Who's being self-righteous?

Also, might I point out that there isn't "a question". It isn't a ridiculous discussion just because there is no one answer. What's the fun in only finding answers?

No one has all the answers, but unless this thread is offending someone (and though I haven't read every page, so far taking offense would be a little...sensitive, I think), why shut down those who want to talk? Let it be and if no one stays interested it'll die.

This may just be my $.02 - but perhaps if you want to start a "Calling someone Black v. Calling someone White" thread, it would be a more appropriate place for your part of the discussion.

I just don't think that you and I, as white women, should really be commenting on whether people should be called African American or Black. Not that I have a huge amount of guilt about the past (because I don't, really), I just don't think it's my place as someone who is not a member of the culture or race to slap a label on it.

And I don't think it's your place, either.

Indeed.

Oooooo Missy puhleeze don't beat me on houwse I calls myself!

Translation--This discussion is stupid in stereo... Tweeting about it is nothing more than a "clanging bell"--it means nothing but wasted space. How you choose to draw your box on how you want me in, doesn't mean I draw one your way or I get a failing grade. That's retarded--like, you like chocolate milk!!!

Hayle, if you want to call yourself "Sugar Honey Iced Tea-colored", it should be your choice. I would not choose that kind of definition of myself, but, that is how some people think--what is it to me??? :huh:

Why don't you answer this question for me: What is it to you what people call themselves in the grand scheme of things?

I guess what I fail to understand is why discussion shouldn't take place. What is the point in going through life never wanting to understand anyone else's point of view? Mine is different from yours and that's the point. The point isn't to change the world's system of labeling but to see why people think the way they do. It goes like this: I give my opinion, someone else gives theirs. Someone else responds to my opinion and I respond to the first's opinion, who responds to the second person's opinion, and there you are...three different points of view. Beautiful.

Suggestion...Because you aren't going to be able to convince me that discussion is bad and because I won't be able to convince you that it's good, why not both of us stop talking to each other? If anyone is interested in the topic at hand they'll offer their opinions and if not the thread will die. Either way, THIS isn't the point...it isn't going to go anywhere...arguing isn't discussion. It's arguing.

To answer your question: interesting.

The world would be a boring place full of misunderstandings and divisions if we can ONLY talk about people with the same skin color as ourselves. Being overly PC doesn't do anyone favors. It's a discussion. I am very obviously not here to change anyone's mind nor did I for a moment think I could. It's interesting and it's good to understand...and the door works both ways. I think the question "Why is "black" offensive when "white" is not?" is interesting and people have different opinions on why that is or is not true.

And of course, think what you want, but it's also nowhere near your place to tell me what to talk about.:D

^^^
Sweety you're missing the point. Others have expressed to you that calling them black (and a myriad of other terms) is disrespectful to them. What people have been trying to tell you and you have yet to grasp is that they don't NEED to give you a reason why they feel the way they do. They do not HAVE to engage in discussion with you on this topic.

This discussion and similar discussions have been attempted time and again on GC and members do not want to engage in said discussion once again. Should you have a implacable desire to discuss this, then find another venue, simple as that.

And just because YOU don't find white offensive doesn't mean it isn't. I know a young woman who can be/and often is categorized as "white" but the term is EXTREMELY offensive to her and she makes her feelings on the matter known should a situation arise.

And others have expressed that it is NOT offensive and that other terms are.

You aren't going to change my mind...so continue to waste time if wished. I will wait for someone capable of discussing and if no one wishes to, that's fine as well. In the mean time, I strongly believe that discussion is important for human beings to understand one another...you will not change my mind on that viewpoint, but continue to try if you wish.

Which explains why you are forcing this topic.

No offense to the white GCers who can take how people self-identify and let it be, but topics such as this are often perpetuated by whites. It is similar to some whites who want to probe blacks on the use of the N word. This isn't an in depth discussion of race dynamics and race interactions that generate and perpetuate these categories. It's a surface-level probing that gets extremely annoying when people have essentially told you that blacks are not monolithic and opinions will vary.

Americans of near or distant African descent understand why "black" and "African American" and "black not Hispanic" and "Hispanic not black" are relevant for Census, research, record keeping and other purposes where categories of humans are necessary. But as for cultural and ethnic identities that include but transcend race, people know what they identify with and as.

