Biracial and Multiracial black people: Are those considered a race?

Like Tree24Likes

It seems that SOME people who like using the biracial or multiracial label or want their kids to use it say that they are using it to get away from racial thinking or to honour their parentage... but how so? How is it getting away from racial thinking to further break down or analyze who is half this or a quarter that? (and of course those who are considered "full Black", whatever that is, is on the bottom.) I don't like the "half and half" thinking because it implies that the "two halves" were pure to begin with, which they likely were not.
Originally Posted by Amneris
I don't know if you are referring to me, but since I am a parent who wishes her child to identify as what she is (biracial/African Polish-American/Black and Polish), rather than what someone wants her to be (Black or by some slim chance, White), you may be referring to me. In which case...

I've stated that I do not mind race in and of itself. It's is very obvious that there are is something different about me and my husband, besides our genders. It's when people place some value on it, as you seem to be doing, that causes the problem. I certainly do not put myself at the bottom of the race totem pole. But then, I do not think of it as a totem pole. To me, it's more of a rainbow or a spectrum. (And that's not meant to sound all kumbaya.) There is no better or worse, as they are all on the same plane, as far as I'm concerned.

Regarding purity, and this is not meant to be taken as a sign of some sort of superiority... As far as I know, the three to four generations above me are all Black. My husband's are all Polish. That makes us pretty close to "pure," and I'm sure there are lots of other folks who can claim the same, and maybe trace further. That doesn't make us any better or worse than my daughter, you, Tiger Woods, Barack Obama, or any other person. I'm sorry, but if I have a great great great great grand parent who is white, I'm not claiming biracial. That is just a bit too far removed.

I don't really buy into this idea that everyone is multiracial. It seems almost as bad as those who hold tight and fast to their purity as though it is some sort of badge of honor. Not only does it buy into the one drop rule, it sounds to me like a desperate attempt to make us all the "same," and simultaneously make some "not different." But, I am one of those people who celebrates our diversity. I love that there are different types of people in this world. I do not want a world where everyone is the same!
Originally Posted by CocoaCoily
Good post CocoaCoily.


I have some evidence of how that framework has played out in the examples of my three youngest siblings. They are Black and Italian, and they identify as such (sometimes biracial, sometimes African Italian-American). If someone tries to call them either one or the other, they correct them. They see it the way I do. And it's quite simple. Mom's black, dad's Italian. So they are Black Italians. If both parents were Italians, that's what they would be. If both were Black, that's what they would be. It's not really something that you can choose. You can deny, but that would not change what you really are. And, of course, it doesn't make for who you are.
Originally Posted by CocoaCoily
The experience of your younger siblings rings true for me and other bi and multi-cultural/racial people I know. The honoring part is in recognizing 2 parents who contributed to your genetics and raised you, in a world that can be very hostile towards miscegenation and interracial marriage. I, for one, am not going to give up claiming the identities of both parents just because of what may make others more comfortable or happy in their own skin and narrow world views. I am most concerned with how I live, my choices and their consequences.

I will acknowledge that one's appearance and how one is raced by others can have a very big impact on self-identification and maintaining a comfort zone with self-identification.
Originally Posted by love yourself first
Also very good.

I don't think she should be called just white or black because she isn't just white or black. It took 2 of us to make her.
Originally Posted by FieryCurls
Exactly.


My Fotki
And I still haven't answered the original question. Is Biracial and Multiracial considered a race?

That's a complicated question in my opinion. In a legal sense (in America at least) absolutely not. In a social sense- For me in a perfect world I would find it riduculous to define Multiracial as an actual race (and any value people put on that which being people they will) because that gets way too confusing. All the proportions and mixtures and phenotypes and trying to define it as a race. I do think it should be defined and people allowed to call themselves as such but I think of it as more the absence of race. It should be the catalyst for poeple realizing race doesn't exist and the eventual abolishment of all racial categories. So making it a category seems to legitimize race in a way I wish didn't have to happen. I think the same way about the term Hispanic and how many people think it's a race. IMO it seems to be an attempt to create a category for a people too diverse to fit in any catgegory becuase it's too scary to admit they have no racial alliance. They just are.

But since we don't live in a perfect world, and people still place value and restrictions and prejudices on race (even if it's not legally acknowledged), and pretending multiracial people don't exist isn't going to stop any prejudice they face, and people are still scared of gray area and people who are undefinable then yes I think Multiracial and Biracial should be considered a racial category as a nod to the world we live in that insists on defining everything. Or at the very least it should be acknowledged they don't have to be one or the other. So make racial boxes so you can pick more than one.

And I think there needs to be more studies that don't adher to the one drop rule, whether medical studies or sociological studies. I always get confused when I hear some commercial talking about "Cuacasions and Asians are particularly at risk for X disease". As true as this may be it ignores people between the lines and confuses us greatly. When a medical disease happens most often to Blacks, I have to wonder does my body adher to the One Drop Rule as well as society? And this wouldn't happen if there was more medical research done on diseases and health problems of Mulattos and other Mixed people like Hapas.

