HotGritz said:

paintedlady said:

I never use twitter, I just never got into it.

But that's just it ain't it? Even many of us that complain about how people use labels against us never even educate themselves about their own culture. They walk in silent shame/guilt and project their shit on other people because they don't like themselves. Some need to feel important about their situations and lifestyles.

It may sound corny, but its the truth in my eyes as I see it. Anyone can be a crab in a barrel and drag others down, or choose educate thensemlves and takes risks by challenging what has been taught to them.

To protect yourself, its good to know who you are and were you are going, but a label can also box you into small mindedness if one lets it happen.

More twitter shit I guess.... but that's just my POV

Twitter is crazy and you would not believe some of the stuff people tweet. I wish I could get paid to spy but then I'd have to work 18 hour days 7 days a week.

But to your point...yes we complain about how labels are used on us by others but we never educate ourselves enough to even understand why the label should offend or compliment. I'm thinking I don't even like the term "label" and would like to replace it with "description". If someone describes me, no problem. If they label me...mmm I might have to kiss them or kick their ass.

Agreed... 10000% you can label my ass "fine" anyday!

I went on twitter and tweeted for one day.. that was it. I went back a week later and had twenty or something odd requests for followers ... I guess I have none now because I haven't went back in a year damn near.

2freaky4church1 said:

I like European American or white person or whatever, but caucasion sounds like some sexual disease. African American is a strong term, while caucasion is weak.

I think it's a plot..lol

We're all African anyway. lol

I thought you had stopped drinking?

KingBAD said:

Alkebulan (Alkebu-lan)

"The name "Africa" was invented and used by the Romans, but they had no idea how big the continent was. They used the name to to refer to their small area around Carthage.

In Africa itself, there are well over 1000 spoken languages, who would all have used their own names for places known to them. Africa is a very big place and no language encompasses the whole continent. It is very unlikely that any of the many empires, kingdoms and tribes had a concept of Africa as one clearly bounded continent with one name. They probably referred to their local region, and some far off regions known to them. "

Where's the link to your source? . From what I researched, the Romans first referred to the Northern part of that continent, as Africa, and at the time, they didn't realize how large that continent was.

I also researched that Africa was named by a Roman General named Scipio Africanus, who won that name because he defeated General Hannibal. I also found out the continent's name prior to that was "Kemet", then "Eden", and the end result was "Africa", due to General's Scipio's battles/victories he won in Africa.

Of course the orignal inhabitants (first humans) were there long before all this name changing took place, and many years before other humans, from various ethnic groups, finally met up with one another. In the end, that is how the continent of Africa ended up with the name "Africa" although it had other names prior to that one. There seems to be so much more many of us have to learn about that continent. Guess I have more work to do.

[Edited 4/12/11 18:05pm]

BlackAdder7 said:

cut us open, we're all pink and red inside...with guts and stuff.

As Prince sings in the song, "Race":

Cut me, cut U

And both the blood is red

HotGritz said:

XxAxX said:

doesn't it make us all a little less relevant when we refer to each other and ourselves just by one or the other color? black and white are like the keys on prince's piano for sure, but none of us are prince's piano and real people are anywhere from pink to brown. we should call it like it is, imo. beige, pink, cafe au lait, etc. just my 2c

some people are beige

some people are ebony

some people are dark brown

some people are medium brown

some people are light brown

some people are golden brown

some people are blue black

some people are ghostly white

some people are tan

some people are fake tan

some people are bronze

some people are copper

some people are chestnut brown

some people are burnt orange due to age and sun exposure

some people olive complected - has nothing to do with the mediterranean

some people are dark pinkish - lots of Irish folk are this colorand I've been told this is due to

mongolian ancestry (?)

some people are very pale pink - another tribe of Irish..perhaps Viking Irish

some people are bright yellow

some people are dark yellow

some people are greyish

some people are spotted due to vitiligo

some people are covered in tats which would make them rainbowish

I am kind of greyish yellowish pink

NDRU said:

Serious said:

NDRU said: It felt so strange for me when I was asked in Trinidad by some magistrate if I would call myself caucasian. First if I would have to define myself I would say white and second overhere I never ever had to identify myself as part of an ethnicity. I remember it was shocking for me when I first saw my boyfriend's identity card stating his colour of skin.

