JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: admin on February 03, 2008, 06:18:43 AM
-
The reason I ask is that Hispanics is a farce of a "race" invented by The US Census Bureau. It is truley a social construct. In Politics of Diversity class the teacher said race was a social construct which I DO NOT agree with. But Hispanic has no basis in Science. It is not a race because Hispanics come from 3 different races or a combination of two or more.
Hispanic is not even a nationality because there are many Latin American countries and there are not one country. Furthermore, the term Hispanic has the stigma of meaning non-white. This is not always the case and it is forced on whites in Latin America who may not even be Spaniards such as Italians or Eastern European Jews in Argentina.
I vote yes. Latin American is a much better term since it is just describing a geographic location.
-
How about we treat people from Jew-hating nations like mexico the same as other Jew-haters........with abuse and derision.
White, european-Americans of Spanish descent can just be considered as european-Americans like krauts, Italians or others.
-
I think we're banning too many terms. Hispanic is a perfectly legitimate description of people from Spanish-speaking countries. Others prefer the term Latino. My concern is that if we keep banning words that we are becoming "politically correct", G-d forbid.
-
How about we treat people from Jew-hating nations like mexico the same as other Jew-haters........with abuse and derision.
White, european-Americans of Spanish descent can just be considered as european-Americans like krauts, Italians or others.
So what about white Americans of Spanish-Mexican descent?
If you mean loyal US citizens who identify as such and not as mexicans then they should be in the same boat as european-Americans. Just as we view Allan Keyes or Joe Clark as Americans and not (specifically)schvartzas.
-
I think we're banning too many terms. Hispanic is a perfectly legitimate description of people from Spanish-speaking countries. Others prefer the term Latino. My concern is that if we keep banning words that we are becoming "politically correct", G-d forbid.
GLORY HELLELUJA!!!!!!!!!!
Thankyou Chaim!
I (along with a great many peeved-off JTFers) applaud.
-
How about we treat people from Jew-hating nations like mexico the same as other Jew-haters........with abuse and derision.
White, european-Americans of Spanish descent can just be considered as european-Americans like krauts, Italians or others.
So what about white Americans of Spanish-Mexican descent?
I have always found the people from Spain and Portugal to be very different in mentality than most people from south of the border and Puerto Rico. They do seem to be more upstanding in the way they live.
-
Why is Hispanic a racist term ?
Don't ban it.
-
OK whats a Hispanic ? what races are they? and Latin American please explain that term as well.
Like Ricky Martin is Latin American, but is he an Hispanic too or is that a different thing?
-
I think we're banning too many terms. Hispanic is a perfectly legitimate description of people from Spanish-speaking countries. Others prefer the term Latino. My concern is that if we keep banning words that we are becoming "politically correct", G-d forbid.
Chaim as always your are the voice of reason and thats what makes JTF so great.
-
The one at the bottom is a half-breed mexican at best. 3/4 anglo, I'd say.
'Hispanic' has never referred to full-blood indians has it?
-
Honestly I don't think the term means anything much.
-
This is why I feel "hispanic" is NOT a legitimate term....
The following people are ALL classified as being of the same ethnicity of "Hispanic"
Amerdindians:
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2047/1878292290_f334eff481.jpg?v=0)
Mestizos:
(http://www.northernbelize.com/grc/cult_mestizo02.jpg)
White Hispanics:
(Mexican-American "hispanic" actress):
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/195/441181026_6972e01312.jpg)
Now, are all these people really the SAME ethnicity?
I personally don't think so, I do think its a farce.
I think Millsy has a point -
-
The one at the bottom is a half-breed mexican at best. 3/4 anglo, I'd say.
'Hispanic' has never referred to full-blood indians has it?
In a job application and college application I was looking at a while ago, the term "Hispanic" covered full blooded amerindians. They are seen as Hispanic,I mean what other term would they use? Have you honestly seen "Amerindian" on an application before?
And how can you say she's a half breed? Do you know her?
Or are you just saying that because she's part Mexican? Is it part of what you claim to be 99.9% of the time you calling Mexicans names? LOL.
Yea I'm sure she's a half-breed with a name like Alexis Bledel...such a "half-breed" name!
She doesn't look latin, spanish or mexican.........whatever lable you wanna use. She looks anglo-keltic. I wouldn't feel right calling HER names...................unless someone can prove she's over 51% mexican, then I'll be happy to.
