Back up what you said w/ quotes from such authors. Please include the book (or speech and date of said speech) in which they referred to particular blacks as being well-spoken and articulate. Also, it's Toni Morrison and not Tony. My Soror is not a dude.

It's great that you appreciate those that are articulate on this board but it really doesn't need to be said.

The question: Why should black people feel exhuberant over the fact that some of us are perceived to be "articulate" and "well-spoken"?

If you don't understand, then you will never understand. It's not my place to school those that have no desire to learn.

Would you describe Rick Santorum or George Bush as 'articulate'?

Please re-read what I wrote.

I asked you a question.

I did not say those authors called other blacks articulate, but asked if you consider them articulate.

And the word articulate is used by blacks:
http://www.nblsa.org/
"The National Black Law Students Association (NBLSA) is a national organization designed to articulate and promote the professional needs and goals of Black law students."

http://www.blackcommentator.com/61/61_fr_racism.html
"At the time I still watched the Today show and tuned in to see an interview in progress with two very well dressed, articulate black men who were not entertainers or athletes."

http://www.dusablemuseum.org/program2.asp
"Chantel Mitchell (Ariyan Johnson), a hip, articulate, black high-school girl in Brooklyn"

I could find many more quotes, but you asked a question and I provided the answer sufficiently. :)

-Rudey
--I'll leave the issue of Toni Morrison's femininity for another thread.

So you can say some people have "no desire to learn" but someone else can't say another person is "articulate"?

I can say anything I want and from your posts, I would say you are not articulate.

-Rudey

It happens to me every now and then... but usually over the phone with elderly friends of the family. I'll admit, I do sound a lot like Tiger Woods when I talk, and was the captain of my forensics team, but I usually get confused for a telemarketer when I'm just trying to thank someone for a birthday card or something. This one lady, who goes to my church treats me like one until I explain who I really am. Then she lightens up and tells me that I speak proper and that it's a good thing. I was the captain of my forensics and debate team so it was more unusual for me to speak in the popular vernacular most of the time.

Unspokenone, I do know where you're coming from. Just because I find communication important, there is no reason for people to patronize me. Anybody with sense speaks clearly, or at least tries to. Although my first impressions have allowed me to stand out at some favorable times, I've seen the look of surprise on some people's faces when they meet me in person. It makes me laugh. Not because it's funny, but because I'm just not that nice. I could rebut some insulting comments from people with even more assaulting assesments, but maybe I believe that some people don't think before they say things. I don't sometimes.


-one of the "GOOD" ones

No I wouldn't. George Bush uses the fact that he is not articulate as an advantage. In my opinion, Santorum is articulate regardless of the fact that a lot of what he believes is rubbish.

-Rudey

There is a difference between saying someone is articulate and saying they are articulate for a black person.

I don't know you but I would think friends of your family are complimenting you.

-Rudey

Well, since you described Santorum as articulate (I understand the Bush one), then yes, those you listed are articulate as well.

Please stop while you're ahead (although barely)

I'm sure being the 45th person to say the exact same comment must be pretty entertaining.

-Rudey

I know. I've heard both. I was answering unspokeone's question directly. Refer to her question.

Anyway, it's that look of surprise, that innocently stated comment and assumption that I'm advanced or something because of the way I talk. Just like I make a distinct first impression, the people who make snap reactions also leave a distinct first impression.

Your opinion but my law firm and colleagues at my law school don't seem to think so. ;)

Just as sure as I am that after gettin your @#% handed to you by some of the fellow GC'rs it's fun to rip on someone else.
Get a grip hun. I quoted her before I saw the posts of others.

"gettin your @#% handed to you"

What the heck are you talking about?

Are you acting silly again like when you said the exact same thing as others?

-Rudey

^^LOL! I'm tired now. I don't feel like playing anymore. Talk to y'all later.

Everyone can have an opinon :)

And if your colleagues are calling you articulate, you should be offended according to your narrow interpretation of that word.

-Rudey

Frat, I can also identify w/ everything that you have stated except I wasn't called "articulate" by my relatives.

They don't use the word b/c they know better to. I, unlike other GCers, will not be going back and forth with you. Discussion closed.

And moving on....

Rudey, IMHO, it's a matter of clarity.

I do alumni interviewing for my alma mater, and I often have reason to point out that one applicant is a more effective and erudite speaker than another. But the word articulate, in particular, has become loaded because of the way it's been abused in the past. If I interview a black student who I think is the next Franklin Roosevelt, I'm going to praise his verbal skills in my evaluation, but I'll pick another way to say it. Why? Because otherwise, there's a very good chance that I'm going to be misunderstood. I'm NOT condescending to him, so I won't use language that's often used to express racial condescension.

There are a lot of otherwise neutral words and phrases ("boy"; "my best friend is ____"; etc.) that can take on poisonous meanings in the wrong context. If you want to make your meaning clear, it's best to choose different words.

