Blaakmaan
Posts: 374
Joined: 5/21/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: einstien5201
quote:
ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
Fashion. They used to be called Negroes (well, they were known as something else first), then darkies, then coloreds, then blacks, then African American. We'll think of something else to call them eventually.
A minor correction: Negro was in use well before the other word you imply, and was actually the root word of the other. It comes from the Spanish word for "black", "negro".
As for why "African-American" is used in favor of "Black", I can think of a few reasons, though I have no support for these other than my own thoughts.
The new term emphasizes that they are a subset of Americans, rather than of people in general, helping to promote the idea that citizens of the US are Americans first, and only after that whatever group or culture they identify with.
"Black" conjures up images of evil, witchcraft, and spooky graveyards at night, in much the same way "White" conjures up images of cleanliness, angels, and healing magic. While most won't object to an adjective that associates them with angels and clean linen, being associated with evil knights and bad luck is understandably undesirable.
It just doesn't fit. While "Black" may be a relatively accurate description of the population in certain areas of Africa (at least as accurate as "White" is of certain populations in Europe - I'm thinking of the Norse countries and Ireland in particular), it certainly isn't accurate of the majority of those who identify with the term "African-American". Even before his transition into a poster child for cosmetic surgery gone wrong, Michael Jackson could hardly be described as having black skin, and I think that the same goes for most "Americans of african descent". We are after all a mixing pot, and that doesn't just apply to culture and language, but to genetics as well.
Hmmmm...
An intelligent, educated response.
How refreshing!
Use of the term "Black" was an explicit rejection of the term "Negro" and an attempt, more or less successful, to eliminate any preferences or gradations in status among the descendants of slaves depending on how much white lineage they had.
And, the "black" identification was, in a sense, revolutionary, because the descendants of American slaves had been taught to revile the "black" identification.
When I was a child, the surest way to start a fight with a black person was to call him or her "black."
And, the gravest of insults was to call a black person a "black _________".
All that has changed.
Thank God.
We're all Black. We're all one. At least in theory.
We're Black and we're proud.
The term "African-American" is a cultural, rather than a strictly racial, identification.
It acknowledges that "African-Americans" are indeed American--not just some free-floating people without a country or a place.
It does not deny blackness. It is not a rejection of the "black" identification.
It is more an augmentation--an additional identification that is culturally, rather than racially, based.
And it's not really a new identity at all.
In fact, the term "Afro-American" was much used in the 1960's, if not before, and it co-existed with the "black" identification.
Some eschew the "African-American" identification because it can tend to divide American Blacks from Black Africans and Blacks of Carribbean descent, for example, which is unfortunate.
If you don't get it, you just don't get it.
For those who would actually like some insight into this issue, as opposed to an excuse to post silly, racist bullshit (which, unfortunately, seems to be the norm):
http://uppitynegronetwork.com/2008/07/12/why-im-a-black-african-american/
|
RE: Why not "Black" instead of "African ... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread