anyway) even though we know this concept is a scam. This racist mentality is kept alive in societies consciousness by anti "passing" propaganda in the media passing as "entertainment." And of course the never ending supply of ODR supporting articles, books, etc...
Some Americans would read the above quote and ask themselves how can a white person be culturally associated with/related to blacks and still be white? They must just look white and really not be. It deeply saddens me to say, but I feel many American "whites" and "blacks" still subconsciously view each other as belonging to different species and not the same human race. Of course only open diehard racist would admit to it... Although society HAS progressed tremendously "race wise" thank GOD, look below the surface and some things haven't really changed that much at all.
Those who openly reject hypodescent are still seen as rebels of sorts to a large number of people.
That "Native American" ancestry is precisely the non-African ancestry I was referring to. There are Americans of African/Native-American heritage who do not consider themselves solely black.
She mentioned knowing about small amounts of distant native american ancestry - which she probably knows little about.
Quote:
"It's her life and her choice."
My issue with the above statement, and similar ones often made about certain african americans here on ODR forum (i.e calling people "black-identified" instead of black), is that it implies Ms. Ford is actually a mutli-ethnic person that is merely choosing to call herself black in spite of having a mixed family; as if her identity was rooted in complying with the "one drop rule" - or telling "social lies" (A Powell). This is not the case, as Ms. Ford does not come from a multi-ethnic family.
In order to be able to make a "choice", to identify as something, there has to be more than one option; which is why its usually worded that way when describing multi-racial people that call themselves black. What choice could a person with a uniformly black-american family be making in calling themself black??
You could, say that Halle Berry (or some other bi-racial person) "chooses" to identify as black, or "considers herself black", and that would be an accurate statement; Sabrina Ford( and others like her) however, simply is black.
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Tue 11 Apr 2006 04:04 Post subject: Considering ourselves
Phil345 wrote:
You could, say that Halle Berry (or some other bi-racial person) "chooses" to identify as black, or "considers herself black", and that would be an accurate statement; Sabrina Ford( and others like her) however, simply is black.
Hi,
What is Black?
What does mean to be Black? or White? or Yellow? or Red? or Brown?
It looks it is such a trivial question, but it is not.
People often confusses race with culture. Race is just a way of saying "genetics", culture means the knowledge of a group of people.
A race is not the same than an ethnic group. Blacks Americans of today are more an ethnic group rather than an uniform race.
As it happens, Black Americans is a group of people which share, (most of them), certain traditions, culture and a common history. If it is defined as a culture, black americans could be of any complexion. Is that simple, I guess.
There are White Americans which grew up inside the Black American culture (think in "light skinned" blacks), and also black persons who grew up inside the White American culture -think on adoptions.
I don't know why Americans get so complicated with something so simple.
Well, it is just my view as an outsider, anyways. My dam Latino way of seeing things.
Anyways. In Cuba and Brazil one can see Orisha's priests and candomble masters who are white, because that is their culture, with roots in Africa. No contradition on that.
You could, say that Halle Berry (or some other bi-racial person) "chooses" to identify as black, or "considers herself black", and that would be an accurate statement; Sabrina Ford( and others like her) however, simply is black.
There are people in the American black community (in this instance meaning a cultural group and not a "race") who because of generations of bi/multiracial endogomy on both the mother and fathers side have just as much white ancestry and in some cases MORE than Halle Berry. There is even a small percentage of "African-Americans" that show NO sign genetically of having ANY African ancestry at all.
So Sabrina Ford and others like her (including those possessing stronger racially ambiguous appearances) are genetically bi/multiracial but of course culturally African-American/black. It doesn't matter if the "pure" white ancestors are known about or not in the family. They've obviously left their genetic mark all the same. Which, creates the same type of experiences that a directly biracial person often has. The "what are you?", "what are you mixed with?", "you're sure light for being only black", etc... questions.
That's why IMO - and that's all it is - Sabrina does have a choice and she's made it. There are others coming from the same background she has, who identify differently.
There are people right here at this site who've been raised by black identifying parents in black identifying families and communities, who now consider themselves mulatto/biracial. Those who used to mark black/African-American on legal forms who now mark the other box, leave it blank, or specify two or more legally recognized "races".
