Comments

1. DEAF FEMINIST PUNK!! wrote:

   to be fair, in the UK, South Asians and Blacks (of Jamaican/Carribbean heritage) are often slumped together as “black.”

   It’s not a big deal. I was born in England and always considered myself black (I’m South Asian if anyone is wondering). when my family and i moved to America, i was stunned to hear that i wasn’t considered black.

   talk about having your beliefs shattered!!!

   Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 8:36 am ¶

2. Jesse wrote:

   I am not sure. First, it depends on what you mean by “categorically black.” South Asians have been viewed very differently from Black people in the US (usually as a contrast — ”
   hey, the Indians/Hindus/Pakistanis can work hard, why can’t you?”).

   If anything, the linked column plays into that (the PGA column I mean). So I am not sure that it fits quite so well.

   Of course, part of the issue is that South Asians weren’t a significant part of the population anywhere until relatively recently, when the black/white dichotomy in the US had already been “fixed” as it were.

   The situation is different in, say, Britain or France where the big groups of immigrants were non-white, make up a much larger proportion of the population, and neither country has quite the same tortuous history as we do here. In Britain the “categorically black” thing actually makes more sense, at least intuitively, but that’s not based on a deep enough knowledge for me to say that with any certainty.

   I mean, I have never seen any white person mistake a South Asian for a black or latin person, ever. Now, my samples are skewed — I live in New York. But I have never heard white people do/say the things that I recognize as mentally categorizing someone as “black” either when referring to people like Singh. Even the racial slurs are different. That would say to me that the unconscious categorizing we do (as white folks) is probably different.

   So yeah, Yang’s piece seems a bit of a reach to me. An interesting idea, but not one that seems to me to fit the situation so well. I’d want to see some better data to support the hypothesis.

   Also, remember the PGA piece is referring to Singh playing the villain in contrast to his actual personality and playing it against Tiger Woods, who by many accounts just seems too good to be true — he hasn’t become the New York Yankees of Golf, but he could (I mean becoming the guy we love to hate because he always wins). I did not get the sense that people wanted Singh to fail, not from that piece anyway.

   Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 9:15 am ¶

3. afroamericawriter wrote:

   I know (from reports I’ve read) Vijay Singh doesn’t consider himself black but Fijian. So I’m of the mindset of to each his own.

   But as a person that just this past Saturday while servicing my car got in some pretty interesting discussion about politics and race, I’m not surprised by the categorically black comment.

   So here I was at the car service place when of the guys (who’s white) said to me (after saying “no disrespect”) he would have assumed just by seeing my first name on the computer I was “Middle-Eastern.”

   Only for one of the black guys (who said he was Caribbean) was surprised I was born an American even though my Parents are Africans and of course, he made a generalization comment I called him out on.

   I told one of my relatives the said comment yesterday which got a good laugh. Nobody, who looks at me will say I’m white but because of my features which confuses a whole lotta of folks might say she’s black but . . .Well, the way I deal with that is just call me an African-American.

   Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 9:54 am ¶

4. Jamerican Muslimah wrote:

   Let’s not forget how many South Asians in America fight VERY HARD to distance themselves from Black people. They don’t want the association even if there are Black people who have fairer skin than theirs or a better social position. I also feel like many South Asians work to gain acceptance and approval from White people.

   I’ve even seen it with so-called friends of mine. The only acceptable “American” to marry is White (and in some instances, fair-skinned Latinas.)

   Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 9:57 am ¶

5. Thea Lim wrote:

   Just wondering about the implications of this piece: is it using “black” as a synonym for marginalised?

   Not sure I am comfortable with that (it that’s what’s going on) for a number of reasons:

   - though I understand it is a reference more to the way the system treats Black people rather than Black people themselves, I don’t know if it is a good idea to equate “Blackness” with being an underclass. Because the black experience is really broad, complex, diasporic and global.

   - there are lots of people who aren’t “Black” who are marginalised. For eg people of colour who aren’t dark-skinned. Or people who face staggering barriers to just living their lives: people who experience discrimination because of language, or people who have disabilities, teenage homeless mothers…or teenage homeless mothers of colour who don’t speak the dominant language, and have disabilities.

   To me it has a little bit of the oppression olympics in it, to suggest that one experience of marginalisation is the definition of marginalisation, and to claim those from other groups into itself. Like if we are looking for a word that we can apply to all people who are “invisible, unwelcome, or second-class”, why choose “Black”? Why not choose “Muslim”? Or “cerebral palsy”?

   Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 10:02 am ¶

6. DEAF FEMINIST PUNK!! wrote:

   you guys are forgetting a HUGE important fact.

   the U.S did not colonialize India like the UK did.

   the UK colonialized India and many parts of the Carribbeans. In turn, many of these people came from these areas and moved to the UK, where many racial groups are usually poorer and disadvantaged, unlike in the United States, where Indian Americans (and the rest of Asian Americans) are much more successful and well educated.

   Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 10:02 am ¶

7. DEAF FEMINIST PUNK!! wrote:

   @ Jamerican:

   wow, way to go for slumping all South Asians together in one group. My best friend is a black guy, and I don’t look down at black people. I’m more comfortable around Blacks than I ever did around white people. Thanks a lot for slumping all of us together in one pro-White, anti-Black group.

   Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 10:04 am ¶

8. Latoya Peterson wrote:

   @Thea – My thoughts exactly. I have heard that argument before (the uncoupling of the word “black” from a specific race, and used to apply the meaning to anyone who is marginalized) but it doesn’t sit well with me. I’ll discuss this a bit more in another post tomorrow.

   Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 10:06 am ¶

9. gatamala wrote:

   Thea, I agree with you. I’m not comfortable with being my dark skin being the poster child for marginalization. It cheapens me and especially give short shrift to the myriad of ways folks can be marginalized.

   It really is another way of reinforcing Black = bad (negative attribute; this is not a value judgment of the poor)

   That’s just the flip side of hard-working/working class.

   http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/04/AR2008100402333.html?nav=hcmodule

   I don’t know much about golf, but I do know that the mere presence of his dark skin, South Asian Fijian heritage are a thorn in the side to the golf set.

   Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 10:30 am ¶

10. Cynthia wrote:

    Feminist Punk: Are non-white people in the UK generally poor? Aren’t there quite a few Hong Kong Chinese at boarding schools in the UK?

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 11:02 am ¶

11. Kandee wrote:

    Black. That’s what I’ve always said the term meant. The disenfranchised, unwanted, marginalized people of society. In the American context, that’s anyone with some native west African roots. In other countries, the cultural/national/geographical characteristics are different like South Africa and the Chinese or the UK and South Asians. That’s why Obama is mixed race in some parts of the world and Black in America. In speaking to some of my American family and friends, the conflict always arises when it is explained that “Black” is a concept, and not an actual racial group, especially when seeing it globally rather than regionally. It’s hard for them to see outside what they’ve been told about themselves and that term. This is a perfect example of that concept.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 11:26 am ¶

12. RChoudh wrote:

    Interesting post. As a South Asian myself I would have to say that it’s very hard sometimes to categorize the various types of marginalization into a “black/white” dichotomy. Growing up South Asian in America I have seen that South Asians are marginalized in many ways. On the one hand they’re thought to be “model minorities” like other Asians who are perpetual foreigners with funny English accents that study too much and steal high paying American jobs. I know of South Asians who were denied access to minority college scholarships and entrance to universities because they didn’t need ” a leg up”. I think Singh’s accomplishments in Golf reflect this type of marginalization where he’s thought to be a perpetual foreigner who like other Asians is better at whatever he does than whites, thus “stealing” something else from whites, thereby posing a threat to the predominantly white Golf establishment.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 11:28 am ¶

13. RChoudh wrote:

    @DFP

    I have also heard of how South Asians are marginalized differently within the UK from the US. I heard that generally since UK South Asians were poorer there than here and the biggest minority group there, that’s why they are treated much the same way black/Latino minority communities are treated in the US by being isolated and treated with contempt by the white establishment there.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 11:32 am ¶

14. RChoudh wrote:

    I think if Singh’s accomplishments were in the UK rather than here, then the black marginalization category could be more aptly applied (sorry for the triple posts)

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 11:33 am ¶

15. Ron wrote:

    Native Fijians and South Asian descent Fijians have been intermingling with black americans quite some time now. Kenya, Ethiopia, Uganda, South Africa have seen this extend to Africa as well.

    I think considering them as black is a natural progression that was bound to happen eventually anyway because of worldwide color consciousness.

    It is funny when people bring up Tiger Woods Thai background when Thai has a strong aboriginal population that phenotypically looks black but has been separated from Africa for over 100k years thus not retaining genotype proximity.

