|
|
|
|
I've given a lot of thought to whether or not I really wanted to reply to the commentary started by the Mammy posting. My initial reaction was "I'm not opening more cans of worms there." The vast majority of you took it in the spirit in which it was meant, as a joke, and didn't seem to be offended by it. But there have been a lot of sub-topics opened up in the discussions that I think I can add to, and perhaps help other guys understand how this particular younger Southerner views the issue of race, and especially guys from other countries. There have been some comments made regarding the treatment of slaves, and other aspects of Southern history that deserve to have another viewpoint presented. I have taken time to give this matter a lot of thought. I've talked to Jon about it, and he felt a reply of some sort was needed.
Anyone who read the post I did, and who had ever watched Gone With The Wind immediately recognized the character of Mammy, as played by Hattie McDaniel. Throughout the movie, Mammy repeatedly scolds Miss Scarlett for her behavior and lack of ladylike decorum. Curtis is a Southern boy like Jon and I, and I knew he would understand the humor I was trying for when I "scolded" him in the style of a Southern mammy-type. The only character I could think of was Miss McDaniel's portrayal, and so I used that. Actually I thought I was being honest and open in posting the picture of Miss McDaniel in her costume and persona of Mammy, and what I wrote under her portrait was genuine and from my heart.
Was I putting words in Miss McDaniel's mouth? I really don't think so, and since she's been gone for fifty years, I think it's a dead issue. We see pictures of the Pope with balloons and captions of him saying all kinds of outrageous things, and we see pictures of the President and the Queen saying things they never said, and wouldn't dream of saying, but we see those as funny too. We don't worry about how Catholics and republicans and monarchists feel. So I don't understand how "Mammy" scolding a gay boy in fun can upset anyone. Do you get upset seeing black people on cereal boxes like "Rastus" on the Cream of Wheat carton? Or the "Aunt Jemima" on the pancake mix? Or how about "Uncle Ben" on the rice box? These are all "black stereotypes" who, like "mammy," have become American icons.
Let's be realistic here. Hattie McDaniel chose a career on the stage and in film knowing that the roles she would have would be stereotypically Negro for those days. But she chose to play those roles anyway. She could have refused the role of Mammy, but she decided to accept it, and it turned out to be an Academy Award winner for her. Having such a long theatrical career, from vaudeville through the stage and on to Hollywood, it is inconceivable that Miss McDaniel didn't know quite a few gay lads along the way. She is reputed to have had a broad sense of humor, and I honestly can't see her taking exception to my gentle parody of her lines from Gone With The Wind. Incidentally, if you remember the things she said in the movie, you'll know that what I wrote were nearly verbatim take-offs. Would Hattie McDaniel have been offended by "scolding a gay boy" and saying the lines I gave her? I don't think so.
So we come to the question of whether the things I wrote for "his Mammy" to say to "Massuh Curtis" were or are inflammatory to black people today. Well, I'm sure there are some blacks who would be offended. Just as there are some Catholics who are offended by pictures of the pope saying outrageous things, and just as there are Right Wing Christian Fundamentalists who would get offended if they saw the church signs we all had some fun with a while ago on this Forum. The dialect and speech patterns I used in the posting were from my own experience. Where I live, that's how black people of a certain age and educational level speak. I have had black teachers who slip and speak like that. I don't see how anyone can listen to the latest garbage black rappers spout, with all the obscenities and "cultural african-americanisms" and think that it is acceptable, while thinking my posting is "stereotyping black people." Black people stereotype themselves, just like poor white trash people stereotype themselves as racists by running around in sheets and pointy hats, and "elitist white Southern gentlemen" like me stereotype ourselves.
Am I insensitive? Am I a closet racist? I don't know. That's a hard thing to judge about yourself. Maybe if you knew more about "where I'm coming from" it would help understand my attitudes towards race relations, people of color, and Southern society in general. Timmy's friend was correct when he said that anything touching upon the issue of slavery immediately inflames the black population. As a race they need to preserve the idea that "they are victims" and anything that even hints that "the struggle" was anything less than catastrophic for black people as a whole is swiftly swept under the carpet. The myth seems to be that the Negroes were plucked out of this Nirvanah-like existance in Africa, hauled across the Atlantic and then whipped and bludgeoned and abused and half starved by maniacal and sadistic owners and overseers until they died, while their womenfolk were systematically raped and outraged and forced into a life less than that of a prostitute. The facts of the matter are somewhat different. Slavery was widely practiced in Africa, and the Negroes were sold to slavers by members of their own race, but of a different tribe. Yes, the transatlantic transport was a bit barbaric, but generally once here life settled down to a better existance than they knew in Africa. I know that's not politically correct to state that, but it's the truth. They were Stone Age people living a hunter-gatherer life, and at least in this country, as slaves, they were taken care of. Another greatly unpopular fact is that large numbers of free Negroes in the Southern states owned slaves of their own, as did large numbers of Native Americans. There was money to be made in plantation agriculture, and free blacks and American Indians wanted a piece of the pie like everyone else. Unfortunately, plantation agriculture was labor intensive, and the profits were realized because the labor was "free." But was it free? I explain this in a few paragraphs down.
We are a British family, originally from Yorkshire. There have always been a majority of us with blond hair and blue eyes, and my father insists it's because we were probably Danish, and got to England via one of the numerous Viking invasions. We've always married into English families, once or twice into Swiss families from down New Bern way, and even a few times into Jon's family, making him not only my best friend, and my boyfriend, but a second or third cousin too. I grew up with a firm sense of who I am, where my family came from, our history and perhaps a slight or not-so-slight sense of entitlement and superiority.
