Comments

1. Anonymous wrote:

   I am a new vistor to your blog, I found it through NPR/News and Notes. Great article and I totally agree with you

   Paul Jr
   Philadelphia

   Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 6:48 am ¶

2. Brian wrote:

   The debate between whether one’s genotype (genetic make-up) or one’s phenotype (appearance) determines race has been a long and complicated one, particularly for people who do not fit “neatly” into one group. I personally feel that phenotype also includes culture and experience and that this is the primary factor for one determining his/her own race, particularly because this is often how they are defined by others. It’s a complicated task, as there are often pressures to identify with one group or another, and generally these pressures are for the wrong reasons. I wonder if the original writer of that article would have the same stance if Obama was a drug dealer. People are quick to try to “snatch up” people of mixed race into their own racial group if they are considered to be a “positive” member of society and less so if they are not. This is not right by any means, but is often what happens. Considering the historical context (one-drop rule anyone?) and the ways in which others (primarily whites, but clearly not exclusive to them anymore) often try to identify other people for them, this is quite problematic. Shouldn’t everyone be allowed to self-identify, assuming their is some accurate basis in their identification (this is where genotype comes in). Obviously I, as a Polish/Italian-American, could not identify as black. But who is to say what anyone else should identify as, especially when the social constructs we have created for identifying ourselves are so flawed?

   Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 7:20 am ¶

3. Elise wrote:

   I completely agree. I have two friends who have mixed race children and I hope that the kids will grow up and be able to identify as biracial or mixed without having to choose one parent’s heritage over another.

   However it was definitely not an option when Obama was growing up. The people who get all up in arms that Obama isn’t giving his mom her due seem willfully blind that in the US, if he were just walking down the street, he would be read as Black. I doubt he was given much of a choice about who he wanted to identify with as a kid, based on society’s perception, and now he’s damned if he does, and damned if he doesn’t.

   Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 7:44 am ¶

4. AKA Lynn wrote:

   Are you certain this article wasn’t written by A.D. Powell? LOL

   Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 7:45 am ¶

5. Dat Homie wrote:

   I’m so sick of this argument from people. “African American” is a ETHNIC GROUP! An ETHNIC GROUP is NOT the same as a STRICT, PHYSICAL RACIAL CATEGORIZATION! Dear lord, people act as though mixed people are out there calling themselves “African Negroids” or some stuff like that. Black Americans, whether Tyrese Gibson or Barack Obama, are MIXED any damn ways due to enslavement. We are an ethnic group, we are not some pure blooded, mono-racial, group of people. Obama feels an affinity to, related to, started his career on the support of, and is married with children to a BLACK AMERICAN. If you want to whine and complain about genetic heredity, thats your prerogative, but please let people self-identify as they please!

   Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 7:45 am ¶

6. AKA Lynn wrote:

   Obama identifies as black, but never once have I heard him deny his white mother. Obama pays homage to both his white mother and her parents often.

   What keeps me most puzzled the most about the desire for some to move away from being boxed into one catagory, (which I think is fine) is how quickly some individuals fight to dismiss their darker genes all together, and are ready to challenge anyone who doesn’t have a problem being identified along with POC.

   Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 8:01 am ¶

7. Mary wrote:

   I laughed out loud when I got to your “What?”, because that’s exactly what was in my head when I finished reading that quote.

   It’s not just alleged progressivism that seems to be motivating Alibhai-Brown. Writing in a UK paper, she asserts: In this country, we have thankfully moved on… Assertive mixed-race couples and children have ensured that progress, away from just another kind of bigotry. The US lags far behind. Oh yum, a side order of snide nationalistic self-congratulation comes with it too.

   Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 8:10 am ¶

8. Jas wrote:

   “I wonder if the original writer of that article would have the same stance if Obama was a drug dealer. People are quick to try to “snatch up” people of mixed race into their own racial group if they are considered to be a “positive” member of society and less so if they are not.”

   Agreed. This seriously pisses me off to no end. Especially when people use those individuals as a prop to show how much better race relations are getting. I’ve noticed this especially when it comes to biracial blacks. If Obama was Joe Blow from Chicago, or a janitor from Oregon I doubt very many people would give much stock to his “white side” or say “He’s more white than black”.

   Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 8:20 am ¶

9. Dan wrote:

   The first problem is taking an article about race in the U.S. from a UK paper, by a Ugandan-born UK author, seriously. Neither one truly knows the depth of racism in this country nor the history of it.

   If Brown did know of real American history, she would know that between 1910-1930, almost every state actually had a law regarding the one-drop rule.

   It is not some fabrication of the African American community. It was an idea put forth by WHITES and enacted into state legislation on a state-by-state, but nationwide basis. Those laws sought to ostracize and penalize those with African blood in their veins but on the abolishment of those laws, the legacy of those laws only succeeded in creating a common bond between those with African blood in their veins.

   So even though those Jim Crow laws are gone, the after effects remain and now that one-drop rule has been adopted by the black community and been turned into a positive in order to deflate the negativity of it. Much as the black community adopting the N* word and using it in a loving manner (originally, it can be debated in the past 15 years that it’s taken on a negative intonation) sought to deflate the racist and evil implications of the word, so has the black community tried to reverse the original evil intent of the one-drop rule by making it something to bond over.

   So if Brown had known this history, I don’t see how she could have still written that article and been serious.

   In addition, the simple fact that whites still regard anyone with African ancestry as ‘black’, regardless of whether they also have white European blood, and uses that fact to discriminate against such an individual, means that Obama is not forgetting his white mother, but rather white Americans are and in doing so, are actually pushing Obama to identify more with his black father because of the latent racism and prejudice the white community is directing his way.

   Brown needs to live a good decade or two in the US, preferably somewhere in the rural South, before she can start commenting in racial matters in the U.S. It is vastly different from the U.K.

   Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 8:20 am ¶

10. atlasien wrote:

    Alibhai-Brown is a victim of the servile colonized mentality. She’s putting up a frantic defense against threats to white hyperdescent. She married into the ruling race and wants her children to be able to claim that higher status.

    The part about her children made that achingly clear, and also showed that she believes English=white.

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 8:23 am ¶

11. eric daniels wrote:

    [Mod Note - Though I see you used the word *some* to try to mitigate what you were saying, your comment could be considered offensive to biracial people, Jews, and HRC supporters. In a word, flame bait. Rethink what you wanted to say and resubmit. While the basis of your comment is valid, the comparisons drawn were not. - LDP]

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 8:25 am ¶

12. Jenn wrote:

    Someone help me, if someone states half African American and half white, what do they want from me? What is “white” culture? These people are aware that black culture is American culture for the simple fact slavery has removed us of African culture so we had to develop a new in America. I know what Italian or Irish culture is, but what is a “white” culture?

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 9:00 am ¶

13. gatamala wrote:

    Are we still using the word miscegenation?

    And this:

    My daughter has my colouring, and could pass as Asian, but I would never, ever want her to. Her wonderful English father made her past and will her future.

    ok…NOW I get where you’re coming from…I concur w/ atlasien.

    Oh yum, a side order of snide nationalistic self-congratulation comes with it too.

    co-fuckin-sign Mary…from a chick who knows jack shit about the United States. Case in point:

    One suggests that expediency, if not honour, should persuade him to come out: “Maybe,” says one, “he should calculate how many votes he would gain if he embraces his whiteness as much as his blackness. Some of those backward Appalachians need to hear about his mum and gran, their consistency when his dad buggered off.”

    Backward? and…ummmmm….he is running those ads DUMBASS…You need more people, hon.

    ENOUGH: Folks from across the pond. Stop passing judgment on American racial issues as if we are the only ones. You are from GB/UK/England for fuck’s sake!! The case could be made that YOU developed, perpetuated, and perfected to a science (e.g., miscegenation) the racial classfication system that is all too prevalent on planet earth. So please…spare me the enlightened European (if you consider yourself that) bullshit. That includes the “colouUred” descendants of the former subjects of the Blessed Sun Never Sets Empire

    I also agree w/ the statements regarding “claiming” folks (the draft!). If Obama had carjacked Chelsea Clinton, he wouldn’t be biracial.

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 9:08 am ¶

14. Persia wrote:

    How sad and infuriating.

    What keeps me most puzzled the most about the desire for some to move away from being boxed into one catagory, (which I think is fine) is how quickly some individuals fight to dismiss their darker genes all together, and are ready to challenge anyone who doesn’t have a problem being identified along with POC.

    I was thinking about how eager we are to box people in the first place– white, black, “English.” Human experience is a continuum, but we’re always so eager to chop it up into easily-graspable categories.

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 9:11 am ¶

15. bertie wrote:

    Jenn–In my mind “White Culture” is the baseline U.S. culture–the cultural norms to which everything else is distinguished against.

    The problem with articles like the one on the listserv is that they conflate “race” with culture. Clearly Obama is biracial–he is as black as he is white (or kenyan as he is kansan—if we’re going to use superficial markers like race to define Obama why not use geography).
    Although, Obama is bi-racial, he is unicultural. And that culture is black american culture.