    The absuridity that is race tries to balkanize blacks to maintain white racial numerical superiority.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 11:38 am ¶

16. Jamerican Muslimah wrote:

    @Deaf Feminist Punk,

    I did not say ALL South Asians. Seriously, are you going to sit there and deny the fact that many South Asians have an aversion to Blackness? I lived amongst South Asians (in the Muslim community) for over 6 years and all I’d ever hear about is how “dark” I am and how the most suitable woman for marriage is a “fair-skinned, slim girl.” Despite all of the talk about us being one as Muslims I could see exactly what was going on. I’ve also seen how it is acceptable to marry White but don’t even THINK about Black. I’ve watched friends of mine who dared to cross into the forbidden territory ostracized by the South Asian community. These are real issues. Am I suggesting ALL South Asians agree? Absolutely not. However, I’m not going to pretend either…

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 11:52 am ¶

17. DEAF FEMINIST PUNK!! wrote:

    @ Cynthia:

    I was referring to many South Asians (mostly Pakistani/Muslim) and Black British people of Carribbean heritage.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 11:59 am ¶

18. Jess wrote:

    @Cynthia–

    Non-whites in the UK (I lived in the Brixton neighborhood there for some time) have as much class diversity as anyone else, but there is a weird classism within those communities (from Africa, anyway) that kinds of hinges on what class your family was back in Nigeria or wherever. That’s because the kid whose dad was educated to be a diplomat at the best university in Nigeria knows the system a bit, even if his dad is a cab driver now. So he has all that knowledge of the testing system and what to say and not say at an interview and all that stuff. The kid whose dad was an uneducated farmer in Nigeria won’t have all that, so he has to learn it, and it ain’t like the information comes by way of Vulcan mind-meld. You gotta find it. So those kids are the ones who hang out in Peckham and get into trouble more often for the same reasons working-class kids of whatever color in the US get into trouble more often.

    Hong Kong Chinese that come to the UK are almost by definition going to be wealthier. That’s because it costs a lot to get there (from HK) and the kinds of folks likely to send their kids to boarding school are already middle- and upper-class people. So there’s a bit of self-selection of the sample. And the dynamic is different.

    Then you get Singaporeans and Malaysians — the former don’t even think they are really Asian sometimes. It’s weird.

    Then on top of all that you have people from India and Pakistan, who often were from the bureaucratic and middle classes in those countries. And they too, have their own class issues intra-community. I’ve seen how my Oxford-educated Telegu friend talks about the Pakistanis from NWFP and called them “primitives.” Picture that in a very measured Oxford tone from a guy raised in Kuwait who is darker than Dave Chapelle.(When I think about it now it’s only really funny to Americans. He made that remark back in — oh, must’ve been 1990 or so).

    You see how complicated this all gets?

    Anyhoo, the upshot is that Deaf Feminist Punk is right that the colonization makes a big difference and the way people work will depend heavily on what that experience was.

    All of which is to say I get real nervous about transposing any racial terms across countries, because the meaning is so different. And for the same reason I also get nervous about applying those categories cross-culturally to people who don’t fit in it because the history of their group in the US is different. Hence my call for a little data to support or falsify the hypothesis.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 12:21 pm ¶

19. Thea Lim wrote:

    @ Jess

    You mention that Singaporeans “don’t even think they are Asians sometimes” – do you have a source for that? I grew up in Singapore and never quite came across that sentiment. There is definitely snobbery towards China, but because Singapore is so racially segregated, in my experience people were very attached to their cultural identities. As well a lot of the tourist info for Singapore describes it as “Little Asia” because it is a mix of different Asian cultures.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 1:22 pm ¶

20. Lisa J wrote:

    @DEAF FEMINIST PUNK!!
    I don’t know if he was trying to clump all South Asian Americans into one group because he did introduce it with the qualifier or “many”. From my perspective he may have a point though. I grew up in a suburb of New Jersey where there were a fair number of South Asians, mostly from India, and though the town was predominantly white, there were more South Asian Americans (and Far East Asians, mostly from China) than African-Americans like myself. I had several South Asian Americans whom I considered friends, and though they were fine with me and seemed to be fine with black people in general themselves, they did tell me that their parents and extended family considered blacks to be “bad” and had told them so. Most of their parents were nice enough to me personally (about the same as my white friend’s parents) but they told me that if they brought home a black person of the opposite sex to date their parents would go NUTS. Of course they wouldn’t be pleased with any non-South Asian (or a South Asian of the wrong religion, i.e Muslim when they were Hindu or vice verse) a white person would be more accepatable than a black person. Of course that isn’t the case with everyone, and I know at least one South Asian guy who went to the prom with a black girl, and my cousin had a South Asian girlfriend and her family seemed ok with it, but I do know another girl who snuck around with a black boyfriend for 2 years rather than tell her parents (she later married a white guy and though her folks had a “cow” but they love him now). I recently had another South Asian American tell me that he thinks it may be a generational issue with regards to thinking blacks are bad and those born or mostly raised here or under 40ish don’t feel that way as a group. I know it is a gross generalization, but when you have several people tell you the same thing, basically unprompted, it makes you wonder. I apologize if this didn’t make sense, my mind is a little disjointed today.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 1:57 pm ¶

21. Jess wrote:

    @Thea–

    I’ve heard more than one Singaporean refer to Asians as “other people”, and whatever they put out for tourists, I’ve seen few Asian nations that go so far out of their way to be British-like and show how they differ from everyone around them.