-
The one at the bottom is a half-breed mexican at best. 3/4 anglo, I'd say.
Newman now doen't get nasty. No need to use the term "breed". .. We understand that in Australia most of the people behave like animals but you cannot generalize the rest of the world ! I remember you telling me that you cannot leave your house without being attacked by a King Cobra or a Kangaroo.
-
The one at the bottom is a half-breed mexican at best. 3/4 anglo, I'd say.
Newman now doen't get nasty. No need to use the term "breed". .. We understand that in Australia most of the people behave like animals but you cannot generalize the rest of the world ! I remember you telling me that you cannot leave your house without being attacked by a King Cobra or a Kangaroo.
Hey!
You've seen those cartoons where Sylvester meets the baby kangaroo that he thinks is a giant mouse. They can kick butt!
-
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! I know....some of the best ones !
-
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! I know....some of the best ones !
You don't know about the Yowies, either. They're real buggers to run into on a dark night.
-
The term "Hispanic" should not be banned. Instead, it should be exclusively used to refer to white people of Spanish descent. However, the term "Latino" should be banned. That term, which was coined by frog sociologists during the 1860s for the purpose of rationalizing Napoleon III's invasion of Mexico, sounds deceivingly ambiguous, but for the most part, refers only to the Spanish-speaking peoples south of the United States (Brazilians are occasionally considered Latinos), and not to all white Romance people. How the hell is it that someone from Central America with one Spanish great-grandparent, and the rest of his ancestry being Amerindian, be considered a "Latino", yet someone from Romania, Italy, France, and so on, cannot himself be considered a "Latino"? If the term "Latino" really did refer to all Romance-speaking peoples in the Americas, then that must include the Haitians, right? After all, they speak French, a Romance language. It is for such reasons that the term "Latino" should be banned. It should be rendered on this board as either "Hispanophone-American" or "Ibero-American"
-
I have no clue what the difference is...
Hispanics in latin america are a combination of White Spanish, Native NOrth and South Americans, and Blacks...Some are whiter than others and others are blacker than others.
-
Yacov, this is getting ridiculous. Hispanic is a fine term because it is a simple, neutral way to classify all people of Spanish-speaking descent. You all are getting WAY too hung up on race. Most Hispanics (with the exception of most Argentines and Uruguayans) are what you would call "mestizo" (mixed white and indigenous). A LOT of Hispanics have varying levels of black blood too.
Being white does not make a Hispanic righteous either--there are an awful lof of anti-Semitic Argentines who have blond hair and blue eyes.
-
She doesn't look latin, spanish or mexican.........whatever lable you wanna use. She looks anglo-keltic. I wouldn't feel right calling HER names...................unless someone can prove she's over 51% mexican, then I'll be happy to.
Newman, you are going more insane with each and every post.
-
She doesn't look latin, spanish or mexican.........whatever lable you wanna use. She looks anglo-keltic. I wouldn't feel right calling HER names...................unless someone can prove she's over 51% mexican, then I'll be happy to.
Newman, you are going more insane with each and every post.
Indeed. This sounds exactly like nazi-germany, where people had to prove their racial pureness, by proving no Jewish forefathers for 3(?) generations.
Shame on you.
-
Alexis Bledel and her types are just the result of Europeans that settled in Central and South America. Most European migrants went to Uruguay, Argentina, Chile and Brazil. Many Lebanese Maronites also settled in S. America and are part of the prominent minority. Carlos Slim (Now the richest man in the world) is a Lebonese Maronite from Mexico.
-
Yacov, you are being silly. Nobody ever called Hispanic a "race". I said exactly what it is--a way to group people of Spanish-speaking background of all origins. Latin American Jews ARE Hispanic, because they speak Spanish and come from Spanish-speaking Latin countries.
Please show me the Latinos (of any race) who are upset about checking "Hispanic" on the census surveys.
-
I think we're banning too many terms. Hispanic is a perfectly legitimate description of people from Spanish-speaking countries. Others prefer the term Latino. My concern is that if we keep banning words that we are becoming "politically correct", G-d forbid.
GLORY HELLELUJA!!!!!!!!!!
Thankyou Chaim!
I (along with a great many peeved-off JTFers) applaud.
I'm with Newman on this one. How many absolutely pointless and ridiculous baning threads must there be? A complete embarrassment to this movement. This kind of garbage makes it appear that we are all in the 4th grade. If you are going to pull childish stuff like this then at least hide it on some forum that is buried very far away from the main forum.