Plus as it stands without a category, in the social arena, a lot of Mulatto and other mixed race children are slipping through the cracks in terms of research done on what they are going through. I was once afraid that without the umbrella of Black to protect us and any funding or affirmative action that goes with that, we would be lost. Becuase I still get treated like a Black person in many ways, in social settings. But this fear only holds us back, I don't think Multiracial should go without affirmative action or social programs. Becuase as long as we have this social constuct of race, they need help too. I don't know how we would legislate that but it would still be needed. This is an interesting study by Freakonomics (rare in it's kind, a study focusing solely on Black/White people who too often get lumped in with Black people which ignores any mental stress or social prejudice or even medical issues they go through becuase of being Mixed) that shows Biracial children are suffering becuase of being Biracial, that proves we are "not all mixed". This hasn't stopped even with the Black community embracing them for the most part or most people seeing them as Black, they still know they are not to some degree and it affects their lives. While I do have some issues with parts of this study (too many generalizations, Black or White thinking, falling back on stereotypes to explain results), most of the research is solid- the researchers looked at I believe over 90,000 American first generation Black/White mixed children and the results were Mixed children go through stress and things that directly relate to being mixed, and this happens without a racial category that acknowledges them:
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.co...race-children/
The Plight of Mixed-Race Children

By Steven D. LevittWhat’s it like to grow up with one parent who is black and another who is white?
In a recent paper I co-authored with Roland Fryer, Lisa Kahn, and Jorg Spenkuch, we look at data to try to answer that question. Here is what we find:
1) Mixed-race kids grow up in households that are similar along many dimensions to those in which black children grow up: similar incomes, the father is much less likely to be around than in white households, etc.
2) In terms of academic performance, mixed-race kids fall in between blacks and whites.
3) Mixed-race kids do have one advantage over white and black kids: the mixed-race kids are much more attractive on average.
The really interesting result, though, is the next one.
4) There are some bad adolescent behaviors that whites do more than blacks (like drinking and smoking), and there are other bad adolescent behaviors that blacks do more than whites (watching TV, fighting, getting sexually transmitted diseases). Mixed-race kids manage to be as bad as whites on the white behaviors and as bad as blacks on the black behaviors. Mixed-race kids act out in almost every way measured in the data set.
We try to use economic theory to explain this set of facts. I can’t say we are entirely successful. If we had to pick an explanation that best fits the facts, it would be the old sociology model of mixed-race individuals as the “marginal man”: not part of either racial group and therefore torn by inner conflict. One reason this model is largely consistent with our facts is because it makes so few strong predictions that it is hard to falsify, which isn’t really fair to the competing models.


My Fotki

Last edited by KinkyKeeper; 08-07-2009 at 03:48 AM.
Feels like I just posted 8 different things but I just found a good article:
http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/rvp/pubaf/chronicle/v11/f13/rockquemore.html

Biracial Identity: Beyond Black and White

Sociologist's expertise built on experience, not just scholarly inquiry

By Sean Smith
Chronicle Editor

The man in the next seat had been eyeing her furtively for a while, so Asst. Prof. Kerry Ann Rockquemore (Sociology) figured it was only a matter of time before the question came.

Asst. Prof. Kerry Ann Rockquemore (Sociology): "...There is still a social reality for race that we have yet to come to grips with. If you have a racial identity that does not neatly fit into this reality, how do you experience the world? How do others see you? How do you see yourself?" (Photos by Gary Gilbert).

"What are you?"
There was neither malice nor menace in her fellow airplane passenger's voice, but Rockquemore - recalling the event in a recent interview - knew what he was asking: He wanted to know her racial and ethnic background.
The daughter of a black father and white mother, Rockquemore was no stranger to questions and misperceptions about her appearance. That very day, one person had spoken Spanish to her, apparently thinking she was Latina, and a casual remark by the attendant at her flight check-in indicated that he took her for Italian.
"What are you?"
Trying to be polite, Rockquemore replied, "Why don't you guess?"
The man thought for a minute, mused aloud about her green eyes, black hair and freckles, then announced, "You must be Irish!"
Rockquemore laughs at the memory of that exchange, yet the question that prompted it is the essence of her work as a scholar, and a possessor, of biracial identity.
Through her research, including her co-authored 2002 book Beyond Black: Biracial Identity in America, Rockquemore seeks to shed light on the social and personal experiences of America's growing biracial population. The rise of interracial marriages in the United States during the past three decades, Rockquemore says, and the visibility of celebrities such as golfer Tiger Woods and movie stars Vin Diesel and Halle Barry have helped to create more acceptance of biracial people.
But race is still a troubling subject for America, as evidenced by recent controversies over affirmative action policies and Trent Lott's remarks on segregation. The perspective of multiracial people, she says, is an important component for dialogue on race - and on the whole nature of identity itself.
"As a society, we're at an awkward place," she said. "Our old ideas about race and racial categorization are unraveling, and being replaced by new ideas that have a more scientific basis. We are no longer so bound by the 'one-drop rule,' which classified mixed-race children according to the racial group of the lower-status parent - in other words, you could never be considered 'pure' white, no matter your appearance. Racial identity is something far more fluid than it used to be.
"But there is still a social reality for race that we have yet to come to grips with. If you have a racial identity that does not neatly fit into this reality, how do you experience the world? How do others see you? How do you see yourself? 'What are you?'"

