[Captain Obvious]

This just made me laugh:

“The word ‘minority’ from our standpoint should mean African American. I don’t think women, Asians and Hispanics should be able to use that title,” Minister Meeks said. “That’s why our numbers cannot improve — because we use women, Asians and Hispanics who are not people of color, who are not people who have been discriminated against.”

Once again reiterating why Chicago is home to Rev (lulz) Jesse, Jesse Junior, Rev Wright, and Farrakhan.

Congrat Rahm, the City Hall can't possibly go to anyone else now.* The math just isn't there.


*assuming of course your firm has enough clout to dismiss your residency challenges.

[Doofy]

African-American.


American. A dumb one at that.

[subego]

Overheard: he could still have every black man in the city vote for him... And come in third.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious

Jew FTW

?

[nonhuman]

Jew WTF?

As in, wtf does this have to do with Jews?

[subego]

Very little.

It's clickbait.

[OAW]

While I understand Rev. Meeks point, the way he worded it leaves much to be desired. Many cities have Minority & Women-owned Business (MWBE) programs to foster more diverse participation in public contracting. Inherently such programs are fairly weak since they are typically organized around participation level "goals" ... which are rarely, if ever, met. And it is certainly true that white women, whether actual business owners or fronts for their husbands, have been the primary beneficiaries of such programs ... by far. If Rev. Meeks wants to champion increased African-American participation in public contracting ... then fine. Just say that and stand on it. But to suggest that Asians or Hispanics aren't "minorities" is pretty silly IMO.

OAW

[OAW]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

Jew WTF?

As in, wtf does this have to do with Jews?

I suppose it means that Rev. Meeks' comments will it even harder for him to win the mayoral race in Chicago. As he is one of the more high-profile contenders his demise will make it even more likely that Rahm Emmanuel .... a Jew ... will win the race. Having said that, it seems like a title of "Rahm Emmanuel FTW" would have sufficed.

OAW

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

African-American. A South African born individual of European descent (German, French, & Dutch) who became a naturalized US citizen in 2007.


American. An American-born individual of African descent ... or IOW, an African-American.

It's amusing how some people take such issue with the term African-American yet Chinese-American or Italian-American doesn't seem to generate the same level of consternation. For the life of me I can't recall ever seeing someone try to "correct" Martin Scorsese or Al Pacino for referring to themselves as Italian-American.

OAW

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OAW 

It's amusing how some people take such issue with the term African-American yet Chinese-American or Italian-American doesn't seem to generate the same level of consternation. For the life of me I can't recall ever seeing someone try to "correct" Martin Scorsese or Al Pacino for referring to themselves as Italian-American.

Don't put words in my mouth, OAW.
I've had amusing arguments with "Irish Americans" by telling them that I'm more Irish than they are, and they're simply "Americans".

If you weren't born in Africa, you're not an African-American. You're an American, period. Same goes for the Irish, Italians, Chinese and Anglos.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by OAW 

It's amusing how some people take such issue with the term African-American yet Chinese-American or Italian-American doesn't seem to generate the same level of consternation. For the life of me I can't recall ever seeing someone try to "correct" Martin Scorsese or Al Pacino for referring to themselves as Italian-American.

You bring up a good point. The hyphenated nationalities generally bore me to death regardless of the nationality in question. A great many whites will go out of their way to refer to black folks as African-Americans and I've even done it myself here in cases where I wanted to ensure I'm not misunderstood. I've selectively asked only a couple of my black friends if it bothers them to be referred to as black as opposed to African-American and they've expressed that the term African-American seems kind of silly to them. I wasn't sure if they were just trying to make me more comfortable so let me ask a more anonymous friend of mine from this forum...

What do you think OAW?

[SpaceMonkey]

If someone feels some identification with their Chinese heritage and wants to call themselves a "Chinese-American," it's no skin off my hide.

To me, "African-American" feels a little sillier because an "African" heritage is so much less specific and harder to identify with than "Chinese" or "Italian." It does not surprise me that some black Americans feel the same way.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

African-American.

Egadz! Are there more like her in this Africa-America? A move may be in order.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Egadz! Are there more like her in this Africa-America? A move may be in order.

Imagine her screaming at you to take the trash out in Afrikaans (her mother tongue).
It'd be like heaven on earth. Possibly even better than an Italian redhead being pissed at you. Worth not taking the trash out just so she gets mad at you.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by OAW 

While I understand Rev. Meeks point

I expected nothing less than that from you.