    I mean, to hear them tell it those Malaysians were just a bunch of layabouts and unable to be modern, which is why they needed their independence. Though the Singaporeans who were brought up in London from a young age were less vehement about it.

    I haven’t got enough data for a scientifically-viable theory, but from what I got Singaporeans have an odd relationship with the continent they live on. I mean, I am sure there is a long history there and reasons stemming from that. But as a New Yorker, it always seems weird that a port city with as much cool stuff from all over would reject its diversity the way the Singaporean Chinese (the clearly dominant group) do. Maybe it’s because they are Chinese? Who knows.

    And like I said, once they move to London the attitude seems to change some. Not entirely sure why that is either, though I have a few guesses.

    If there’s someone around from Singapore who can give an insider’s view, have at it. I may not be entirely accurate in my own observations, lord knows, because like a lot of observations about culture there’s a bit of a Heisenberg effect going on.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 2:35 pm ¶

22. RChoudh wrote:

    I can definitely attest to the fact that there are a significant number of South Asians who would not like being associated with blackness. I am not trying to lump all South Asians together of course but I think due to sensitivity toward skin color, the influence of British colonialism, and the idea that we have to keep up this “model minority” status in America in order to be accepted by whites, South Asians unfortunately have an aversion to having any association with other minority groups like blacks and Latinos.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 2:57 pm ¶

23. RChoudh wrote:

    I would also to add in response to the poster who mentioned a generational divide, while I agree that divide has caused a slight change in attitudes, it hasn’t completed eliminated the bias felt towards other minorities unfortunately. Even though the younger generation may not have as much of a problem hanging out with other minorities groups and doing other casual things together, when it comes time for marriage especially the biases and pressure to conform internalized while growing up with prejudiced immigrant parents can rear their ugly heads. That’s why there is very little intermarriage happening between South Asians and other minorities in America as opposed to whites/other South Asians.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 3:09 pm ¶

24. Jamerican Muslimah wrote:

    @Lisa J, “he” is a she, lol. But yeah, I’m glad you understood my point.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 3:17 pm ¶

25. Kaonashi wrote:

    I would like to take a step back from the conversation and appreciate the fact that this man is magically delicious.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 5:14 pm ¶

26. Joseph wrote:

    @ Jess
    “You see how complicated this all gets?

    Anyhoo, the upshot is that Deaf Feminist Punk is right that the colonization makes a big difference and the way people work will depend heavily on what that experience was.

    All of which is to say I get real nervous about transposing any racial terms across countries, because the meaning is so different.”

    @Kandee
    “…the conflict always arises when it is explained that “Black” is a concept, and not an actual racial group, especially when seeing it globally rather than regionally. It’s hard for them to see outside what they’ve been told about themselves and that term. This is a perfect example of that concept.”

    Co-Sign. Quoted for truth.

    Around the world things are more complicated than just skin color. And thanks to colonialism (props to DFF) and immigration sometimes competing views of who is “Black” and who isn’t exist in the same space…and then change depending on generational attachment and assimilation to the cultural mainstream.

    Yeah. Can of worms.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 5:39 pm ¶

27. LaSmartOne wrote:

    There’s no such thing as “biological race”. Please, Racialicious, you should be beyond reifying this repeatedly discredited concept.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 6:34 pm ¶

28. Church of ShiskaBob wrote:

    This is incidental to the perceptions of race and ethnicity. But long time golf fans know that Vijay has a reputation for being arrogant, standoffish and even a jerk. I think this as much as anything else has hurt his marketability and popularity. Also, the reference to hypermasculinity is way off-base. Vijay does not have this image at all in the golf world. In fact, I can’t think of one golfer offhand that would have the label attached.

    That is not to say that race is not a factor. But let’s avoid the hyperbole whenever possible to do real justice to the subject.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 8:49 pm ¶

29. NancyP wrote:

    Well, he’s rude and a sexist pig, and furthermore he isn’t as attractive and as gracious as Tiger Woods. Maybe Vijay is sick of all the women paying attention to Tiger and not to him.

    I just figured that Vijay had some South Indian ancestors – I didn’t know he was from Fiji, which goes to show that NRIs are in lots of unexpected places.