Well you asked for instanced of blacks calling others articulate and I provided them.

You also said your colleagues called you articulate, after I said I thought you weren't, clearly indicating that you consider articulate to not be a negative word.

I would understand why you wouldn't go back and forth. There isn't much of a case that you were able to make.

-Rudey

Funny how to be articulate, you can't use that word.

-Rudey

I love when people have nothing to say so they write "And moving on".

You are truly a gem.

-Rudey

I was silently reading and enjoying the discourse and resulting debate. I think everything's pretty much been clarified (and chastised when necessary) but I just have a couple of things in response to you. :)

Be careful with the use of the term "they." I know that "we" has been used throughout this thread but incorporating "they" can increase the level of antagonism when there should be none.

Also, people can easily confuse what it means to be affected personally. Many of our parents were college students during the Civil Rights Era so we've heard stories. However, we should never assume that everyone has benefitted from stories of oppression and triumph, associated with slavery and postslavery, directly passed down from generation to generation. Some blacks can only read about it. There are also blacks who will claim to have never felt or experienced anything "personally." These individuals will completely miss the point that being able to relate to or understand something is about indirect/vicarious experience as well as direct experience.

To address something brought up by HUkingPIKE, being about to relate or identify with something isn't synonymous with a dependence or reliance on that thing. It is his dual identity that makes him feel compelled to come in here and post what he did. No one was talking about racism being to blame for everything and blacks using race as a crutch. Matter of fact, this thread wasn't even about racism until some people started throwing around the term a couple of pages ago. I understand that his post was a general assessment of the issue as he perceived it. But his post reminded me of a "peace keeper"/moderator approach similar to that of an "articulate credit to his race who is different than the rest."

Me too.

I'm glad you think so...but wait...as a matter of fact I dont' really care;)

Keep responding to me and saying you don't care and want to move on.

It's clear you do care and don't want to move on.

-Rudey
--Additionally, I'm waiting for you to answer the question I asked about getting something handed to me.

Well, more ignorant one, ladygreek was obviously speaking from a Jewish American standpoint. Jewish Americans tend to have "white skin" which goes back to their history in this country. You can check the immigration and racial and ethnic assimilation research for that.

In addition, if people are talking about the Jewish Holocaust (which is what was being discussed) and not other sources of Jewish oppression across the globe, those sufferers were generally not Hispanic Jews, Ethiopian Jews, or Middle Eastern Jews. Context people, context.

Pardon me if this has already been said:

There's actually a "joke' associated with this that I heard when I was in elementary school.

What has 6 legs and goes "hodedoe?" Three black men running to catch the elevator.

If "hodydoe" has the same history that "moteesir" has then someone please clue me in. If it does not then I wonder if it was Conard's attempt at connecting slave talk to postslavery inarticulation.

Some.

Sephardic Jews. They have dark skin since their descendants come from North Africa, Spain and the Mediterranean. Although they're not as big in the US as the Ashkenazi Jews (which come from Eastern Europe), there are still many of us here. I'm half Sephardic and Ashkenazi so I have a lighter olive skin tone but my mother's whole family is Sephardic and living in the US. People mistake that side of my family all the time for being either Middle Eastern or Mexican.

Going to a PWI or being articulate has nothing to do with anything because most of us share those two things in common.

Whether you are black or white doesn't change my opinion of how silly it is to compliment (particularly college educated) people on their ability to be articulate. However, whether you are black or white may change what is embedded in your comment or how people generally feel when they hear/read it.

Exactly.

Yes. As was mentioned earlier, many American and European Jews also belong to groups that must wear identifying clothing and hairstyles, so they are not able to pass.

I've never understood why this matters, though. I'm "white" enough to pass for a non-Jew, but I refuse to, because I will not reject who I am for any reason. If I am discriminated against because of my heritage, the fact that I could theoretically deny my identity, change my name, get baptized, and thus try to avoid the discrimination doesn't matter. I'd die before I'd do that, and a lot of us have.

Actually there is a large portion of Sephardic Jews in America (itself a small population). There has been a Sephardic presence in America for centuries including some who died during the Revolutionary war. :) Most of the early American Jews were Sephardic.

-Rudey

Surely Rudey knows the difference between "articulate" as an adjective and "articulate" as a verb.

Surely Rudey knows that the the second quote is a social commentary that supports our point and not his.

Surely Rudey knows that the third quote also supports our point and not his. The fact that people feel they have to highlight articulation is not a coincidence. It is extremely deliberate and often used when the person is perceived to defy a particular stereotype. How you perceive the stereotype and its defiance is a matter of social context.

The descriptive of "articulate" has not always been used to convey the message that a person is tremendously clear and concise in his/her message. It was, and still is, used when someone is just able to speak a basic sentence void of slang, broken English or any stereotypical communication techniques.

Are you positive about that?