My family were slaveholders, Jon's family were slaveholders, and Curtis told me his family were slaveholders. I go to school with people who are black, and two or three have the same surname as I do, and it's an unspoken truth that "my people owned their people." It doesn't confer any special status on me, and it doesn't demean them. It's just the way things are in the South. It's the way things always have been. My family owned slaves from 1710 until 1865, and that's a long time. I wish I could say "I have black friends," but I can't. I have black acquaintances, and I treat everyone with dignity and respect, but I don't have any close friends who are black. We no longer live in a society that is officially and legally segregated according to a person's race and I believe that is a good thing. But yet, but yet we do. In some ways Southern society today is more stratified than it was during segregation times. It's a hard thing to understand much less put into words. There is still, in the South, the idea that "we are happier with our own kind." It isn't just a black and white issue either, but an economic one too. People tend to stay with people like themselves. I just would never think of asking my parents, much less my grandparents, to entertain black people in their home. Jon's family is different in that regard. His father is a physician, and because of his professional associations has all types of people at parties and gatherings. Indians, Pakastanis, Chinese, Nigerians, it's like the United Nations there sometimes. I accept that I live in a plural society, but "they" are over their with "their" cultural heritage and "we" are over here with "ours." Neither Jon or I or any of our friends "sag" our pants, we don't greet each other with "Hey, ma nigga" and we don't listen to rap or urban or gangsta music. We acknowledge that "they" are entitled to "their" culture, but we prefer our own, thanks just the same.
Because of my family and my heritage, I believe that I have a different perspective on the South's "Peculiar Institution" of slavery. I believe with all my heart and mind that slavery was an evil from which this county might never fully recover. This is the viewpoint held by all persons of breeding and education in the South, and was a viewpoint largely held even before The War for Southern Independence. Robert E. Lee, our great military leader wrote to his wife in 1856 that slavery was a moral and political evil, but that he could see no practical way to end it. The trouble was that by 1860 and the secession crisis that precipitated the conflict, the institution of slavery was so neccessary for the continuance of the national life of the South we couldn't see any way beyond it. In retrospect of course wiser and cooler heads should have been able to work out some form of paid abolision of slavery, and the return of the majority of the slave population to Africa. I also belive that with the advances in mechanization in agriculture, and the development of agricultural technologies, slavery would have died out on it's own by the turn of the twentieth century. I know this is all a little simplistic, and the questions are large and complex, but I don't have the time to write a textbook on sectionalism, the economics of slavery, and the Civil War.
In the antebellum period, and continuing to this day, various stereotypes arose about white slaveholders that are largely incorrect and sensationalistic. Were there abuses of slaves? Of course. Slavery was a human institution, and human institutions are prone to abuses. There were and are abuses in Congress, the White House, Parliament, the churches. The Abolisionist press in the immediate antebellum years concentrated on "worst cases" and outright fabrications to inflame Northern and European public opinion about slavery. The stereotype of the slaveowner as a ravening beast with a whip in one hand and a bottle of bourbon in the other, lusting over nubile young slave girls certainly did happen, but it was certainly not the norm.
In one posting Timmy wrote that slaves were "abused" while they were slaves. Some slaves were certainly abused. I'm sure there were slaveowners who were fools, or sadists or both. I'm sure that there were slaveowners who forced their female slaves to have sexual relations with them, and mullatto children listed in the slave rolls attests to this, but I don't believe it was as common as is believed.
But I'd like to point out one very important fact that people tend to lose sight of in all the anti-slavery propaganda, and when they see horrific pictures of the scared backs of a few mutinous and rebellious slaves.
Slaves were VERY expensive.
And I don't mean a little expensive. I mean for the times they were major capital investments. Only a fool would mistreat a piece of personal property that cost what a slave cost or was worth. To give you an example from my personal knowledge, the last slaves bought by my family were purchased in 1857. A "23 year old Negro Woman a Midwife and general Nurse and Good with Children" cost $750.00, and "a 26 year old Negro man a good Carpenter and Cooper and together with his Son of 4 yrs." cost $2000.00 together. The man's wife and infant daughter had died during childbirth and my g-g-g-great grandfather couldn't bear to separate them, so he bought them both. Using standard U.S. Government inflation tables these slaves cost $16,250.00 and $43,317.00 in today's Dollars. If you had that level of investment in personal Negro property, would you abuse them? Of course not. Beating a slave would be like taking a sledge hammer to a Lexus. In 1865 when the last records of slaves were kept, our family owned 45 people. I took into account that there were seven household slaves (like mammy) and the rest were outside hands. I estimated that the AVERAGE value of a slave was $1000.00 in 1865 so it comes to $45,000.00 more or less. Now that translates into $990,000.00 in todays currency. Let's just say a million dollars and be done with it. Also for the record, I personally consider that figure to be the amount the Federal Government illegally and unconstitutionally stole from my family through the Emancipation Proclimation of 1862. Jon did a quick calculation, and he believes the figure for his family's slaves in today's currency is about two and a half MILLION dollars.
I would also like to point out that those 45 persons were the TOTAL number of slaves, and included "slaves too old to work" and "children not yet in the fields or otherwise employed." So the costs of slave ownership not only included the purchase price, but for slaves born on the plantation six or seven years of idleness before they could be used as labor, and perhaps twice that length of time after they grew too old for labor. Slaveowners were legally obligated, and we felt morally obligated, to care for slaves after their working life was over even though the slaves were not saleable.
It is a fact that slaves were disciplined. Most slaveowners, my family included, viewed their slaves like children who needed a firm hand and guidence in addition to care and feeding and clothing and housing. In the 155 years of our slave ownership, there are four recorded instances where slaves were lashed. I'm sure there were more, but for some strange reason the records begin at 1781 for slave infractions. In 1787 a male slave named Peter received five lashes for "stealing the Property of another Slave and also his Knife," in 1809 one male slave named Shem received five lashes "for stealing My Horse Nola and riding to see his Paramour at -------'s farm and for being ther four Days and for causing me great Trouble," in 1817 one slave named Toby received twenty lashes "for the Murder and killing by a Knife of my Slave Uriah and I did allow Uriahs brother the whipping" and it is recorded that the whipping was "particular dreadful and terrible the mans Wife wailing and screaming and the others rolling their Eyes and shrieking," and in 1836 one slave named Elisha received ten lashes "for running away and for causing Me the expense of having him captured and also for his Return." On our properties most slave discipline was done by the slave being put into stocks, just like you see in places like Williamsburg, or in a sort of small prison building and being placed on short rations for a time. It is ironic that on our farms the punishments given slaves were less severe than the punishments commonly given white people through the courts for the same crimes.