    Jess, the NWFP Pakistanis ARE largely “primitive” if one judges by the ones that get into the news, the Talibani-influenced clans that kill women who dare to teach girl children, have honor codes where women who are raped in war are killed by their families after, a girl who requested marriage to a particular boy or man, not chosen by her father, was put to death by being buried alive along with her mother, aunt, and a few girl sibs and cousins who spoke up for the girl – all approved by the village jirga (assembly of males)…….you get the drift.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 9:44 pm ¶

30. Joseph wrote:

    @NancyP
    Slow your roll. It is not okay to refer to a discreet ethnic group as “primitive”…even if they adhere to practices you personally disagree with or even abhor. It’s racist and ethnocentric. And NOT okay.

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 10:02 pm ¶

31. Lisa J wrote:

    @Jamerican Muslimah
    Whoops, my bad girl. I should have read your name more carefully before commenting on a comment about you and put 1+1 together .

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 10:21 pm ¶

32. Cynthia wrote:

    Question: What does NWFP mean? Is it something like being “Fresh of the Boat/Plane”?

    Posted 06 Oct 2008 at 10:39 pm ¶

33. RChoudh wrote:

    NWFP refers to the NorthWest Frontier Province of Pakistan where currently alot of fighting is happening. This part of Pakistan has historically enjoyed autonomy and is mainly inhabited by the Pashtuns, who also inhabit Afghanistan.

    Posted 07 Oct 2008 at 8:49 am ¶

34. Jess wrote:

    Cynthia–

    NWFP = North West Frontier Province. It borders Afghanistan (along that thin strip you see on the map) and is separated from Afghanistan in the west by a thin strip called the FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas).

    Both areas are places where government control is pretty nominal. The Taliban have operated there, as have various armed militias.

    In any case, life there is pretty traditional. And poor. And the only way to make a living is to sell opium poppy. Or become a local warlord. Or both. There has been a long fight there between the Pakistani government, the Islamic militias, the local warlords, and on top of that you have the Talibani militias supported by elements in the Pakistani military and used to make trouble — it really is a mess.

    The terrain is pretty rugged. I would not want to be lost out there without some pretty hefty survival gear. It’s cold and dry or hot and dry. (Kind of like the badlands in South Dakota, come to think of it). If you like greenery this is not your ideal vacation. Mountains, on the other hand…

    NancyP –
    Calling anyone a “primitive” in that way is not ok. There are plenty of cultural practices I think should end — female genital cutting in Africa, for example, and the practice of honor killings in many Islamic countries, and the fundamentalist Mormon practice of imposing what amounts to sexual slavery on 13-year-old girls.

    But calling someone a primitive isn’t terribly helpful. And none of these things will end tomorrow. And all of them — even the most horrific — exist for a reason (even if it isn’t a good reason). So you have to ask “Why did this culture evolve that way? What were the influences? Take-aways from others they met? What did they reject? Why? Was there some survival value in it?” There usually is the latter.

    For instance, were I to try and address issues in Islamic countries such as Afghanistan or Pakistan, the first thing I would do is educate the women. It’s amazing the effect that has. Then offer a way for people to make a living besides trying to scratch a poor farm out of crappy soil. (It’s one reason they choose to grow opium–the stuff is a lot easier to cultivate than food is, and it sells for more, and farmers aren’t stupid).

    Stability helps too. No society can progress very far without any of that (please don’t get all over me over the definition of progress, I think we can all agree that going hungry and dying of disease and/or getting killed and raped by a local militiaman isn’t helpful to anybody).

    It’s easy to write off people in what we used to call the “Fourth World*” back in the day. But it’s still wrong.

    *Back in 1992, on the 500th anniversary of the Columbus voyage, a lot of folks were pushing to use the term “fourth world” to describe marginalized communities (usually indigenous) that were in both third-world and developed nations. The term third world has fallen out of use as the Cold War ended and fourth world never caught on, though I admit at the time I thought it described the situation pretty well. But a lot has happened since then, and the geopolitical situation has altered just a wee bit.

    And yes, I know why people here chafe a bit at the term third world. Historical perspective, please.

    Posted 07 Oct 2008 at 9:22 am ¶

35. Sobia wrote:

    @ NancyP:

    I can’t believe I just read what you wrote. I had to read it again to see if you did indeed say what you did. And I was shocked to see that you had. I cannot believe that you had the gall to generalize about a whole ethnic group of people. Based on media reports? C’mon lady! You should know better.

    I have family in the NWFP and am partly Pathan/Pashtun myself (the main ethnic group in the NWFP is Pathan/Pashtun). And although there are some tribal traditions among them, as there are among many ethnic groups in various parts of the world, to say something as ludicrous as calling them ALL primitive just shows your own prejudices and racism toward them.

    And not only that, you used instances that occurred in Balochistan, not in the NWFP (the burying alive of women). For f’s sake, if you want to smear a group of people at least be ethnically accurate about it! Or maybe you think we’re all the same.

