tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6124690.post112481919913717731..comments2023-10-30T01:39:44.302-07:00Comments on Nesting Ground: No Such Thing As a Stupid Question. Right? Right?verhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18059954107392477750noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6124690.post-74265055007696200202010-02-06T04:36:39.057-08:002010-02-06T04:36:39.057-08:00I am 'Old school' and know it. Caucasian,m...I am 'Old school' and know it. Caucasian,mongol and negro were the 3 races taught in school till 1974 when 'they' say I graduated.<br />Which of the 6 below are Nationalities NOT Races?<br />2008 Census Race Percentage Number<br />White alone 75.0% 228.2 million<br />Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, of any race 15.4% 46.9 million<br />Black or African American alone 12.4% 37.6 Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16672270160512420114noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6124690.post-1125382719985427152005-08-29T23:18:00.000-07:002005-08-29T23:18:00.000-07:00Class is in session!"Convenient"? Yes, make sense....Class is in session!<BR/><BR/>"Convenient"? Yes, make sense. A very simple, elegant answer. Thanks for taking the time; I wasn't sure you were speaking to me 'cuz I drive a...you know...<I>Suburban</I>. Eeeeek!verhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18059954107392477750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6124690.post-1125375628068479722005-08-29T21:20:00.000-07:002005-08-29T21:20:00.000-07:00"Caucasian," "Mongolian" and "Negroid" were basica..."Caucasian," "Mongolian" and "Negroid" were basically the three main racial categories used by anthropologists back then (they're still more or less the same categories that Cavalli-Sforza tracks down in his study of "genetic distances between different populations).<BR/><BR/>Salvador Roldan successfully argued that he was not "Mongolian" but "Malay" -- it depended, really, on the particular Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6124690.post-1124913173228439062005-08-24T12:52:00.000-07:002005-08-24T12:52:00.000-07:00Hmmmm. I don't think I know any "real" Americans ...Hmmmm. I don't think I know any "real" Americans by her standards.<BR/><BR/>JDAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6124690.post-1124906495474146202005-08-24T11:01:00.000-07:002005-08-24T11:01:00.000-07:00Oh, please, rant away! What a bizarre conversation...Oh, please, rant away! What a bizarre conversation with that woman...verhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18059954107392477750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6124690.post-1124901984480691992005-08-24T09:46:00.000-07:002005-08-24T09:46:00.000-07:00Well, it seems that the 8 generation cutoff is a c...Well, it seems that the 8 generation cutoff is a convention used by geneologists as a way to designate a definitive, single country of origin for a person. If PersonA can show they have ancestry in one country for 8 generations, then they are of that country - no hyphenations necessary. At least that's how I understand it from the awkward conversation I had with this gal.<BR/><BR/>She went on to Rebecca Mabanglo-Mayorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04207083816496893894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6124690.post-1124837319861653532005-08-23T15:48:00.000-07:002005-08-23T15:48:00.000-07:00I don't understand the 8 generations. I'm about a...I don't understand the 8 generations. I'm about as white as anyone could get (and whiter than most would want to be) and I think we only go back 4 generations. I consider myself to be an American but not because of color, what my Great grandfather was or anything else. It's because it is who I are! And, isn't this why people take a citizenship test (of which I probably wouldn't pass)? The Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6124690.post-1124833385103924392005-08-23T14:43:00.000-07:002005-08-23T14:43:00.000-07:00Now did the woman just conveniently stop at 8 gene...Now did the woman just conveniently stop at 8 generations because she didn't want to know where the 9 and 10 generations really came from?<BR/><BR/>And people wonder why people don't see themselves as Americans when they are 2nd, 3rd, 4th generation and especially when they don't look like the "standard" 8th generation "American".Gurahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10471788990106109508noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6124690.post-1124826715626190752005-08-23T12:51:00.000-07:002005-08-23T12:51:00.000-07:00Thanks you two coupla smartypants. Yes, this makes...Thanks you two coupla smartypants. Yes, this makes sense. It's almost...quaint?...that they would even bother to cloak such blatant racism by using the larger (and therefore somehow less obviously hateful—does that makes sense?) classifications.<BR/><BR/>Am also hoping our esteemed blogging, 80s music-loving, filmophile anthropologist weighs in...verhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18059954107392477750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6124690.post-1124826168321564612005-08-23T12:42:00.000-07:002005-08-23T12:42:00.000-07:00Yep, I agree with BJ. Mostly it was a 'scientific'...Yep, I agree with BJ. Mostly it was a 'scientific' way to make a racial designation without sounding racist while also making sure other 'races' weren't left out by 'accident' - ie. then a different Asian descendent couldn't claim to be other than Filipino or Chinese, and thus not subject to the same racist tactics. <BR/><BR/>The whole argument at the time (and even now) being predicated on how Rebecca Mabanglo-Mayorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04207083816496893894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6124690.post-1124820983311930252005-08-23T11:16:00.000-07:002005-08-23T11:16:00.000-07:00doh! i mean "malay" and "mongolian" are larger cla...doh! i mean "malay" and "mongolian" are larger classifications than chinese or filipino. ok. there you have it.bjaneprhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07212077947146090915noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6124690.post-1124820906853564832005-08-23T11:15:00.000-07:002005-08-23T11:15:00.000-07:00good question. i do not know who/what dates samuel...good question. i do not know who/what dates samuel george morton/18th c. ethnography but i believe these racial classifications are/were anthropological, and i also believe morton had something to do with craniology - that is, attempts at "scientific" justifications for the inferiority of some races (larger classifications than "mongolian" and "malay") hence the superiority of the caucasian race.bjaneprhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07212077947146090915noreply@blogger.com