While slave marriages were not considered legal and slaveowners were under no legal obligation to keep families together, there is no recorded instance of my family ever selling slaves where the sale would break up a recognized family unit. It was a known fact of slave economics that having a "wife" and a "family" kept the slaves docile and relatively happy, and slave men, who were the majority of "runners," were less likely to try to escape from the farm and thus abandon their loved ones if they were in a family relationship. Slave women who were pregnant were allowed light work before and after their delivery, slave births on our farms were always attended by a Negro or white midwife, the mistress of the plantation, and a white doctor if needed. Slaves were valuable, and were treated as such.
A statement was also made that when the slaves were freed, they were let go with nothing more than the skills they had managed to aquire while in bondage. These skills I would beg to point out were frequently better than the skills of the white population, who at the time were largely illiterate and unskilled themselves. The majority of slaves actually refused to leave the plantations after emancipation since they had no other homes, and were fearful of change. Our slaves went from being slaves to being sharecroppers, and then got confused when our family stopped feeding, clothing, and housing them. They had to be educated about having money, and how to save and buy things for themselves. Eventually it worked out, and it worked out because families like Jon's and Curtis's and mine accepted their responsibilities.
If you are interested, there are three books I would like to reccommend. Black Slave Owners: Free Black Slave Masters in South Carolina, 1790-1860 by Larry Koger; Time On The Cross: The Economics of American Negro Slavery by Robert W. Fogel and Stanley L. Engleman, which is perhaps the best and most objective study of the subject ever written; and Without Consent or Contract: The Rise and Fall of American Slavery, also by Fogel. I have used all of them at various times and in various classes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cameron
|
 |
Toe is in the water |
Registered: January 2008
Messages: 70
|
|
|
I think that perspective needed to be heard and I totally agree with you. It was very well presented, too.
Thank you Eldon, I could not have said it as well, myself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JimB
|
 |
Likes it here |
Registered: December 2006
Messages: 349
|
|
|
... for sharing your thoughts with us. I found them very interesting, enlightening and educational. I'm glad you decided to post your reply and hope that you are too.
JimB
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Donny, a lot of people only know the propaganda the north put out and the things used to stir up the black population. We have records of Tenant farmers who owned one or two slaves. The farmer and the slaves worked the fields and lived in the same houses. It was a mater of servival and producing a salable crop. Yes I agree slavery was wrong, but it wasnt the brutal institution that it has been made out to be. I have aquaintances who are black and one of my grandpas tenant farm families is black. I do not hange out with black boys tho. Our culture is different. People in the north have a skewed view of people in the south. They think we are all raciest. Yes there is racism here, but it is out in the open when you run into it. Up north the racest hide it and only act out in the dark. I had a black boy from Boston tell me one time that at least in the south you know who your enemy is, cause up north you might not find out till it is too late.
Sweet dreams till sunbeams find you......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That must have taken you quite some time to put together. I enjoyed reading it and learned a lot. Thank you for saying it because it needed to be said.
If it weren't so very off-topic I would write something about how my people treated slaves when they had slaves - 2000 years ago.
J F R
The paradox has often been noted that the United States, founded in secularism, is now the most religiose country in Christendom, while England, with an established church headed by its constitutional monarch, is among the least. (Richard Dawkins, 2006)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
I have learnt a very great deal about a world I only knew by reputation. From the economics I can see that some of the stereotypes about slaveholders are also warped.
You will know that I started the thread in order to have just such calm and reasoned discussion, but this treatise is beyond my hopes.
You are a sample of one family and if that sample translates to other families, to the majority of slaveholder families (and I have neither reason to believe that it does nor that it doesn't), then possibly the greatest wrong is done by those who perpetuate the "Being a slave was so terrible and black people were badly treated" viewpoint, because it can be argued that it is they who have caused the oppression of, rather than the (non optional) employment of black people.
I cannot see that your family is unique, simply because good people are more common than bad people. But good people are not newsworthy, nor do they fuel campaigns for abolition.
So where does that leave your post?
For me it is good background, excellent background. I never felt your post needed justification, and I took it at face value, as a parody of a genuinely loved stereotype. My cultural background prevents me from seeing the post differently with or without the background.
"Mammy" existed in life and on screen. Hattie McDaniel was a fiercely proud black lady. Her award acceptance speech talks about being "a credit to my race." And no, she doesn't, didn't, speak like Mammy. I can't see how it demeaned her then and I can't see how it demeans black folk now.
That doesn't mean that some black folk won't feel demeaned by a direct parody. I am seriously tempted to suggest to them that they "get over it" and treat it as humour that is directly relevant to them and can enhance them. Just imagine how empowering the history of slavery could be if your example is genuinely capable of generalisation.
I'm glad that you replied
[Updated on: Thu, 31 January 2008 08:57]
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you, Eldon, for introducing such common sense. It was also interesting to read.
Hugs
Nigel
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
 |
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
Eldon, thanks for posting this, it does give me somewhat of a better perspective. I want you to understand that my comments weren't directed to you personally. It was the effect of the parody i was commenting to.
The entire situation is hard to deal with. But it is a legacy that we all try to live down. The black people here in my area are mostly from southern Mississippi, the Jackson area to be specific. I know a great many of the moms and grandmoms from a part time evening job I once had as a closing manager at a supermarket that carried a large variety of smoked meats and ethnically oriented foods. I like these ladies and I respect them and they inturn showed me the same... Holidays when working at the store always brought the tastiest plates of yummy food... and i learned quickly to allow the fridge to go a little lean the week before a major holiday,,,
To this day, some 10 years later, when we meet on the street we stop and talk... I see many of their children in college and even some of the ladies as well...