I don't know that particular situation, but I can say it's not always asked with bad intentions.

Over here there is almost always the "decline to state" option

I'm pretty sure they aren't even allowed to ask anyone what is their race over here.

It's got so PC now that on a police report they cannot say the perp looked to be of indian or african descent. They MAY be able to say black hair and of dark complexion

any aussies know for sure?

I'm more surprised this thread hasn't been moved one step below, well you know where. As I am reading this so far, its not as uncivil as I would have expected. Good nuggets of wisdom being shared, that's a good thing.

johnart said:

PositivityNYC said:

It was meant to be used for Americans decended from black American slaves -- but ppl tend to mistakenly use it for every "black" face they see

~ this way, the term should not be applied to Latinos or West Indians, or even black ppl from Europe, Asia or Canada (unless their heritage does include black American slaves).

However, if the term is to be properly used, like "Irish-American" (born in the USA with Irish heritage) and "Italian-American" (born in the USA with Italian heritage), and so on, two good examples are:

1)President Obama isn't "African American" b/c he's half black, he is African-American b/c

a) he has one African parent and one American parent

b) he has at least one African parent and was born in America

* if he had been born in Africa to at least one American parent, this, too, would apply

2) If Charlize Theron has a kid with her American bf, that child - though white - will also be African-American

but yes (original post); human beings began on the African continent and spread out from there... technically, all human beings are "African."

While all of these "racial" labels attempt to define us, all they really do is divide. There's only one race; human (or hueman, as I've seen some ppl use ~ since man comes in so many lovely hues ).

[Edited 4/12/11 11:24am]

I love your ass.

And I love the Charlize example.

*smooch*

2elijah said:

PositivityNYC said:

We Americans were barely taught our own history, fully/accurately ~ no wonder we don't know much about the Caribbean, even with "world" history classes in school..

I never heard that Americans thought West Indian blacks were trying to deny their African heritage [how is that possible??] -- well, aside from black Latinos in the Caribbean....

hey, did you hear about this airing April 19th - May 10th?

on PBS: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/b...in-america

should be interesting.. especially since I just read/saw these two:

http://edition.cnn.com/20...n.heritage

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/n...cause/8489 not so cool...

Whoo Hoo! Thanks for those links. I will definitely enjoy watching that. Som of my Dad's brothers used to live in the Dominican Republic back in the early 60s, and my Godmother is from there. So it will be interesting to see how they react to see how much knowledge they have over in the Latin Caribbean countries about their history.

I never really knew what "olive-skinned" was ... I was called that often.

Then (seriously no exaggeration at all) I swam as a teen in a pool with clorine and then sunned myself.... I literally turned olive green as I tanned. I was that puky green color for damn near a month. Now I NEVER like to be in any clorinated water and tan after wards.

Salt/fresh water for me only please!

:itsnoteasybeinggreen:

I can't remember ever referring to myself or being referred to as caucasian, only white. Here in Thailand I'm called a farang though, which goes for basically all reasonably pale folks from North America, South America, Europe, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand. I've quite often had a tan these last few years though, and this (coupled with a beard when it's particularly unkempt) can easily confuse some Thais. A lady in the hairdresser's once remarked she thought I was from 'somewhere like Morocco'.

'White' is fine with me. It's common and easily understood. 'Caucasian' would be fine too though. 'Farang' I have mixed feelings about, depending on the context and way it's said.

edit: included, on reflection, South America. If they're light skinned they'd be called farang here, I'm sure.

[Edited 4/12/11 20:49pm]

I use "blue-eyed devil," myself!

Lammastide said:

I use "blue-eyed devil," myself!