-
we are way too hung up on genetics here.. We aren't scientists...we are talking about social, cultural, and poltical livlihood..and religion.
-
Nobody stops white Latin Americans from checking off "white". In fact, most Argentines do.
-
bottom line....WHO CARES?!!?!?!?!??
This is a very very pointless thread and hurts JTF immensely with this kind of silly talk!
As Nazi Islam spreads, we bicker about who's a Hispanic!! Talk about scatter brains we are a demise to the very thing growing at a rapid pace ready to destroy us...enough with this genetics talk! I'm sick and tired of it!!!!
-
I repeat!
bottom line....WHO CARES?!!?!?!?!??
This is a very very pointless thread and hurts JTF immensely with this kind of silly talk!
As Nazi Islam spreads, we bicker about who's a Hispanic!! Talk about scatter brains we are a demise to the very thing growing at a rapid pace ready to destroy us...enough with this genetics talk! I'm sick and tired of it!!!!
-
From now on se shall make the following replacements:
Hispanics: IBM's (Itty bitty Mexicans)
Native Americans: Casino Owning Alchoholics
Irish Americans: Non-Casino Owning Alchoholics
Take Note of it.
-
I don't understand the difference between the two anyway.
-
I repeat!
bottom line....WHO CARES?!!?!?!?!??
This is a very very pointless thread and hurts JTF immensely with this kind of silly talk!
As Nazi Islam spreads, we bicker about who's a Hispanic!! Talk about scatter brains we are a demise to the very thing growing at a rapid pace ready to destroy us...enough with this genetics talk! I'm sick and tired of it!!!!
This is part of our fight against political correctness. It is also part of our fight against affirmative action since the label "Hispanic" is used as a determining factor of whether to use affirmative action discrimination.
By wanting to change the term is an act of political correctness. Really, it's not helping.
-
The term Hispanic is fine in my opinion. I just don't think Spaniards should be labeled Hispanic, because you have Spaniards from Spain label Hispanic/Latino under the U.S. census instead of labeling White/Caucasian.
-
I repeat!
bottom line....WHO CARES?!!?!?!?!??
This is a very very pointless thread and hurts JTF immensely with this kind of silly talk!
As Nazi Islam spreads, we bicker about who's a Hispanic!! Talk about scatter brains we are a demise to the very thing growing at a rapid pace ready to destroy us...enough with this genetics talk! I'm sick and tired of it!!!!
This is part of our fight against political correctness. It is also part of our fight against affirmative action since the label "Hispanic" is used as a determining factor of whether to use affirmative action discrimination.
By wanting to change the term is an act of political correctness. Really, it's not helping.
Trust me! Calling Dominicans and Puerto Ricans black would not be PC. :P :'( Getting rid of the Hispanic guise is a conservative ideal!
Personally if they are Spanish speaking and i'm not sure which country or region they are from I say Hispanic or Latino
If I know which area, then I say, "Carribean, Domnican, Mexican, Central American, South American etc etc etc... It's really not a big deal.
-
The term Hispanic is fine in my opinion. I just don't think Spaniards should be labeled Hispanic, because you have Spaniards from Spain label Hispanic/Latino under the U.S. census instead of labeling White/Caucasian.
Spaniars are European...simple..done!
-
The term Hispanic is fine in my opinion. I just don't think Spaniards should be labeled Hispanic, because you have Spaniards from Spain label Hispanic/Latino under the U.S. census instead of labeling White/Caucasian.
Spaniars are European...simple..done!
Exactly, that's why I think it's ridiculous when I've talked to some Spaniards that label Hispanic/Latino because they are Spanish speaking.
-
We're all from planet Earth. The end.
-
We should call them all 'Spanish'.
-
There is nothing wrong with the word Hispanic. So No.
-
I repeat!
bottom line....WHO CARES?!!?!?!?!??
This is a very very pointless thread and hurts JTF immensely with this kind of silly talk!
As Nazi Islam spreads, we bicker about who's a Hispanic!! Talk about scatter brains we are a demise to the very thing growing at a rapid pace ready to destroy us...enough with this genetics talk! I'm sick and tired of it!!!!
This is part of our fight against political correctness. It is also part of our fight against affirmative action since the label "Hispanic" is used as a determining factor of whether to use affirmative action discrimination.