Eldon, I have to be honest here. And I am by no means attacking you... when i see jokes or parodies that could hurt their feelings, it hurts my feelings... I know fully that you hold no malice in you... We have talked enough for me to know you well enough to be confident in that knowledge...
When at school, sometimes there are "gay" jokes or parodies... when i hear them I am hurt deeply... am I being too sensitive if i get upset over so trivial a thing? or in reality, is it not so trivial?
I hope I expressed myself as well as i intended to...
Marc
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benji
|
|
Likes it here |
Location: USA
Registered: August 2007
Messages: 297
|
|
|
Brutally honest, and yet a well written piece Eldon!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
saben
|
 |
On fire! |
Registered: May 2003
Messages: 1537
|
|
|
Marc, I think it's a little of both. I think sometimes a joke isn't trivial and sometimes it is. Sometimes it reflect ignorance, sometimes prejudice, sometimes just a reflection of a situation with no value judgement.
When an American talks about "throwing a shrimp on the barbie" to me, it's a totally inaccurate stereotype. Australia, in the cities, is an extremely urban, sophisticated and multicultural place. Even "country folk" are a far cry from Steve Irwin and Paul Hogan. Do such stereotypes, jokes and parodies hurt? Not especially, though they do often reflect the ignorance of the speaker. It would be offensive to me to be thought of as a country bumpkin if I let it get to me, but I don't.
I understand that as an Australian I face little discrimination because of my Australian nationality. So black jokes, gay jokes, etc can touch on more sensitive spots. But essentially it is the same thing... Someone picks out a quality or trait and parodies it.
Of course, some jokes are entirely different. "The only good fag is a dead fag", "Why did an aboriginal cross the road? He was running from the cops." stuff like that is inappropriate as it assigns a highly negative characteristic or opinion to a group. But Eldon wasn't making a value judgement, he was merely parodying a way of speech. Sometimes I talk with a lisp to parody other gay guys- even though it isn't how I, as a gay guy, speak!
Look at this tree. I cannot make it blossom when it suits me nor make it bear fruit before its time [...] No matter what you do, that seed will grow to be a peach tree. You may wish for an apple or an orange, but you will get a peach.
Master Oogway
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
saben
|
|
On fire! |
Registered: May 2003
Messages: 1537
|
|
|
I don't think you can say "they had better lives as slaves" when it wasn't an agreement they entered into voluntarily. That's the same argument used for The Stolen Generation in Australia, where tribal aboriginal children were taken from their families and put in white Christian run missions so they could integrate into "civilised" society...
Slavery is a total violation of liberty, it is never justified. Taking someone from their lands and their people and putting them into a different situation, even a better situation, is not your decision to make it is theirs if they wish to voluntarily enter into such an agreement.
I do think that slave owners were likely unfairly demonised. As you say, such a large investment wasn't something to throw away. The actual circumstances of slavery were probably quite decent, but to me it is the moral argument behind it.
As you say, there were some in the South that admitted the immorality of slavery but couldn't see how abolition should come about. I think that the North forcing their laws onto the South was as much a violation of freedom as the taking of slaves in the first place. And the same thing happens nowadays- people look to suppress freedom of speech which is a greater violation of rights as any harmful speech that might be uttered.
I think your parody was in good taste, Eldon. Though, even a parody in bad taste would deserve to be protected as free speech.
I think there's a lot of hypersensitivity about some words and at times over political correctness.
Offtopic but kind of not: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2DxyAGzGxM Bit of bad language, so not work safe.
Look at this tree. I cannot make it blossom when it suits me nor make it bear fruit before its time [...] No matter what you do, that seed will grow to be a peach tree. You may wish for an apple or an orange, but you will get a peach.
Master Oogway
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
I think one might suggest "Better economic lives" or "better quality of life". Remember these were people who had already lost a battle with other tribes and were being sold on as profit.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know when or if ever this country will really come to grips with racial issues. The sad fact is that, as Eldon eloquently points out, we are two entirely different cultures here in the United States. Except for professional or other rare reasons, we rarely mix together. And all this despite the strides that we've taken in desegregation and racial integration. I don't think we can place any sort of blame here - we are simply two distinct cultures. We try to pretend that America is this big melding pot but it really isn't. In the bigger cities you see people living in neighborhoods of their own ethnic backgrounds. We have Italian, Chinese, Polish, Irish, black and ever other sort of community you can think of. We tend to segregate along other lines as well. We have Muslim communities now too. And of course we've always segregated ourselves based on economic class. There are welfare, working poor, lower-middle, middle class and professionals segregating themselves as well. And I don't think these are just American issues either. Somehow these are issues that seem to be human and fit our desire to 'fit in' and be a part of others that we identify with. These separate communities exist in UK cities as well.
Blacks 'do' speak differently here. Northern blacks speak differently than Southern blacks but it is still a distinctive 'black' speech. Perhaps it's a sense of pride or identity in developing their own, distinctive style of communicating with one another. I'm not a sociologist and can't tell you why it exists; it simply exists.
Hugs to you Eldon. And though you didn't owe anyone an explanation, I thank you for your honest and reasoned answer. We all know that history belongs to the victor, and for that reason alone we can understand that the Southern viewpoint would have been much maligned. Thank you for the viewpoint from the 'other side' as it were.
Youth crisis hot-line 866-488-7386, 24 hr (U.S.A.)
There are people who want to help you cope with being you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
saben
|
|
On fire! |
Registered: May 2003
Messages: 1537
|
|
|
It is partially a US issue, Australia has fairly minimal second generation ghettoisation. First generation immigrants may not speak English, but their children do and their children integrate and end up as Aussie as the next person. In Melbourne and Sydney at least.
Aboriginals are still marginalised, but Greek, Italian, Chinese, Vietnamese, Jewish all seem to integrate pretty seamlessly. I guess it might just be easier in a smaller country?
Look at this tree. I cannot make it blossom when it suits me nor make it bear fruit before its time [...] No matter what you do, that seed will grow to be a peach tree. You may wish for an apple or an orange, but you will get a peach.