HotGritz said:

XxAxX said:

doesn't it make us all a little less relevant when we refer to each other and ourselves just by one or the other color? black and white are like the keys on prince's piano for sure, but none of us are prince's piano and real people are anywhere from pink to brown. we should call it like it is, imo. beige, pink, cafe au lait, etc. just my 2c

some people are beige

some people are ebony

some people are dark brown

some people are medium brown

some people are light brown

some people are golden brown

some people are blue black

some people are ghostly white

some people are tan

some people are fake tan

some people are bronze

some people are copper

some people are chestnut brown

some people are burnt orange due to age and sun exposure

some people olive complected - has nothing to do with the mediterranean

some people are dark pinkish - lots of Irish folk are this colorand I've been told this is due to

mongolian ancestry (?)

some people are very pale pink - another tribe of Irish..perhaps Viking Irish

some people are bright yellow

some people are dark yellow

some people are greyish

some people are spotted due to vitiligo

some people are covered in tats which would make them rainbowish

Well, I'm pale pinkish with brown polk-a-dots (freckles). But my family is French, Native American, and Caucasian. We're all mutts...

paintedlady said:

I never really knew what "olive-skinned" was ... I was called that often.

Then (seriously no exaggeration at all) I swam as a teen in a pool with clorine and then sunned myself.... I literally turned olive green as I tanned. I was that puky green color for damn near a month. Now I NEVER like to be in any clorinated water and tan after wards.

Salt/fresh water for me only please!

:itsnoteasybeinggreen:

Been called that too. It's always felt like "we're gonna make the distinction that you're different "skinned" than us but that we're not afraid of you" Whatever. I've never turned green but I will turn pretty dark if I'm out in the sun a long time.

I've posted this before...Dark Lady

[img:$uid]http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i9/jgascot/personal/tan.jpg[/img:$uid]

2elijah said:

KingBAD said:

Alkebulan (Alkebu-lan)

"The name "Africa" was invented and used by the Romans, but they had no idea how big the continent was. They used the name to to refer to their small area around Carthage.

In Africa itself, there are well over 1000 spoken languages, who would all have used their own names for places known to them. Africa is a very big place and no language encompasses the whole continent. It is very unlikely that any of the many empires, kingdoms and tribes had a concept of Africa as one clearly bounded continent with one name. They probably referred to their local region, and some far off regions known to them. "

Where's the link to your source? . From what I researched, the Romans first referred to the Northern part of that continent, as Africa, and at the time, they didn't realize how large that continent was.

I also researched that Africa was named by a Roman General named Scipio Africanus, who won that name because he defeated General Hannibal. I also found out the continent's name prior to that was "Kemet", then "Eden", and the end result was "Africa", due to General's Scipio's battles/victories he won in Africa.

Of course the orignal inhabitants (first humans) were there long before all this name changing took place, and many years before other humans, from various ethnic groups, finally met up with one another. In the end, that is how the continent of Africa ended up with the name "Africa" although it had other names prior to that one. There seems to be so much more many of us have to learn about that continent. Guess I have more work to do.

[Edited 4/12/11 18:05pm]

wow!!!

whut you said was so waaaaaaay different than whut i wrote that i have to change everything i ever thought on the subject. i mean REALLY!!!

KingBAD said:

2elijah said:

Where's the link to your source? . From what I researched, the Romans first referred to the Northern part of that continent, as Africa, and at the time, they didn't realize how large that continent was.

I also researched that Africa was named by a Roman General named Scipio Africanus, who won that name because he defeated General Hannibal. I also found out the continent's name prior to that was "Kemet", then "Eden", and the end result was "Africa", due to General's Scipio's battles/victories he won in Africa.

Of course the orignal inhabitants (first humans) were there long before all this name changing took place, and many years before other humans, from various ethnic groups, finally met up with one another. In the end, that is how the continent of Africa ended up with the name "Africa" although it had other names prior to that one. There seems to be so much more many of us have to learn about that continent. Guess I have more work to do.

[Edited 4/12/11 18:05pm]

wow!!!

whut you said was so waaaaaaay different than whut i wrote that i have to change everything i ever thought on the subject. i mean REALLY!!!

Now, now. Are you willing to learn from 2elijah or not?

What's the black equivalent to caucasian? Do you like that word or no?

GetAwayFromMe said:

What's the black equivalent to caucasian? Do you like that word or no?-

The short answer would be "Negroid," using a certain simplified 19th-century system of categorizing. But, as with any human classification, nothing's quite "neat," because history, politics, regionality, cultural meaning, self-identity, etc., come into play.