    @ Jess:

    “In any case, life there is pretty traditional. And poor. And the only way to make a living is to sell opium poppy. Or become a local warlord. Or both.”

    My exposure to the culture has been of a rich and strong culture. The wealth levels in the NWFP are similar to those of Balochistan, Sindh, or Punjab (Pakistan’s other provinces). There are poor people there but there are also poor people in the US. Historically speaking the Pathans have probably been the most patriotic people in Pakistan. As a result of oppression from the federal government which resulted from America’s War on Terror (which is a War OF Terror in that region) many people in the region have now become more antagonistic toward to those who oppress and terrorize them. Who wouldn’t? AND the majority of the people in the NWFP support a secular government – not a religious one. The people in the region just want to be left alone. They don’t like the religious extremists nor do they like foreign interference.

    No doubt there are aspects of their culture which are misogynistic but to there are many aspects of Western culture which are also extremely misogynistic. This does not mean that we should not address the problems there, but misogyny cannot be tackled unless other issues are addressed as well. Also, we have to work within the culture, not try to make them more Western. This approach reeks of White and Western supremacy.

    And remember, we’re taking about Pakistan here. The opium industry is big in Afghanistan – not Pakistan. Please don’t conflate the two. (And I’m not even sure what you said is accurate about Afghanistan either).

    There ARE other ways to make a living in the NWFP. (Ugh! I can’t believe you insinuated that all we do is produce drugs and kill people to make money.) The vast majority of my family in the region is highly educated, and we’re not unique at all.

    And the terrain there is absolutely breathtaking. My family paints beautiful pictures of the NWFP they know. Yes, there are AREAS which are rugged but there are areas in British Columbia that are rugged as well where I would not be without “some pretty hefty survival gear.” I have not visited yet but God willing on my next visit to Pakistan I intend to go to the NWFP and connect with that part of my own heritage.

    And just one other defensive rant:

    Honour killings are not unique to Muslim countries. The practice is unfortunately just as common among Sikhs in India. India is not a Muslim country. Additionally, many feminists would argue that many women who are killed by their partners in Western countries could also be considered honour killings. And before we talk about how it is more “acceptable” there, we should examine how much the police and other authorities here support victims of intimate partner abuse. The findings are very discouraging.

    Man, the whole discussion about the NWFP is making me so uncomfortable. People seem to be having no trouble here generalizing about them and the region. But I suppose being partly Pathan myself and having close family from there makes me a little sensitive.

    Sorry if I came across as offensive. I just felt I needed to defend an ethnic group that was being unfairly portrayed and smeared.

    Posted 07 Oct 2008 at 10:52 am ¶

36. Jehanzeb wrote:

    WELL SAID SOBIA!

    @ NancyP

    Whoa, so people need to be “attractive” in order to be likable? I’m not going to defend Vijay’s sexist remarks, but what does his “attractiveness” have anything to do with this? Should we tell aspiring golf players that they should give it up if they are not “attractive” enough.

    Regarding your remarks about the NWFP: Are you encouraging people to base their knowledge and opinions about a certain group of people off the media? That’s GENERALIZING and STEREOTYPING.

    As Sobia pointed out, honor killings and stonings are regional practices. I’m sure we all remember when Dua Aswad Khalil was stoned to death by people of the Yazidi faith. These brutal acts are not reflective of the religions, but of the cultures.

    Just look at our news channels and look at how many brutal crimes and murders are committed every day. If a group of Pakistanis, for example, have never visited the United States before and all they know about Americans is through the news, imagine what they think of the U.S. What about all the school shootings like Columbine and Virginia Tech, or the Omaha mall shooting. How about the Amish school shooting in 2006 or the Church shooting in Missouri? What about the reports of so-called Catholic priests molesting their children, or the MOTHERS who drown their children or throw them off of bridges. What about the crime rate in Philadelphia, teenage pregnancies, pedophilia, domestic violence, and rape cases?

    This is directed to NancyP and Jesse: Have either of you ever been to the NWFP? We can’t be generalizing about an entire ethnic group of people — it doesn’t promote equality or even leave room for understanding. Those kind of comments stigmatize a group of people, and it also prevents you from seeing the larger picture, i.e. neighboring countries like India have practices of honor killings too. It also prevents you from seeing the positive aspects of culture, spirituality, and history (as often happens when we generalize and stereotype a group of people).

    Posted 07 Oct 2008 at 1:12 pm ¶

37. Joseph wrote:

    @Sobia
    Thanks for your thoughtful correction to some of the above nonsense.