Master Oogway
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JL
|
 |
Getting started |
Location: US
Registered: December 2004
Messages: 24
|
|
|
O.K. I'm just gonna go head, say my piece and peace out.
I don't see how anyone can listen to the latest garbage black rappers spout, with all the obscenities and "cultural african-americanisms" and think that it is acceptable, while thinking my posting is "stereotyping black people."
First, rap is no more substance-less (or no less substance-filled depending on your perspective) than any other popular music. Second, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here; I'm not sure how my tastes in music affect my ability to evaluate the validity of your post.
I will never, ever speak against stereotyping. Mentally grouping people according to a defining characteristic is a result of man's pattern-finding nature. It's impossible not to do. I will, however, protest allowing these stereotypes' impeding one's judgment.
Timmy's friend was correct when he said that anything touching upon the issue of slavery immediately inflames the black population. As a race they need to preserve the idea that "they are victims" and anything that even hints that "the struggle" was anything less than catastrophic for black people as a whole is swiftly swept under the carpet.
The tone of this whole paragraph (and much of what follows) just screams racist/bigot/prejudice to me. I have a hard time seeing how was slavery not catastrophic for blacks. It seems to be what introduced segregation, and was the catalyst for many of the problems black people face today.
(By the way, I'm not really sure why you started referring to blacks as "Negroes" in this paragraph, but it's really not an okay thing to do. You clearly weren't joking here, there were no sarcastic/mood-lightening quotes around it, nothing. Please don't use this word.)
Yes, the transatlantic transport was a bit barbaric, but generally once here life settled down to a better existance than they knew in Africa. I know that's not politically correct to state that, but it's the truth. They were Stone Age people living a hunter-gatherer life, and at least in this country, as slaves, they were taken care of.
Who are you to say that their lives here were better? A life of freedom is preferable to a life of enslavement. Period.
They were not "Stone Age." Africans had very sophisticated social and governmental systems. There was no need for a writing system--though I think there's evidence that some groups may have written--and the land was unsuitable for farming (and still is without heavy usage of fertilizers).
As far as blacks and Native Americans owning slaves goes, I've never heard this before, but that doesn't make it untrue. You seem to mention this as a way to justify the owning of slaves. Just because Africans were the original owners of many slaves in the Americas, and just because freed slaves "wanted a piece of the pie" doesn't make it okay that it happened.
I wish I could say "I have black friends," but I can't. I have black acquaintances, and I treat everyone with dignity and respect, but I don't have any close friends who are black.
No offense intended, but since you have no black friends, I'm wondering where your insight into black culture comes from. You don't really socialize with black people, you don't listen to rap, you don't watch black movies/TV shows (again, an assumption), so how can you say with certainty how black people view the world?
I just would never think of asking my parents, much less my grandparents, to entertain black people in their home. ... I accept that I live in a plural society, but "they" are over their with "their" cultural heritage and "we" are over here with "ours."
You probably have more in common with the average black person (of similar economic status) than you think. Both your cultures are probably American first, and Caucasian or black second.
Neither Jon or I or any of our friends "sag" our pants, we don't greet each other with "Hey, ma nigga" and we don't listen to rap or urban or gangsta music. We acknowledge that "they" are entitled to "their" culture, but we prefer our own, thanks just the same.
Pants sagging is becoming less and less fashionable in the north; I don't think I've never heard a black person greet another black person with "hey, ma nigga"; and listening to rap/urban/gangsta music is no longer a "black-only" phenomenon. 50 Cent didn't get where he is by appealing to a single group of people.
Black is the new... black. Black culture as a whole has become "cool" recently, so I find it interesting that you, as a middle-class, American, white male think your culture is completely separate from black culture.
I don't really have much to say about the rest of your post because it's entirely about slavery and a culture to which I am not really connected.
Anyway, that's about it. Hopefully I wasn't too much of a jerk.
JL
[Updated on: Fri, 01 February 2008 03:48] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
Now this is challenging. I appreciate that you have strong feelings, and I appreciate that you would like them heard. The challenge I have is that the tone you have picked, perhaps without noticing, is combative.
I think you could get your point across without phrases attacking the person whose views you disagree with. Deal with the views, please, never the person.
I'd appreciate it if you went back in and made some good edits to alter the tone of the post without diluting your strongly held views
[Updated on: Fri, 01 February 2008 07:51]
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JL wrote: >By the way, I'm not really sure why you started referring to blacks as "Negroes" in this paragraph, but it's really not an okay thing to do.<
I may not have caught up with the latest PC fashion in linguistics, but what's wrong with referring to Negroes as Negroes? After all they are not the only blacks in the world - Polynesians, Aboriginals and some Asians can be pretty black too.
Hugs
N
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously JL you are from up north and believe all the hype you hear about how racist the south is. In reality the north is more racest than the south. IN the south its out in the open and up north its hidden. You obviously believe all the hype about the supression of the black man. All the hype is perpetuated by the oganizations that have to promote racial hate in order to justify their existance.
You need to read the books Eldon listed and do some serious studying. The black enslaved their own kind in Africa and its was the blacks that sold other blacks to the white slave dealers. IM not saying the white man was right but lets be sure and put all the blame where it belongs.
Even today the blacks are busy killing each other off in Africa. Africa has produced such wonderful people as the president of Uganda who not only supressed his own people he was a cannable who ate them. Im told that africa had a great civilization and a wonderful city called Timbuktu. Thats a bunch of bull. Timbuktu was a great trade city and was founded by Greeks and run By Greeks.
YOur right JL we dont listen to Rap, one cause it promotes violence and two its not music. Cultural Heratige? If we embraced black heritage this country would cease to exist. It would become tribal states waring with each other constantly.
Because we dont hobb nobb with blacks doesnt mean were prejudice. It mearly means we have nothing in common. If your under the assumption that we are all the same then you are sorely misguided.
A black person should have the same oportunities as a white man or hispanic, or Asian. Everyone should follow the same social rules and laws of the country they live in. But we are not the same.