Most would probably not like being referred to as "Negro" today. Too much baggage. Moreover, there is not a consensus around what constitutes "Black" today, much less an overlap in what is widely considered Black and what historically has been considered Negroid or some other category. For example, the peoples of various parts of Northeast Africa -- Somalia, Sudan, Eritrea, etc. -- probably would be considered Black in most of the Western world, but they may or may not consider themselves Black, especially relative to nations further South. Further, along certain 19th-century measurements, they were variably included in those humans said to be of a Caucasoid or mixed anthropological profile. Elsewhere, some Sub-Saharan peoples, whom in mixed circles roundly would be recognized as just "Black," are categorized in Negroid sub-races (e.g. Bantu or Pygmy) or in altogether discrete races (Capoid or Congoid) by some social scientists. And many would argue there are active sociopolitical interests at play in all of this variable logic.

The long and short of it is, all categorizations we use with regard to people are a cultural shorthand at best that shrink, grow and altogether transform based on context and, yes, intent. I think we should use them all with caution and qualification.

[Edited 4/13/11 8:28am]

KingBAD said:

2elijah said:

Where's the link to your source? . From what I researched, the Romans first referred to the Northern part of that continent, as Africa, and at the time, they didn't realize how large that continent was.

I also researched that Africa was named by a Roman General named Scipio Africanus, who won that name because he defeated General Hannibal. I also found out the continent's name prior to that was "Kemet", then "Eden", and the end result was "Africa", due to General's Scipio's battles/victories he won in Africa.

Of course the orignal inhabitants (first humans) were there long before all this name changing took place, and many years before other humans, from various ethnic groups, finally met up with one another. In the end, that is how the continent of Africa ended up with the name "Africa" although it had other names prior to that one. There seems to be so much more many of us have to learn about that continent. Guess I have more work to do.

[Edited 4/12/11 18:05pm]

wow!!!

whut you said was so waaaaaaay different than whut i wrote that i have to change everything i ever thought on the subject. i mean REALLY!!!

Not really, you were right in a sense that the continent"Africa" was given that name by some Romans, but seeing what you posted, I just did a little research on it, because I had heard in the past, that wasn't its original name, and you are correct on the info you posted, but I was interested in what other names that continent was called prior to that, so just did a little extra research. You don't really have to change a thing, I just added more info I thought would be of interest to you. No worry, it's all good.

[Edited 4/13/11 8:47am]

Fauxie said:

KingBAD said:

wow!!!

whut you said was so waaaaaaay different than whut i wrote that i have to change everything i ever thought on the subject. i mean REALLY!!!

Now, now. Are you willing to learn from 2elijah or not?

Oh hush, but gee...thanks for the flattery.

psychodelicide said:

BlackAdder7 said:

cut us open, we're all pink and red inside...with guts and stuff.

As Prince sings in the song, "Race":

Cut me, cut U

And both the blood is red

Yeah, a person doesn t need to educate themselves with history books to see that we are all the same inside and share the same conciousness. It requires a degree of self knowledge.

Graycap23 said:

Humans should let go of terms.

Drop the terms.........drop the drama associated with it.

yep.

PositivityNYC said:

2elijah said:

Whoo Hoo! Thanks for those links. I will definitely enjoy watching that. Som of my Dad's brothers used to live in the Dominican Republic back in the early 60s, and my Godmother is from there. So it will be interesting to see how they react to see how much knowledge they have over in the Latin Caribbean countries about their history.

By the way, you can check out Spencer Wells documentary anytime. I posted it in another thread that got locked. Watch at your leisure. It's 13 episodes, and will automatically start the next one at the end of each chapter. It's regarding the origins of the human species. Quite interesting to say the least. I'm a fan of Spencer Wells' and Dr. Stephen Oppenheimer's work, as well as Dr. Alice Roberts. Just to name a few.

