From here:

http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/25550

> “White African American” Suspended from Medical School Paulo Serodio,
> a former student at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New
> Jersey says he is the victim of discrimination after he was suspended
> from school for “unbecoming conduct”. The controversy stems from a
> class discussion in which Serodio described himself as a “white
> African American.” Serodio was born in Mozambique and immigrated the
> the US. Some class members were offended that Serodio would describe
> himself as African American. According to Serodio, this incident led
> to harassment which included assault and damage to his car. The final
> straw was when the school suspended him.
> 

If anybody should be considered African-American, it would be him. I 
hate the term, because it makes no sense in it's current usage. It used 
to be you could call people black, or white ...Now it's politcally 
"incorrect" so, we come up with BS terms like this ... Africa is a huge 
continent, some people are black, some white, some other skintones.
-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com> wrote:
> If anybody should be considered African-American, it would be him. I 
> hate the term, because it makes no sense in it's current usage. It used 
> to be you could call people black, or white ...Now it's politcally 
> "incorrect" so, we come up with BS terms like this ... Africa is a huge 
> continent, some people are black, some white, some other skintones.

  The term has always bothered me as well. Especially since it's used
for *all* black people, even those who have never even been in the
American continent. How does that make any sense?

  Even more jarring is that it's also used for dark-skinned people who
are neither African nor American. (Many people in the Pacific islands or
south Asia, for example, could very well pass for Africans, even though
they aren't.)

  I agree with the student in the original story: If he was born in Africa
and is currently living in America, isn't he by definition an African-
American? Why would skin pigmentation have any effect on this?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> If anybody should be considered African-American, it would be him. 

In one of my college student rags, there was an article about apartheid, in 
which it talked about the whites fighting with the african-americans.

No! They're just africans. Black africans fighting white africans, none of 
them in America.

I suspect some over-enthusiastic search-and-replace going on.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> In one of my college student rags, there was an article about apartheid, in 
> which it talked about the whites fighting with the african-americans.

> No! They're just africans. Black africans fighting white africans, none of 
> them in America.

  I remember years ago even reading some article where Nelson Mandela was
specifically called "African-American".

  Has Mandela even *been* in the American continent at all?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp escreveu:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> In one of my college student rags, there was an article about apartheid, in 
>> which it talked about the whites fighting with the african-americans.
> 
>> No! They're just africans. Black africans fighting white africans, none of 
>> them in America.
> 
>   I remember years ago even reading some article where Nelson Mandela was
> specifically called "African-American".
> 
>   Has Mandela even *been* in the American continent at all?

Now that's quite insane indeed.  And quite inconsiderate: there are 
south-american-africans too. :P

I like short names best like white, black, gay, geek or midget. 
Straight and to the point.

-- 
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9

Post a reply to this message

nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Straight and to the point.

  No pun intended, I suppose? ;)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp escreveu:
> nemesis <nam### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> Straight and to the point.
> 
>   No pun intended, I suppose? ;)
> 

hahaha, not really... :P

-- 
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If anybody should be considered African-American, it would be him. I 
>> hate the term, because it makes no sense in it's current usage. It used 
>> to be you could call people black, or white ...Now it's politcally 
>> "incorrect" so, we come up with BS terms like this ... Africa is a huge 
>> continent, some people are black, some white, some other skintones.
> 
>   The term has always bothered me as well. Especially since it's used
> for *all* black people, even those who have never even been in the
> American continent. How does that make any sense?
> 
>   Even more jarring is that it's also used for dark-skinned people who
> are neither African nor American. (Many people in the Pacific islands or
> south Asia, for example, could very well pass for Africans, even though
> they aren't.)
> 
>   I agree with the student in the original story: If he was born in Africa
> and is currently living in America, isn't he by definition an African-
> American? Why would skin pigmentation have any effect on this?

I don't support our racial categorizations, but I suspect that the 
fellow's ancestors all trace back to Europe, in which case he is 
classified as Caucasian and not African.  The fact that his family did 
time in Africa is regarded as immaterial.

I personally think that anyone who wants should be able to claim himself 
or herself as the progenitor for an entirely new race.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   The term has always bothered me as well. Especially since it's used
> for *all* black people, even those who have never even been in the
> American continent. How does that make any sense?

	Eh? Not over here. I occasionally hear someone claiming someone else is
an African American, when he's purely African. I correct, and no one
thinks my correction to be strange.

>   Even more jarring is that it's also used for dark-skinned people who
> are neither African nor American. (Many people in the Pacific islands or
> south Asia, for example, could very well pass for Africans, even though
> they aren't.)

	I personally have never heard someone from South Asia be called
African, unless it is purely by mistake. Nor have the complained to me
about it. Officially, people from South Asia are classified as Asians in
this country, regardless of skin color.

>   I agree with the student in the original story: If he was born in Africa
> and is currently living in America, isn't he by definition an African-
> American? Why would skin pigmentation have any effect on this?

	The usual classification is regarding race - not ethnicity. He's not
racially African. I'll agree that the word can be confusing, but I can
understand that if the white people are considered Caucasian (which I
believe is the official designation in the US) - named after the
Caucasus, I can understand black people wanted to be categorized as
African (I wouldn't add the American to the end, but it's a minor
difference). Don't know the history, but perhaps they wanted not to be
called Negro, and it wasn't about not being called black. Dunno, really.