Sweet dreams till sunbeams find you......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JL
|
|
Getting started |
Location: US
Registered: December 2004
Messages: 24
|
|
|
Not a problem at all. I'll edit it right now.
Though I'm sure I don't need to ask you this, would you mind letting me know if the edited version is better?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JL
|
|
Getting started |
Location: US
Registered: December 2004
Messages: 24
|
|
|
I actually didn't realize people used it in other parts of the world. In the (northern) United States, Negro's a bit of a throwback to segregation. It's nowhere near as bad as the official "n word," but it's considered a very outdated and disrespectful way to refer to black people. Or at least that's how I see it.
Honest (ignorant?) question: Are those other people you listed (Polynesians, Aboriginals, Asians, etc.) considered black? Like, is that how they refer to themselves? Or do they prefer the terms you listed?
JL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JL
|
|
Getting started |
Location: US
Registered: December 2004
Messages: 24
|
|
|
Obviously JL you are from up north and believe all the hype you hear about how racist the south is. In reality the north is more racest than the south. IN the south its out in the open and up north its hidden. You obviously believe all the hype about the supression of the black man. All the hype is perpetuated by the oganizations that have to promote racial hate in order to justify their existance.
The north is no more or less racist than the south, I think the racism is just perpetuated differently. I'm from one of the most segregated areas in the United States (though I'm not exactly sure how they determine this). I don't believe in the suppression of the black man, I think that black people tend to be oppressed nowadays more because of socio-economic status rather than race (though race may sometimes/often factor into it). I actually meant to say that in my post, but deleted it.
I don't think the hype is perpetuated by such organizations, though I must admit I'm not really sure which ones you're referring to.
You need to read the books Eldon listed and do some serious studying. The black enslaved their own kind in Africa and its was the blacks that sold other blacks to the white slave dealers. IM not saying the white man was right but lets be sure and put all the blame where it belongs.
This was another thing that was in my post originally and I removed it later. I definitely know that slaves were owned and sold by other Africans and really did mean to include this.
Even today the blacks are busy killing each other off in Africa. Africa has produced such wonderful people as the president of Uganda who not only supressed his own people he was a cannable who ate them.
Every time, place, race, culture, religion, etc. has had their share of bad leaders. Africa is by no means the exception in this regard. Additionally, Africa is a very large continent, I'd be careful in making generalizations about the entire continent.
As far as the "blacks... busy killing each other off", whites have done the same in central/eastern Europe. Former Yugoslavia is what came to mind the quickest, but I'm sure there are other relevant examples.
YOur right JL we dont listen to Rap, one cause it promotes violence and two its not music. Cultural Heratige? If we embraced black heritage this country would cease to exist. It would become tribal states waring with each other constantly.
Not all rap promotes violence, in fact, much of it does not. Why do you say it's not music? What makes it less musical than pop or opera?
I don't really understand what you mean with this second part. Black culture is not primitive (no culture is), if that's what you're suggesting.
Because we dont hobb nobb with blacks doesnt mean were prejudice. It mearly means we have nothing in common. If your under the assumption that we are all the same then you are sorely misguided.
How can you generalize about an entire, extremely large and diverse group of people like this? I don't think "we're all the same" but I stand by what i said about there being significant, important and relevant similarities between people of the same economic status; similarities that override differences in skin color.
A black person should have the same oportunities as a white man or hispanic, or Asian. Everyone should follow the same social rules and laws of the country they live in. But we are not the same.
What are the differences?
JL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
Thank you. I think it retains its impact and pretty much removes personality.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
It's strange. The root of "Negro" is the word "black". I have no idea if the other folks mentioned are "black" or not. I simply see them as distinct ethnic groups.
We allowed thye term "Negro" to fall by the wayside here, ony because it became inappropriate as we "realised" that Africa had nations! But those nations are pretty much illusory, and we now seem to have to use tribe names. Look at Kenya, Ethiopia, or Rwanda, for example.
If we look at Africa, the population there does black people everywhere a huge disservice currently. That ranges from megalomaniacs like Mugabe to a kid in the Rift Valley with a machete.
Perhaps Obama's campaign will allow a sense of self respect and better self image in the USA.
Here in the UK we do have racism. We have the British National Party - much despised - but we also have genuine equal opportunities for all our citizens, if they wish to take it. As an example, I am off shortly to spend a day working with one of my business partners, a Nigerian chap. He says he makes use of being black, and sees it as a huge advantage over white folks in business.
And he's perfectly capable of being a stereotype himself! He made a load of cash in Italy as a "Black Break Dancer" while also being a management consultant in the daytime!
I must ask him if it ever comes up what he thinks about the term "Negro". It's just that racial things never come up at work, the same way as sexuality.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I can't answer the question, JL. I come from a normal family in the UK that tries to avoid the PC fashions emanating from our capital and government, normal families who are condemned by the vociferous publicists as soon as they open their mouths.
Racism in this country is a major industry with all the interested parties associated with an industry. I am sure that if we were left alone to get on with our lives there would be far more racial harmony. After all, people are just human beings until someone comes along and points out there is a difference.
I am interested in the devaluation of language. I now learn that Negro is a non PC word. At the rate we are going on Black will in turn become non PC and be replaced by another term.
Do I sound sceptical or cynical? (Rhetorical question.)
Hugs
N
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nigel wrote:
> I may not have caught up with the latest PC fashion in linguistics, but what's wrong with referring to Negroes as Negroes? After all they are not the only blacks in the world - Polynesians, Aboriginals and some Asians can be pretty black too.
Referring to ANY group by a term that they in general find offensive - whatever the reason they do find it offensive - is simply grossly impolite.
I have no idea what people identify as in the USA - the terms here are very different from those currently accepted in the UK. One Black British guy I know has had the unnerving experience of being called an "African-American" by an over-zealous US Immigration Officer!