By wanting to change the term is an act of political correctness. Really, it's not helping.
Dan I agree fully, this is starting to become a bit silly.
-
Are we going to start calling Blacks "African American"? This is leftist liberal lingo.
-
Yacov if you used different topic titles, you could still discuss the term without people getting wound up about it being another banning poll.
-
The reason I ask is that Hispanics is a farce of a "race" invented by The US Census Bureau. It is truley a social construct. In Politics of Diversity class the teacher said race was a social construct which I DO NOT agree with. But Hispanic has no basis in Science. It is not a race because Hispanics come from 3 different races or a combination of two or more.
Hispanic is not even a nationality because there are many Latin American countries and there are not one country. Furthermore, the term Hispanic has the stigma of meaning non-white. This is not always the case and it is forced on whites in Latin America who may not even be Spaniards such as Italians or Eastern European Jews in Argentina.
I vote yes. Latin American is a much better term since it is just describing a geographic location.
This topic's original sentiment was with the intent of denouncing Hispanic as a "racial" term. Hispanic is a culture (i.e. Anglo, Franco, Germanic). The term African American (i.e. British-American, Korean-American) indicates line of descent which is consequently racial implying Negroid, Coloured ancestry. Therefore, have categories like Spanish-American, indicating Caucasoid/White ancestry, Indigenous-American surmising Mongoloid/Oriental ancestry, and African-American implying Negroid/Coloured ancestry. This is classic, righteous American sub-grouping.
I have no problem with subclassing..however...
1. If we are going to subclass one group, we should subclass all groups.
2. Today most people are a mix of different subclasses.
3. If this is going to be a new way of identifying race in applications, for example, then an option of allowing picking more than one subclass shoudl be allowed.
-
The reason I ask is that Hispanics is a farce of a "race" invented by The US Census Bureau. It is truley a social construct. In Politics of Diversity class the teacher said race was a social construct which I DO NOT agree with. But Hispanic has no basis in Science. It is not a race because Hispanics come from 3 different races or a combination of two or more.
Hispanic is not even a nationality because there are many Latin American countries and there are not one country. Furthermore, the term Hispanic has the stigma of meaning non-white. This is not always the case and it is forced on whites in Latin America who may not even be Spaniards such as Italians or Eastern European Jews in Argentina.
I vote yes. Latin American is a much better term since it is just describing a geographic location.
This topic's original sentiment was with the intent of denouncing Hispanic as a "racial" term. Hispanic is a culture (i.e. Anglo, Franco, Germanic). The term African American (i.e. British-American, Korean-American) indicates line of descent which is consequently racial implying Negroid, Coloured ancestry. Therefore, have categories like Spanish-American, indicating Caucasoid/White ancestry, Indigenous-American surmising Mongoloid/Oriental ancestry, and African-American implying Negroid/Coloured ancestry. This is classic, righteous American sub-grouping.
I have no problem with subclassing..however...
1. If we are going to subclass one group, we should subclass all groups.
2. Today most people are a mix of different subclasses.
3. If this is going to be a new way of identifying race in applications, for example, then an option of allowing picking more than one subclass shoudl be allowed.
Which mixes are you referring to? Barack Hussein Obama has direct white lineage, yet he refers to himself as BLACK/Negroid. 8;) 8) This is our history, and if you all support the South as you say all should be hands off with the tradition of sub-grouping. One choice is enough: CHOOSE WISELY ! O0
Multiculturalism should only be found within religion. Most religions have followers from all around the world. Therefore, if you want to adhere to a "multiracial" :-\ category just write in your faith/creed!
The there shoudl be a separate category for religion or creed from a racial one.. There is a difference between race and religion..can't mix the two.
Obam is half "negroid" and half "Caucesoid"..so if he were to check off anything, he should check off both of those..and then for religion, he shoudl check off Dirty Stinky Nazi Muslim.
-
I just realized..... you can't spell Hispanic without writing PANIC!
His...PANIC
as in...."he's getting his panic attacks again"
lol I never noticed that :::D
-
Hispanic refers to people from Spain, of people of white Spanish ancestry. It also could refer to people of mixed heritage, partly Spaniard, which is how it is most often used today. It's not a slur.
I never dreamed when JTF was being described to me that it would be this PC.
-
The reason I ask is that Hispanics is a farce of a "race" invented by The US Census Bureau. It is truley a social construct. In Politics of Diversity class the teacher said race was a social construct which I DO NOT agree with. But Hispanic has no basis in Science. It is not a race because Hispanics come from 3 different races or a combination of two or more.
Hispanic is not even a nationality because there are many Latin American countries and there are not one country. Furthermore, the term Hispanic has the stigma of meaning non-white. This is not always the case and it is forced on whites in Latin America who may not even be Spaniards such as Italians or Eastern European Jews in Argentina.
I vote yes. Latin American is a much better term since it is just describing a geographic location.
This topic's original sentiment was with the intent of denouncing Hispanic as a "racial" term. Hispanic is a culture (i.e. Anglo, Franco, Germanic). The term African American (i.e. British-American, Korean-American) indicates line of descent which is consequently racial implying Negroid, Coloured ancestry. Therefore, have categories like Spanish-American, indicating Caucasoid/White ancestry, Indigenous-American surmising Mongoloid/Oriental ancestry, and African-American implying Negroid/Coloured ancestry. This is classic, righteous American sub-grouping.
I have no problem with subclassing..however...
1. If we are going to subclass one group, we should subclass all groups.
2. Today most people are a mix of different subclasses.
3. If this is going to be a new way of identifying race in applications, for example, then an option of allowing picking more than one subclass shoudl be allowed.
Who said anything about "sub-classing"? Listing Hispanics by race rather than the imaginary Hispanic classification is no different than listing native-born Americans by race. We have whites, blacks, and Orientals. The same exists in Latin America. So why should we pretend that all Latin Americans are one imaginary race the second they arrive in The United States?
It's because latin americans are a hybrid of several races..and have become their own race..they are a mix of european, native american, and black...some are more pure of one race than the other.
THe thing here, yaacov, is that you obssess too much over race..it's bad..very bad.
Secondly, don't call Orientals orientals..they are asian..and if you want to be specific then just say far east asians...These people are not carpets.
-
Hispanic is an ethnicity (Spaniard blood), but because Spaniards conquered many areas of the world or had influence in many areas of the world, they left mixed populations in various places of the world such as in Latin America and Southeast Asia, thus the term gained a wider meaning.
Applying the term to those who are not descended from Spaniards is just confusion.
-
honestly if we are giong to be accurate about race, i like the terms caucesoid, negroid, mongoloid, australoid, etc...we should stick with that
And if we are talking about a causecoid, we say, he/she is a causecoid from Turkey...etc etc...
None of these subclasses are offensive. Secondly, they are scientific..so if anyone is offended by science, well, they can just go to mars and live over there.
-
No!
We should call them "chili chokers" or "beaners".
That way they won't be offended by being labeled as "Hispanic" or "Latino".
-
honestly if we are giong to be accurate about race, i like the terms caucesoid, negroid, mongoloid, australoid, etc...we should stick with that
And if we are talking about a causecoid, we say, he/she is a causecoid from Turkey...etc etc...
None of these subclasses are offensive. Secondly, they are scientific..so if anyone is offended by science, well, they can just go to mars and live over there.
Of course we should use those terms.
so let's put these terms together describing race present it before the forum and see how it goes with the public.
-
honestly if we are going to be accurate about race, i like the terms Caucasoid, negroid, mongoloid, Australoid, etc...we should stick with that
And if we are talking about a Caucasoid, we say, he/she is a Caucasoid from Turkey...etc etc...
None of these subclasses are offensive. Secondly, they are scientific..so if anyone is offended by science, well, they can just go to mars and live over there.
Of course we should use those terms.
so let's put these terms together describing race present it before the forum and see how it goes with the public.
We don't have to put them together. Physical Anthropologists have already done it for us.
i know can you post these subclasses for us
-
honestly if we are going to be accurate about race, i like the terms Caucasoid, negroid, mongoloid, Australoid, etc...we should stick with that
And if we are talking about a Caucasoid, we say, he/she is a Caucasoid from Turkey...etc etc...
None of these subclasses are offensive. Secondly, they are scientific..so if anyone is offended by science, well, they can just go to mars and live over there.
Of course we should use those terms.
so let's put these terms together describing race present it before the forum and see how it goes with the public.