    The fact that people choose a culture (or have a culture chosen for them by circumstance) that isn’t generally associated with their race isn’t all that unique and definitely isn;t a slap in the face to ones ancestors. I have a dear friend who is samoan, but was raised in NC. Culturally he is a southern black male despite whatever his geno or phenotype may be.

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 9:30 am ¶

16. Mickey wrote:

    @ gatamala

    Amen and then some!

    I have lived in TX all my life; it’s been in my experience that White people don’t care what color your mother or father is/was. If you look Black, then you’re Black-end of discussion.

    Most of the Incognegro’s* I went to school with considered themselves Black, even the one’s who could have “passed”.

    *Credit to The Black Snob

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 9:44 am ¶

17. Abu Sinan wrote:

    Thanks for the article. As a father of two bi-racial children I try to understand as much as I can about the issues they are going to face here in America.

    Not only are they bi-racial, they are also members of a religious minority that isn’t well liked here at the moment, more issues for them to deal with.

    We try as much as possible to instill in them the values, thoughts and ideas that both of us associate with our cultures, at the same time realising that our shared religion is more important to us than our races are.

    Anyway, we speak both English and Arabic at home, in the hopes that the boys learn both languages. Language is very important in one’s identity, that is why colonisers and oppressors always seek to eliminate the language first. Think Irish in Ireland, American Indians here in the USA.

    Looks wise both our boys can pass for white, but their names will give them away. Unfortunately, I have learned that the racism that they will face wont come from just one community, but it will come from all directions, from the white community as well as their mother’s community.

    Racial dynamics are very complicated and change from country to country, even region to region within a given country, so it is a bit much for a person who has not lived in the US to start giving people advice.

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 9:45 am ¶

18. Roseanna wrote:

    Yasmin Alibhai-Brown recently wrote an aritcle for the Independent claiming that attempts to use locally-sourced food are motivated primarily by xenophobia rather than environmental concerns. ‘Cause, y’know, British people don’t want those darn foreigners getting their mits all over our asparagus. The woman is a couple of clowns short of a circus.

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 10:56 am ¶

19. chairo wrote:

    What irritates me to no end is how so much of our society latently perpetuates the one-drop rule idea. You get this with magazine, tv, film, mtv

    Every single newspaper i’ve read over here in England has referred to Barack as black. So many well-meaning US bloggers, pundits, have all referred to barack as black. There hasn’t been this big focus on his mixed heritage. Bam he’s the black candidate.

    When the reverend wright BS reared its ugly head barack was constantly being defined as black. He had to explain why he was “so black”, and hung out with “really black” people like reverend white(the whitest black man i’ve ever saw).

    For a while a part of me started to believe Barack was black myself. Not because my eyes were seeing that; but because he’d been hounded in a way black people historically have been.
    Then I saw the picture with barack as a kid with his mother. What really depressed me is the way there’d be such polarization along racial lines during the primaries. You’d get racist whites who’d be interviewed who’d say “oh he’s just gonna put his kind in all the top jobs” etc. WHAT?
    No one questioned why they didn’t acknowledge the fact that he was as white as he was black. I’m not saying that we should even encourage this kinda tribalism, just that i think we need American society to not see black + white = black
    that leads to all sorts of trouble with kids confused about their identity.

    Light brown and mixed raced actresses constantly get more screen time and magazine coverage than dark skinned actresses, so someone’s bothering to make the distinction there But when it comes to Barack he’s black. This nonsensical dichotomy of black and white needs to stop.

    What also annoys me is when people will say; “a lot of white folk will see him as black”
    I think this should be rephrased to “a lot of white folk will see him as more black than white”

    I’m not saying mixed people who call themselves black should be shouted at,
    just that we’re kinda feeding racism by calling them so.
    Saying “they have a right to identify with whatever they want”
    is just profoundly inane. Mixed race people shouldn’t have to choose, and we’re kinda subtly coercing them into doing that with this attitude; given the type of society we live in.

    I can tell there’s a flaw in my argument, and its something i ponder every now and then. If race is a social construct, then why am I arguing for mixed people not to call themselves black

    Society makes the effort to differentiate between Italians and the English
    Yet all relatively brown people = black
    in spite of all the diversity amongst brown people

    god its exhausting ! lol

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 12:08 pm ¶

20. SAH wrote:

    A friend of mine is bi-racial (black and white) and considers himself a black man. His older brother, if anyone calls him black, will correct them and say “I’m bi-racial,” acknowledging his mother and white family members. When I asked my friend why he doesn’t do the same thing, he just answered “Cause I’m black.”

    I think it depends on the exposure; what the individual is exposed to and familiarizes with. My friend spent more time with his father (the Black parent) and his brother spent more time with his mother (the White parent). He can say he is black without feeling as though he is being unfair or disloyal to his mother, because he recognizes that his experience in this country is that of a black man. Also, Black people have a romance with mixed-raced people, and based on the social heirarchy that the Western world imposed on the race with skin-tone politics, bi-racial Black people are usually favored amongst Black-Americans. They are also one of the most picked on, since it is assumed that they are arrogant because of their lighter skin.

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 1:58 pm ¶

21. Thea wrote:

    @ Abu Sinan - your kids are lucky that you are so invested in helping them to navigate the stickiness of mixed-raced-ness! Not all parents are able to recognise that being mixed race is even something that needs to be navigated.

    What has created the most angst for me is not the racism I experience as a person of colour (that tends to create anger, rage, indignance etc…) but rather the feelings of loss, inauthenticity and confusion that come from being a little bit stuck in the middle.

    I think the best thing that mixed race parents can do for their kids is to help them feel validated and authentic, whatever that requires. And to also not take their kids own struggle personally. For eg not take it personally if, due to their own complex life experiences that parents - no matter how engaged or caring - don’t know about, kids tend to identify more with one culture than another.

    @chairo:
    While I understand your frustration at people being forced to choose, I sort of see that as a macro level problem - race categories are very ingrained. People make choices as a way of aligning themselves with communities, and often it’s not that mixed race people are victims of “being forced to choose a category” - but rather, like anyone else with a race in America, they just do choose a category.

    And the choice they make is based on what they’ve learned to be true, on what seems to make the most sense to them - as is the case in SAH’s black mixed race friend.

    If a mixed black/white person wants to call themselves black, I recognise that they’re doing so in response to a life experience that I know nothing about, can never experience, and so don’t have the right to judge - even as a mixed race person myself.

    Definitely race is a social construct - but so is time, and both those things have huge ramifications on our lives. In the case of race, one of the effects the reality of race has, is to create communities of solidarity.

    People align themselves with certain communities because that’s where they’ve come to feel most at home. To suggest that someone should place themselves anywhere else but where they feel most comfortable, can be extremely insulting.

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 2:32 pm ¶

22. chairo wrote:

    @Thea

    “To suggest that someone should place themselves anywhere else but where they feel most comfortable, can be extremely insulting.”

    I’m in no way insinuating that people can’t be part of any community they want. Communities shouldn’t be defined by skin colour.
    However calling yourself “black” when one of your parents is “white”
    makes life harder for everyone; its just that you in that moment might not feel it yet. A kid in another town might feel it. That kid might feel they have to act in a certain way, when in fact they shouldn’t be under that pressure.
    I hear people say “yeah america’s getting over its race issue look they’ve got all those models on those covers, and halle berry was the first “Black” woman to win the oscar for best actress”.Just to detour there, when i saw that I think I was around 15 and I was utterly BAFFLED. She picked up the award cried then sat next to her white mother.
    I knew it was a big deal, but my eyes couldn’t see a black woman. I have had all types of friends who’ll say to me she’s the best looking black woman in the world, to my dismay. There’s something creepily colonial about it all.
    The difference between Halle berry’s mother and my mother is that mine has experienced racism from white people in a white western country. I’m not saying that mixed kids have got it easy; just that the their experiences which do differ; should be appreciated.

    To be honest I dont think this conversation should solely be taking place amongst individuals.
    Its society’s duty to start a proper discussion about this, so people can just be people without worrying about “acting too black” or not “acting black enough”

    I mentioned quite a bit my issue with how the media discussed Obama, because I think there was a great opportunity missed to discuss mixed race issues.

    To elaborate on the last comment I made: what i was trying to get at is, ultimately what constitutes being black?
    I myself have constantly maintained that I am black; as both my parents are brown skinned Africans. But within Africa there’s so much variation thats there, and my mother is light brown in comparison to certain African people.
    Basically how brown do you have to be to be black? Why must I call myself “black” outside of a white western country when that label is so loaded and nonconstructive

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 3:39 pm ¶

23. christine wrote:

    @thea- as I read this article and comments I was crafting my own response in my mind. However, you wrote it for me! Thanks, saved my fingers some hard work!

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 3:46 pm ¶

24. Ali wrote:

    @chairo - I understand what you’re saying but in a way I feel that it’s a little unfair. I feel that you’re saying mixed people don’t have the right to identify as they choose. Racial identity when it come to black folks (specifically African-Americans) has always been complicated in this country and it is in large part due to the legacy of the one drop rule.

    I completely empathized with Halle Berry during her Oscar acceptance speech, and I felt in that moment that she did represent me as a black woman. I had no problem with her acknowledging all of the black women (mixed or not) who came before her and the connection she feels to them. It was not at all awkward for me to watch her accept an award as a black woman and then take a seat next to her white mother. Just because she identifies as black does not mean that she is rejecting her mother. Her racial identity exists in relation to her experience as an individual in this country, it is not a reflection of her relationship with her mother. She has stated in numerous interviews that her mother raised her as a black women because she realized that’s how the world would see her.

    I understand your dismay at hearing people say that Halle Berry is the best looking black woman, especially if you’re thinking in the back of your mind that she’s ethnically mixed. I also see why that strikes you as colonialist, but just as her declared racial identity has nothing to do with rejecting her mother it also has nothing to do with the personal preferences of color-struck, feature-struck strangers. If stupid individuals think that black women with sharper, more “European” features are more attractive that their problem.

    Lena Horne, Dorothy Dandridge, Josephine Baker, Frederick Douglas, hell even my grandmother (albeit on more of a personal level) are mixed persons who played pivotal roles in American Black History. In fact many figures in American Black History where actually of mixed race. To deny them the right to identify as they choose seems a little shortsighted and misguided in my opinion. In fact, Lena Horne is famous for setting people straight lest they mistake her for a white woman.

    I think it’s also important to note that not all black persons of mixed heritage are at a place where they feel comfortable claiming all pieces of their ethnic heritage, I am specifically thinking of older people from the south (especially when you consider the legacy of slave rape in this country). I think a lot of this reluctance is being phased out with older generations and am very much looking forward to seeing the current and future generations are shaping and presenting multi-racial/multi-ethnic identity.

    I can empathize with your disappointment that Obama’s candidacy may not be as great an opportunity to discuss mixed race issues as one would hope but I think much of that still remains to be seen. Whether these issues come up or not he still reserves the right to identify as he sees fit and he’s chosen to identify as a black man who has a white mother. (I would also argue that he has every right to identify himself African-American as well since the last time I checked he was born here.)

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 5:02 pm ¶

25. CVT wrote:

    @thea - You kind of covered it all, even to the point of giving Abu Sinan credit for being so involved in giving his kids the full option of choice

    @Chairo - Being mixed is a whole other ballgame that just can’t be understood by somebody that’s mono-racial - it’s beyond complicated, and changes for each individual. Therefore, hard and fast “rules” just can’t apply.

    A lot more to say, but I’ll let this post cover it:
    http://choptensils.blogspot.com/2008/06/mixed-experience.html

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 5:50 pm ¶

26. jen* wrote:

    I just happened to write about this issue myself, not Obama directly, but me and how I identify. I don’t usually walk around with a sign that indicated my background, so people make assumptions.

    {IMO} That’s why folks keep calling Barack black. They’re used to just basing it on skin color. He certainly can’t pass for white - so he’s black.

    Strangely, I got a response that accused me of being too concerned with what other think of me, and what color I should be [as though there is one], and then ended saying they liked my post - not before inserting this all-important piece of news: that they are the parent of a mixed child.

    Apparently, folks come to this discussion from all kinds of angles, with different agendas. I couldn’t understand the writer, here, lambasting Obama for calling himself black, when she made that statement about her own children.

    I, personally, have never felt pressure to only claim my white side, but I’m thinking that’s a temptation that only comes to those who can actually pass.

    But, it’s amazing to me that there are white people who are bringing up Barack’s mama, and trying to lay claim. I’ve never seen white people fight to claim someone who actually looks black, before.

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 6:42 pm ¶

27. Kali wrote:

    I read the article and it is far more thoughtful and balanced than you indicate in your post.
    As someone who spent most of my life in Britain, who has a white oartner and biracial children I couldn’t agree more and have said so many times on this blog.

    The American perspective on Blackness has been dictated (and now enshrined in US culture) by white slave-owners to deny the substantial ‘white’ genetic make-up of so-called ‘blacks’ and to justify their oppression.

    Yasmin A-Brown is perfectly entitled to write her British opinion in a British newspaper. I notice that most of the commenters on the newpaper site in question- the (British) Times Online are American - and not many of them shrink from telling the British what to think and do. I happen to believe as she does that my husband’s contribution to our children’s lives and upbringing cannot be just erased - for whatever worthy/reactive reason.

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 8:35 pm ¶

28. Anon wrote:

    I must say I am from the UK (and I am black though this is irrelevant) and nobody I know would ever describe a mixed race person as black, ever. I’m always a little confused when I see Americans doing it so I can see where she is coming from with the article

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 9:00 pm ¶

29. jen* wrote:

    I haven’t gone to read the original article, but I suppose the cultural differences between the UK and US would be enough to create differences in how we view race.

    Generally speaking tho, I’ve never seen a bigoted white person [from any country] pause to ponder the actual ethnic background of a brown person they’re about to say something negative about. And I’ve had the opportunity to be in the company of some bigoted white folks as the “present company excluded” guest on various occasions in my life.

    Assumptions about race/ethnicity based on visible physical traits are common no matter what race you are, or what country you’re from. I’m guessing that’s why so many people have mistaken me for having a background other than what I actually am.

    [my post about this: http://molecularshyness.wordpress.com/2008/06/30/what-color-am-i/

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 10:07 pm ¶

30. Joseph wrote:

    “My race shifts depending on the racial politics of where I am.”

    Amen, sister.

    I’ve said it before (and quite a bit lately, hmm) but when you challenge racial/ethnic certainties just by being it destabilizes a power structure that a big chunk of the world is very invested in.

    As Danzy Senna said (referring the US), “This is not a culture that deals well with ambiguity.”

    Posted 02 Jul 2008 at 11:17 pm ¶

31. Juan wrote:

    I gotta go with most people have said before in this conversation and others–along the lines of, if Obama was just some regular nobody on the street, or just didn’t know who he is, they would still treat him based on what he looks like whether or not they’re told he’s mixed to begin with and/or he wants to be perceived as mixed.

    That whole perception doesn’t equal reality thing I guess.

    And did he ever state how he chooses to identify himself in his biography or interview? Anyone know?

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 12:43 am ¶

32. uglyblackjohn wrote:

    # 28 makes a good point about the intentions of the original article getting lost in the translation.
    I’m mixed-raced but it seems awkward putting it that way and seems to imply that I want to come across as better than “Black-only”.
    It’s even more amusing that when Mr. Obama makes statements condemning some parts of Black culture - he then is accused of being “Not really Black” by other Black people.
    Instead of worrying about who is really Black, Blacks should be working towards redefining what the Black stereotype means.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 12:59 am ¶

33. chairo wrote:

    @ ALi

    “I feel that you’re saying mixed people don’t have the right to identify as they choose. ”

    No you’ve got me wrong; that isn’t my message(or at least not the tone). I said before that this debate should be happening on a larger scale. Friend’s shouldn’t have to do this; society should through tv, film etc.

    I don’t know what’s so difficult about calling oneself bi-racial. To me it just makes sense; its self-evident. I was friends with a mixed dude who grew up surrounded mostly by whites, when i saw his mother and thought about the fact that he’d lived with her most of his life, it just seemed absurd of me to call him black.

    My problem is that by calling mixed people black were delaying a more sensible way of thinking.
    What about mixed raced men and women who’ve grown up surrounded solely by whites. Society would encourage them to tackle their blackness, and absorb it,
    when this pressure shouldn’t be there in the first place; i mean ultimately it shouldn’t be there for even black people.

    Why must black people alone claim mixed raced people. I can’t help but think of the one drop rule here.
    But then when I see ad after ad in the uk; where there’s a white guy and a very fair mixed woman I then think of colonialism, and Brazil. There’s this perverse fetishization of mixed raced girls that needs to be highlighted in this discussion. Kanye’s comments on “mutts” and the aforementioned ads present us a really ugly issue we need to face.
    You talk about “black people” being a fluid category, and i agree, but i think that this loose classification opens doors for some, and closes doors for others.
    MTV along with hollywood mutes dark skinned beauty, but favours mixed girls.
    This kinda thinking got into my head when i’d go out with friends in my mid teens. The guys in my group would scan a house party or club (terminator style) for a fair skinned girl or white girl. preferably the mixed ones.
    A black girl couldn’t look average, she’d have to look amazing to get any attention.
    I felt this stupid shame in admitting i liked girls who were as dark as me. When i got older and my group diversified this kinda thinking left me.

    Watching the afro punk documentary made me think of how troublesome and suffocating race can be. When people say “identify” as black, I’ve realised that they’re talking about more than just skin colour. A lot of the kids in the afro punk documentary felt suffocated by blackness and couldn’t find a sense of individuality that blacks could accept.
    I don’t think that mixed raced kids should have to go through this, and i’m tired of seeing black women being pass over again and again, or being demonised as loud and obnoxious (see big brother 9 UK alexandra).

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 2:39 am ¶

34. msday wrote:

    It is amazing that no one made a big issue out of Halle Berry choosing to identify as black or even Dave Justice, Lenny Kravitz, and other entertainers. In fact, none were ever questioned for authenticity. However, all of a sudden a man who may become the first person of color in the presidency is questioned about his choice of identification. Who knows how many times, he walked across Campus and was called the “N’ word. Who knows how many stupid assumptions and questions were asked based on the darkness of his skin. Perhaps his experiences caused him to choose his identification.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 6:12 am ¶

35. Kali wrote:

    I am not sure why it’s such a bad thing, to be endlessly analyzed for people to date outside their ethnic group or prefer biracial partners.