I think it's entirely reasonable to try to avoid offending people by trying to avoid words that have a historic weight of persecution and prejudice behind them. I'm none too keen on being called "homosexual", "invert", or "nancy-boy", for example. None of these words were orginally perjorative, but they are currently seen as such by most of us!
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What are the differences?
I don't know, I can't put into words right now all the things I've got swirling around in my head about all this. But white people regard black people as different. North, south, east, west, gay, straight, white people in their hearts think black people are inferior. I'm sorry. I hate myself for feeling like this. Every ounce of common sense I have tells me this is the wrong thing to believe. And if you think white people are racist, you should hear what the Asian kids in school say about black kids!
I want you to know JL that I'm not angry or upset by what you posted and there is no need to rewrite anything on my account. In a way, you did me a great service by holding up a mirror and making me look into it.
I'm a racist. There it is. I can associate with black kids on the athletic fields, in school and in general society, but not in my social life. Yes, I'm educated enough to change, but I see no reason to change. I would never, ever advocate a return to segregation or the old days but like I wrote, I feel better with them "over there" and us "over here."
I'm in homeroom now, so I can't finish this, but I will give more thought to what I want to say.
Sorry about the use of the work Negro. I was trying to be polite. I don't know what black people want to be called anymore. They've gone from colored people, to Negro, to black, to persons of color, back to black...
Well, I'm colored too. I'm pink. In the summers parts of me get to be this copper color, and the hair on my legs goes from light brown to blond, so I am not only colored, but I change colors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
saben
|
|
On fire! |
Registered: May 2003
Messages: 1537
|
|
|
What do you prefer to be called:
A fag?
A gay (noun)?
Gay (adjective)?
A queer (noun)?
Queer (adjective)?
A homosexual?
Homosexual?
Same-sex attracted?
Different people prefer different terms. Recently a lot of University groups are calling themselves "queer". I find that word quite offensive myself, queer to me means "abnormal", I think I'm normal, but different.
Similarly some blacks like to be called black, some like to be called African-American (doesn't really work for British Africans, however...) some may like to be called Negro and some may use the term nigger.
It is hard to know the right term to use.... But there are some obviously offensive terms... much like "fag" is almost exclusively negative, I'd put it in the same category as "nigger".
Negro I'd compare to "queer" by and large it is offensive, but some groups are trying to reclaim it.
I think that adjectives- "a gay man", "a queer person", "a homosexual boy", etc are far less offensive than nouns- "a gay", "a queer", "a homosexual", "a fag".
Similarly the more appropriate words to use with black people would be adjectives. To say "black people" has a much kinder tone than "blacks", even saying "a negro man" would be far less offensive than "a negro", even if the former is still considered offensive.
Adjectives are descriptive words but they don't say what we ARE, they merely mention our traits. Once you use a noun you are making a definitive statement about us which can often be taken as stereotyping and prejudice. It's a subtle, yet important difference, I think.
As for changing racism, Eldon, spending some time in an Asian country would help. I lived in Japan for 18 months and it taught me what it's like to be on the other side of racism. People speak to you as if you are dumb, say "I don't speak English" to you, even when you have been speaking to them in Japanese. And constantly you have people staring at you and muttering "gaijin" (literally outside person). Whites are seen as loud, obnoxious and smelly at best; violent criminals and monkeys at worst.
Then there's a whole nother side where Japanese social expectations don't apply because you are white- you're already an outsider that doesn't follow the rules so you can get away with a lot. Favourable racism... it still pisses me off. Of course the favourable racism doesn't really exist in South Korea or China- a lot of Chinese and Korean people just don't like whites in their countries, plain and simple
[Updated on: Sat, 02 February 2008 14:10]
Look at this tree. I cannot make it blossom when it suits me nor make it bear fruit before its time [...] No matter what you do, that seed will grow to be a peach tree. You may wish for an apple or an orange, but you will get a peach.
Master Oogway
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
Eldon, and us all...
To be able to look into that mirror and see that there is something that needs work is something to be proud of.
Of course, there's nothing wrong in keeping to ones own kind, as long as it is dome with respect and decorum for those that also choose to be with their own kind.
I know a great many black people here and we often talk when we meet on the street, but they don't invite me to their homes and for the most part I don't invite them to mine... There are exceptions of course... A very nice black ladt of some 75 years young is getting her degree in may and i have been invited to cook at the party to follow... I am planning a killer menu and will have a hoot of a time as well...
See, the way I see it is to live as one feels comfortable but don't be afraid of stepping outside of the comfort zone when a good opportunity comes by.
Eldon, what you said here is good and you should be proud of yourself.
Thanks,
Marc
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JL
|
|
Getting started |
Location: US
Registered: December 2004
Messages: 24
|
|
|
I think the actual "problem" with the word, is not necessarily its embedded connotations but what it suggests about the person using it. Because the word was popular and widely used during the 60s(?) when racial tension was very high, using a word from this time may suggest the person using it retains the mentality from these times. Or at least that's how it seems to me.
I am interested in the devaluation of language. I now learn that Negro is a non PC word. At the rate we are going on Black will in turn become non PC and be replaced by another term.
Ha. Well, as far as I can tell, in America black is here to stay and is often preferable to the more PC term African American. Do they have a British equivalent to this last term? Or are people of African descent in non-American countries just black?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
The reason? it was abusive. My opinion.
JL very kindly edited his post which I found challenging. But some posts just can;t be re-written.
This is an emotive topic. That is all the more reason to discuss it with as little emotion as possible. Abuse raises hackles. Quiet discussion allows us to learn and to alter our views.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JL
|
|
Getting started |
Location: US
Registered: December 2004
Messages: 24
|
|
|
But white people regard black people as different. North, south, east, west, gay, straight, white people in their hearts think black people are inferior.
I assure you, this is not a widespread belief. Especially in the North.
And if you think white people are racist, you should hear what the Asian kids in school say about black kids!
This is not an adequate justification for your own racism.
I'm a racist. There it is. I can associate with black kids on the athletic fields, in school and in general society, but not in my social life. Yes, I'm educated enough to change, but I see no reason to change.