We don't have to put them together. Physical Anthropologists have already done it for us.
i know can you post these subclasses for us
They're not sub-classes. There are 4 human races. Those are the 4 you wrote above. Sub-classes are called sub-races and only divide members of the same race, not whites from blacks and other non-whites. They can be further broken down but I'm only familiar with the way Caucasoid and Negroid can be broken down. Caucasoids are broken down into Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean (They are also mixes of them such as Dinaric.) and Negroids are broken down into Congoids and Capoids, although Capoids are viewed by some people as a separate 5th race (The differences between Capoids and other blacks can be like the difference between Orientals and Caucasians.). I'm sure Congoids can be broken up into differnet features based on what part of Africa a black is from. Many East Africans have Caucasian features and look like Ethiopian Jews. They may be mixed.
For an in-depth of discussion of this, see http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=1113.105 . There is no reason for me to go through all of it all over again.
Yacov, much of "Latin" America has nothing to do with Latin. Many of them are mixed or pure Native american Indians. You may argue they speak a form of Latin, but I think hispanic is a better term since they are influenced by thr sp. language.
-
honestly if we are going to be accurate about race, i like the terms Caucasoid, negroid, mongoloid, Australoid, etc...we should stick with that
And if we are talking about a Caucasoid, we say, he/she is a Caucasoid from Turkey...etc etc...
None of these subclasses are offensive. Secondly, they are scientific..so if anyone is offended by science, well, they can just go to mars and live over there.
Of course we should use those terms.
so let's put these terms together describing race present it before the forum and see how it goes with the public.
We don't have to put them together. Physical Anthropologists have already done it for us.
i know can you post these subclasses for us
They're not sub-classes. There are 4 human races. Those are the 4 you wrote above. Sub-classes are called sub-races and only divide members of the same race, not whites from blacks and other non-whites. They can be further broken down but I'm only familiar with the way Caucasoid and Negroid can be broken down. Caucasoids are broken down into Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean (They are also mixes of them such as Dinaric.) and Negroids are broken down into Congoids and Capoids, although Capoids are viewed by some people as a separate 5th race (The differences between Capoids and other blacks can be like the difference between Orientals and Caucasians.). I'm sure Congoids can be broken up into differnet features based on what part of Africa a black is from. Many East Africans have Caucasian features and look like Ethiopian Jews. They may be mixed.
For an in-depth of discussion of this, see http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=1113.105 . There is no reason for me to go through all of it all over again.
Those are a bit old fashioned terms from what I read in my Physical Anthropology book, but some use them for a classification of a criminal or what not. These terms can still be used but are somewhat contradicting. Capoids are just indigenous Subsaharan Africans with somewhat more differentiation than people from the Congo imo. Most Capoids have Negro blood in them anyways, and are becoming extinct, so that term will lose it's validity. I don't really believe in subdiving terms like Nordic, Alpine, Mediterranean those are just people of that region with unique local variation and tendencies to people here and there, they are just adaptive processes imo. For example, you could have a person from a Nordic or Alpine region roughly have a similar biotype, but phenotypically vary. Oh well, "Hispanic" sounds like a good enough term for me.
-
But the main problem with the term Hispanic is that people have a misconception that it is a race and it also gives a stigma of meaning "non-white", even if someone from Latin America is of Spanish or other European origin.
Yacov, it's really shameful that the media has done such a number on people that the majority see no problem with allowing Hispanic to be seen as an imaginary color 8;) of the racial spectrum.
A perfect, paradigm example that Hispanic is seen as a race of humans: Police use the term "Hispanic" when referring to the phenotype of a suspect or person in pursuit of. What is the color of "Hispanics"? Don't all see that this is a term of political convenience and an insult to all other American groups that have assimilated into the Anglo culture of America?
The term is the epitome of anti-Americanism. The saddest part of this fabled saga is that this term became apart of the U.S. census and thus the American mainstream during the "Reagan Revolution" ???.
Hispanic to me refers just to Spanish-speaking peoples. When Police use the term "Hispanic" for a crime committed by someone, it's rather committed from a Mestizo person not a European Spanish-speaking Hispanic like a Spaniard. I find it ridiculous to equate "Hispanic" to a phenotype, they must just mean a Mestizo person, I suppose. Mestizos are their own indigenous ethnic group and people.
-
But the main problem with the term Hispanic is that people have a misconception that it is a race and it also gives a stigma of meaning "non-white", even if someone from Latin America is of Spanish or other European origin.