-t

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Imagine her screaming at you to take the trash out in Afrikaans (her mother tongue).
It'd be like heaven on earth. Possibly even better than an Italian redhead being pissed at you. Worth not taking the trash out just so she gets mad at you.

With any luck she'll refer to you by your full name. NOW OFF TO BED DAHHLING!

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Don't put words in my mouth, OAW.
I've had amusing arguments with "Irish Americans" by telling them that I'm more Irish than they are, and they're simply "Americans".

If you weren't born in Africa, you're not an African-American. You're an American, period. Same goes for the Irish, Italians, Chinese and Anglos.

Well you see Doofy ... it all comes down to how the terminology is being used. You are using the term in a manner that defines African-American based upon Birthplace-Nationality. Yet 30 million plus Americans of African descent define the term based upon Heritage-Birthplace. So African-American means a person of African heritage who was born in, and therefore is a citizen of, America. Just like Al Pacino is a person of Italian heritage who was born in America. And interestingly enough ... this isn't just me talking. This isn't just how African-Americans self-identify. The common dictionary definition of the term says ...

African-American: a black American of African descent.

So if you choose to twist the meaning of the word to suit your own purposes then that's cool. But for the record, being an African-American doesn't mean you are African. It never has.

OAW

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Yet 30 million plus Americans of African descent define the term based upon Heritage-Birthplace.

...annnnd that's how to perpetuate the racism.
You're not special or different just because your great great great granny was African/Italian/Irish/etc.. It's nothing. It's bullshit. Just a label you all use to separate yourselves into little groups (so the Irish can hate the Italians, etc.), instead of all trying to get along.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

You bring up a good point. The hyphenated nationalities generally bore me to death regardless of the nationality in question. A great many whites will go out of their way to refer to black folks as African-Americans and I've even done it myself here in cases where I wanted to ensure I'm not misunderstood. I've selectively asked only a couple of my black friends if it bothers them to be referred to as black as opposed to African-American and they've expressed that the term African-American seems kind of silly to them. I wasn't sure if they were just trying to make me more comfortable so let me ask a more anonymous friend of mine from this forum...

What do you think OAW?

I can't speak to the thinking of your black friends. I do know that self-identification of Americans of African descent has gone through various phases. Colored, Negro, Black, Afro-American, African-American have all been the preferred term in different periods.

Having said that, generally speaking the majority prefer African-American these days which again, means Americans of African descent. The term Black is typically used in a more general sense to refer to people of African descent regardless of nationality. IOW ... black people are all over the world. They live in many countries, speak many languages, and have a variety of different cultures. African-Americans are merely a specific group of black people that have a country, language, and culture of their own.

OAW

[OAW]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

To me, "African-American" feels a little sillier because an "African" heritage is so much less specific and harder to identify with than "Chinese" or "Italian." It does not surprise me that some black Americans feel the same way.

Indeed the term African-American is a lot more generic than Italian-American or Chinese-American. However, there is a reason for this. African-Americans were literally cut off from their nation as well as their language, religion, and culture by slavery. The overwhelming majority of African-Americans can't trace their lineage back beyond a 4 or 5 generations. It's common place in American to hear white people say "I'm part Irish and Dutch on my dad's side, and French and German on my mother's side" or something to that effect. Whereas you virtually hear no African-Americans say anything that specific. We simply don't know because the slave masters had little incentive to keep the necessary records which would make this possible. Ethnic groups were deliberately split up to minimize the chances of a slave rebellion. All we know is that most of us came from West Africa. Some from Southern African. That's about it. Modern DNA testing is getting to the point where some of us can trace the matrilineal side to specify ethnic groups in the Motherland ... but in the meantime, African-American is about as specific as we can get.

OAW

[OAW]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

I expected nothing less than that from you.

-t

Likewise.

I'll simply cite the following which sums up the issue Rev. Meeks was rather clumsily raising quite succinctly ....

Meeks is dead wrong to think that blacks are the only minorities, and the only people facing discrimination. But with that said, he does speak some truths.

The numbers don't lie. According to the U.S. Census, Chicago's population is 42 percent white, 36.8 percent black, 26 percent Latino and 4.3 percent Asian. Women are 51.5 percent of the city's population. Meanwhile, Chicago's set-aside program reserves 25 percent of municipal contracts for minorities--who make up 58 percent of the population--and 5 percent of city contracts for women--who are over half of the population. Meanwhile, black-owned businesses take a paltry 7 percent cut of the $1 billion city contractor market, down a percentage point from the previous year, which is what prompted Meeks to weigh in on the issue.