Pondering questions about biracial identity is not merely an academic or rhetorical exercise, according to Rockquemore: The matter of whether a person identifies him or herself as having a biracial identity can have sociopolitical ramifications.
A proposal to add a multiracial category to the 2000 federal census, she points out, set off a contentious debate before it was rejected. Supporters of the new category said its addition would help to accurately represent shifting demographic trends while also providing a true reflection of biracial people's understanding of their identity. Opponents argued that a multiracial category would ultimately make it more difficult to monitor racial discrimination and enforce civil rights legislation.
The census controversy might be seen as an indication of the growing self-advocacy among biracial people, especially those in their 20s or younger. Susan Lambe, co-leader of the Boston chapter of SWIRL, a social and educational support group for families, couples and individuals of mixed race, says that unlike in the past, "passing for white" is less of a concern for biracial persons.
"You have more of a choice now as to how you identify yourself," said Lambe, whose parents are white and Asian. "Because of that, those of us who are mixed or biracial want to create our own community, instead of being forced into a category."
The choice to which Lambe refers, and the factors that influence it, are explored by Rockquemore and University of Alabama-Huntsville Assistant Professor of Sociology David Brunsma in Beyond Black. Their project focused on offspring of black-white unions, she explains, "because blacks and whites continue to be the two groups with the greatest social distance, the most spatial separation and the strongest taboos against interracial marriage."
Rockquemore and Brunsma's research used survey data and in-depth interviews with biracial undergraduates attending Detroit-area colleges. Those conversations give voice to the complexities of biracial identity, and how it can be influenced by physical appearance, friends and acquaintances, surroundings, situation and other factors.
Chris, for example, described herself as "biracial, but I experience the world as a black woman," largely because of her appearance. Kathy, more light-skinned and with features most likely to identify her as white, talked of being stigmatized by many black students who interpret her biracial self-identification as trying to establish herself as "better than" or "beyond" black.
the rest here:
http://boards.mulatto.org/post?id=86...acial+children


My Fotki
okay how come white people don't get the white polish the white german the white italian, white american? you know what i mean??
Originally Posted by turtles
I don't get what your saying, but what I'm saying is okay you've met people who are white and will be like I'm Polish-american...BUT most white people i know just go by straight up white or Caucasian. Yet black people have to be like african american. When you fill out that crap on papers you don't see irish-american scottish-american german-american yada yada.
Originally Posted by turtles

I don't know if you are being deliberately obtuse, contentious or really just don't understand...

An African, by blood is going to be varying shades of Black. Poles, Italians, English, Germans, by blood, are going to be White. Asians will have epicanthic folds. We are taking ancestry/bloodline, not nationality. Yes, if I were born and raised on Chinese soil, I would be Chinese by nationality, but not by ancestry.

And the use of the term Black in the description of my daughter's ancestry refers to African. We all know that.

I don't get what the question is here?

Oh, and if you ask a White person what they are, they aren't going to say White. They are going to tell you their ancestry... We've had threads here that proved that point. The converse for many Blacks is unfortunately, not always an option. So, we instead point to a whole continent, since many are unable to point to a specific country. These things are general knowledge now, come on.


Oh my gosh Love Yourself First, excellent post. I was even going to use the term emotional blackmail. Becuase it really is to say someone acknowledging who they are and come from and both parents is going to weaken the Black community, is turning their back on Black people, is trying to pass or hold themselves above Black people, they think they're better than Black people by calling themselves Biracial. All I have heard before. Even IF there are people who use their multiraciality to escape their Blackness or think of themselves as better then other Black people and hate their Blackness that doesn't mean everyone who wants to be called Biracial is hating on the Black in them. And yet it often gets aplied to all of us or a reason why we should not acknowlege being Biracial. I'm sure they get tired of the things SOME Black people do being extended on all Black persons.

And, I'm just gonna say it, frankly usually when people say something like this I have found SOME of them have issues with being Black themselves and are so inwardly bitter becuase they feel they are fighting some terrible battle being Black so they feel anytime someone is acknowledging being Hispanic (and they are clearly of some African heritage) or Mixed it is always an affront to them and their community. Becuase secretly they wish they could poof and escape the shackles of being Black. So in us just being ourselves, they see it as us trying to pass for priveleges to acknowledge being non-Black or partially non-Black, which is not always true. Oh and God forbid you say you have multiple racial identities, then you are trying to be greedy and have the privileges of being Non-Black and then Black when it suits you.

And it's all ridiculous. Becuase who is to say that the fight of Biracial people is easier than the fight of a Black person? In many ways, in my opinion, it's harder. So I think we need to move past this idea that a Biracial person claiming their Biraciality is doing so for an easier time. Becuase the reality is there is nothing easy in fighting the oppressive and still quite alive ODR to go against the majority and claim your dual heritage. And on top of it have to put up with people who will lay a guilt trip on you are for hurting "the Black community". And then still putting it up with any discrimination Blacks do in social settings, if you have a Blacker phenotype (and any added discrimination against Mixed people).
Originally Posted by KinkyKeeper
Thanks for your kind words I have to agree with your post too, including the bolded part.

And god forbid that a mixed race person have a phenotype that morphs based on the viewer (or race in the eyes of the beholder). That seems like a threat to some as well. And its so sad.

I guess for me, one huge turn off about the black community is "colorism." Some say it comes from the outside but I also see it as an internal dsyfunction that creates a lot of pain, drama and distrust. I just have a very low tolerance for it based on my life experiences.

Your articles are interesting; I will read them later. Thanks for posting them!
"Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people."

"I think that somehow, we learn who we really are and then we live with that decision."
- Eleanor Roosevelt (both quotes)

(taking a break from posting starting late august 2009)
KinkyKeeper, I really liked your post (even though we previous disagreed on the hair thread lol)

And loveyourselffirst, was waiting for you to join this thread !
Curlies add me on myspace!

www.myspace.com/agilruth
I am a biracial (Black/White) African American.
3b (with 3c tendencies) on modified CG

And I still haven't answered the original question. Is Biracial and Multiracial considered a race?