Yacov, it's really shameful that the media has done such a number on people that the majority see no problem with allowing Hispanic to be seen as an imaginary color 8;) of the racial spectrum.
A perfect, paradigm example that Hispanic is seen as a race of humans: Police use the term "Hispanic" when referring to the phenotype of a suspect or person in pursuit of. What is the color of "Hispanics"? Don't all see that this is a term of political convenience and an insult to all other American groups that have assimilated into the Anglo culture of America?
The term is the epitome of anti-Americanism. The saddest part of this fabled saga is that this term became apart of the U.S. census and thus the American mainstream during the "Reagan Revolution" ???.
Hispanic to me refers just to Spanish-speaking peoples. When Police use the term "Hispanic" for a crime committed by someone, it's rather committed from a Mestizo person not a European Spanish-speaking Hispanic like a Spaniard. I find it ridiculous to equate "Hispanic" to a phenotype, they must just mean a Mestizo person, I suppose. Mestizos are their own indigenous ethnic group and people.
No, Amerindians are the indigenous ethnic group and people. Their race is Oriental as are all American Indians. Mestizos are mixed race between Amerindian and white.
Yes, but the European immigrants that came was around the 15th century etc., these Europeans had local variation coming from all different backgrounds and regions that also mixed with Amerindians, so in a way I suppose you could say they both were indigenous, but you're right that the Amerindians in a stricter narrower sense refer to the indigenous people. Yes, American Indians are Oriental people, but I've heard some people say they are an ethnic group on their own that were once part of a Mongoloid race formation, that are differentiated than typical East Asian Orientals.
-
You do know that not everyone is Spain speaks Spanish, right?
People there also speak Catalonian and Basque and not spanish...yet are Spaniards...are they "Hispanic"?
I and many other people do not consider spaniards "hispanic", they are just white.
Like I said a while back, when I was applying to school, under race/ethnicity "White" referred to anyone of European ancestry, including Spain and Portugal.
But aren't Basques not even Spaniard? They are their own unique people un-related to any other known European group. They don't speak a Romance language. Catalonian is just a regional dialect of Spanish. What we call Spanish is really also only one regional dialect: Castillian. But Castille dominated Spain so Castillian became Modern Spanish. I think Aragon was also a dialect at one time. These were all kingdoms before Spain was unified. Linguistically, all these dialects are no different than Portuguese so if Spain and Portugal were one country called Iberia, we would call the dominant language Iberian and the people Iberians. It just happens to be that when the differnet regions of Iberia were unified, Portugal was not included so therefore it became it's own country and not included in Spain.
I consider Basques native and indigenous to Spain so in a way they are somewhat Spanish, except the language is very different.
-
I consider Basques native and indigenous to Spain so in a way they are somewhat Spanish, except the language is very different.
So would you say they are also "hispanic" since they are from Spain?
Well, to be honest what comes to mind when I either hear "Hispanic" or "Latino" I think of Mestizo. So I guess not, no. Though they both speak Spanish ;D ;)
"Hispanic" should be used for Mestizos and if you want you can also include Latin American Indians from Latin America imo. European-Latin Americans are rather European.
-
honestly if we are going to be accurate about race, i like the terms Caucasoid, negroid, mongoloid, Australoid, etc...we should stick with that
And if we are talking about a Caucasoid, we say, he/she is a Caucasoid from Turkey...etc etc...
None of these subclasses are offensive. Secondly, they are scientific..so if anyone is offended by science, well, they can just go to mars and live over there.
Of course we should use those terms.
so let's put these terms together describing race present it before the forum and see how it goes with the public.
We don't have to put them together. Physical Anthropologists have already done it for us.
i know can you post these subclasses for us
They're not sub-classes. There are 4 human races. Those are the 4 you wrote above. Sub-classes are called sub-races and only divide members of the same race, not whites from blacks and other non-whites. They can be further broken down but I'm only familiar with the way Caucasoid and Negroid can be broken down. Caucasoids are broken down into Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean (They are also mixes of them such as Dinaric.) and Negroids are broken down into Congoids and Capoids, although Capoids are viewed by some people as a separate 5th race (The differences between Capoids and other blacks can be like the difference between Orientals and Caucasians.). I'm sure Congoids can be broken up into differnet features based on what part of Africa a black is from. Many East Africans have Caucasian features and look like Ethiopian Jews. They may be mixed.