    There is a tug-of-war both between preference for one’s own kind (for security) as well as for someone different (for genetic diversity and improved survival).

    Heard about ‘hybrid vigor’? Plants with cross-fertilization do better . Same may be true of humans.

    Latoya- hope you don’t mind my picking on you & I expect you to riposte (mods have broad shoulders I’m guessing). You identify yourself as generic black but with my science eye I see someone with a very diverse genetic make-up from two different gene-pools. Remote African ancestry for people who have lived here and isolated from the rest of Africa, for hundreds of years does make for a ‘different’ gene pool. So I’m going to believe (without any real proof of course except in the plant kingdom) that your phenomenal intelligence, courage and beauty (!) are due to hybrid vigor.

    As for what Obama says about his own ‘race’ I think he side-steps the issue of what he thinks - and points to how people see him. I don’t fault him for that - rather I respect him for not rejecting outright half of his (white) ancestry.

    People often see me as South American or Middle eastern - that does not mean I change my race for each individual I meet depending on how they see me. Ditto for countries and cultures.

    Believe me, folks the days when we neatly pack people like cookies or Jelly bears into neat little boxes are fast coming to an end. I’ll check back with racialicious in 10 years to se if my prediction is coming true! And the British are ahead of the US game imo, but still have a long way to go.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 7:43 am ¶

36. Dan wrote:

    @ Jenn: I think “white culture” is the absence of culture.

    My father’s side of the family is French/Italian. My mother was born in Austria. I was born in America.

    Yet growing up, apart from an occasional German meal and the occasional portion of smoked bacon, there was nothing remotely cultural about my upbringing. Nothing was talked about. No stories about ‘the old country’ or anything.

    Want to talk about ‘American’ culture?

    According to a recent survey, more Americans can name the characters on The Simpsons than can recall the rights protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution.

    Ever watch when Jay Leno goes out onto the streets to ask average Americans things like who the Attorney General is? Or Secretery of Defense?

    Yet whites will DEMAND that immigrants ‘assimilate’ into American culture, which is of course, ‘white culture’ in this country. So assimilate into what? Ignorance? Christianity? Becoming a Larry The Cable Guy fan?

    The white race and white culture is a relatively modern concept which was created as a bond around skin color in order to make the very color of skin, a commodity. So in the ultimate irony, ‘white’ identity has actually harmed people of European descent in America by causing them to ignore their traditions and interests for the sake of phony racial bonding.

    To paraphrase Tim Wise:

    It was created as a way for the elite whites in the American colonies to secure their power. In this country’s infancy, poor Europeans, mostly Italians and Irish were put into indentured servitude and worked alongside African slaves. Wealthy landowners feared rebellions, in which these poor European peasants might join with African slaves to overthrow aristocratic governance; after all, these poor Europeans were barely above the level of slaves themselves, especially if they worked as indentured servants.

    Bacon’s Rebellion in 1676 prompted a new round of colonial laws to extend rights and privileges to despised poor Europeans, so as to divide them from those slaves with whom they had much in common, economically speaking. By allowing the lowest of Europeans to be placed legally above all Africans, and by encouraging (or even requiring) them to serve on slave patrols, the elite gave poor “whites” a stake in the system that had harmed them. Giving poor Europeans the right to own land, ending indentured servitude in the early 1700s, and in some cases allowing them to vote, were all measures implemented so as to convince lower-caste Europeans that their interests were closer to those of the rich (and white) than to those of blacks. It was within this context that the term “white” to describe Europeans en masse was born, as an umbrella term to capture the new pan-Euro unity needed to defend the system of African slavery and Indian genocide going on in the Americas. And the trick worked marvelously, dampening down the push for rebellion by poor whites on the basis of class interest, and encouraging them to cast their lot with the elite, if only in aspirational terms.

    This divide-and-conquer tactic would be extended and refined in future generations as well. Indeed, the very first law passed by the newly established Congress of the United States was the Naturalization Act of 1790, which extended citizenship to all “free white persons,” and only free white persons, including newly arrived immigrants, so long as the latter would make their homes in the U.S. for a year. Despite longstanding animosities between persons of European descent, all blood feuds were put aside for the purpose of extending pan-Euro or white hegemony over the United States and thus making ‘whiteness’ a privileged commodity in and of itself. (Tim Wise, http://www.lipmagazine.org/~timwise/whitepride.html)

    Personally, I do not associate myself with white and American culture. Just as I reject my Roman Catholic upbringing and identify more with Zen Buddhism (I struggle everyday to be a good practitioner and rid myself of ego), I reject the American culture of ignorance and the commodity of skin color because it affords me privileges that it doesn’t offer to those not of my skin color.

    So whatever the children of my black wife and I decide to identify with, we will support them. We will give them all the information they need and instruct them on their heritages so that they can create a self identity and be proud of their diverse background. And hopefully as they age, the collective intelligence of my fellow whites will evolve and they won’t be so quick to slap a label on my children based solely on 1/2 of their background, but instead will recognize them for what they are: persons of a multi-racial background.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 8:13 am ¶

37. Casket*Maiden wrote:

    I kind of agree with Brown, because it is very true that many of us mixed people will deny an important or even insignifigant part of our racial identity. The only problem is her white worship. Me, I am multiracial, the product of biracials/triracials/mixed people comming together. Mixed person+mixed person=mixed person. We all look different but are usually clumped into latino because latinos, as much as they will deny it, are mixed people, not a race. I embrace European culture, though it is pretty far back in the family, but not far enough that it doesnt manifest in the children. I think Obama should be seen as the first biracial president, because he’s not just black and can barely pass. It would make all mixed people just one race if he keeps on identifying as black. Many of my family members except for me, my bro, aunt, mom identify as simply “black” (we are mixed west indians). I cant stand that, because we are obviously mixed and its nothing to be ashamed of. My mom would try to cll herself black to attract black men who always later on find out about her scottish/indianess no matter how hard she tries. I love th idea of being mixed because it makes me feel as different as my personality, looks and mind. Mixed pride is beautiful, eotic and unique, no one should be ashamed.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 9:09 am ¶

38. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    @Kali -

    Thanks for the compliment. However, I will take offense at the term hybrid vigor - I believe Carmen has spoken on her issues with that term on the podcast and how that kind of plays into the idea of superior and inferior genetic backgrounds.

    In terms of my background, Wendi called it best - it’s the slavery era remix. While I am leaning heavily toward genetic testing, I cannot answer your question definitively. However, I have never been taken as anything other than black and I have never been quizzed about my background.

    @All - Also, please remember that Barack’s identification is also a result of his time and area. We may perceive him as mixed, but as Thea said in the piece above, it depends on the racial politics of the society you inhabit.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 9:36 am ¶

39. Kali wrote:

    I think it is prejudiced to assume that just because Yasmin A-B talks of “wonderful English father” she is racist etc. What if she had said “wonderful Chinese/Finnish/Australian/Ghanian/French”? And why is she not allowed to say “wonderful English” when her partner is English. Should she have said “wonderful white/British” so as not to offend some of the rather vitriolic nonEnglish commenters here? (My wonderful partner/father-of-my-kids is not English btw but is white, so I have no personal stake in this).

    To some of my fellow PoC commenters: please avoid capitals/bold please - it does not make your comment more weighty or worthwhile than the regular text commenters .

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 9:44 am ¶

40. Mary wrote:

    Yasmin A-Brown is perfectly entitled to write her British opinion in a British newspaper.

    My issue isn’t that she’s expressing her opinion, it’s that she’s really talking down to Americans for not thinking about race like the British do, and failing to address the incredibly different racial histories the two countries have.

    If I, as an American, wrote a similarly condescending and proscriptive editorial in an American newspaper about how the UK should handle its race issues, I would expect to get smacked down too.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 10:00 am ¶

41. Kali wrote:

    @Latoya
    There isn’t anything about hybrid vigor in a scientific sense (not an agricultural one) that implies that any one ‘race’ is superior or inferior. Forced hybridization to improve harvests or disease resistance uses the same principle but there usually is a ‘preferred’ side of the equation- for example the more edible variety is preferred but not necessarily ’superior’ in any other sense.

    The reason that almost all cultures make incest and even close family matings taboo (cousins and uncles/aunts) is because we instinctively know that we need a ‘diverse’ gene pool for the survival of the species.

    Research studies of genius IQ people show that a disproportionate number come from mixed-ethnicities. Physical vigor, very gifted athletes etc, may also be similar.

    Certainly recessive diseases (where you need two exact copies of the same gene from each parent; having only one leaves you completely normal) that kill or maim are more common the smaller the gene pool and appear rarely and only by accident(called ’sporadic’ occurence) in larger ones. In my own country of origin (as well as in other communities around the world including the US) these recessive diseases can be a terrible curse and people are encouraged to widen the mating pool even if we don’t use the term h-v.