    Posted 07 Oct 2008 at 1:27 pm ¶

38. Jess wrote:

    Sobia–

    I didn’t mean to come off as saying the culture isn’t rich or strong. But the instability, constant warfare spilling over from Afghanistan and from Kashmir and even (a while back) from the north as you get into Tajikstan made conditions there pretty shaky for a long time. Millions of Afghan refugees showed up in the 80s and there are still issues with that.

    The result is that the whole area becomes a major conduit for guns, drugs and militiamen who all have their separate agendas. And as I pointed out (I think) the behavior of the Pakistani military isn’t at all helpful. (In fact the Pakistani military is chock full of Islamic fundamentalists itself).

    And as I think I noted, there are practices in many cultures we might not like but you have to deal with them in context. See original post.

    As to referring to it as relatively poor, take a look at any of the reports from the UN or any of the NGOs and you see that NWFP and FATA have made big gains but that is relative to what was a worse situation before — but in some spots its still pretty bad. I would describe some parts as very wealthy (Peshawar) while outside of urban centers living standards drop off pretty rapidly. And there is a huge difference between the northern half of the NWFP and the southern. NWFP is one of those places that is rich in some resources but hasn’t done a stellar job of distributing that wealth.

    This has less to do with the culture of the Pathans (or Pashtuns) in NWFP and more, I think, to do with the conditions I mentioned earlier.

    In fact, the whole thrust of what I put up there was to say that calling them “primitives” was wrong, not to slur the Pathans.

    You’re not coming off as offensive, don’t worry.

    Posted 07 Oct 2008 at 1:39 pm ¶

39. Sobia wrote:

    @ Jess:

    Thank you for clarifying. I know the smearing was coming from NancyP, not you. That comment was directed at her more so. I was glad that yourself and Joseph actually called her out on her blatant racism. But was a little surprised no one else did. And I think that added to my discomfort.

    Posted 07 Oct 2008 at 2:28 pm ¶

40. Eric D wrote:

    Some of the posts here indicate that the posters are under the belief that the common preference with lighter skin in much of Asia is due to contact with Europeans. I have read on this subject, and in fact have Korean in-laws who confirm the same, which is that the traditional preference for light skin far pre-dates contact with Europeans and colonization. It appears to be rooted in classicism; specifically that people with darker skin were ‘common’ folks – laborers and field workers, while lighter skinned people were wealthier and of a higher class and therefore didnt have to survive by labor. In fact, if one goes beyond the most recent century or so, one would find the same preference for light skin among Europeans (no tanned skin craze in Elizabethan times), and for the same class-related reasons.

    Posted 07 Oct 2008 at 3:30 pm ¶

41. Brohammas wrote:

    40 posts so far and only two or maybe three, that I can tell, actually mention what he IS.

    Fiji is very much polynesian and not lacking in it’s own culture. We as Americans of all hues have a great knack for assumptions and an ignorance of anything outside our borders.

    Bula Vinaka Vijay!

    Posted 08 Oct 2008 at 6:34 am ¶

42. NCM wrote:

    @ DEAF FEMINIST PUNK

    “My best friend is a black guy, and I don’t look down at black people. I’m more comfortable around Blacks than I ever did around white people.”

    **YAWN** Black people hear this all the damn time. Why it needs to be said to PROVE your point I don’t know. “My best friend is black” it’s usually the thing said by non-blacks when you rumble them for making a derogatory comment.

    Being a born n raised Londoner never have I heard nor even seen it as accepted to refer to a south asian as black. NEVER. Not even Indians who out run us here in the UK. Luckily for you, you know some black people that are OK with you referring to yourself as black. You wouldn’t feel comfortable around my friends, because they’d let you know “honey you are not black” Brown skinned maybe, black (a common term to describe people of african decent) you are not.

    Our histories and present day experiences are something you have never had to go through nor will as a black person.

    Like Paul Mooney says “Everybody wants to be a n**** but nobody wants to be a n****”

    Wants the status but not contend with what black people have and continue to go through in society.

    Posted 08 Oct 2008 at 9:13 am ¶

43. Sobia wrote:

    @NCM:

    Brown skinned maybe? No, brown skinned definitely. I’m South Asian and many of us in North America refer to ourselves as “Brown.” In North America none of us, including non-South Asians, refer to South Asians as Black.

    I’m not going to speak on behalf of DFP because I disagreed with her initial comment. Many South Asians do look down upon Black people. It is an unfortunate occurrence which needs more attention within our community.

    However, DFP’s comment was not the first time I heard that South Asians were referred to as Black in the UK. I do research on South Asians and have come across academic articles which have mentioned the use of this label for South Asians. The researchers did not use it officially but rather their South Asian participants mentioned that White Britons would refer to them as Black.