In a job interview-like situation, do you think your racism would prevent you from acknowledging the abilities of a black person? Do you think you would be able to see around your prejudice to give the minority a chance? Also, what are your feelings on other minorities?
I feel better with them "over there" and us "over here."
Why?
I don't know what black people want to be called anymore. They've gone from colored people, to Negro, to black, to persons of color, back to black...
Black, African American. Those are the two most common. People of color works too, though isn't as common with young people up here (unless they're in an academic setting).
[Updated on: Fri, 01 February 2008 14:53] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
Please do us the same service that JL did, and edit this for tone.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
You know, the entire human race, as a generalisation, cleaves to similar folk.
The concept of racism has come with civilisation and the genuine and laudable desire to live in peace and harmony. But in times gone by safety lay with your own tribe, vilage, town. And you socialised with them. You mated with them.
Look today. Most weddings Mr Big Nose marries Miss Bigger Nose. The kids have big noses. They socialise with big nosed people.
"Above" this, races cleave to races. Sure, there are exceptions. Love doesn't respect race any more than it respects gender.
An active decision to embrace all races as one is hard. It goes against generations of instinctive seeking safety with your own kind. Logic says that you are black and he is white and he is the same as you, but logic is not relevant where instinct is concerned. You seek safety with other black guys.
So we are all inherently racist. It is a mark of our civilisation that we strive to rise above that.
Eldon has done something amazing here. He has admitted in public that he has a weakness. I want to hug him to bits (DO get your mind out of the gutter, he may be cute as a basket of puppies, but really!) for that. He may, or he may not, conquer that weakness. That's personal and only he will know. But he has held up a beacon to us by saying "Look at me. I'm not perfect"
Well, for the record, nor am I. "My" country is not what it was when I was born. I find it intimidating to walk in Slough where the probability of seeing another white face is not high. It upsets me because, 2nd generation immigrant that I am, this is "not my country any more" and I do not feel truly at home.
I don't think that's racism. I suspect it's nostalgia.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's good to get some insight into ourselves. But I don't think you are unique in your feelings by any means. We tend to associate with people that we share the most in common with. This is true of both whites and blacks. I know there are plenty of blacks that feel about relating towards you the same way you feel about relating towards them. Then there are the fortunate few who feel equally comfortable in either culture.
I live in a town with a large Mexican-American base. As a rule they are more at ease associating with people that share their culture, language, etc. I don't consider them racist because of this. We interact with one another on a daily basis and, for the most part, it is a congenial relationship. I think that what is important is that we respect one another's rights to be different while recognizing that we are all human beings and have value.
I'd like to think that eventually we will all meld and become one homogeneous group. But it won't happen if we put one another's values down or hold ourselves up as being, somehow, morally superior to any other group. Race, religion, sexuality - there are lines of division everywhere we look. We owe it to future humanity to overcome obstacles to accepting others. It isn't easy, it's just necessary.
Youth crisis hot-line 866-488-7386, 24 hr (U.S.A.)
There are people who want to help you cope with being you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dear Donny,
I'm replying to the first post but I've read up to noon on 1 Feb.
I don't think you are racist. To admit you aren't comfortable imagining inviting someone of another race home doesn't make you a racist - at least not in the pejorative sense. As many of the stories confirm, people who've never knowingly talked to an open gay person are often *very* uncomfortable with it. Gays have a closet to hide in: blacks don't. People who've never been able to talk on equal terms with black people (or white people) have similar problems.
It is quite difficult, even in Bristol (once the home of the slave trade) where the school I was governor at had approximately a third of its pupils from non-white origins - even in Bristol it is quite hard for me to meet black people. I'd like to get to know some but I rarely get the opportunity to meet. And when I do there is a reluctance to be open with each other for fear of rejection (at least that is what I think it may be). If you are black, knowing that there are quite a few racists about, you get in the habit of avoiding the risks. And, of course, if the motive in talking to a black person is to get to know them *because* they are black - then that is racist too! And it's no good me smiling at them because I wear lycra running tights instead of trousers and they take one look and you can almost see them thinking poofter before they scowl - can't smile at one of those!
There are two members of the croquet club (of 118) who are 'black' and both have been here for a meal. And only two white members have been.
If anything I think black people are more beautiful than whites.
In 1968 or 1969, before I was appointed to a new job at Watford Computer Centre, the Managing Director took me to one side and asked me whether I minded having a woman as my boss! In those days some men were too macho to be able to accept a female boss! Society has changed since then - I can't imagine that would happen in England nowadays. Maybe it will take as long before black people overcome their defensiveness and white people get used to working for them and looking up to them and being outclassed by them in other ways.
The racism is more in society than in you - at least I feel it is.
Love,
Anthony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wrote "(of 118)" [of one hundred and eighteen, close bracket] and it changed the eigth and close bracket into a smiley!
No discrimination! That's the problem.
Love,
Anthony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
In the UK I think the term "Negro" was used in the same way that "black" is used. To describe a people by one unique property.
We do not have the rather forced terminology equivalent to 'African American'.
The class of music "Negro Spiritual", what of that?
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think, but do not know, that we refer to (Black) Africans and Afro-Caribbeans. I doubt if 'Blacks' is here to stay as language is not static.
You may well be right about being stuck in a mindset of a former age. That happens to most people as they grow older. When I was a child you just did not see black, brown or yellow people except on very rare occasions. They were only found in story books. Similarly fat / obese people were extremely rare because the country was on food rationing and people exerted themselves more physically.
Hugs
N
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How do you stand on Eskimos and Inuits?
Hugs
N
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Timmy wrote: >Eldon has done something amazing here. He has admitted in public that he has a weakness.<
That really is condescending (patronising) and an impertinence. It implies that your own position is unassailable.
Hugs
N
I dream of boys with big bulges in their trousers,
Never of girls with big bulges in their blouses.
…and look forward to meeting you in Cóito.
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Thank you Eldon ... 
I just deleted something 