Every year a small percentage of the formerly black identified change racial identification and reinvent themselves as whites. I can only imagine that these people were already predominantly European genetically to begin with.
The world is full of choices. We all make them everyday.
So Sabrina Ford and others like her (including those possessing stronger racially ambiguous appearances) are genetically bi/multiracial
Is race even genetically/biologically defined to begin with??
....additionally how are you so certain of Sabrina's Fords background (which you seem to know more than her) in light of developments like this article you posted?
Which, creates the same type of experiences that a directly biracial person often has. The "what are you?", "what are you mixed with?", "you're sure light for being only black", etc... questions.
That's why IMO - and that's all it is - Sabrina does have a choice and she's made it.
Having similar experiences does not equate with choosing a racial identity. That is something multi-ethnic people can do; Sabrina ford is not.
....thats like saying David Letterman (or any random mono-ethnic person), chooses to be white; as if he one day made a concious decision to be white , even though his whole family is. What could he be choosing from?
Last edited by Phil345 on Wed 03 May 2006 01:56; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 1842 } Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posted: Wed 03 May 2006 00:12 Post subject:
Phil345 wrote:
Is race even genetically/biologically defined to begin with??
Forgive me if I am ignorant, but isn't this question some sort of a contradiction to the following assertion that you make:
Phil345 wrote:
she is genealogically African-American/black.
Geneology is by and large the study of ones genetic make up, is it not??
So what is "genealogically African-American/black", when even if the construct of race does exist, there is no such race as "African American"?? If you base geneology on how one identifies or is brought up to identify, then a person can say they have Catholic genes, when we all know, there are no such genes.
Phil345 wrote:
This is not the case, as Ms. Ford does not come from a multi-ethnic family.
In terms of how they identify themselves, yes.
Phil345 wrote:
You could, say that Halle Berry (or some other bi-racial person) "chooses" to identify as black, or "considers herself black", and that would be an accurate statement; Sabrina Ford( and others like her) however, simply is black.
Really, if that were the case, then why do people question her ethnicity?? If she were "simply black", there would be no questions in peoples minds as to what she "is". That would be true the WORLD over, not just in the US.
oevega wrote:
Blacks Americans of today are more an ethnic group rather than an uniform race.
Could not have stated it better myself.
My personal experience is that when I was younger growing up, there wasn't much of a question to how I was perceived. This changed as I got older as peoples perceptions changed. I have always viewed ODR suspiciously. It never made sense to me. Members of my family were "black" by virtue of the ODR. I questioned it as early as 4 years old, which was 40 years ago. But I was not brought up in a black area, so never had a black identity. As a youngster, I had a hard time with black identified people. I still do today. This might have had an impact on how I see myself. But I was smart enough at the age of 4 to realize something wasn't right when my mother told me that my father, uncle, and grandmother were "black", but just fair skinned. To which I would reply, "but why don't they look like Negros??" I can remember this. This is why I have this interest in ODR.
So what I am really trying to say is that in terms of the American Black ethnic group, I have never been a part of. I think Black identified people can see this in how I carry myself. This perhaps is the reason why I have a difficult time with some of them.
It really hit home for me that ODR was not universal when I started traveling abroad.
Phil, you can believe what you want, that's you. I do not question that. But if I could see an obvious admixture in people at a very young age, without parental or societal influence, it is hard for me to understand people who do not, other than for me to think they were brought up to think this way. Perhaps I'm just extra perceptive. IMO, a person is Black if they will be seen as black universally. Not perceived as black by the white racist American ODR. Which ironically, is championed by the Black identified and the Black leftist elites.
Last edited by DChapman on Wed 03 May 2006 01:07; edited 1 time in total
Phil345, both of our viewpoints obviously make sense to us personally. We're both just expressing our opinions. Nothing more.
We don't have to agree or try to convince each (or anyone on this board for that matter) of the rightness of our positions.
I obviously know no more of Sabrina Fords background than what she has shared. Looking at her, I can see that she has some degree of admixture (which she mentioned in the article as being Creole & Native-American). What percentage? I of course do not know and do not care.
If she's content with what she calls herself, who am I to disagree or be upset about it?
If David Letterman (or any random mono-ethnic person) discovered/heard family folklore about Native-American, Gens de couleur, or African-American, etc... ancestry, he could also if he wanted to (although I believe it would be highly unlikley for him to do it) claim a different racial identity.