    I don’t think this is an instance of South Asians wanting to be Black or referring to themselves as Black but rather of White Britons imposing the label on South Asians.

    Posted 08 Oct 2008 at 10:38 am ¶

44. Joseph wrote:

    @NCM
    That is hilarious. How can you be a black person without understanding how race works? “Blackness” is not decided by other black people–wherever you are in the world. It is decided by white people who need “blackness” to define themselves against.

    That means you (or your friends) don’t get to vote DFP (or anybody else) “Black/Not Black” based on your prejudices. The prejudices of white people are the only ones that matter in this equation.

    Put it this way. Go find yourself a white lady your Mom’s age and ask her if DFP is “Black.” But do yourself a favor: don’t ask her on an elevator.

    Posted 08 Oct 2008 at 11:22 am ¶

45. Jess wrote:

    @Brohammas–

    True that. He’s Fijian, and of south Asian descent, (right?) and there’s a whole other world that comes with that. And we should have mentioned it. Too often in discussions like this we get caught up in what we think should be, and forget to look at what the facts are.

    So, apologies.

    Posted 08 Oct 2008 at 6:15 pm ¶

46. bdsista wrote:

    Can we substitute Ignorant for Primitive? All that horrific violence done against women and children regardless of religion is ignorant and I get Nancy P’s point. Heck GW Bush and McCain are primitive, and Cheney is too!
    I am glad we are having some dialogue about Asian/Black colorism, its the elephant in the room and both my biracial (Black/Japanese) cousins married Black men. I don’t think they were EVER approached by any Asian men and they were both light, one with the long straight black hair and other with long black curly hair. Having been to Singapore, I found it very segregated and interesting. I will say the people were nice to me as a tourist (I’m African American) and were not condescending when I couldn’t buy many shoes (top size is a 9) or clothes (good luck with those plus sizes) in the department stores. The Indian area was da bomb! I got asked a LOT of questions about my ethnicity. Nobody had ever heard of MD, DC yes. The Arab District was Malaysian, and the other section was Chinatown. I generally classify Vijay as “my color, but not my kind.” Statement my Mother used to say.

    Posted 08 Oct 2008 at 9:40 pm ¶

47. Sobia wrote:

    @bdsista:

    “Can we substitute Ignorant for Primitive?”

    No, we cannot. How about we just not generalize?

    “All that horrific violence done against women and children regardless of religion is ignorant”

    How much is all that? I’m not trying to say it doesn’t happen. It does and it can be pretty bad, but done a little research in the area of violence against women in Canada, I can tell you it’s pretty horrific here too. The number of indigenous women who go missing all too often it seems (usually murdered) and no one taking it seriously – that’s pretty horrific. And I’ve only been exposed to a small portion of the work in the area.

    The idea of painting a whole culture as engaging in or condoning violence against women is not only inaccurate but just ripe grounds for racism and ethnocentrism. We can’t fight sexism with racism.

    Maybe this is why feminists of colour haven’t always appreciated the work of White feminists.

    Posted 08 Oct 2008 at 11:33 pm ¶

48. Don wrote:

    Bdsista Where does your Black/Asian/Japanese cousins live in the US. I would have looked at them? Do they look like Kimora Lee Simmons? I have a perception that single Black guys/African American are looking for light skin or black/attractive, white, Latin, Asian women . I am well aware of this situation in the black community and whether to date interracially or not, but I know the black comunity is not monolithic.
    I’m Asian Indonesian American and now I admit I get ruffled when I see a attractive Asian woman with a white guy. I am not against interracial dating/marriage. Some work and some do not. I guess you can see that in Barack Obama’s experience as he has a half-Indonesian/Asian sister Maya-Soetoro-Ng and a colorful family background.
    There was a news story out of Atlanta of the conviction of Indian father who made a contract hit on his black female daughter in law and he was convicted for life. The bad thing was his son decided to follow his father’s advice and marry an Indian woman, but I heard this guy does not want to do anything with his mixed daugher who is taken cared for by her black grand parents. I hope this in not indicative of the community, but like I said there is good and bad in all races, ethnicity, nationalities and religions.

    Posted 09 Oct 2008 at 1:37 am ¶

49. unknown wrote:

    You really cant consider someone as “Categorically Black” I mean seriously either they are black or there not. I can some what understand you reference about his background heritage, but at the same time has Fijian ever been consider as Black? In the meantime Black or Fijian he’s still a great player and thats one thing anyone should be ablt to agree on

    Posted 20 Dec 2008 at 11:14 pm ¶

50. T I wrote:

    Vijay Singh said he was black:

    http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E1DE1038F935A25754C0A9669C8B63&sec=&spon=&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

    Posted 16 Jan 2009 at 1:32 pm ¶