Chicago mayoral campaign stung by affirmative action scandal

IOW, even if African-American participation in Chicago city contracting doubled ... it would still represent less than half of the African-American percentage of the population. And some people take issue with the fact that a city like Chicago is quite "equal opportunity" when it comes to taxation, but considerably less so when it comes to city contracting. Whereas ... others don't.

OAW

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

So it's official? Only blacks are 'minorities', and only blacks have been discriminated against? Great. So does this mean everyone else can move forward now and stop classifying themselves by race and other useless atributes, and just get on with it?

Race-obsession is a disease that affects racists, and sadly, far too many of their intended targets who've actually done more of an internal mind-**** to hold themselves back, than the racists probably ever dreamed possible.

Honestly, what sheet-wearing dimwit of the 1950's-60's ever really pictured blacks SELF-SEGREGATING themselves, terrorizing/drug-addicting huge swaths of their own communities, and murdering more of their own number in a few decades than the ENTIRE history of the KKK (subjects not to be ashamed of, but glorified in 'rap' culture for the entertainment of whites!) destroying the family-unit, squandering the education system since desegregation (and making excuses for those facts, never seriously addressing them) INSISTING on being singled out, separated, and patronized based on race by crooked politicians, well into the 21st century?

All of it is probably beyond the wildest wishes of even the most viscous racists of the past. THAT, is truly sad. And since I don't suffer from P.C. disease, YES VIRGINIA, I'll continue to point it out, even if it 'offends' some of those who do.

[sek929]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

...annnnd that's how to perpetuate the racism.
You're not special or different just because your great great great granny was African/Italian/Irish/etc.. It's nothing. It's bullshit. Just a label you all use to separate yourselves into little groups (so the Irish can hate the Italians, etc.), instead of all trying to get along.

Damn straight.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OAW 

It's common place in American to hear white people say "I'm part Irish and Dutch on my dad's side, and French and German on my mother's side" or something to that effect.

So you want to be as stupid as them?

[andi*pandi]

Why stupid? It's interesting to know your family history and cultures. If you use that to then justify "better than that guy's culture" comparisons, ok, that's stupid.

I'm also very glad to hear that women who are business owners must merely be fronts for their husbands. After nearly 100 years, the truth is out. I mean, women couldn't possibly think about all those numbers with those pretty 'lil heads. They might cry! And of course they vote the same way their husbands do. Why'd we bother giving them the vote at all?

That comment proves we haven't come far enough, baby.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

Why stupid? It's interesting to know your family history and cultures.

So...? If you find out you're 8th Irish instead of a 16th you're going to get more drunk on St Paddy's day?

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

I'm also very glad to hear that women who are business owners must merely be fronts for their husbands. After nearly 100 years, the truth is out. I mean, women couldn't possibly think about all those numbers with those pretty 'lil heads. They might cry! And of course they vote the same way their husbands do. Why'd we bother giving them the vote at all?

YouTube - Women: Know Your Limits! Harry Enfield - BBC comedy

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

So you want to be as stupid as them?

It's interesting how your responses to my comments only address snippets and rarely the overall point. In any event, if using the term "African-American" or "Italian-American" based upon the DICTIONARY DEFINITION makes me "stupid" in your estimation then that's cool. But the suggestion that racism is the result of people identifying themselves based upon their heritage as well as their national origins is downright ludicrous. I have some friends from Togo. Not "African-American" in the slightest. Just "Togolese" as you would presumably prefer. So it must have just been a figment of their imagination when they said that the levels of racism they had
experienced was unprecedented when they moved to the Midwest. Much greater than when they lived in NYC. Which was in turn considerably more than what they experienced in Paris. And virtually non-existent back home in Togo. Yet their self-identification remained constant. Imagine that.

OAW

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OAW 

the suggestion that racism is the result of people identifying themselves based upon their heritage as well as their national origins is downright ludicrous.

Originally Posted by Austrian Painter

4. Only members of the nation may be citizens of the State. Only those of German blood, whatever be their creed, may be members of the nation.

What else do you think "racism" is? I mean, clue: Race-ism. "Race"... ...or "heritage" as you colonials like to call it.

Originally Posted by OAW 

I have some friends from Togo. Not "African-American" in the slightest. Just "Togolese" as you would presumably prefer. So it must have just been a figment of their imagination when they said that the levels of racism they had experienced was unprecedented when they moved to the Midwest. Much greater than when they lived in NYC. Which was in turn considerably more than what they experienced in Paris. And virtually non-existent back home in Togo. Yet their self-identification remained constant. Imagine that.

Why weren't they banging on about being "Ewé-Togalese" or "Mina-Togalese"?