That's a complicated question in my opinion. In a legal sense (in America at least) absolutely not. In a social sense- For me in a perfect world I would find it riduculous to define Multiracial as an actual race (and any value people put on that which being people they will) because that gets way too confusing. All the proportions and mixtures and phenotypes and trying to define it as a race. I do think it should be defined and people allowed to call themselves as such but I think of it as more the absence of race. It should be the catalyst for poeple realizing race doesn't exist and the eventual abolishment of all racial categories. So making it a category seems to legitimize race in a way I wish didn't have to happen. I think the same way about the term Hispanic and how many people think it's a race. IMO it seems to be an attempt to create a category for a people too diverse to fit in any catgegory becuase it's too scary to admit they have no racial alliance. They just are.

But since we don't live in a perfect world, and people still place value and restrictions and prejudices on race (even if it's not legally acknowledged), and pretending multiracial people don't exist isn't going to stop any prejudice they face, and people are still scared of gray area and people who are undefinable then yes I think Multiracial and Biracial should be considered a racial category as a nod to the world we live in that insists on defining everything. Or at the very least it should be acknowledged they don't have to be one or the other. So make racial boxes so you can pick more than one.

And I think there needs to be more studies that don't adher to the one drop rule, whether medical studies or sociological studies. I always get confused when I hear some commercial talking about "Cuacasions and Asians are particularly at risk for X disease". As true as this may be it ignores people between the lines and confuses us greatly. When a medical disease happens most often to Blacks, I have to wonder does my body adher to the One Drop Rule as well as society? And this wouldn't happen if there was more medical research done on diseases and health problems of Mulattos and other Mixed people like Hapas.

Plus as it stands without a category, in the social arena, a lot of Mulatto and other mixed race children are slipping through the cracks in terms of research done on what they are going through. I was once afraid that without the umbrella of Black to protect us and any funding or affirmative action that goes with that, we would be lost. Becuase I still get treated like a Black person in many ways, in social settings. But this fear only holds us back, I don't think Multiracial should go without affirmative action or social programs. Becuase as long as we have this social constuct of race, they need help too. I don't know how we would legislate that but it would still be needed. This is an interesting study by Freakonomics (rare in it's kind, a study focusing solely on Black/White people who too often get lumped in with Black people which ignores any mental stress or social prejudice or even medical issues they go through becuase of being Mixed) that shows Biracial children are suffering becuase of being Biracial, that proves we are "not all mixed". This hasn't stopped even with the Black community embracing them for the most part or most people seeing them as Black, they still know they are not to some degree and it affects their lives. While I do have some issues with parts of this study (too many generalizations, Black or White thinking, falling back on stereotypes to explain results), most of the research is solid- the researchers looked at I believe over 90,000 American first generation Black/White mixed children and the results were Mixed children go through stress and things that directly relate to being mixed, and this happens without a racial category that acknowledges them:
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.co...race-children/
The Plight of Mixed-Race Children

By Steven D. LevittWhat’s it like to grow up with one parent who is black and another who is white?
In a recent paper I co-authored with Roland Fryer, Lisa Kahn, and Jorg Spenkuch, we look at data to try to answer that question. Here is what we find:
1) Mixed-race kids grow up in households that are similar along many dimensions to those in which black children grow up: similar incomes, the father is much less likely to be around than in white households, etc.
2) In terms of academic performance, mixed-race kids fall in between blacks and whites.
3) Mixed-race kids do have one advantage over white and black kids: the mixed-race kids are much more attractive on average.
The really interesting result, though, is the next one.
4) There are some bad adolescent behaviors that whites do more than blacks (like drinking and smoking), and there are other bad adolescent behaviors that blacks do more than whites (watching TV, fighting, getting sexually transmitted diseases). Mixed-race kids manage to be as bad as whites on the white behaviors and as bad as blacks on the black behaviors. Mixed-race kids act out in almost every way measured in the data set.
We try to use economic theory to explain this set of facts. I can’t say we are entirely successful. If we had to pick an explanation that best fits the facts, it would be the old sociology model of mixed-race individuals as the “marginal man”: not part of either racial group and therefore torn by inner conflict. One reason this model is largely consistent with our facts is because it makes so few strong predictions that it is hard to falsify, which isn’t really fair to the competing models.
Originally Posted by KinkyKeeper
Re: the bolded, italicized, underlined - it's difficult to take "research" like this seriously with comments like this.
Formerly ladyjag123
Re: the bolded, italicized, underlined - it's difficult to take "research" like this seriously with comments like this.
Originally Posted by ladyjag123
Researchers have conducted tons of "attractiveness studies" in all areas of sociological research.

I didn't know biracial people had been shown to be more attractive but I've read several times that biracial people have shown to be physically healthier.
3b (with 3c tendencies) on modified CG

I was just going to say.... someone actually said "biracial people are more attractive?" what? This is one of the reasons why I don't like the whole "biracial movement." And... watching TV is a "bad" behaviour?????

And KinkyKeeper... all those terms are so confusing. First generational mulatto... second generational mulatto...it sounds to me a lot like slavery where people were classified as quadroons and octoroons and all the rest.

I wonder how you all would classify me, then?

My mother could be short-hand described as Black but she is from the Caribbean, her father was half-Chinese and there's Spanish, French and Irish further back.

My father could be short-hand described as white but he's also from the Caribbean and has Black and aboriginal blood further back - he has one parent who considered themself of Spanish descent and one of UK descent.