For an in-depth of discussion of this, see http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=1113.105 . There is no reason for me to go through all of it all over again.
Maybe what we can try to do is create an outline and give examples of nations that contain certain races and maybe give an example of a famous person who fits the description...
Basically list it as so:
caucesoid
-Nordic: nation, famous person as example.
-etc
-etc
Negroid
-congoid
etc
etc
etc
We should do this as a separate post and it shoudl be written in a simple manner like we are taking notes for class.
-
honestly if we are going to be accurate about race, i like the terms Caucasoid, negroid, mongoloid, Australoid, etc...we should stick with that
And if we are talking about a Caucasoid, we say, he/she is a Caucasoid from Turkey...etc etc...
None of these subclasses are offensive. Secondly, they are scientific..so if anyone is offended by science, well, they can just go to mars and live over there.
Of course we should use those terms.
so let's put these terms together describing race present it before the forum and see how it goes with the public.
We don't have to put them together. Physical Anthropologists have already done it for us.
i know can you post these subclasses for us
They're not sub-classes. There are 4 human races. Those are the 4 you wrote above. Sub-classes are called sub-races and only divide members of the same race, not whites from blacks and other non-whites. They can be further broken down but I'm only familiar with the way Caucasoid and Negroid can be broken down. Caucasoids are broken down into Nordic, Alpine, and Mediterranean (They are also mixes of them such as Dinaric.) and Negroids are broken down into Congoids and Capoids, although Capoids are viewed by some people as a separate 5th race (The differences between Capoids and other blacks can be like the difference between Orientals and Caucasians.). I'm sure Congoids can be broken up into differnet features based on what part of Africa a black is from. Many East Africans have Caucasian features and look like Ethiopian Jews. They may be mixed.
For an in-depth of discussion of this, see http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php?topic=1113.105 . There is no reason for me to go through all of it all over again.
Maybe what we can try to do is create an outline and give examples of nations that contain certain races and maybe give an example of a famous person who fits the description...
Basically list it as so:
caucesoid
-Nordic: nation, famous person as example.
-etc
-etc
Negroid
-congoid
etc
etc
etc
We should do this as a separate post and it shoudl be written in a simple manner like we are taking notes for class.
We already have that at the thread I linked to.
it's not detailed to the point that woudl help others to understand the terms.
-
Spain technicly means all Iberia, that's why Portugese king Manuel protested when Ferdinand of Arragon and Isabella of Castille/Leon started to use the title of Catholic Kings of Espanias; so Hispanic can theriticly mean Brazilain too althou Iberian American woud be better... 1/3 of Argentinians however are descending from Italy they're Latin not Iberians but they're also many etnic Poles around 1 000 000 mainly in Brazilia Haw we can call them Hispanic? I prefer to use therm North and South American but latin American which is culture not ethnic or racial term is good too. BTW Catalan is not dialect of Spanish (Castilan is used only inside Spain) you can get solid beating in Barcelona for voicing such opinions. ::) You can call mesticos who don't speak spanish metis and those who do Mexicans 80% percent of them are mix of white and Indian.
-
Spain technicly means all Iberia, that's why Portugese king Manuel protested when Ferdinand of Arragon and Isabella of Castille/Leon started to use the title of Catholic Kings of Espanias; so Hispanic can theriticly mean Brazilain too althou Iberian American woud be better... 1/3 of Argentinians however are descending from Italy they're Latin not Iberians but they're also many etnic Poles around 1 000 000 mainly in Brazilia Haw we can call them Hispanic? I prefer to use therm North and South American but latin American which is culture not ethnic or racial term is good too. BTW Catalan is not dialect of Spanish (Castilan is used only inside Spain) you can get solid beating in Barcelona for voicing such opinions. ::) You can call mesticos who don't speak spanish metis and those who do Mexicans 80% percent of them are mix of white and Indian.
Yeah that's true about Catala! Its not a dialect of Spanish!
Are you Catalonian, Ultra Requete?
Just curious because I might be... ::)
None I'm avare of, but here in Europe we have dozens of nations, dialects and regionalismes and you must be careful to not confuse them from the others becouse for ex some Corsicans can be very rude when you'll call them Frogs ::), When mayor countries are sinking under wave of execive mu-slime imigration and EU is taking absolute power every village and mountain valley wants "independance" Good luck for them. ::) I'm atlest 75% Polish and I don't care about the rest becouse I love my culture. ;)