The Term African American

[Sista]

Originally Posted by Ch2tf

I now see how, no matter how much it is explained to you, and no matter how many sources you are referred to with regards to colonization and race as a social construct, you are not going to get it. I'll ask someone to pray for you because I don't even have the patience to do that.

If people didn't integrate, there wouldn't be a such thing as colonization and there wouldn't be a such thing as racism, hence, there would not be a such thing as racial distinction. Maybe a such thing as class, higher and lower but not racism hence racial distinction. If not for colonailsim, theft of land and intergration, we would not be talking about Social Construction. Do you understand that? I don't care if you try and turn this around to make it seem as though I just don't get it. Bottom line, Social construction wouldn't have been thought of, if there wasn't some type of underlining propaganda to detour the not well thought out futurisitic/present results due to colonialism, integration and theft of land. Perfect example, South Africa.

Social Construction:
A social construction, or social construct, according to the school of social constructionism, is an idea which may appear to be natural and obvious to those who accept it, but in reality is an invention or artifact of a particular culture or society. The implication is that social constructs are human choices rather than laws of God or nature

• en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_construction

[Ch2tf]

Originally Posted by Sista

Social Construction:
A social construction, or social construct, according to the school of social constructionism, is an idea which may appear to be natural and obvious to those who accept it, but in reality is an invention or artifact of a particular culture or society. The implication is that social constructs are human choices rather than laws of God or nature

• en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_construction

People are most likely calling you names because you continue to talk and use examples of which it is obvious that even you yourself don't understand. Case in point your choice to define and the bold certain sections of the above definition clearly show that you lack certain critical reading skills. You chose to excerpt the above definition to "prove" that a social contstruct in an invention or artifact..." But what you failed to realize when trying to make said quip is that you are only supporting what just about everyone here has been trying to tell you. But just a word of advice on critical reading. When using above referenced definition of social construct, you must insert the social construction you are intending to speak about. Since 'race' is the social construct being spoken of in this thread, I'll give you an example. Replace 'race' with "social construct" and you get the following:

"'race' is an idea which may appear to be natural and obvious to those who accept it, but in reality is an invention or artifact of a particular culture or society."

This explains how the concept of race has and will continue to change and be "flexible" in American society, just as much as it explains how the concept of race varies within and between the U.S., Latin America, Europe, Africa. etc.

[DSTRen13]

Ch2tf ... you have so much more patience than I will ever have. I'm glad you understood what she was talking about by quoting wikipedia.com, because I definitely didn't ...

Can you interpret this part? I have no idea what she is trying to say (really, I don't know why I want to any more, except it's kind of a morbid fascination).

If people didn't integrate, there wouldn't be a such thing as colonization and there wouldn't be a such thing as racism, hence, there would not be a such thing as racial distinction. Maybe a such thing as class, higher and lower but not racism hence racial distinction. If not for colonailsim, theft of land and intergration, we would not be talking about Social Construction. Do you understand that? I don't care if you try and turn this around to make it seem as though I just don't get it. Bottom line, Social construction wouldn't have been thought of, if there wasn't some type of underlining propaganda to detour the not well thought out futurisitic/present results due to colonialism, integration and theft of land. Perfect example, South Africa.

What does that mean??

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by DSTRen13

What does that mean??

She is saying that colonialists integrated, hence colonialism. And without the integration of different groups of people, there would be no need to create racial and ethnic distinctions or the resulting racism. In her mind, integration is simply any type of adding different races and ethnicities of people together in a given setting. It's a static occurrence instead of a dynamic process of social interaction.

Well, looking at the history of this world, the processes of "othering" and "exploitation" happened long before groups actually integrate, voluntarily or involuntarily. The stripping of land and economic foundation for the enslavement and exploitation of labor of certain groups of people, didn't require integration. It required outsider control of land and/or people and the ability of outsiders to come in, take, and leave. Or stay, and reside among people who look like them with little to no interaction with "others." And the "others" that were interacted with were not social equals. That isn't integration.