    However if the term offends and is misused to propagate racism I will not use it here.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 10:18 am ¶

42. Abu Sinan wrote:

    @ Dan,

    The white race and white culture is a relatively modern concept which was created as a bond around skin color in order to make the very color of skin, a commodity. So in the ultimate irony, ‘white’ identity has actually harmed people of European descent in America by causing them to ignore their traditions and interests for the sake of phony racial bonding.

    Spot on! What goes as “white culture” here in the US is not really culture at all. It is a dumbed down, bastardized version of European culture and American history.

    In Europe it is unrecogniseable.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 10:37 am ¶

43. Ali wrote:

    @CVT - Thanks for the link! A very interesting read!

    jen said: “I’ve never seen white people fight to claim someone who actually looks black, before.” SO TRUE!!! That’s half the reason I stayed glued to my tv. This shit is nearly unprecedented.

    @Kali - You should do a search on this site for the term “hyrbid vigor.” I remember a couple of hilarious posts about that from the Mixed Media Watch days. Specifically one about basketball player Joakim Noah comes to mind.

    @chairo - You are absolutely correct that this is at its core a very broad discussion which encompasses a range of interwoven topics. I can definitely empathize with your colorism woes as I too am of the dark and lovely persuasion but I don’t necessarily see colorism issues as being intrinsically linked to mixed race identity.

    My cousin is mixed. Her mom’s Korean and her dad (my uncle) is black. She identifies as both black and mixed. I don’t feel at all maligned by her claiming a black identity. In fact I’d be pretty pissed if anyone did attempt to argue that she’s “not really black” because last time I checked individuals don’t retain the right to kick someone out of a race. (As an aside I will also mention that I have been accused multiple of times of “not really” being black because of various mannerisms, interests, accent, etc. These accusations were usually lobed at me by whites. Some one who wants to control/define you is some who wants to control/define no matter they [or you for that matter] look like).

    The fact that guys at certain clubs consistently pass me up and make a b-line for her has nothing to do with her right to be (or not to be) incorporated under the umbrella of blackness. Those dudes are just shallow assholes. Their color issues and attitude problems have nothing to do with me or my cousin or how either us choose to self-identify.

    I too loved the Afropunk documentary (I will actually be attending the Primordial Punk Debutante Ball next week, holla!). I saw that film more as a celebration of the diversity within blackness. Yes the subjects of the film were struggling under the weight of what it means to be black yet identify with a sub-culture that seems out of step with contemporary notions of blackness but to me that’s an integral part of the black experience. Blackness is something that is constantly being defined and redefined. To quote Ta-Nehisi Coates that’s what makes it a “beautiful struggle.” I understand what you’re saying but I guess I’ll just to agree to disagree on this one.

    @msday - Another great point and I think this speaks to what jen was saying as well. When is the last time you saw white people clamoring to claim a non white-looking mixed person? The only other example I can think of off the top of my head is Guns N’ Roses guitarist Slash and actually a lot of people don’t even know that he’s biracial.

    @Kali (again) - Just saw your latest comment and you definitely need to check out Carmen’s (and Jen’s) previous posts on so called “hybrid vigor.” People are not plants dude. And as for the UK being ahead of the US in the racial game, I once had an older white British gentleman attempt to guess my ethnic background while I was trying to buy a book of fucking stamps. He then proceeded to refer to colonial Africa as the good old days. Food for thought.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 10:43 am ¶

44. Kali wrote:

    @Latoya
    Correct me if I’m wrong as I see from Google that there are actually other LaToya Petersons in the US, but I seem to remember reading that your father was African not African_Am - which is why I was talking about diverse genetics and hybrid vigor. Nothing to do with any post-slavery admixture with ‘whites’ *within* this country.

    Genetic testing by and large doesn’t tell you much about your ancestry in a general way - guess why? Because human beings are so very similar black, brown or white despite appearances to the contrary.

    Obama is a politician and has to be prudent and pragmatic.( Otherwise we’ll end up with McCain). We don’t have have to subscribe to popular stereotypes or categorization in the same way (unless we want to get elected).

    Not long ago you posted about a beautiful African woman you saw somewhere. You thought she was beautiful even though her proportions did not fit the American idea of beauty. Is it possible that we are hardwired to admire a person from a different gene pool - because we are hardwired for species survival. I personally find multi-ethnic people very pleasing to look at - maybe it is the unexpected combination of features.

    When you think about it fashion works similarly - we tire of a trend - and then look for something ‘different’ but not too different to come along to pique our interest again.

    I love growing roses and I only buy hybrids as I neither have the expertise to look after the pure-bred strains nor do I think they are much different or attractive anyway.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 10:55 am ¶

45. Latoya Peterson wrote:

    Kali -

    Ooooh - You’re thinking about Nadra Kareem. She’s the fabulous special correspondent we added to the site a couple months back. (I’m starting to get a bit surprised - there are five people who regularly contribute here. Nadra, Wendi, and I are all identified as black women. Are people assuming everything is from me?)

    You can address your questions to that effect to her.

    And yes, there are a few other Latoya Petersons in the US.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 10:59 am ¶

46. Kali wrote:

    @Ali
    “One older English gentleman” does not justify your generalization.
    If you have spent a couple of decades in each country as I have then I am happy to discuss specifics with you.

    Hybrid Vigor is very much a scientific term even if misused. Spastic used to be a scientific term (implies spasm of the muscles) until it was abused and is now replaced with Cerebral palsy.

    Humans like plants have two matched sets of chromosomes so are subject to the same biological rules. Perhaps if they taught biology better in US high schools we wouldn’t hear “humans are not plants”. Plants need water, humans are not plants but need water too.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 11:04 am ¶

47. Kali wrote:

    @latoya
    No I didn’t think all the posts were from you. It’s the incipient Alzheimer’s.

    @Ali
    For the record I have dual citizenship - British and US and some of my family is British too and I will continue to argue against stereotyping the British even if it isn’t politically correct to do so in this country.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 11:10 am ¶

48. juju wrote:

    Identification can be a personal thing. Yes, there is the issue of how society sees you, but there is also the matter of which parent/community you feel a greater affinity to (if any one in particular). I am multiracial and married to a bi-ethnic man. I expect that our daughter, still a wee toddler, will find her own way (as did her parents). I hope (and will encourage) that she claims all of her rich and diverse ancestry.

    Inspired by the words of G-dub-ya, Alibhai-Brown is not the decider; she doesn’t get to tell Obama who he is, how to identify, and what to call himself.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 11:27 am ¶

49. queerhapa wrote:

    Kali, it’s really problematic to apply the term “hybrid vigor” to humans, and it smacks of social engineering and eugenics. “Race” is a social construct and not a biological fact, people of different “races” do not belong to distinct gene pools, and there is more genetic variation among people classified as the same “race” as there is variation between races. So, if you want your so-called “hybrid vigor,” there is already plenty of genetic diversity within races. Trying to “breed” higher calibers of humans is just plain creepy.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 11:28 am ¶

50. Ali wrote:

    @Kali - I don’t mean to stereotype the British. From personal experience and that of friends that “one gentleman” was but a single drop in the bucket. I simply meant the anecdote to illustrate my point that in my opinion the UK is not so far ahead of the US in the racial progress category.

    You said: “If you have spent a couple of decades in each country as I have then I am happy to discuss specifics with you.” I don’t see why we can’t discuss specifics now. Even if I had spent “a couple of decades” in each country who’s to say we’d come away with a similar experience.

    You said: “Perhaps if they taught biology better in US high schools we wouldn’t hear ‘humans are not plants’.” Who’s making sweeping generalizations now? I never argued against the validity of “hybrid vigor” as a scientific term, especially in regard to botany. I DO have a problem with the application of the term to people. Yes there are many similarities between plants and people but setting those aside, no matter how you slice it, plants are NOT people.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 11:40 am ¶

51. Kali wrote:

    @queerhapa
    No one is espousing deliberate ‘hybridization’ of humans - but it’s going to happen by choice and because of globalization anyway - trends like this don’t suddenly stop or turn around.

    Race has no genetic basis but isolated populations - isolated for religious or ethnic reasons - do have constricted gene pools. The ‘color’ of the individuals is not the point. For example: everyone who is brown Indian does not come from the same gene-pool. If a group of Indians settle outside of India and then continue to marry within that community without seeding from outside - from the community outside - or from India; then they become ‘inbred’ in scientific terms and may suffer from disease. This is a fact - not conjecture. So cross-breeding is healthy - not necessarily in every individual case but certainly in a wider sense. I choose to speak of Indians and India because that is my much loved country and people so that it is harder to accuse me of being racist here - the same rules apply to every group of humans.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 11:45 am ¶

52. Kali wrote:

    @Ali
    I didn’t say plants were people- they aren’t.

    I am not going to discuss small numbers of English or even small numbers of loud, inconsiderate Americans that I meet on my annual visits to Britain - the most recent of which starts tomorrow.

    I am extremely sensitive about racism and always stand up to it and I generally have to do far less of it in Britain - both in the workplace and outside it than I do in this country.