Wait. I think I see a pattern here. Plenty of hyphenated self-identification in the US and loads of racism. No hyphenated self-identification in Togo and no racism. How odd!

And you know why there's not much racism in Paris*? Because everyone's "French". Not "African-French" or "Italian-French" or "Irish-French" or "Martian-French". Just French.

(* Excluding the anti-semitic muslim population, of course)

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

What else do you think "racism" is? I mean, clue: Race-ism. "Race"... ...or "heritage" as you colonials like to call it.

racism - noun
• the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, esp. so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
• prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on such a belief

So again ... identification of one's heritage and acting like a d*ck to others based on them having a different heritage are two completely different things. This is a fairly basic concept Doofy. Please don't insult my intelligence by pretending that you don't recognize the difference.

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Why weren't they banging on about being "Ewé-Togalese" or "Mina-Togalese"?

What makes you think they weren't? Let it put it to you like this. When I first met them I asked them "Where are you from?" The answer was Togo. I then asked them who were their people? And the answer was Ewe. Have I ever heard them use the term "Ewe-Togolese"? Not particularly. That just doesn't seem to be how they roll in their country. Perhaps because the "Togolese" part goes without saying? I can't really speak on the reasons why because my familiarity with such matters in their country is so limited. In any event ... the fact remains. Ethnically they self-identified as Ewe. And in terms of nationality they self-identified as Togolese. There really isn't anything complicated about it. Whether they "hyphenate" the two or not is immaterial. That is who they are.

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Wait. I think I see a pattern here. Plenty of hyphenated self-identification in the US and loads of racism. No hyphenated self-identification in Togo and no racism. How odd!

Oh you're still stuck on alphabetic characters I see. As if that is the root of racism. Let me be blunt Doofy. The level of racism they experienced didn't have a damned thing to do with "hyphenation". It had everything to do with the level of anti-black sentiment amongst the white people who were in the majority where they were living at the time. Some simply have more of an issue with this foolishness than others. Whereas some have no issue with it at all. It's a lot more logical to say that they don't have "racism" in Togo because 99% of the population is black. That's not to say that there isn't strife among the various ethnic groups within the country. But it certainly isn't based on this rather dubious thing called "race".

Originally Posted by Doofy 

And you know why there's not much racism in Paris*? Because everyone's "French". Not "African-French" or "Italian-French" or "Irish-French" or "Martian-French". Just French.

Again ... when they lived in Paris they did not consider themselves to be French. They did not self-identify as French. They were Togolese who lived and worked in France. Many African-American artists and musicians emigrated to France during the Jim Crow era to escape the "back of the bus" BS in America. It's not that they were considered "French". It was quite obvious that they were black Americans regardless of how they self-identified. It's just that the French seemed to have a lot more sense in this regard than white Americans. I'm just saying.

OAW

[Doofy]

I give up.
You carry on whining about whitey keeping you down. I'm going to go eat cake.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

I give up.
You carry on whining about whitey keeping you down. I'm going to go eat cake.

But what race color does the cake have ?

-t

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

But what race color does the cake have ?

Well, since I'm oppressing its existence with my teeth, it must be black - because no other race colour of cake can possibly be oppressed.
(It's actually brown with white streaks in it. A bit like Will Smith.)

[subego]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

And you know why there's not much racism in Paris*? Because everyone's "French". Not "African-French" or "Italian-French" or "Irish-French" or "Martian-French".

Unless you're Algerian.

[Lint Police]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Don't put words in my mouth, OAW.
I've had amusing arguments with "Irish Americans" by telling them that I'm more Irish than they are, and they're simply "Americans".

If you weren't born in Africa, you're not an African-American. You're an American, period. Same goes for the Irish, Italians, Chinese and Anglos.

Blank American. Amen.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

I give up.
You carry on whining about whitey keeping you down. I'm going to go eat cake.

Well when the facts don't support the BS that is coming out of your mouth then that is the wisest course of action.

To recap, you were the one that went down this tangent of who is or is not an African-American. See first you tried to redefine the term. Then when I pointed out that how you were using it was at odds with the dictionary definition you shifted gears and bemoaned the ills of "hyphenated" self-identification. A standard you apparently didn't apply to yourself when you incorrectly used it in reference to Charlize Theron. And of course when you get backed into a corner about that "hyphenated self-identification = racism" nonsense you try to throw the oh so typical "Hail Mary" pass and claim that I think that "whitey is keeping me down" … when I haven't said anything of the sort. At all. Not even a little bit. So I'm content to leave it at that since the way that this particular line of discussion has unfolded speaks for itself.