I could be considered Latina or Hispanic which some regard as a "race." I could be considered biracial. I'm technically multiracial. Is my mixing considered first generational or second generational? Figuring out all those labels makes my head hurt.... and the reality is that in my life experience, I've primarily been treated as, and lived as, Black, but as a person who is clearly also multiracial.

I don't think that I had any significantly different life experience because of the "races" of my parents, personally, but I am seeing that others had different experiences.
Get used to me. Black, confident, cocky; my name, not yours; my religion, not yours; my goals, my own; get used to me. -Muhammad Ali











KinkyKeeper, I really liked your post (even though we previous disagreed on the hair thread lol)

And loveyourselffirst, was waiting for you to join this thread !
Originally Posted by kindredspirit1983
Yes that's a cool thing. You can disagree with someone on one subject and agree with a lot of their views on another.


My Fotki
ALSO... if a biracial Black/white person has a child with a Black or a white person... is that child biracial also, since if "biracial" is a race, they now have parents of two races? But their races are not "50/50" anymore.
Get used to me. Black, confident, cocky; my name, not yours; my religion, not yours; my goals, my own; get used to me. -Muhammad Ali











I don't think that I had any significantly different life experience because of the "races" of my parents, personally, but I am seeing that others had different experiences.
Originally Posted by Amneris
Different than...other Blacks you know? Other people of Caribbean decent? Just your peers?

See, I feel I have (somewhat different than most other African Americans...and definitely different than White Americans).

That's certainly not to say I can relate to the experiences of every other Black/White biracial person out there either! OMG! Some of the stories they tell, they might as well be Chinese!

I feel like I've lived an AA experience overall (i.e., many similarities to what other AAs describe), but w/ a lot of interesting curveballs thrown in.
3b (with 3c tendencies) on modified CG


Last edited by spiderlashes5000; 08-07-2009 at 10:05 AM.
[quote=BekkaPoo;1054277]Edit: to answer the OP's thread question: I'd say no. There is no separate "race" called Biracial/Multiracial. This just describes the fact that a person comes from a multicultural background. Nothing more nothing less.[/quote]

Is that soooo hard to understand? I thought this was a pretty clear answer.
"The challenge is to be yourself in a world that is trying to make you like everybody else."
"...rationality is not necessary to sell things.."
My staples: Mane n Tail (cowash), Garnier Fructis Sleek n Shine (leave in condish), Grapeseed oil or shea butter (sealing), Organic Root Stimulator Elasticitea (leave-in condish & light hold)
okay how come white people don't get the white polish the white german the white italian, white american? you know what i mean??
Originally Posted by turtles
I don't get what your saying, but what I'm saying is okay you've met people who are white and will be like I'm Polish-american...BUT most white people i know just go by straight up white or Caucasian. Yet black people have to be like african american. When you fill out that crap on papers you don't see irish-american scottish-american german-american yada yada.
Originally Posted by turtles

I don't know if you are being deliberately obtuse, contentious or really just don't understand...

An African, by blood is going to be varying shades of Black. Poles, Italians, English, Germans, by blood, are going to be White. Asians will have epicanthic folds. We are taking ancestry/bloodline, not nationality. Yes, if I were born and raised on Chinese soil, I would be Chinese by nationality, but not by ancestry.

I think this just isn't true, though. There are Africans who have been in Africa for generations - centuries even - who consider themselves African but have mainly European, or Middle Eastern, blood and appearance and would say that their ancestry is African. No, they're not the majority, but they do exist. And there are plenty of Italians who are not white. And there are different types of people in Asia.

If we're going by the "bloodline" argument, then we should assume that Australians and New Zealanders are Black, since that is what their aboriginal people are, and whites are only Australian by nationality.... Americans and Canadians are aboriginal. And Italians were not traditionally considered white and many have significant Arab and African bloodlines. There have been people of colour in Europe for generations. Britain has had Blacks since way back at the beginning of the slave trade. Are they not English enough still after generations and generations? What about Romany people who have been in Europe a long time but trace their ancestry to India? Don't they have Romany people in Poland? What about some of the Sephardic Jews in Europe with Semitic backgrounds? Or those descended from the Moors in Spain?

Also, when people say Black, they don't necessarily mean African. While the way we use it here implies African ancestry, people may use it while thinking primarily of Caribbean or Latin culture, too. And in the UK, Black also included South Asians until recently and still does for some people.

I don't think race is as clear-cut as that.

I think you said earlier your background is Belizean, so to me at least, Belize-Poland or Black-white go together, but Black-Poland don't, and I personally would find that more confusing for a child, but that's just me.

And the use of the term Black in the description of my daughter's ancestry refers to African. We all know that.

I don't get what the question is here?