    I have met a few annoying Indians/British/Americans- black, brown and white /Australian/French/etc etc but I don’t generalize from those.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 11:52 am ¶

53. Thea wrote:

    @Kali

    I would disagree with you that the Alibhai-Brown article is thoughtful. I did read it several times, and for the sake of consistency when writing my critique of her article, only picked out a few of her many points. So yes, I did leave out a lot of her argument - but only because a lot of it just didn’t seem worth commenting on.

    For eg? I was particularly irritated by the way she called Obama’s mom a “brave lass” which seems like a strange and condescending way to refer to an adult woman. It bothers me when white folks are congratulated on choosing a partner of colour - as if their choice of mate shows that they are so enlightened or something. That’s just strange, and I would think that the white partner of a person of colour would be made uncomfortable by that assertion.

    Another section of the article which echoes some of your sentiments about “hybrid vigour” is here, where Alibhai-Brown says:

    “They leave the gene pools of sterilized waters, swim out instead into the saltier, messier, yes dirtier, unpredictable seas full of unknown creatures and perils – but also freedom.”

    I have to say I was very disturbed by her tone here. As Ali says “people are not plants” and whenever anyone suggests to me that I must be more beautiful/smart/worldly/superior because of I am mixed, it smacks of Dov Charney type fetish-isation. I do not take it as a compliment, and find it objectifying and offensive.

    And as I noted in my article, at least half of North America is mixed. For eg my mother is English and Irish. I’ve heard many of my white friends refer to themselves as “some sort of European mutt”.

    There’s something wrong in the insinuation that a mix of European races creates a mutt, ie inferiority due to lack of pedigree, but a mixed white/non-white person is supposed to be “swimming in the gene pools of freedom.”

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 11:58 am ¶

54. Vodalus wrote:

    Dirtier!? For reals? Wow.

    Anyways, I’m one of the mutt-identifiers, so I can speak to that phenomenon! (How exciting, my voice has a place!)

    I refer to myself as a “white mutt” not out of shame but more out of humor. I find self-described Scots-Irish-German-Italians whose ancestors immigrated here 8 or 9 generations ago to be a smidgen ridiculous. Especially since their ethnicity tends only to emerge when discussing drinking prowess, temper tantrums, or “hey, my ancestors were oppressed too!” Since a lot of these people also tend to be guessing, I use the mutt descriptor since I don’t have a clear idea of my heritage beyond one immigrant from Northern Ireland in the 1860s. That’s enough to call myself European, but not much more.

    But I definitely don’t consider the term “mutt” to be self-pejorative. It’s more tongue-in-cheek than anything. When I’m not being silly, I consider myself white.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 12:22 pm ¶

55. CVT wrote:

    Kali -

    You’re scaring me here with your confused science. As you said, it’s just as likely that a group of “brown” Indians will have a diverse gene pool as a a group made of “brown” Indians and white folks. Race (and many other obvious physical characteristics) are not a significant indicator of genetic difference (or similarity). Therefore - all you are saying about mixed-race (whether within Africa, or from without) folks having “hybrid vigour” makes no scientific sense.

    This kind of mis-used science parallels misguided beliefs of “pure” races (and superiority or inferiority thereof). It’s also this type of mis-attributed science that had people using evolution as a means to justify racial hierarchies.

    I get that you are trying to be complimentary and pro-mixed-race here - but please don’t try to do so with faulty science. That just sets a tone and allows racists to use your “facts” to justify their own misguided beliefs.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 12:24 pm ¶

56. Fatemeh wrote:

    HOLY JAYSUS, MS. ALIBHAI-BROWN.
    Great post, Thea!

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 12:27 pm ¶

57. CVT wrote:

    @chairo - I will assume here that you are not “bi-racial,” yourself. You do not see how simply claiming that as a single label is difficult. That is because you have not experienced it.

    I could claim my Chinese side, and most non-Chinese would go with that and interact with me accordingly. If I claimed my white side, most folks would laugh in my face.

    So, my experience IS mixed - different from either/or. So I do tend to claim “bi-racial” as my fall-back. In that, you are correct in your assumptions.

    However, there are times when just being “bi-racial” doesn’t work. When (for my own sanity) I have to do more. And that “more” usually falls under standing up as a person of color - and for Chinese folks. I have never had the experience of “being white” in this country - it has been made clear to me that I cannot be accepted as that, and that it is not my inheritance. Therefore, I have experienced life as a person of color, as Asian (most often), and I therefore have to represent that without fear or shame.

    Suggesting that I ignore that side as equally as I am not allowed to bring in my white side only furthers the effects of white privilege and power in this country - while weakening the position of Asian-Americans. And that’s not something I particularly want to do.

    The white world is doing just fine without me as a member - while I feel that I can actually make some inroads by representing BOTH mixed people of color AND Chinese-Americans (in my way).

    I hope that makes some sense. Again - go up top and link to my post if you want some deeper clarification.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 12:32 pm ¶

58. Kali wrote:

    1. Lass=gal (not girl) used in a very egalitarian/ even friendly sense in British usage therefore not condescending.

    2.Latoya describing African woman as exceptionally beautiful is not objectifying but those of us who think multi-ethnic people are pleasing to the eye are ? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, it is a subjective opinion not an incontrovertible fact.

    My experience is that both contributing ethnicities find the mixed-ethnicity kids beautiful. You can label it fetishing - imo that would just be demonizing a normal human tendency. Both my kid’s grandfathers must be fetishist too …

    My mixed-race kids don’t find it fetishising or abusive, merely amusing. They would be conceited if they agreed with the observers.
    Most people would say that they are smarter than both their parents (us) put together and more daring and iconoclastic - because they are forced to swim against the current of stereotypy…

    You cannot stop human beings from liking novel combinations as it is clear from the comments that many of them do - and calling them fetishists and race-traitors is only trying to control other people’s thinking for our own ends.

    In my opinion as a British person - and I read the Times online every single day - I think you have provided a very UScentric view.

    Y A-B is perfectly entitled to write honestly about Obama just as any reporter here is perfectly entitled to write about Putin. Can’t expect the Soviets to buy the whole deal though. You are perfectly entitled to write it as you see it and I am perfectly entitled to disagree and provide an alternative view.

    Any geneticist will tell you that hybridization within a species (plant or animal) can yield healthier(more vigorous) stock. My be politically incorrect - but it’s true. People thought it was politically incorrect to say the Earth went round the Sun at one point in time - they thought it was insulting to Earthlings…food for thought…

    Mod Note - Re: Point 2: Again, that was Nadra in her post on the Visitor.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 12:35 pm ¶

59. Kali wrote:

    @CVT
    No, you are the one who don’t understand the science. You are reading what I write here (which perforce is only a tiny fragment of what you would learn in 4 years of a college genetics course) and then extrapolating .

    I did NOT say that group of brown Indians were as ‘diverse’ as mixed-race kids.

    I did NOT say that people were the same as plants.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 12:41 pm ¶

60. Kali wrote:

    @CVT
    “However, there are times when just being “bi-racial” doesn’t work. When (for my own sanity) I have to do more. And that “more” usually falls under standing up as a person of color - and for Chinese folks. I have never had the experience of “being white” in this country - it has been made clear to me that I cannot be accepted as that, and that it is not my inheritance. Therefore, I have experienced life as a person of color, as Asian (most often), and I therefore have to represent that without fear or shame.”

    It seems that we must all placate American Society whatever it takes. “They’ won’t accept ‘bi-racial’ so you have to find some other round hole to squeeze the square peg into.

    Maybe it is time to rebel?

    The anti English/British vitriol here is deeply offensive to me - it makes me wonder whether it is this xenophobia (an Dubya is not the only one, no more than Hitler was) that got the US into Iraq and so maligned in the rest of the world.

    I have not seen this level of ugliness in any anti US sentiment on blogs in the UK. Neither do I hear fetishist or race-traitor aimed towards biracial young people or their supporters in the UK.

    The world gets smaller everyday. Time to put the old ‘Americans know/are best’ attitude to rest. Maybe Americans actually have something to learn from the rest of the world. People in the UK and elsewhere are not going to stop thinking and writing their opinions because of what Americans think about what they publish in their own damn newspapers.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 1:15 pm ¶

61. CVT wrote:

    Kali - you keep ignoring everybody’s responses to your claims of “hybridization.” Hybridization, within a species, does increase fitness. Nobody’s arguing with that.

    The point is that - race does NOT equate to genetic make-up. Hybridization is not an appropriate term for inter-racial mixing, because race has no genetic correlate. Please stop repeating yourself without acknowledging the science we are presenting you.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 1:49 pm ¶

62. CVT wrote:

    Kali - by the way, in general, both contributing parents find their kids beautiful - whether the kid is mixed or not. How many parents do you know that talk about how ugly their kids are?

    I’ve been on the end of “mixed folks are better looking” too many times to accept that as anything other than a stereotype that separates people’s qualities as racial artifacts.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 1:51 pm ¶

63. Carmen Van Kerckhove wrote:

    I wanted to point everyone to the very first interview I did with Dr. Joseph L. Graves, author of “The Race Myth: Why We Pretend Race Exists in America” on Addicted to Race back in 2006.