Can we at least agree that Charlize Theron is hot like cayenne pepper?

OAW

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Lint Police 

Blank American. Amen.

Dude is pretty funny.

OAW

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by OAW 

I can't speak to the thinking of your black friends. I do know that self-identification of Americans of African descent has gone through various phases. Colored, Negro, Black, Afro-American, African-American have all been the preferred term in different periods.

If each of the above had been the preferred term prior, how is one to know exactly what the preferred term is today? IOW, Colored, Negro, and Afro-American are actually quite offensive today whereas you're telling me at one point they were the preferred term. Preferred by who? Paranoid white people trying to get it right or black people who at times refer to one another in the most reprehensible ways? (don't explain why, while I understand it the point is that it's a source of confusion for well-intentioned white folks) Who's to know what's acceptable and when?

People do not refer to me as Irish-American because they couldn't know, but indeed that is primarily what I am. For example, one black friend of mine is partially Latino, white, and black, (absolutely gorgeous btw) but is generally referred to as African-American. If I assume that because she appears to have African-American features, she's indeed African-American when she's not, I'm guilty of a classic generalization no? When does it stop? How many hyphens should one use to express their identity and how much wiggle room should be given those who couldn't know?

Having said that, generally speaking the majority prefer African-American these days which again, means Americans of African descent.

No. By definition it would mean born in Africa, moved to America. Whatever happened to "Say It Loud, I'm Black and I'm Proud"!? Blacks are the ones who have been subjected to racism in the US, not African-Americans and Doofy illustrated this above with the picture of the beautiful white woman with blue eyes, indeed born African. I asked you what you thought was the preferred reference and you state it is African-American, but this is what I found Per Gallup polling:

Code:
"Some people say the term 'African-American' should be used 
instead of the word 'black.' Which term do you prefer -- 
'African-American' or 'black,' or does it not matter to you?"

2007

African American       Black       Doesn't Matter
      24%               13%              61%

While any one of us can demonstrate our google-fu, I asked because I was curious if I was going to get an answer that reflects your personal experience or an answer that reflects your personal bias and it seems I've gotten the answer that reflects bias. I did this to illustrate to you why it is that you are often perceived as perhaps somewhat fixated on race. You compounded this by invoking racial oppression and discrimination in response to posts that had nothing to do with this detestable aspect of human nature.

The term Black is typically used in a more general sense to refer to people of African descent regardless of nationality. IOW ... black people are all over the world. They live in many countries, speak many languages, and have a variety of different cultures. African-Americans are merely a specific group of black people that have a country, language, and culture of their own.

So... are you saying then that a black American's preference for African-American is mistaken?

[OAW]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

If each of the above had been the preferred term prior, how is one to know exactly what the preferred term is today? IOW, Colored, Negro, and Afro-American are actually quite offensive today whereas you're telling me at one point they were the preferred term. Preferred by who? Paranoid white people trying to get it right or black people who at times refer to one another in the most reprehensible ways? (don't explain why, while I understand it the point is that it's a source of confusion for well-intentioned white folks) Who's to know what's acceptable and when?

Indeed it can be somewhat confusing. I would just direct you to my earlier post where i outlined how this identity issue among African-Americans originated. In the meantime, you asked me what I thought and I told you. If you choose to accept that or not is your decision.

Originally Posted by ebuddy

People do not refer to me as Irish-American because they couldn't know, but indeed that is primarily what I am. For example, one black friend of mine is partially Latino, white, and black, (absolutely gorgeous btw) but is generally referred to as African-American. If I assume that because she appears to have African-American features, she's indeed African-American when she's not, I'm guilty of a classic generalization no? When does it stop? How many hyphens should one use to express their identity and how much wiggle room should be given those who couldn't know?