For instance, an olive complexioned Greek-American has cultural and ethnic identities. For race identity, he or she is classified as "white" but can PERSONALLY prefer to be called something else. That doesn't mean that their personal preference will be acknowledged by everyone or that it socially overshadows the general category of "white" that is used to simplify matters. The people who responded to this thread acknowledge the categories and were sharing their opinions of them. However, they aren't unaware of the social reality of these categories.

So understand that context matters and it is not your responsibility to make everyone comfortable.

Your only task is to make sure that you don't use the more outdated terms such as "colored" and racial slurs that are ALWAYS offensive even if you (in general) have black friends who are dumb and think it's cool.

No one should feel guilty about the past. :) Just be aware of it.

LOL.

I recommend, as always, that LOVE conducts some research on this topic if it interests her. But GC isn't a research source.

You've pinpointed my issue with LOVE in this thread.

Ok, maybe I am not making myself clear, but I am beginning to think I shouldn't blame myself at this point.

As I have said...repeatedly...if no one wants to discuss it THAT IS FINE. I cannot have a discussion with myself. But I AM NOT obligated to NOT discuss with anyone who cares to because some people think it's stupid. NO ONE IS FORCING ANYTHING. If no one is interested no one will discuss. What a simple solution!

Now we are getting into another interesting discussion...the fact that my posts have (obviously to myself) not been read thoroughly, but skimmed and assumptions made because I said I was "white". Nowhere in my posts have I made the assumption that "all black people think the same" and have pointedly discussed the fact that "all black people" DO NOT think the same...hence the interest in the topic. All "white people" do not think the same either, by the way.

Maybe some are overly sensitive or defensive and on message boards I expect that, but the posts I write are to individual posters and not to an entire ethnic group, and that is the entire point of them. No one person here can speak for all people of a similar ethnic group, and I never have assumed that they could. Now, if anyone wants to respond to what has actually been written, and not to a skimmed over and pre-conceived notion filled version of what is there in black and white, fine. Otherwise, advice duly noted, though it doesn't exactly apply. Should I one day decide to place all people of one particular ethnic group into a category I will take your sage words into account when speaking with the selected spokesperson. But until that day...leave be.

The bottom line is that people are free to identify themselves however they wish based on whatever rationale that makes sense to them. And by the way, being however many years removed does not automatically make you less African, Irish, or whatever.

Overall, people are who they identify themselves to be and who are we to tell anyone how they should view themselves? Why is Obama African American? Because he says he is. Period. The end.

Seems an odd comment from someone who wants to hear other people's opinions?

I think y'all made her mad.

What I am interested in is other peoples' opinions/beliefs on the topic of discussion at hand. What I am not interested in is judgmental, condescending "advice" given on basis of who someone thinks I am and not on basis of what I've written. I am not interested in listening to person after person tell me I should not be able to discuss what I am interested in, and I am not interested in rudeness.

I am also not interested in changing anyone's opinion nor am I interested in someone attempting to change mine.

Who said that isn't ok?

That is what the bandwagon members are missing. Personally I never said it wasn't ok to think "This is what I belive, end of story". I just asked questions. No one has to answer them if they don't feel comfortable or if they don't feel like there are any other than "This is who I am". If no one is interested in discussing...then they don't have to.

Very amused, not mad. Why bother to write lengthy responses to a construct instead of a poster and their posts? Is that really worth the time it takes to convince no one?

What you don't understand, but we've said it...repeatedly, is that there is a sense of entitlement embedded in your posts. Even saying "THAT IS FINE" implies that you have a choice in the matter but are relinquishing it. :)

ORLY?!?!?! Perish the thought.

And no one is asking a white person to explain anything or asking whites how they should be labeled and categorized. Hmmm...ever wonder why that rarely happens? That was discussed pages ago, nevermind. :)


Don't be a smartass. You're the one who is seeking answers, not us. You're like the cocky researcher whose subjects are telling her to take a hike. But you won't take a hike.

Thanks for freeing them from the bondage of your inquiries. ;)

That isn't entitlement, that's common sense. I already had posted a long while back questions. If no one wants to answer them that's their business. I'm not going to go delete them because some people post rude, condescending, and bitchy comments.