Oh, and if you ask a White person what they are, they aren't going to say White. They are going to tell you their ancestry... We've had threads here that proved that point. The converse for many Blacks is unfortunately, not always an option. So, we instead point to a whole continent, since many are unable to point to a specific country. These things are general knowledge now, come on.
Originally Posted by CocoaCoily
,
Get used to me. Black, confident, cocky; my name, not yours; my religion, not yours; my goals, my own; get used to me. -Muhammad Ali











And I still haven't answered the original question. Is Biracial and Multiracial considered a race?
This is an interesting study by Freakonomics (rare in it's kind, a study focusing solely on Black/White people who too often get lumped in with Black people which ignores any mental stress or social prejudice or even medical issues they go through becuase of being Mixed) that shows Biracial children are suffering becuase of being Biracial, that proves we are "not all mixed". This hasn't stopped even with the Black community embracing them for the most part or most people seeing them as Black, they still know they are not to some degree and it affects their lives. While I do have some issues with parts of this study (too many generalizations, Black or White thinking, falling back on stereotypes to explain results), most of the research is solid- the researchers looked at I believe over 90,000 American first generation Black/White mixed children and the results were Mixed children go through stress and things that directly relate to being mixed, and this happens without a racial category that acknowledges them:
http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.co...race-children/
The Plight of Mixed-Race Children

By Steven D. LevittWhat’s it like to grow up with one parent who is black and another who is white?
In a recent paper I co-authored with Roland Fryer, Lisa Kahn, and Jorg Spenkuch, we look at data to try to answer that question. Here is what we find:
1) Mixed-race kids grow up in households that are similar along many dimensions to those in which black children grow up: similar incomes, the father is much less likely to be around than in white households, etc.
2) In terms of academic performance, mixed-race kids fall in between blacks and whites.
3) Mixed-race kids do have one advantage over white and black kids: the mixed-race kids are much more attractive on average.
The really interesting result, though, is the next one.
4) There are some bad adolescent behaviors that whites do more than blacks (like drinking and smoking), and there are other bad adolescent behaviors that blacks do more than whites (watching TV, fighting, getting sexually transmitted diseases). Mixed-race kids manage to be as bad as whites on the white behaviors and as bad as blacks on the black behaviors. Mixed-race kids act out in almost every way measured in the data set.
We try to use economic theory to explain this set of facts. I can’t say we are entirely successful. If we had to pick an explanation that best fits the facts, it would be the old sociology model of mixed-race individuals as the “marginal man”: not part of either racial group and therefore torn by inner conflict. One reason this model is largely consistent with our facts is because it makes so few strong predictions that it is hard to falsify, which isn’t really fair to the competing models.
Originally Posted by KinkyKeeper
Re: the bolded, italicized, underlined - it's difficult to take "research" like this seriously with comments like this.
Originally Posted by ladyjag123
I see where you are coming from Ladyjag. For me when I first saw this study I hated it, saw it as nothing more than propaganda, many of their conclusions read like a KKK pamphlet to scare people away from having mixed kids. They are gonna get all the bad things from both races, they are going to pyschological messed up, but gosh they sure are pretty. And I agree they could have left out the study on attractiveness, doesn't really add anything and might diminish the otherwise logical research the did.

As for the rest, I've read it more in depth and I actually just figured out my main problem with it was the conclusion of "marginal man" they reached for WHY some mixed children may be have troubles. Marginal Man is just another word for tragic mulatto. Comes from the (faulty) idea that anybody in the middle or of two groups is going to suffer some internal conflict. Which isn't true. My take on the results are basically any minority is going to go through psychological distress becuase of being a minority. It's just that first generation mixed children may have somewhat more or won't cope with it as well becuase they often tend to be isolated in their issues. One parent of one race, one of another, them in the middle. And the parents may be, however innocently, not prepared for the issues of a seperate racial group than them. That's a big pet peeve of mine. People who have children outside their race (whther biologically or through transracial adoption) and don't take into account they are going to have to educate themselves about the seperate (not more difficult, just different) issues of that child that they themselves won't know about being monoracial or of a different racial group than said child. There are plenty of resources out there these days (more so than the 90's when this study was done) so there is no excuse for ignorance. Not saying it's not possible to raise a healthy biracial child but it takes extra effort on the parents' part that some don't do. Mine didn't so I have some personal experience with the added stress that puts on a Biracial child.

And it's not like most first generation biracials grow up with a support system of other biracial people to talk about any issues they may go through, if there parents aren't helping them. Monoracial people take for granted they will be surrounded by people like them on any given day, White people more so than minorities but even monoracial minorities to some extent. That's yet one more reason I believe there needs to be acknoledgement and definition of Biracial.

I was just going to say.... someone actually said "biracial people are more attractive?" what? This is one of the reasons why I don't like the whole "biracial movement." And... watching TV is a "bad" behaviour?????

And KinkyKeeper... all those terms are so confusing. First generational mulatto... second generational mulatto...it sounds to me a lot like slavery where people were classified as quadroons and octoroons and all the rest.

I wonder how you all would classify me, then?

My mother could be short-hand described as Black but she is from the Caribbean, her father was half-Chinese and there's Spanish, French and Irish further back.

My father could be short-hand described as white but he's also from the Caribbean and has Black and aboriginal blood further back - he has one parent who considered themself of Spanish descent and one of UK descent.

I could be considered Latina or Hispanic which some regard as a "race." I could be considered biracial. I'm technically multiracial. Is my mixing considered first generational or second generational? Figuring out all those labels makes my head hurt.... and the reality is that in my life experience, I've primarily been treated as, and lived as, Black, but as a person who is clearly also multiracial.

I don't think that I had any significantly different life experience because of the "races" of my parents, personally, but I am seeing that others had different experiences.
Originally Posted by Amneris
You mentioned you were multiracial Amneris and I have been wondering exactly how, so thanks for the details. I like to know where people in the debate are coming from life experience wise, plus I am inordinately curious about other multiracial people. Oh and I have probably said this in some other thread, but my father is Italian American and my mother is African American.