Ok. "Latino" is an ethnic group based upon language. It is not a "racial" group insofar as that even exists. So there are Latinos who are black, white, indigenous American and all kinds of mixtures thereof. So given the description of your friend she very well is African-American. And she's a Latina too. And she has white ancestry just like nearly all other African-Americans. What you have to keep in mind is that "race" as we think of it today is not a biological reality. From a DNA perspective there is more diversity within so-called racial groups than between them. The concept of "race" is actually more of a social construct. And in that light if your friend appears to African-American then that is how she will be perceived. Look at Soledad O'Brien on CNN. She's African-American and Latina too. She happens to be fair-skinned. But from an ancestry perspective I wouldn't be surprised if she was very similar to your friend. Yet despite her appearance she's still considered to be black in America because her mother is black. Even if her dad was an Australian of Irish descent. Even if it was a grandparent or great grandparent that was black, in America we have a society rooted in the One Drop Rule which says that any black ancestry makes you black. And let's keep it real here. White people started all that. And for the most part that's still how they see the world today. Halle Berry is "bi-racial" … but her mother had sense enough to tell her as a child that she was "a little black girl with a white mother". Because that was how she would be perceived in America. Tell the truth. How many of your white friends think of Halle Berry as a white girl? Do you? President Obama is "bi-racial" too. But he came out of the oven much darker than Ms. Berry. Now because of who he is some white people want to embark on this "intellectual" exercise and try to claim that he's not African-American. But real talk … if he was just a regular dude he'd have just a hard of a time catching a cab in NYC as me or any other black man. And his white mother wont mean a damned thing then now will it?

Originally Posted by ebuddy

No. By definition it would mean born in Africa, moved to America.

I posted the definition above my friend. Are you suggesting that I misread what it said?

Originally Posted by ebuddy

Whatever happened to "Say It Loud, I'm Black and I'm Proud"!? Blacks are the ones who have been subjected to racism in the US, not African-Americans and Doofy illustrated this above with the picture of the beautiful white woman with blue eyes, indeed born African. I asked you what you thought was the preferred reference and you state it is African-American, but this is what I found Per Gallup polling:

Code:
"Some people say the term 'African-American' should be used 
instead of the word 'black.' Which term do you prefer -- 
'African-American' or 'black,' or does it not matter to you?"

2007

African American       Black       Doesn't Matter
      24%               13%              61%

While any one of us can demonstrate our google-fu, I asked because I was curious if I was going to get an answer that reflects your personal experience or an answer that reflects your personal bias and it seems I've gotten the answer that reflects bias.

I suppose I'm a bit confused as to why you think this contradicts what I said? Even by your numbers there's a 2 to 1 preference for "African-American" if you consider the "Doesn't matter" crowd to be neutral. And if you include that crowd with both of the other groups there is still a clear majority for what i said. I would suggest that you delve a little deeper and think why 61% say it doesn't matter. Perhaps it's because in general conversation we use the terms interchangeably? Again, language is contextual. And in the context of the US "African-American" and "black" are virtually synonymous. Not exactly … but for the most part. I never said that the term "black" has taken on a pejorative connotation like "negro" or "colored". Having said that, from a standpoint of accuracy and in the context of this particular discussion i will reiterate what I said earlier. "Black" is a more general term. There a black people in America. Black people in Cuba. Black people on Jamaica. Black people throughout Africa. There are more black people on Brazil than in the most populous country in Africa. You see the term "black" doesn't convey any sense of nationality or citizenship when you step back and think about it. Whereas African-American conveys both heritage and citizenship. But again, in the context of America the terms are often used interchangeably. Myself included.

Originally Posted by ebuddy

I did this to illustrate to you why it is that you are often perceived as perhaps somewhat fixated on race. You compounded this by invoking racial oppression and discrimination in response to posts that had nothing to do with this detestable aspect of human nature.

How people "perceive" me around here is the least of my concerns. What I deal in are FACTS. So in that light let me ask you this …

Did I start the thread?

The thread topic involved race did it not?

The thread title has a rather interesting reference to Rahm Emmanuel's ethnicity that was in no way related to the OP. Yet that gets a pass by nearly all involved in the thread right?

Turtle made his snide remark directed at me. I'm sure you saw it. The only thing I said regarding discrimination was to present FACTS to back up why I said I understood The point Rev. Meeks was trying to make. Facts that have thus far gone unchallenged let alone refuted.

Who started this line of discussion about who is or is not an African-American? Well before I even made my first comment in the thread.

Crash goes on one of his typical rants that for the most part is completely off topic. And as usual, even when he makes some valid points he's convinced himself that being an asshole in his manner of expressing them is some sort of badge of honor.

But I'm the one tripping though right?

I could suggest that you review the thread history around here and see just how these conversations get started. I start some. But any honest assessment would show that the vast majority aren't started by me. I'm generally responding to one of the usual suspects. I mean there have been threads where some pretty blatant race baiting comments have been made. And for the most part, not a peep out of you guys. But let me respond and check that individual and then I'm the one "fixated". But it's cool. And it's certainly not unexpected.

OAW

[subego]

Originally Posted by OAW 

The thread title has a rather interesting reference to Rahm Emmanuel's ethnicity that was in no way related to the OP. Yet that gets a pass by nearly all involved in the thread right?