    I asked him this exact question about whether multiracial people really exhibit hybrid vigor at around the 1:25:00 mark:

    http://www.addictedtorace.com/?p=27

    His answer in short:

    1) genetic variation and race are not the same thing

    2) hybrid vigor in humans is a *theoretical* possibility

    3) but no one has ever done a study like that, so we have no scientific evidence to demonstrate that people of “mixed ancestry” have hybrid vigor

    4) people of “mixed ancestry” often are exposed to harmful environmental effects (hello racism) that may overwhelm any possible genetic “hybrid vigor” that may have existed anyway

    5) humans are not fruit flies. We live in complex societies and deal with complex social problems.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 2:10 pm ¶

64. atlasien wrote:

    Positive multiracial stereotypes (”hybrid vigor”, “new generation”, “best of both worlds”) are just the flip side of negative stereotypes (”mongrels”, “impure and contaminated”, “trapped between two worlds”). As a multiracial person, I quickly realized that. I didn’t need to read any books to get really uncomfortable about positive stereotyping. Any parent who applies these positive stereotypes to their multiracial child is playing with fire.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 2:17 pm ¶

65. atlasien wrote:

    Kali, how many British biracial people are on this thread and having their experiences dismissed? I don’t see a single one.

    I’ll support multiracial people claiming their own identity, no matter what country. I don’t support non-multiracial people who are telling them which identity to claim and putting words in their mouths.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 2:23 pm ¶

66. Vodalus wrote:

    May I also point out that the closer analog to race mixing is mixed-breed animals and not hybrids? (I’ll use dogs since I’m more familiar with them.)

    There are two arguments about mixed-breed dogs. The first is “Mixed Breeds have better genes because they haven’t been inbred as much.” This is in many senses true as mixing genetic populations decreases the likelihood of a negative recessive trait being expressed. If one is dealing with mutts descended from a long line of randomly breed mutts, then you’ll also have a bit of environmental selection happening too.

    But the second argument about mixed breeds is “Don’t buy designer mutts like labradoodles because they’re more likely to have unpredictable genetic issues.” This is because you’re taking two highly-inbred populations with different genetic problems due to inbreeding and mixing them together. You just doubled the chances of having dominant genetic problems crop up and may or may not changed the likelihood of recessive issues. (Plus the parents of designer breeds are generally poor-quality pure breeds and blah blah more irrelevant dog stuff.)

    The things is, neither of these arguments really apply to people. Very few groups are as inbred or line-bred as pedigree dogs. But very few people are as randomly mixed as street mutts. You’re also supposing that various genetic benefits (and detriments) are tied to race.**

    I can see where the concerns about genetic homogeneity could play into the need for an isolated community to bring in new blood. But since most races are not that small and most people not that tied to their community of origin anymore, the argument that people of mixed-race background benefit from hybrid vigor… seems insufficient.

    **This smacks of eugenics and I’m not sure that it is what you *intended* to communicate.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 2:32 pm ¶

67. Yvette wrote:

    Better biology/genetic education in the schools would be a great thing. So would better “literacy” in statistics. That way we would not make the common mistake of attributing qualities about populations and distributions to individual units making up populations and distributions.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 3:01 pm ¶

68. CVT wrote:

    Kali - oops. I will now acknowledge my ignorance in totally skipping over your dual citizenship.

    Okay - so you’ve seen how race is, perhaps, a bigger deal in America. So shouldn’t that make it easier to understand why it’s not so simple as just saying “I’m bi-racial” (which, I repeat, I stick to, while also backing the Asian-American cause).

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 3:20 pm ¶

69. i-geek wrote:

    “I’ll support multiracial people claiming their own identity, no matter what country. I don’t support non-multiracial people who are telling them which identity to claim and putting words in their mouths.”

    Thank you. I’m so tired of being treated with disbelief when people find out that my father is Mexican. Yeah, I’m light-skinned. So what? I know where my ancestors came from. I’m not lying. I’m multi-ethnic. Just because I’m not brown and my Spanish is terrible, doesn’t mean I’m “just white” because I don’t look like a full-blooded Mexican. Guess what? My dark-skinned cousins- darker than their Mexican parents- that look full-blooded? Are all half-Polish and thus are just as much Latino as I am. Most of them aren’t fluent in Spanish either. I’m not going to deny my father and all of my Mexican ancestors just because I don’t fit some pre-conceived phenotype. Neither am I going to deny my white mother and the European ancestors on her side either. It seems like I’m expected to choose one or the other and since I “pass” for white, I’m expected to choose to be just white. No way.

    Sorry for the rant. This post and the comments following have brought me out of lurker mode.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 3:22 pm ¶

70. CVT wrote:

    Okay - last thing, I swear. I’m getting all riled up, but I need to move on with my life and get productive, so:

    @the “just bi-racial” crew -
    I am bi-racial. Barack Obama is bi-racial. So our experiences (racially) must be more or less the same?

    If that comment seems ridiculous - why is it so? Probably because a full HALF of Barack Obama’s blood, family, and experiences are black (African, specifically). Whereas a full HALF of my blood, family, and experiences are Asian (Chinese, specifically).

    Britain, U.S., wherever - nobody is going to look at me and Barack Obama, (or know our background), and call us the “same race.”

    Sometimes, “bi-racial” just isn’t enough.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 4:05 pm ¶

71. Matt wrote:

    I doubt too many people here are familiar with her, but Alibhai-Brown is known for some really stupid stuff. Really, really stupid. This article earned her quite a bit of condemnation. Not only does it hit every antisemitic trope in fashion today, she reached back to the Dark Ages for one of the strangest beliefs about Jews ever, “David Abrahams, the strange shape-shifter…” Yup, shape-shifter. Straight out of Borat.

    So why is this kind of tripe being published in the Independent, an allegedly left-wing newspaper?

    Good question.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 4:12 pm ¶

72. Joseph wrote:

    @ i-geek
    “It seems like I’m expected to choose one or the other and since I “pass” for white, I’m expected to choose to be just white. No way.”

    Amen.

    This discussion always takes place from the other direction (i.e. so-and-so “looks black” so they should or shouldn’t identify one way or another) but rarely from the direction of someone who is assumed to be white, but isn’t really. The idea that if everyone assumes you are whatever then you automatically default to that is outrageous. My identity is not up for a committee vote.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 5:48 pm ¶

73. chairo wrote:

    @ CVT

    “@chairo - I will assume here that you are not “bi-racial,” yourself. You do not see how simply claiming that as a single label is difficult. That is because you have not experienced it.”

    this and the rest of what you highlighted still doesn’t really justify having to pick.
    I’m NOT saying that mixed people right now HAVE to say they’re bi-racial. I’m not saying anyone has to be forced into anything. I’m merely suggesting the benefit of people being recognised for what they are(when i say this i’m stretching a little and i mean; the fact that their parents are of different “races”. This isn’t subtle coercion just common sense.

    I know a lot of whites won’t see you as half-white, but that’s not the point as i’ve said, and how are we getting past colonial mindsets by seemingly removes whites from the mixed race
    None of the faces i saw on those news channels during the reverend wright thing made note of his upbringing; he immediately was a black man on trial. Whites need to acknowledge mixed people as being partially white.

    In my group of friends we’d make the effort to try to understand one another and where we come from. I’d mention the fact that my fam are west african, and explain certain cultural traits etc. my mixed friend (who calls himself mixed) would speak about both his parents. There was no difficulty understanding; there weren’t’ mammoth misunderstandings.

    As a side note, i’m becoming increasingly more dubious of what people mean on here when they say “identify as black”

    Read my comment again.
    I was saying that this discussion should be happening on a much larger level. Me being black doesn’t make me more equipped to deal with anti-black racism; it just means that whoever’s being anti-black clearly doesn’t like me and they’re making that clear to me.

    @ALI
    “I can definitely empathize with your colorism woes as I too am of the dark and lovely persuasion but I don’t necessarily see colorism issues as being intrinsically linked to mixed race identity.

    My cousin is mixed. Her mom’s Korean and her dad (my uncle) is black. She identifies as both black and mixed. I don’t feel at all maligned by her claiming a black identity. In fact I’d be pretty pissed if anyone did attempt to argue that she’s “not really black” because last time I checked individuals don’t retain the right to kick someone out of a race. ”

    I’ve said again and again, that i’m not saying that we should be screaming at people to say they’re bi-racial, just it’d be better for society to recognise them as such; as it clearly recognises dark people as being “very black”, and nordic fair skinned people as being “very white” in relation to Mediterraneans.

    you don’t see colorism being linked instrincially to mixed-race identity?
    Haven’t you seen the documentary “brown like me”
    or black like me. So much of that just reflected the ills racist white patriarchy, has left us with.

    In high school i’d get white friends who’d say they prefer lighter girls and its their “racial preference”
    I hated how normalized this position was; if you tried to explain why they had those predelictions they’d say “oh i’m not racist. its just my choice”

    I don’t like having to dwell on beauty
    But i do find it curious that whenever there is a brown actress playing opposite a white dude she’s really light. I’m struggling to understand why this doesn’t strike you as kinda problematic. Please don’t read this as me saying that this combination shouldn’t happen lol. I’m just saying that the images we constantly see have an effect on us.

    onto afropunk lol, man a lot of those kids were pretty cynical. I understand exactly what they’ve been through, and it is pretty tough but c’mon you know what i’m getting at if you remember i think the latter parts of the doc. It felt like the filmmaker had then decided to focus on black attitudes towards people like them.