Dammit, Soror, you tricked me into explaining.

[Sista]

@DSTCHAOS


I went to Wikepedia to get the quote that I highlighted.


@Chtf


In response to your reason for why people are calling me names. Only children result to name calling. If you all are so confident about anything that you have said, you would not allow yourself to get so frustrated to the point where you resort to the acts of a child.

[macallan25]

I hope you trip and fall in front of alot of people soon.

....I also hope your computer crashes.

[TheEpitome1920]

I haven't read all 14 pages but Black folks have had more name changes than Sprint (now Embarq!)

I like Black. I rarely refer to myself as an American.

[Ch2tf]

Originally Posted by Sista

@DSTCHAOS
@Chtf
In response to your reason for why people are calling me names. Only children result to name calling. If you all are so confident about anything that you have said, you would not allow yourself to get so frustrated to the point where you resort to the acts of a child.

I hope you are including yourself in this since, a couple pages ago you called all of us wanna be professors and fake intellectuals. I'm still trying to figure out why is it that you are STILL seeking conversation from us phonies.

[Sista]

Originally Posted by Ch2tf

I hope you are including yourself in this since, a couple pages ago you called all of us wanna be professors and fake intellectuals.

You are right, I did call you guys those names but I don't think those names are hardly as dehumanizing as the names you guys called me. Name calling is name calling but when it gets to dehumanizing an individual, that is another.

Originally Posted by Ch2tf

I'm still trying to figure out why is it that you are STILL seeking conversation from us phonies.

I keep responding to you and the others for the same reason why you and the others keep responding to me.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by Sista

I went to Wikepedia to get the quote that I highlighted.

That quote was essentially the same thing I said pages ago. Be able to see the general and apply it to the specific, and vice versa.

[Sista]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

That quote was essentially the same thing I said pages ago. Be able to see the general and apply it to the specific, and vice versa.

Why don't you stop trying to dictate to me how I should make my points?

I obviously don't get you and your points and you obviously don't get me and my points. The difference between you and I is, I don't take you not getting me and my points as an insult to my excellent, thought to be teaching skills.

Let's just call it a draw, you don't get me and I sure as hell don't get you.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by Sista

If people didn't integrate, there wouldn't be a such thing as colonization and there wouldn't be a such thing as racism, hence, there would not be a such thing as racial distinction. Maybe a such thing as class, higher and lower but not racism hence racial distinction. If not for colonailsim, theft of land and intergration, we would not be talking about Social Construction. Do you understand that? I don't care if you try and turn this around to make it seem as though I just don't get it. Bottom line, Social construction wouldn't have been thought of, if there wasn't some type of underlining propaganda to detour the not well thought out futurisitic/present results due to colonialism, integration and theft of land. Perfect example, South Africa.

This is incorrect. Colonization, racism, and racial distinctions did not begin because of integration. These constructs can and do exist in relatively racial and ethnic homogenous environments.

Instead of going back and forth you, because this has apparently become your thread, I just urge you to read those sources that we mentioned to you pages ago. Do NOT start with Omi and Winant's racial formation theory because you will get lost in it like you did this thread. Begin with the introductory-level textbooks provided by Joe Feagin and Eduardo Bonilla-Silva.

Originally Posted by Sista

Social Construction:
A social construction, or social construct, according to the school of social constructionism, is an idea which may appear to be natural and obvious to those who accept it, but in reality is an invention or artifact of a particular culture or society. The implication is that social constructs are human choices rather than laws of God or nature

• en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_construction

You had to go to Wikipedia for that? Wow. I told you what a social construction is pages ago.

This thread is frustrating to some of us because even some of our students don't take as long to grasp these concepts or at least read up on them themselves, as you have. If you want to discuss, do so after you have the basic understanding and can apply them more broadly.