Honestly, I find the OP to be the most loathsome member of this board, and I'm one of those types who tries to find something redeeming in everyone.

Calling him out is not worth my time.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Who started this line of discussion about who is or is not an African-American?

I did. So, when you say this...

Originally Posted by OAW 

I could suggest that you review the thread history around here and see just how these conversations get started. I start some. But any honest assessment would show that the vast majority aren't started by me. I'm generally responding to one of the usual suspects. I mean there have been threads where some pretty blatant race baiting comments have been made. And for the most part, not a peep out of you guys. But let me respond and check that individual and then I'm the one "fixated".

...I hope you're not meaning me. Because I'm completely colour-blind.
The only comments I ever make are about the clashing edges of incompatible cultures. I don't give a toss what colour anyone is, as long as they're not green (eww, infectious, stay away!) or blue (probably need a heimlich) or communist.

I've not seen any blatant race-baiting comments here. Perhaps your perception is biased because you're fixated on race issues?

This whole "hyphenated American" business is a root cause of the continuance of racism in your country. Ever stopped to wonder why you don't hear "African-Spaniard" or "Chinese-Italian", why the second word in such a construct is always "American"?

I'll recount a talk show episode I remember from about 15 years back. The kind where there's no guests but rather the host talks about an issue with the audience (mingling amongst them with a microphone).
It was something to do with immigration and race. Host goes over to a black guy and asks a question to the effect of "how do you feel about it, does it affect you, have you had any problems?" Black guy says "I don't know, I'm a Welshman."
That's how to do it.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by subego 

Honestly, I find the OP to be the most loathsome member of this board

Dammit. I must try harder then.

[subego]

That's your problem. It's clear you're trying.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

I did. So, when you say this...



...I hope you're not meaning me.

No Doofy. I don't mean you. You have an interesting sense of humor and political outlook. One that took me a while to "get". But I've never considered you to be part of that category.

Originally Posted by Doofy 

I've not seen any blatant race-baiting comments here. Perhaps your perception is biased because you're fixated on race issues?

No my perception isn't biased because I'm fixated on race issues. I certainly don't shy away from discussing them. Nor am I one of those who has deluded themselves into thinking that if we all just pretend that such issues don't exist everything will be hunky dory. No my perception is based upon the numerous instances in threads around here which demonstrate the double-standards that are applied when such topics come up. You see there are those who routinely accuse me of "bringing race into it" ... even though it's obvious to anyone following the entire thread that I didn't initially raise the issue. Just like in this one. It's like it doesn't even register with them when the initial comments are made by someone who is not (or not perceived to be) black. But like I said ... it's cool. You see it's a lot easier to adopt an attitude of arrogant dismissiveness than it is to deal with certain uncomfortable truths. And it's certainly not unexpected because I recognize it for the diversionary tactic that it is. It's not a complaint ... just an observation.

Originally Posted by Doofy 

This whole "hyphenated American" business is a root cause of the continuance of racism in your country. Ever stopped to wonder why you don't hear "African-Spaniard" or "Chinese-Italian", why the second word in such a construct is always "American"?

Doofy my man I really do think you mean well. But African-Americans don't encounter discrimination because of how they self-identify. They encounter it because of who they are. Back in the days when we went by "colored" or "negro" we were still Americans ... yet we were second class citizens at best. And there weren't any "hyphenated" labels in use that you so abhor. Now why do you think that is? When my father was a young man he'd better not get caught in a white neighborhood after dark. And he'd better watch his back in the daytime too. And what he called himself didn't make a bit of difference. Now granted that was a different era. But let me give you a simple example from this day and age which demonstrates why you are being woefully naive with this line of thinking:

WHAT'S in a name? Evidently plenty if you are looking for a job.

To test whether employers discriminate against black job applicants, Marianne Bertrand of the University of Chicago and Sendhil Mullainathan of M.I.T. conducted an unusual experiment. They selected 1,300 help-wanted ads from newspapers in Boston and Chicago and submitted multiple résumés from phantom job seekers. The researchers randomly assigned the first names on the résumés, choosing from one set that is particularly common among blacks and from another that is common among whites.

So Kristen and Tamika, and Brad and Tyrone, applied for jobs from the same pool of want ads and had equivalent résumés. Nine names were selected to represent each category: black women, white women, black men and white men. Last names common to the racial group were also assigned. Four résumés were typically submitted for each job opening, drawn from a reservoir of 160. Nearly 5,000 applications were submitted from mid-2001 to mid-2002. Professors Bertrand and Mullainathan kept track of which candidates were invited for job interviews.

