Biracials have been passing as blacks for so long that they themselves don't even know who they are anymore. It took the perennial Vineyard vacationer Skip Gates to make it safe for the rest of us when he coyly admitted after a 50-50 genetic test result that he did, after all, remember something about his family being partly European.
In fact, all of America is confused - black, white or otherwise. And how could we not be with more than a century of biracial faces representing black ones?
Confirmed biracials (50% black/50%white)
Halle (pre-nose job), Barack Obama, Skip Gates
Hmm, if they are...what about?
Terrence Howard, Sanaa Lathan, Manning Marable
First "black" to sign with a major Holywood studio? First "black" hopeful for Tennessee Senator since Reconstruction? First "black" nominated for an Oscar?
Lena Horne, Harold Ford Jr., Dorothy Dandridge
Far be it from me to claim some biracial form of "gaydar"; however, the basic principles of heredity, summed up handily here by history and molecular anthropology PhD candidate Frank Sweet, plainly prove that what you see is what you get.
When ideology trumps reality to the point that one cannot admit that there is a difference between and , and how that difference came to be then we’ve all ceased to be rational beings. Can anyone really wonder how such cognitive dissonance as George Bush’s insistence that Saddam = Osama can exist unchecked among the American electorate for damned near 5 years, when something as basic as who we are and where we come from has been denied for the last 100? When effectively 350 years of pre-1900 history has been wiped out of the collective American memory?
Forcing our hand is the wave of mulatto Latin immigrants who have more honest racial identities, as well as the well-educated, middle class African immigrants who give lie to the blackness equals poverty equation we have so ingrained in the American psyche. The jury is still out on whether or not they will fall in line with the prevailing color line myth of the 20th century, or mount a serious challenge to its efficacy. I, for one, am ready to see the bubble burst and the whole damned thing come apart.
I spent the majority of my life being confused, feeling alienated and ashamed for not being able to conform to our American race myths. Acknowledging obvious physical and cultural markers of European heritage does not negate African heritage; French Creoles prove this and I am so glad to have met some who have provided me with a healthy and positive model to live by. Mixed race people with African heritage should not have to one drop themselves to support any group's agenda - white, black, immigrant or otherwise. I can understand the desire for white Americans and immigrants to employ One Drop Rule, as historically both groups have benefitted handsomely from it. But haven't African Americans figured out already that adopting tactics that their white oppressors have cooked up cannot ultimately be in their own best interests? It's time for African Americans to rethink their political positioning and their group identity. This one is, and she is not looking back.
These series of posts are dedicated to "the finest woman in East Elmhurst" of her day, my mother Kathlean Elizabeth Barnes. I am bold because she could not be.
Posted: Wed 06 Dec 2006 07:16 Post subject: Re: EPILOGUE - PASSING
Quote:
Far be it from me to claim some biracial form of "gaydar"; however, the basic principles of heredity, summed up handily here by history and molecular anthropology PhD candidate Frank Sweet, plainly prove that what you see is what you get. When ideology trumps reality to the point that one cannot admit that there is a difference between and , and how that difference came to be then we’ve all ceased to be rational beings.
I think she misinterprets fsweet's editorial that she links (he can correct me if I'm wrong), as it emphasizes that what you see is not necessarily what you get, and that ancestry is not the same as appearance.
Despite the authors insistence to the contrary, a "biracial gaydar" is exactly what shes claiming to have.
Posted: Wed 06 Dec 2006 12:47 Post subject: Re: EPILOGUE - PASSING
Phil345 wrote:
I think she misinterprets fsweet's editorial that she links (he can correct me if I'm wrong), as it emphasizes that what you see is not necessarily what you get, and that ancestry is not the same as appearance.
Yes, my point in that essay was that very Euro-looking and very Afro-looking individuals continue to be born into thoroughly mixed populations even after many generations of mixing. More importantly I think her saying "what you see is what you get" downplays the fact that millions of genetically mixed people (like Gates) call themselves solely "Black," and that most 21st-century Americans would agree that they have the right to do so.
Nevertheless, the message that I get from her is benign. She seems to be someone who (in contrast to most African Americans) has decided to acknowledge all of her ancestries. I daresay that this attitude among genetically biracial Americans is becoming increasingly common. It is still demographically minuscule, but it is growing.
She seems to be someone who (in contrast to most African Americans) has decided to acknowledge all of her ancestries. I daresay that this attitude among genetically biracial Americans is becoming increasingly common. It is still demographically minuscule, but it is growing.
Personally I find that it takes a bit of courage to openly (I suspect others feel the same way deep down) acknowledge one is of mixed ancestry in this racially polarized society of ours. Especially if one is raised to consider themselves soley black/African-American. This shaming experience this young woman recounts is a perfect example of the guilt and fear that can arise when the mixed race issue is even broached. Thankfully Ms. Carr seems to have "weathered the storm" so to speak and is at peace with herself and her rich background.
I think that's what's important in the end. Regardless of what we call ourselves "racially" speaking, it should be an identifier (regardless of how it looks to others) we've truly chosen for ourselves without coercion or guilt trips.
