or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Racial Demographic of SF
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Racial Demographic of SF - Page 7

post #91 of 156
Thread Starter 
I was originally going to list option #5 as "Ambiguously Brown"....in hindsight I should have.
post #92 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Checks
I guess I'm not seeing why this you think that.

A group has a title like that but it's improper for anyone else to draw the same conclusion?

It's not about exactitude of language, it's about common usage, and that's pretty clear evidence of common usage of "race" to me.

Race, defined: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/race



Maggie: NAACP founded 1909, BTW, terms have changed since then.


I think what Jon is trying to say is that "Racialism" which you seem very comfortable with, is not a very constructive -ism.

My own objection to "la Raza" is the fact that they act like nothing more than a group of thugs when people of hispanic origin are not interested in joining up or being supportive.
post #93 of 156
It's Margaret. The name hasn't changed.
post #94 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Checks
I guess I'm not seeing why this you think that.

A group has a title like that but it's improper for anyone else to draw the same conclusion?

It's not about exactitude of language, it's about common usage, and that's pretty clear evidence of common usage of "race" to me.

Race, defined: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/race



Maggie: NAACP founded 1909, BTW, terms have changed since then.

Well, the Spanish originated it, are they "˜Hispanics' or are they "˜Europeans'? Are Brazilians "˜Hispanics?' They don't speak Spanish and aren't direct decedents of Spain.

Jon.
post #95 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by iammatt
My own objection to "la Raza" is the fact that they act like nothing more than a group of thugs when people of hispanic origin are not interested in joining up or being supportive.

There's that too...

Jon.
post #96 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by iammatt
I think what Jon is trying to say is that "Racialism" which you seem very comfortable with, is not a very constructive -ism.

My own objection to "la Raza" is the fact that they act like nothing more than a group of thugs when people of hispanic origin are not interested in joining up or being supportive.

I have no idea how you would draw that conclusion, which is incorrect, to the extent I understand it.

My question seems a reasonable one, which is, if a group refers to itself as a race, and it's commonly used that way, and the dictionary supports such a usage, why do people have "thick skulls" of they say that?
post #97 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Checks
I have no idea how you would draw that conclusion, which is incorrect, to the extent I understand it.

My question seems a reasonable one, which is, if a group refers to itself as a race, and it's commonly used that way, and the dictionary supports such a usage, why do people have "thick skulls" of they say that?


Racialism is the belief that race and racial consideration are very important factors to consider when looking at the world as a whole. It is distinct from racism. La Raza is built on a platform of racialism.

I do not know if you are comfortable with racialism, so you are correct that I probably should not have drawn that conclusion. However, you called those who are not thickheaded, so...

I have no problem with them calling themselves a race, I just have a problem with that mattering.
post #98 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by odoreater
Not true. If you go to a group of people that you know nothing about you are going to gravitate towards people that you presume are most like you - this is a natural human tendancy. Since you don't know anything about these people the only thing that you can base who you might gravitate towards is their physical appearance. This is why at any orientation you might immediately see black people hanging out with other black people and white people hanging out with other white people from the very first day - because you automatically presume that these people have experiences that are similar to your own. This is only natural.

Again, there are definite exceptions where social constructs may trump your theory of "racial orientation." Though genetically I'm 100% Japanese, my family has been living in the United States, specifically California, since the late-19th century. I was raised in primarily Caucasian neighborhood with a few Latinos, and consequently identify most closely with middle-class white people. After moving to NY, I've found this especially true since most Asians living in the New York area are culturally Chinese or Korean, having immigrated within the past thirty years. So, if I was to attend your hypothetical party, I would probably be hanging out with a few Jew's and WASPs, avoiding the Asians dressed in all-black, and eyeing the Bengali girl from across the room.

EDIT: Exception #2: I have a few Jewish friends who grew up in South Africa. Technically, they are African-Americans, or applying to become African-Americans, though the accepted connotation of that term greatly differs from the geopolitical identification offered by my friends.
post #99 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS
Well, the Spanish originated it, are they ‘Hispanics’ or are they ‘Europeans’? Are Brazilians ‘Hispanics?’ They don’t speak Spanish and aren’t direct decedents of Spain.

Jon.

I'm confused (I'm not trying to be a dickhead here).

I don't even know the "it" you're referring to. I would give broad deference to how the groups self-identify, FWIW.
post #100 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by iammatt
Racialism is the belief that race and racial consideration are very important factors to consider when looking at the world as a whole. It is distinct from racism. La Raza is built on a platform of racialism.

I do not know if you are comfortable with racialism, so you are correct that I probably should not have drawn that conclusion. However, you called those who are not thickheaded, so...

I have no problem with them calling themselves a race, I just have a problem with that mattering.

It's not a matter I've given a lot of thought to, so (rare for this board) I actually don't have an opinion on this.

Originally, I was responding to an angry post in which someone called everyone thick skulled, for what I know to be a common usage both within and without the group of people who call themselves Hispanic.
post #101 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Checks
I'm totally confused. I don't even know the "it" you're referring to.

The language, the culture, the basis for "˜La Raza'

Jon.
post #102 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS
So say the anti-Semites, who else do you think perpetuated such nonsense? You haven't seen non-Jewish people with big noses?
Hate to be a literalist, but technically, all Semites are not of the Jewish faith.

Sem·ite (sem it)
1. A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.
2. A Jew.

It would be inaccurate, I believe, to equate Semite with Jew; just as it is inaccurate to call "Jew" a race.
post #103 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dakota rube
Hate to be a literalist, but technically, all Semites are not of the Jewish faith.

Sem·ite (sem it)
1. A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.
2. A Jew.

It would be inaccurate, I believe, to equate Semite with Jew; just as it is inaccurate to call "Jew" a race.

A) You know what I meant
B) Fine, call them anti-Jews for all I care, you still know what I meant.

Jon.
post #104 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by odoreater
Being Jewish is a little different from being Christian or Muslim because, as far as I know, one has to be born Jewish to really be Jewish (more exactly, your mother has to be Jewish for you to really be Jewish), whereas people can convert to Christianity or Islam. Therefore, in some cases you can 'look' like a particular religion if one can only enter into that religion by birth. I think some Jewish groups allow people to convert to Judaism now, but, theologically speaking, that's an anomoly and not a widely accepted practice. In fact, if you believe that the Jews are the "chosen people" it would be pretty silly to say that someone can become one of the "chosen people" by just choosing to be one of them and thereby usurping the function of "choosing" from God and granting it to yourself.

My late father (and his father before him) looked wonderfully "Jewish". Yet he was raised a Christian, and was of almost 100% German extraction. He converted to Judaism to marry 2nd wife (after my mother died). Oddly, the woman he married was herself a convert to Judaism! (And she too had a physical appearance many people would equate with "Jewish-ness".)

In my subsequent genealogical research I found that, ironically, my father's great-grandmother was, in fact, Jewish. Had he been aware of this fact, I've been told that his conversion to Judaism would've been somehow "easier". All immaterial, however, as the marriage lasted but a year. The police, in fact, were called to the hotel on their wedding night to break up a chair- and bottle-throwing fight!
post #105 of 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS
A) You know what I meant
B) Fine, call them anti-Jews for all I care, you still know what I meant.
I wasn't picking on you Jon. I just find it amusing that a word (Semite) that is in such wide usage is technically incorrect in almost all applications.

And yes, I do know what you meant.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Chat
Styleforum › Forums › General › General Chat › Racial Demographic of SF