With all those mixes it does kind of sound like you may even be more White than anything. And I usually feel comfortable calling such people either Multiracial or even White. We feel comfortable calling people mostly Black just Black so why not the reverse I say. Now to confusing terminology-I would also say MGM (multigenerational Mulatto) or Hapa (since you are also mixed Asian and that's what Hapa means). And of course you are Hispanic or Latina, as someone whose parents are from a Spanish colonized country. But Multiracial is simplest. But it's how you identity yourself that matters really.

And I can see how some people feel uncomfortable with the continued use of proportion terms like mulatto, quadroon or griffe but many people are taking them back nowadays. And yes it may seem strange to pick and choose which antiquated ideas I like but to me the One Drop Rule was created to keep people in slavery (have sex with a slave and keep the resuting child as legally property) which is evil. Mulatto, griffe, quadroon were basically harmless descriptive words to desccribe parentage like Black is used today, that we have since attached negative value to.

And actually the existence of these words proves even slave masters acknowledged White ancestory within people of African heritage. And actually something a lot of people forget was Mulatto (ie biracial) was legally acknowledged at one point on the US census. It was abolished some time around WWII and it was only then that mixed race people began to be pressured to adopt only a Black identity. But during this brief time they still acknowledged they were part of the Black community, even continues to support the Black community, whle acknowledging they were also of other heritage didn't weaken anyone that I am aware of.

That's good to hear this thread has made it apparent that there are people of Mixed heritage who face battles becuase of their mixed heritage, though you yourself did not.


My Fotki
I don't think that I had any significantly different life experience because of the "races" of my parents, personally, but I am seeing that others had different experiences.
Originally Posted by Amneris
Different than...other Blacks you know? Other people of Caribbean decent? Just your peers?

See, I feel I have (somewhat different than most other African Americans...and definitely different than White Americans).

That's certainly not to say I can relate to the experiences of every other Black/White biracial person out there either! OMG! Some of the stories they tell, they might as well be Chinese!

I feel like I've lived an AA experience overall (i.e., many similarities to what other AAs describe), but w/ a lot of interesting curveballs thrown in.
Originally Posted by spiderlashes5000
What I mean is that, from the "biracial" people I have encountered, there are so many different possibilities:

white mother, Black father
Black father, white mother
parents happily married
parents divorced
parents divorced and re-married to others of different races
parents divorced and re-married to others of their same race
father was never in the picture to begin with
mother abandoned kids
Black = African, or Caribbean, or African-Canadian or African-American
white = Anglo, or French, or Italian, or Jewish.....
in-laws accepted relationship
in-laws did not accept relationship
one side accepted it and the other didn't
grew up primarily around Blacks
grew up primarily around whites
grew up in multicultural setting

etc. etc. etc.

A lot of these could also apply to Blacks, or whites, or whoever. Not everyone who is "biracial" had a loving white parent or a present Black parent. I think the assumption is also often made that biracial = white mother and Black father. For me, IF you consider me biracial, which I don't, it's the opposite, and my Black maternal family were definitely by far the most dominant, and that sets me automatically apart from the majority of "biracial" people I've known who have white mothers and many who didn't even know or live with their fathers.

As you said, I would say I have had primarily an A-A experience with some interesting twists.
Get used to me. Black, confident, cocky; my name, not yours; my religion, not yours; my goals, my own; get used to me. -Muhammad Ali











[quote=KinkyKeeper;1055876][quote=ladyjag123;1055726]
I was just going to say.... someone actually said "biracial people are more attractive?" what? This is one of the reasons why I don't like the whole "biracial movement." And... watching TV is a "bad" behaviour?????

And KinkyKeeper... all those terms are so confusing. First generational mulatto... second generational mulatto...it sounds to me a lot like slavery where people were classified as quadroons and octoroons and all the rest.

I wonder how you all would classify me, then?

My mother could be short-hand described as Black but she is from the Caribbean, her father was half-Chinese and there's Spanish, French and Irish further back.

My father could be short-hand described as white but he's also from the Caribbean and has Black and aboriginal blood further back - he has one parent who considered themself of Spanish descent and one of UK descent.

I could be considered Latina or Hispanic which some regard as a "race." I could be considered biracial. I'm technically multiracial. Is my mixing considered first generational or second generational? Figuring out all those labels makes my head hurt.... and the reality is that in my life experience, I've primarily been treated as, and lived as, Black, but as a person who is clearly also multiracial.

I don't think that I had any significantly different life experience because of the "races" of my parents, personally, but I am seeing that others had different experiences.
Originally Posted by Amneris
You mentioned you were multiracial Amneris and I have been wondering exactly how, so thanks for the details. I like to know where people in the debate are coming from life experience wise, plus I am inordinately curious about other multiracial people. Oh and I have probably said this in some other thread, but my father is Italian American and my mother is African American.

With all those mixes it does kind of sound like you may even be more White than anything. And I usually feel comfortable calling such people either Multiracial or even White.


How so? That makes no sense to me.... the majority of my ancestry is not white. My mother is Black with Chinese and a LITTLE white, like we're talking 4-5 generations back at least.... my father is white but with a significant amount of Mediterranean white likely with Black in it and he has a Black great-grandparent and an aboriginal great-grandparent... so how am I majority white more so than someone who is "biracial?" That makes no sense at all, hence why I find these classifications silly - not to mention that never in my life have I ever been treated or identified as white!

We feel comfortable calling people mostly Black just Black so why not the reverse I say. Now to confusing terminology-I would also say MGM (multigenerational Mulatto) or Hapa (since you are also mixed Asian and that's what Hapa means). And of course you are Hispanic or Latina, as someone whose parents are from a Spanish colonized country. But Multiracial is simplest. But it's how you identity yourself that matters really.