No single employer was sent two identical résumés, and the names on the résumés were randomly assigned, so applicants with black- and white-sounding names applied for the same set of jobs with the same set of résumés.

Apart from their names, applicants had the same experience, education and skills, so employers had no reason to distinguish among them.

The results are disturbing. Applicants with white-sounding names were 50 percent more likely to be called for interviews than were those with black-sounding names. Interviews were requested for 10.1 percent of applicants with white-sounding names and only 6.7 percent of those with black-sounding names.

Within racial groups, applications with men's or women's names were equally likely to result in calls for interviews, providing little evidence of discrimination based on sex in these entry-level jobs.

Economic Scene - Sticks and stones can break bones, but the wrong name can make a job hard to find. - NYTimes.com

There's nothing on a resume saying "African-American" or "Italian-American". But what the study shows is that "Emily" and "Brendan" are twice as likely to get a call back as "Aisha" and "Jamal". With identical resumes! Now I would argue that this is a demonstrable example of the "continuance of racism" in America. And there's no "hyphenated American business" involved whatsoever.

Now again, I think you mean well. And the goal you outline is laudable in some respects. But in all honesty I think you are overlooking the fundamental issue when it comes to this. As the late great scholar W.E.B. DuBois famously said ...

The problem of the twentieth century is the problem of the color-line.

And unfortunately the problem persists in the 21st century, as the example I cited above clearly demonstrates. When those in positions of power and authority actually become as "colorblind" as they so often profess to be ... then and only then will situations like the one above be eliminated.

OAW

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Doofy my man I really do think you mean well. But African-Americans don't encounter discrimination because of how they self-identify. They encounter it because of who they are.

No man, I understand where you're coming from. But listen to what I'm saying:

"African-Americans" perceiving themselves as "African-American" rather than "American" allows other ethnic groups to self-identity ("Irish-American", etc.) which leads to the racism, since the other ethnic groups will stick together instead of simply being "American".
For example, a guido, sufficient integrated into the guido community, will always give a job first and foremost to a fellow guido. If he's a guido he sticks with guidos. If he's "American" he sticks with "Americans".

I'm guilty of this on a cultural level. I won't hang with commies or Britney Spears fans. Why would I, when I can hang with people who're in the same cultural group as myself?

It's just human nature. The sooner you demolish the ethnic identity groups (ALL of them), the sooner racism will cease and you'll be able to enjoy being denied employment because you've got a Che T on or a tattoo of Justin Bieber on yer forehead.

Did that make sense?

[SpaceMonkey]

Demolishing ethnic identity groups is a pipe-dream.

[Eug]

I've met some people originally from the West Indies who get really pissed off being called "African-American", and that's not even considering the fact they live in Canada.

[OAW]

Doofy,

Believe me I understand what you're getting at, I just think you are being a tad bit idealistic. I'm going to have to roll with SpaceMonkey on this one. Eliminating ethnic identity groups is a pipe dream. Now having said that, getting society to the point where people don't give two sh*ts about it when it comes to public life ... and their actions reflect that belief .... is a much more doable goal.

OAW

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Eug 

I've met some people originally from the West Indies who get really pissed off being called "African-American", and that's not even considering the fact they live in Canada.

Oh that's not surprising at all. And people from the Motherland don't particularly appreciate it as well. It's not an accurate term to identify them. If you have 3 guys that are citizens in America ... and one was born in Nigera, another in Jamaica, and the other in Chicago ... they are all black, but only one would be African-American. There are certain things they may have in common, but culturally speaking in many respects African-Americans are more like each other and other non-black Americans than they are Nigerian born Americans or Jamaican born Americans.

OAW

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OAW 

If you have 3 guys that are citizens in America ... and one was born in Nigera, another in Jamaica, and the other in Chicago ... they are all black, but only one would be African-American.

How is this any different from the first post I made in this thread?

I don't get it. Is the Nigerian "African-America" (which is where I went with Charlize) or is the Chicagoan "African-American"? Do you have to have been born in America to be an African-American, and American citizens who were born in Africa aren't "African-Americans"? I'm really not getting this at all.

[sek929]

Jefferson Twilight: Yes, I only hunt blaculas.
Guild Candidate: Oh, so you only hunt African-American vampires?
Twilight: No, sometimes I hunt British vampires. They don’t have “African Americans” in England!
Candidate: Oh yeah, huh, good point.
Twilight: So I hunt blaculas.
Candidate: I was just trying to be…
Twilight: Man, I specialize in hunting black vampires, I don’t know what the P.C. name for that is!