I know of at least one well known case where this happend. Years ago I was watching 20/20 and the program was about Anita Hemmings http://americanculture.vassar.edu/images/pop/pop_overview06.jpg being the first "African-American" graduate of Vassar College. You can even purchase the program...
Anyway, the interviewer asked Anita's Granddaughter if she still considered herself white. She said she now marks other on forms. She no longer felt comfortable claiming a sole white identity. She, her husband, son, and entire extended family were all mono-ethnically white. Yet still, she decided to (or at least claimed to on television) adopt a new/different identity based on the discovery that her Grandmother had supposedly "passed".
FADING TO WHITE
Quote:
One woman’s journey into her family’s past uncovers a story that affects every American
BY JILLIAN A. SIM
Forgive me if I am ignorant, but isn't this question some sort of a contradiction to the following assertion that you make....
no it does not.
Quote:
Geneology is by and large the study of ones genetic make up, is it not??
Genealogy is the record of descent of a person, family, or group from an ancestor or ancestors; like a family tree - not genetics/biology.
My statement was that the woman in question is geneaologically african american; meaning her family lineage is african-american/black. Zsana was implying that she is just "culturally" black, but genetically/biologically something else (a concept which confuses me).
If she's content with what she calls herself, who am I to disagree or be upset about it?
I really dont mean to be overcritical. But when people state what they are, and what their family is, saying that "they choose to call themself black, and thats their right..", or calling them "black-identified", ect (as people do very often here on ODR), are just polite ways to undermine their ethnicity.
Those kind of statements are meant to emphasize that the person is not what they say they are, and they are just "calling" themself that -- meaning you obviously disagree (and purely on the basis of her physical appearance)
Nobody would call Whoopi Goldberg "black-identified", or go on and say that "its her life choice to identify as black, and if she wants to call herself that, then thats her right... yadda yadda", because you dont doubt that she is....
Last edited by Phil345 on Wed 03 May 2006 04:41; edited 2 times in total
Joined: 27 Nov 2004 {Posts: 1842 } Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Posted: Wed 03 May 2006 02:26 Post subject:
Phil345 wrote:
DChapman wrote:
Forgive me if I am ignorant, but isn't this question some sort of a contradiction to the following assertion that you make....
no it does not.
Quote:
Geneology is by and large the study of ones genetic make up, is it not??
Genealogy is the record of descent of a person, family, or group from an ancestor or ancestors; like a family tree - not genetics/biology.
ok. You are correct.
genealogy (n.) A record or table of the descent of a person, family, or group from an ancestor or ancestors; a family tree.
genealogy (n.) Direct descent from an ancestor; lineage or pedigree.
genealogy (n.) The study or investigation of ancestry and family histories.
But there still is a correlation between the record of descent of a person to that persons genetic make up.
Phil345 wrote:
My statement was that the woman in question is geneaologically african american; meaning her family lineage is african-american/black. Zsana was implying that she is just "culturally" black, but genetically/biologically something else (a concept which confuses me).
What do you mean her family lineage is "African American/black"?? Was it always so back say 10 generations?? Or her recent lineage???
Zsana is correct. I think she stated her case in an excellent fashion. That's a very easy concept. Take Americans. I know of some Chinese descended folks who are American culturally, but genetically/biologically, Chinese or Asian. Yet if they were to go to China, they would not fit in culturally. Samething with Italian Americans that I know. I have known several to go to Italy and are looked at as American, not Italian.
What I think Zsana was saying that the woman in question is culturally black because she has a black identity and identifies as black. But she gentically (and phenotypically) is not a Sub Saharan Black. We can go back and forth on this. Like I said, if one would be looked at as a Sub Saharan black universally, then I would say, that's what one is. But if you're one thing in Brazil, and another in the US, then it is open to interpretation. That's the way I see it, you obviosuly do not.
By using ODR standards I think is a detriment to blacks as it yields false hopes, IMO. How much good does it do to say that Halle is the standard of black beauty?? Will that give the more African descended, African phenotype women the same chance?? Everyone who knows the truth knows what the answer is. It doesn't give them a chance. I am not saying this is right or wrong, it just is.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