And I can see how some people feel uncomfortable with the continued use of proportion terms like mulatto, quadroon or griffe but many people are taking them back nowadays. And yes it may seem strange to pick and choose which antiquated ideas I like but to me the One Drop Rule was created to keep people in slavery (have sex with a slave and keep the resuting child as legally property) which is evil. Mulatto, griffe, quadroon were basically harmless descriptive words to desccribe parentage like Black is used today, that we have since attached negative value to.

And actually the existence of these words proves even slave masters acknowledged White ancestory within people of African heritage. And actually something a lot of people forget was Mulatto (ie biracial) was legally acknowledged at one point on the US census. It was abolished some time around WWII and it was only then that mixed race people began to be pressured to adopt only a Black identity. But during this brief time they still acknowledged they were part of the Black community, even continues to support the Black community, whle acknowledging they were also of other heritage didn't weaken anyone that I am aware of.

That's good to hear this thread has made it apparent that there are people of Mixed heritage who face battles becuase of their mixed heritage, though you yourself did not.
Originally Posted by KinkyKeeper
...
Get used to me. Black, confident, cocky; my name, not yours; my religion, not yours; my goals, my own; get used to me. -Muhammad Ali











okay how come white people don't get the white polish the white german the white italian, white american? you know what i mean??
Originally Posted by turtles
I don't get what your saying, but what I'm saying is okay you've met people who are white and will be like I'm Polish-american...BUT most white people i know just go by straight up white or Caucasian. Yet black people have to be like african american. When you fill out that crap on papers you don't see irish-american scottish-american german-american yada yada.
Originally Posted by turtles

I don't know if you are being deliberately obtuse, contentious or really just don't understand...

An African, by blood is going to be varying shades of Black. Poles, Italians, English, Germans, by blood, are going to be White. Asians will have epicanthic folds. We are taking ancestry/bloodline, not nationality. Yes, if I were born and raised on Chinese soil, I would be Chinese by nationality, but not by ancestry.

I think this just isn't true, though. There are Africans who have been in Africa for generations - centuries even - who consider themselves African but have mainly European, or Middle Eastern, blood and appearance and would say that their ancestry is African. No, they're not the majority, but they do exist. And there are plenty of Italians who are not white. And there are different types of people in Asia.

If we're going by the "bloodline" argument, then we should assume that Australians and New Zealanders are Black, since that is what their aboriginal people are, and whites are only Australian by nationality.... Americans and Canadians are aboriginal. And Italians were not traditionally considered white and many have significant Arab and African bloodlines. There have been people of colour in Europe for generations. Britain has had Blacks since way back at the beginning of the slave trade. Are they not English enough still after generations and generations? What about Romany people who have been in Europe a long time but trace their ancestry to India? Don't they have Romany people in Poland? What about some of the Sephardic Jews in Europe with Semitic backgrounds? Or those descended from the Moors in Spain?

Also, when people say Black, they don't necessarily mean African. While the way we use it here implies African ancestry, people may use it while thinking primarily of Caribbean or Latin culture, too. And in the UK, Black also included South Asians until recently and still does for some people.

I don't think race is as clear-cut as that.

I think you said earlier your background is Belizean, so to me at least, Belize-Poland or Black-white go together, but Black-Poland don't, and I personally would find that more confusing for a child, but that's just me.

And the use of the term Black in the description of my daughter's ancestry refers to African. We all know that.

I don't get what the question is here?

Oh, and if you ask a White person what they are, they aren't going to say White. They are going to tell you their ancestry... We've had threads here that proved that point. The converse for many Blacks is unfortunately, not always an option. So, we instead point to a whole continent, since many are unable to point to a specific country. These things are general knowledge now, come on.
Originally Posted by CocoaCoily
,
Originally Posted by Amneris
I think you know full well what I mean. And I might lean toward thinking that you are being somewhat contentious.

If using my China example, if I went around telling people I'm Chinese, you don't think people would be asking, "But, no, what are you really? What is your ancestry/bloodline?" Come on.

With all those mixes it does kind of sound like you may even be more White than anything. And I usually feel comfortable calling such people either Multiracial or even White.


How so? That makes no sense to me.... the majority of my ancestry is not white. My mother is Black with Chinese and a LITTLE white, like we're talking 4-5 generations back at least.... my father is white but with a significant amount of Mediterranean white likely with Black in it and he has a Black great-grandparent and an aboriginal great-grandparent... so how am I majority white more so than someone who is "biracial?" That makes no sense at all, hence why I find these classifications silly - not to mention that never in my life have I ever been treated or identified as white!


I suppose I misread how much "White" ancestory your mother has and I wouldn't say the Mediterranian White of your father doesn't count. Just becuase I misread is no reason to write off all classifications other than Black for all people with partial African heritage. But that was clearly something you wanted to do before my simple mistake so it's understandable. Where did I say you are more White than someone who is biracial?

Secondly, we will have to differ on whether treatment and how the world views you is what racial identity should be about. I have never been treated as a White person either and there are probably racist Whites out there wouldn't claim me or any part of me (not saying you said this, I have heard it several times from others), doesn't stop me from having a White racial identity or Mixed White identity. And if you have never once identified as White in your life it is a good thing I am not choosing your identity for you. You asked for my opinion of what I would think you were before knowing what you prefer. But in the end, I thought this was pretty clear with this statement

But it's how you identity yourself that matters really.


My Fotki

Trending Topics


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2011 NaturallyCurly.com