I think people would gain a better knowledge of the human species if they take the time to do some research, as it would lead to a better understanding of why humans in general, look different physically from one another and how that came to be, as well as answer many of our curiosities about one another, race/ethnicity included. It will also show that we're all from the same human species, despite many of our physical differences (again..i.e, hair texture/skin color/bone structures, eye color, etc.). Anyway, thanks for those other links, I will check them out. Always loved that kind of stuff, guess that's all due to my very, early interests in anthropology and human genetics. Enjoy these links/vids.

Here's another interesting documentary below, but this is the work of

Dr. Stephen Oppenheimer and several other others who are DNA experts. "The Real Eve," (work of Professor Stephen Oppenheimer) was on the Discovery channel a couple of years ago. It's in 9 parts though, and you can order the DVD on Amazon . Here's some info on Prof. Oppenheimer.

http://www.bradshawfounda...eimer.html

[Edited 4/13/11 8:49am]

awesome -- thank you!

I'll add to my favorites list on YT to keep track

Lammastide said:

GetAwayFromMe said:

What's the black equivalent to caucasian? Do you like that word or no?-

The short answer would be "Negroid," using a certain simplified 19th-century system of categorizing. But, as with any human classification, nothing's quite "neat," because history, politics, regionality, cultural meaning, self-identity, etc., come into play.

Most would probably not like being referred to as "Negro" today. Too much baggage. Moreover, there is not a consensus around what constitutes "Black" today, much less an overlap in what is widely considered Black and what historically has been considered Negroid or some other category. For example, the peoples of various parts of Northeast Africa -- Somalia, Sudan, Eritrea, etc. -- probably would be considered Black in most of the Western world, but they may or may not consider themselves Black, especially relative to nations further South. Further, along certain 19th-century measurements, they were variably included in those humans said to be of a Caucasoid or mixed anthropological profile. Elsewhere, some Sub-Saharan peoples, whom in mixed circles roundly would be recognized as just "Black," are categorized in Negroid sub-races (e.g. Bantu or Pygmy) or in altogether discrete races (Capoid or Congoid) by some social scientists. And many would argue there are active sociopolitical interests at play in all of this variable logic.

The long and short of it is, all categorizations we use with regard to people are a cultural shorthand at best that shrink, grow and altogether transform based on context and, yes, intent. I think we should use them all with caution and qualification.

[Edited 4/13/11 8:28am]

Right, thank you. I guess I'm not really understanding the original question. The equivalent term would be Negroid, not African American. So neither is strong nor weak.

I'm ok with pasty white.

PositivityNYC said:

awesome -- thank you!

I'll add to my favorites list on YT to keep track

ZombieKitten said:

HotGritz said:

some people are beige

some people are ebony

some people are dark brown

some people are medium brown

some people are light brown

some people are golden brown

some people are blue black

some people are ghostly white

some people are tan

some people are fake tan

some people are bronze

some people are copper

some people are chestnut brown

some people are burnt orange due to age and sun exposure

some people olive complected - has nothing to do with the mediterranean

some people are dark pinkish - lots of Irish folk are this colorand I've been told this is due to

mongolian ancestry (?)

some people are very pale pink - another tribe of Irish..perhaps Viking Irish

some people are bright yellow

some people are dark yellow

some people are greyish

some people are spotted due to vitiligo

some people are covered in tats which would make them rainbowish

I am kind of greyish yellowish pink

me too! i am not a 'white' person

johnart said:

paintedlady said:

I never really knew what "olive-skinned" was ... I was called that often.

Then (seriously no exaggeration at all) I swam as a teen in a pool with clorine and then sunned myself.... I literally turned olive green as I tanned. I was that puky green color for damn near a month. Now I NEVER like to be in any clorinated water and tan after wards.

Salt/fresh water for me only please!

:itsnoteasybeinggreen:

Been called that too. It's always felt like "we're gonna make the distinction that you're different "skinned" than us but that we're not afraid of you" Whatever. I've never turned green but I will turn pretty dark if I'm out in the sun a long time.

I've posted this before...Dark Lady

[img:$uid]http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i9/jgascot/personal/tan.jpg[/img:$uid]

I get that lovely shade in the summer too! In the winter I'm just a pale yellow.... I don't wear pale well... it just doesn't look that great if your hair is the darkest shade of brown.