    It’d be a lot better if people didnt have to “identify” with a large group of people that looked like them. Culture isn’t in our veins, yet a lot of them time we latently assert this through motions and words that are so commonplace. Whiteness and Blackness are too very problematic categories

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 6:33 pm ¶

74. Hokayshenao wrote:

    My mother is Italian and Native American. My father is African American. I can appreciate the fact that I identify with Caucasians and Asians the most. I have varying skin tones, but I would not try to wise crack Obama. People are usually clear when they identify themselves. I totally support your blog and mixed race people.

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 10:16 pm ¶

75. Aquarianbrass wrote:

    I’m sorry but the bi-racial folks are feeding into the same system of dominance and hierarchy that they contend blacks and whites are perpuatrating.
    See here, what does “black” mean. Well it means different things in different places but it’s application has been to define, categorise and place people with the purpose of creating and maintaining a particular vertical order of power.
    Black is something that has been constituted, created by the socio-cultural forces of white supremacy. IT was a simple way to class all those who originated from the continent we know as Africa( a colonial term) en masse so that it could known
    who there were in the grand order of things(slaves to be dominated. Now race, which originally meant caste, is instrincally a system for creating hierarchal order based on arbitrary traits for the purpose of accruing resources for me and mine to the detriment of your and yours. The categories of race are, like I mentioned, built on seemingly arbritary rules of descent that determine what race you are because, again by definition, race as caste means one can only be one race. The system as to be precies and cannot allow for ambiguity.
    All caste systems have these rules and the one drop rule was the means for determing your place in the American caste system but it is hardly unique to the U.S.
    However, while “black” as an abstraction was defined in this way, the black community, borne in the fields, kitchens, backrooms and shacks of the plantation, is a real, flesh and blood, community of peoples who, thrown together due to harrowing circumstances created new traditions, artforms, languages and ways to relate to one another was/is not abstract and to be apart of this community one simply had to perform and participate and identify with this community. This community included folks with varying degrees of African ancestory and the amount really didn’t matter only ones commitment to others in the community.
    This community is as real as any other and by definition and in reality, includes many people whom one may call “bi-racial” or “multi-racial”.
    Black is not a given, it is socially situated and thus its definition depends on the social climate of the time. There is no pure black. Black in America, by definition implies “mixed” ancestory.
    So I would ask, how would YOU define black?
    (This question is for everyone)
    P.S.
    Yes, by the definition of the mixed rac movement, everyone is mixed race because the categories of race have changed over time. Everyone has ancestors whose national/racial origins differ from next ancestor.
    There was a time when so-called “white” people considered each other to be of differing races.
    With that, race really has nothing to do with skin color, which is rough proxy for where one belongs but ultimately imperfect.
    Just think, dark skinned Indians generally aren’t consided “black” in America.
    It sure as hell didn’t matter to the Serbs and Croatians or the Hutus and Tutsi.
    And with that, Yes Obama is black if he wants to be. He is a part of the black community by way of his participation and family(wife, father, daughters) and can thus self-identify as thus.
    Now, is he apart of the white community as well?
    One last jab to the “multi-racials”
    Given that race is constituted by rules, if you are intent on maintaining racial categories(I assume that multi-racial would be one such new one) what are the new rules for constituting race?

    Posted 03 Jul 2008 at 10:36 pm ¶

76. Anonymous wrote:

    Hi I just came across this blog of yours while browsing around(a nice one it is too).

    I do think that Kali and Chairo are correct, to me you don’t seem to be giving Yasmin Alibhai-Brown a fair cop at all. I get that it may seem as if she’s praising whiteness to you, but I really do feel that you are then misrepresenting her views., that kind of thing can happen with such a touchy subject.

    I agree with her though, there is an awful lot of calling mixed ethnicity persons ‘black’ or ‘asian’, when they aren’t. Barack is not black, he may culturally identify as black which is fine, a white person could do the same even.

    I understand the solidarity type thing you have going on in the USA(I’ve been to conferences on racial issues and slavery in the USA and UK), but a reverse one drop rule isn’t really changing a bad thing to a good thing, it is still absolutist.

    Mixed ethnic people have suffered the same terrible things actual blacks have and so obviously we’ll share that bond, but painting people into these little categories isn’t something that should be done just because it’s in the name of good.

    Back on Y.A.B I see where she is coming from as a mixed race person myself(I do not have too much experience of what’s it like in the USA and have to try find out from relatives), in secondary(high) school funnily enough the most damaging racism I have experienced came from the blacks( in specific the African descended, there was a more veiled kind from the whites ).

    As you’re all aware racism and prejudice are very complex and it’s not all the blatant BNP(google them for a lol) kind.
    I think what YAB was trying to get at it(hard to do without being mixed yourself) is that grabbing everyone who looks a little black and holding them up as black success is errant but I also think the doing so could possibly hinder progression of black issues, Halle Berry,Barack Obama etc are successes against racism but they are not truly black successes.

    In fighting stereotyping,bigotry, oppression, coercion and such we must always make sure we don’t commit those same evils.

    Off the slight tangent I will say I was very surprised when I first went to the USA and got called black straight out by blacks and whites, it’s been very rare for me in the UK.

    Posted 04 Jul 2008 at 9:50 am ¶

77. Mel wrote:

    “But here’s an exhausting (discouraging, nightmare-inducing, etc…) thought: if Obama wins in November, we may just have four years of ludicrous op-eds spewing nonsensical assumptions about race – and mixed race people – as if it is the business of journalists to tell mixed people how they should identify.”

    Bring it on. The vast majority of mixed people (myself included) and blogs such as these will have our arguments ready. I think that this Pandora’s box needs to be opened. I’ve had otherwise informed, intelligent, and smart people telling me things like “You’re not Asian, you’re American!” and “You don’t ACT Japanese, how can you claim Japanese heritage?” If we get a discourse started, maybe we won’t have to answer such ignorant questions on the street anymore/as much.

    Posted 04 Jul 2008 at 11:19 am ¶

78. i-geek wrote:

    Aquarianbrass, why do you have such a problem with us multi-racials/multi-ethnics, and how dare you tell Barack Obama or any us how to identify ourselves? Why should we have to deny half or more of our ancestry to make you happy?

    Posted 04 Jul 2008 at 3:18 pm ¶

79. bea wrote:

    I have read most but not all of the comments, so I hope I am not repeating anything or missing anything here. I am half Chinese and half Anglo-Irish, and I really don’t look decisively either Asian or White.

    I have been privy to lots of racist garbage courtesy my White friends and family. I also grew-up with my father being ashamed of his Asian heritage and not sharing it with me or my sisters. He experienced terrible, overt racism while in school in Tennessee as well as the subtle ubiquitous racism that pervades the media and lexicon of most people in the U.S.

    I mourn the loss of experiencing this part of my heritage as a child and knowing this side of my father- everyday. Yes, I feel some anger and resentment that racist propaganda in the U.S. made my father feel not only ashamed of not being White, but that his daughters would be better off and safer if he raised them to think and act White, without a trace of Asian acculturation.

    These experiences have defined the way I think about myself. I feel like I have much more in common, as far as life experiences go, with PoCs than Whites, even though I seem to be accepted as White for all intents and purposes by most White folks.

    So… Quite honestly, the fact that Obama married an African-American woman and embraces his African roots is absolutely beautiful to me. There is a lot of pressure for PoCs to marry into the dominant White culture and adopt all of its values and morays. Unlike Alibhai-Brown, I think it is wonderful that Obama identifies with and is proud of his non-White heritage.

    Posted 04 Jul 2008 at 6:18 pm ¶

80. bea wrote:

    One more thing: after reading all of the comments from people from the UK, I think it is pretty obvious that you folks don’t really understand the repercussions of a history infused with White supremacist thinking, such as we have here in the U.S.

    Mixed people here have to grapple with this legacy and have very different life experiences than mixed people anywhere else on earth. An intelligent, good reporter would know enough to do a bit of research before writing an article like Alibhai-Brown’s. To presume she can pass judgment on Obama’s decision to identify as Black from such an ignorant and ill-informed stance is both irresponsible and unprofessional.

    Posted 04 Jul 2008 at 6:40 pm ¶

81. lxy wrote:

    When people talk about “claiming Whiteness,” they should fully understand what it is they are claiming.

    The journal Race Traitor provides a revealing analysis of what White racial identity is really about:

    “The white race is a historically constructed social formation. It consists of all those who partake of the privileges of the white skin in this society. Its most wretched members share a status higher, in certain respects, than that of the most exalted persons excluded from it, in return for which they give their support to a system that degrades them.”

    http://racetraitor.org/

    Posted 04 Jul 2008 at 7:32 pm ¶

82. chairo wrote:

    @bea (and others)

    Bea explain to me what you know of mixed-raced issues in UK. Just because we don’t share the exact same history it doesn’t change the fact that US white society, and the society over here, makes the same stupid m