 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:36
|
|
see now, i did that little moderator schpeel a minute ago to re-direct, re-invigorate the debate and prevent more insults but those are your responses, chegitz? telling me i'm ignorant and cursing at Lorizael?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:36
|
|
and i may be ignorant but at least i know of the Gullah islands and dont refer to them with a vague phrase like "little islands off carolina"
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:36
|
|
no... Geechee is the dialect.
and in any event, they were a cultural outlier with limited contact with the rest of the population of america.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:36
|
|
but traces remained on an isolated island. i dont see what that has to do with the systematic destruction of african culture during and after slavery.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:36
|
|
chegitz, i dont get what your point is. is this some sort of whitewashing of slavery? like, sure they had to work in the fields picking cotton with its sharp needles and get beat by overseers, but at least they had their african culture!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:36
|
|
and you think a culture of people numbering less than a few hundred probably on some tiny, isolated islands is enough of a trace of culture in the whole of the black population to justify calling them of the african culture? gee, i guess the english are romans then
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:36
|
|
don't you hate it when a threads gets so long that we got commentary?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Essayo
|
|
New Zealand
Jan 2004 time: 17:36
|
|
quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara
What you feel Blacks / African Americans should think and feel is really irrelevent. What is important is what they feel. If someone asks you to refer to them as Black, do so. If someone asks you to refer to them as African-American, then do so. If they ask you to call the Fred, then do so.
|
Ok so we should only call people what they want to be called....what if we don't know what they want to be called? If asked to describe a person you don't know to someone else how will you do it? If I have to describe the way a person looks to another I'm going to include the colour of their skin - as well as the colour of their hair, eyes, height, build, sex etc....for example to describe myself, I'm a white female with reddish brown hair and blue eyes, above average height, and medium to slim build. To describe one of my friends I'd say black female, braided black hair, brown eyes, average height, and very slim build. How else am I supposed to describe her? Wonderfully sweet girl who loves to dance and likes Tupac? How the hell does that help anyone who is looking for her? For some people (one in particular who I can't remember I'm sorry) to say that they don't like being put in little boxes because of their ethnicity/sex/eyecolour/whatever is bullsh*t. These are physical characteristics and they are there to distinguish me from you. Ok some people think that certain characteristics make one person inferior to another - but i think we all agree here that that is not right. That doesnt stop us from using these characteristics to describe someones physical appearance.
One of my friends is from Eritrea, another from Nigeria. One speaks with an american accent, the other a british/nigerian accent. Neither are american, yet most people who are asked to describe them who don't know them call them african american. This offends them more than anything else. I suppose the proper pc term would be to call them african, but then what about people here in new zealand - they have dark skin, but they aren't african, they're maori, or samoan or whatever. Unless you know their ethnicity, you can't use it as a describing term - however the colour of their skin you can.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote: Originally posted by MrFun
Then why do historians claim Africa is more diverse than Asia?? |
Anthropologists claim that Africa is the most genetically diverse continent. Gene studies trace the ancestors of all Caucasians and Mongoloids to one group thought to have crossed the Red Sea 70,000 years ago. Homo sapiens existed in Africa two to three times longer, so the African gene pool has had a lot longer to diversify.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Albert Speer
|
|
Puerile Polemic
Mar 1999 time: 00:36
|
|
Strangelove:
historically, though, it would seem africa wouldn't be diverse as the Bantu spread from roughly the Congo into all directions. Most ethnic groups in africa trace back to the single Bantu ethnicity.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Tingkai
|
|
To find the Northwest Passage
Aug 2001 time: 13:36
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Lorizael
However, it's innacurate and sometimes harmful to call yourself certain things. |
To some degree you're right. Vague labels like Chinese, American, German or any other nationalistic tag are often inaccurate and harmful.
There is no such thing as a single culture in China. The Cantonese are different from Beijingers. They eat different food. They speak different languages (or dialects). Their cultures, such as opera, are different.
In the US, the New York Democrat has a very different culture from a Texan Republican. A person living in Bismarck, ND is going to have a very different lifestyle from the person living in San Francisco.
In German, Easterners and Westerners are different as are the mainly Protestant north and the mainly Catholic south.
So even though nationalistic names are vague, few people would ridicule the use of these terms, or complain that the terms are being used. Why is that?
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36. Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|