I'll just say this...if you READ MY POSTS and then care to respond, fine. In the mean time this is a response to a construct and not to an individual poster. It's jumping on the bandwagon to enjoy a good ole mudslinging. It is repeatedly ASSUMED that I am in some way coming to "all black people" demanding answers as to why "they" call "themselves" ______. I'm asking individual people what the identify with and why.

Don't be a douchebag and no one will be a smartass.:) You don't get to tell me I can't discuss whatever it is the thread is about. Well...you do...but I in return get to throw "take a hike" right back at you. Speaking of entitlement, what gives you the right to tell me what I cannot discuss? Talk about some entitlement...;)

PS-Personally I don't consider fellow posters to be "subjects". But whatever gets ya off.:D

You're not using common sense right now. No one's talking about deleting the questions that you posed.

Then what is the problem? Why the many attempts to tell me that (entitlement:p) I don't have the right to ask them instead of just NOT RESPONDING...if it's that big of a deal why not let it die instead of being a huge tool for funsies?

Maybe I just answered my own question that time.;)

Wow, you completely missed MY point if you think I assumed that.

Hmmmm...my first post (the one that you tried to be a smartass for) was of a neutral tone because these discussions require a degree of objectivity.

You responded a certain way because you've become paranoid and impatient from explaining yourself to a number of posters. Don't attribute that externally. Attribute it internally and figure out why you're receiving the reception that you're receiving.

And I don't consider you a researcher. But it's called an analogy.

:) So that you will know for your real life interactions that unrelenting probing is silly.

Your questions weren't ignored but you responded with "white isn't offensive to me" and here we are.

Oh I don't think so. My point has not yet been considered nor have my posts been read. Enjoy the sensation.

It was not of a neutral tone. This is a circular argument. That entitlement theory swings and rounds about, eh? Continue the pointless baiting or "take a hike". Your move.

Because the back and forth has made you paranoid.

Which of your points/posts have not received a suitable response?

Then the point of the "discussion" you want to have would be . . . ?

LOVE--you sit here and stated the following:

First of all, you made an outright presumptuous (and contemptuous), sense of entitlement statement to EVERYONE on GC who CHOOSES to call themselves African-American. I DO NOT GIVE A FUCK WHAT YOUR FRIEND SAID--HE IS A LITTLE PRICK TO SAY THAT TO YOU! (If he truly said that BS). Then you are dumb enough to post some shit like that here... That is what all of us are gently trying to say to you and you are NOT interested in shutting the fuck up, reading a book to get the full story in your University library, and really determining why the idea of changing definitions of people is even occurring...

Let me outright judge you without me knowing you: The comments you just said to those of us who CHOOSE to call ourselves African-American, you are behaving like a white supremacist--because who the FUCK are you to tell us what we should be anyways???



Being CALLED Black is NOT the issue! Black is not a derogatory term--it is a non-descriptive term. Classifying those of us who have a highly active tyrosinase gene with accelerated granule secretory formations in epithelial cells and short stubby sebaceous cells causing high kinks--as ONLY American minimizes our ancestral, cultural and current experiences and importance of how our culture shapes OUR identity, value, moral and being. WHO THE HAYLE ARE YOU TO TELL US THIS???? And how we CHOOSE to pursue OUR happiness in this country???

Based on your comments and the definite finality of them, you are NOT interested discourse. So basically, we are all telling you LEAVE--I will be more than happy to use more colorful language if you don't get that! :)

Buh-bye!

Since you missed the last response, LOVE, I just wanted to make sure you got this one.

IF the "friend" even exists. It has been my experience in discussions of this type, that such examples are conveniently trotted out to justify their points, but in fact said persons don't actually exist.

But if he does exist, I'm pretty sure of why he would say such a thing...

She isn't realizing that nothing is wrong with calling someone "White"--it just doesn't accurately describe the breadth and depth of someone and how they choose to define him/herself.

It's like saying what's the difference between "gays" and "lesbians"--aren't they all just "gay"? That's minimizing their cultural development of how GLTBQ CHOOSE to define themselves... It is overall wrong, IMHO.

The new term is "community organizer."

May God have mercy on you.