Jennifer Carr wrote:
Quote:
Finally one evening my mother sat me down and asked me about my interest in all this Irish stuff. I recounted my speculation about my coloring, how other black kids didn't like me and I didn't understand them, and then I brought up our Irish surname and the family crest. Before I could say anymore my mother cut me off and said, "Your father is black, I am black and that means you are black, nothing else."
I was stunned. Fully expecting my mother to confirm my thinking, she instead decimated it. Her words cut through me and lodged in the pit of my stomach. I was having an identity crisis, after all. I suddenly felt embarassed that I didn't know who I was. Then the shame set in. All those black kids who criticized me my entire childhood were right! I was a traitor for thinking that I was anything other than black - a traitor to them and a traitor to my own family. Ashamed, I left the room and never brought up the Irish name or crest again. It would take another 18 years before I began to think of myself as a biracial person, and ironically it would be sparked by a man who looked exactly like my mother.
Posted: Wed 06 Dec 2006 16:10 Post subject: Re: EPILOGUE - PASSING
fwsweet wrote:
Nevertheless, the message that I get from her is benign. She seems to be someone who (in contrast to most African Americans) has decided to acknowledge all of her ancestries. I daresay that this attitude among genetically biracial Americans is becoming increasingly common. It is still demographically minuscule, but it is growing.
I think many African Americans acknowledge their ancestries but the primary one that is acknowledged is the African. Many black folks I've come across believe that black = mixed, so mixed is redundant. They conclude that black people are mixed anyway and those who define themselves as mixed (unless they are Latino) are "running away" from blackness or denying who they really are. This is certainly the response I've encountered from members of my own family who criticize others who do not see themselves as racially black (and I'm not even African American).
It's as if putting the African and the other ancestries on a horizontal footing is seen as a sign that you don't respect the African.
I read her posts. Didn't forget a thing. And I DO admit , her labeling black self-identified genetically bi/multiracial people of African-American ethnicity biracial against their consent/will, is the SAME thing One-Droppers do by labeling black those bi/multiracial people who consider themselves (and wish to be considered by others as) mixed/biracial/mulatto, and in some cases white. I understand this. It's the flip side of the same coin. And I realize a lot of people will have beef with much of what she has written. Still I think it's brave to go against the grain when it comes to being true to yourself. Especially when you run the risk of alienating and hurting those you love and who love you.
G-Man wrote:
Quote:
It's as if putting the African and the other ancestries on a horizontal footing is seen as a sign that you don't respect the African.
I think you're really on to something here. I think this is the perception some folks have. This being a white/light dominated society (some would say world), I believe some think it's impossible for African and other ancestries to TRULY be on a horizontal and equal footing psychologically speaking. Those who believe this may assume biracial people - and those multigenerationaly mixed who identify as mixed/biracial instead of black - really believe they're better and above blacks due to to their "white blood" since whiteness is often exalted and praised while blackness is not. I think this is where the anger (and hurt) comes in and the accusations of "running away" and all the rest.
Hi Jennifer Carr here - I sent a very long email response to Phil345. I won't repeat all of it here, but I will point out a few things.
1) I am not doing the same thing as one-droppers. One-droppers deny biology in favor of social construct. I am pointing out biological characteristics not social ones.
2) I am not "outing" anybody. Skip Gates outed himself; so have Halle and Obama. Terrence Howard flirts with mulattoness with his "santa line slaying" story. I suggest Sanaa Lathan is too in her own way with Something New. There can be no question that Harold Ford, Lena Horne, Dorothy Dandridge and Vanessa Williams are biracial - does anyone here want to debate that assertion seriously? Not in some touchy feely people should be allowed to self define way, but in a what you can see with your own eyes way?
3) I don't think I am misunderstanding Mr. Sweet's arguments at all. A biracial person who mixes with white, and that offspring mixes with white, and so on and so forth with eventually produce people who are white. Sure, white people with African genes, but not genes that define what are generally considered racial characteristics - skin color, hair texture, nose shape, etc. As long as the biracials continue to mix with whites, they will only produce offspring that can pull European genes for racially defining characteristics. Is this not the argument against the idea that a "black" woman cannot give birth to a white child? Is this not the essence of the argument against invisible blackness, i.e. one dropping? What you see is what you get?
Welcome Jen. As a "White" looking person with African ancestry, I don't go by "racial" characteristics. I only consider those communities that identify as "White" as such, and I was not raised in one. Same goes for "Black." I think the terms are valid as ethnic terms but inaccurate, as your articles point out, as phenotypical descriptors.
As such many choose to identify in other ways if they weren't raised to identify as such culturally.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
and 
, and how that difference came to be then we’ve all ceased to be rational beings. Can anyone really wonder how such cognitive dissonance as George Bush’s insistence that Saddam = Osama can exist unchecked among the American electorate for damned near 5 years, when something as basic as who we are and where we come from has been denied for the last 100? When effectively 350 years of pre-1900 history has been wiped out of the collective American memory?