	I can see both points of view. However, both "sides" seem to be
inconsistent. If using African for race is bad, drop Asian, Caucasian,
etc. After all, there are people who lived for generations in the
Caucasus but wouldn't be considered Caucasian, and similar confusion
would ensue.

-- 
Decafalon (n.): The grueling event of getting through the day consuming
only things that are good for you.


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message

Wasn't it Teddy Roosevelt who complained about the hyphenated Americans?
He said each hyphen was like carrying a little dagger around, and that 
we're all just Americans (well, those of us in the US, I mean).

-- 
Chambers

Post a reply to this message

John VanSickle wrote:
> I don't support our racial categorizations, but I suspect that the 
> fellow's ancestors all trace back to Europe, in which case he is 
> classified as Caucasian and not African.  The fact that his family did 
> time in Africa is regarded as immaterial.

My ancestors come from Africa as well.  In fact, all of ours do. 
Doesn't that make everyone in the world an African?

How long does a person have to live in a new land to be considered a 
"native" of that land?  How many generations need to pass?

When you get down to it, carrying around a label like African American, 
Pacific Islander, Eurasion, or whatever you want to call yourself just 
means that you identify more strongly with your past (or your ancestor's 
past) than your present.

Personally, I'm all for naturalization.  If I were to live in Chile for 
the rest of my life, I'd call myself Chileno (well, once I'd been 
granted citizenship).  But then, my opinions rarely coincide with public 
opinion.

-- 
Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> 	Eh? Not over here. I occasionally hear someone claiming someone else is
> an African American, when he's purely African. I correct, and no one
> thinks my correction to be strange.
> 
>>   Even more jarring is that it's also used for dark-skinned people who
>> are neither African nor American. (Many people in the Pacific islands or
>> south Asia, for example, could very well pass for Africans, even though
>> they aren't.)
> 
> 	I personally have never heard someone from South Asia be called
> African, unless it is purely by mistake. Nor have the complained to me
> about it. Officially, people from South Asia are classified as Asians in
> this country, regardless of skin color.

You live in SA, don't you?  It must be nice to live in a civilized country.

People in the US are incredibly idiotic when it comes to race.

-- 
Chambers

Post a reply to this message

nemesis wrote:
> I like short names best like white, black, gay, geek or midget. Straight 
> and to the point.

Try putting them all together :)  (A gay mulatto geek-midget!)

-- 
Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:

> we're all just Americans (well, those of us in the US, I mean).

I wish some people would see it that way... Indeed, we are simply that, 
Americans. (Err, U.S.ians, but that sounds awkward :-D)

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> Chambers wrote:
> 
>> we're all just Americans (well, those of us in the US, I mean).
> 
> I wish some people would see it that way... Indeed, we are simply that,
> Americans. (Err, U.S.ians, but that sounds awkward :-D)

Unitedstatians.

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
> Chambers wrote:
> 
>> we're all just Americans (well, those of us in the US, I mean).
> 
> I wish some people would see it that way... Indeed, we are simply that, 
> Americans. (Err, U.S.ians, but that sounds awkward :-D)

Hell, I like to be inclusive... let's just say we're referring to 
everyone on either continent, and be done with it :)

-- 
Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez <nic### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Mike Raiford wrote:
> > Chambers wrote:
> >
> >> we're all just Americans (well, those of us in the US, I mean).
> >
> > I wish some people would see it that way... Indeed, we are simply that,
> > Americans. (Err, U.S.ians, but that sounds awkward :-D)
>
> Unitedstatians.

Yes

The term "American" has always bugged me when referring to citizenship of the
U.S. _of_ A.  I've always interpreted USA to mean "the united states that are
in America*" not "the states that unite to form America."  Therefore, the USA
by my interpretation** is a country without an easy one-word "name."  Somebody
living in Patagonia is an American.  Somebody living in Hawaii though is
American only in the informal sense, referring the the USA.

*aka "The Americas"

**"America" as a pair of continents, and only informally but very commonly used
to refer to a country.

Charles

Post a reply to this message

Charles C wrote:
> The term "American" has always bugged me when referring to citizenship of the
> U.S. _of_ A. 

Me too. But when I was vacationing in Europe for many weeks, people would 
ask me where I'm from. I'd say "The United States."  They'd say "You mean 
America? You're American?"

So I figured if other countries call me American, it's good enough for me.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Charles C wrote:
>> The term "American" has always bugged me when referring to citizenship
>> of the
>> U.S. _of_ A. 
> 
> Me too. But when I was vacationing in Europe for many weeks, people
> would ask me where I'm from. I'd say "The United States."  They'd say
> "You mean America? You're American?"
> 
> So I figured if other countries call me American, it's good enough for me.

	Yeah - people from most nations refer to citizens of the US as
Americans. Some of the same people insist that America is not just the US.

-- 
Depend on the rabbit's foot if you will, but remember, it didn't help
the rabbit.


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message

Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
> > Charles C wrote:
> >> The term "American" has always bugged me when referring to citizenship
> >> of the
> >> U.S. _of_ A. 
> > 
> > Me too. But when I was vacationing in Europe for many weeks, people
> > would ask me where I'm from. I'd say "The United States."  They'd say
> > "You mean America? You're American?"
> > 
> > So I figured if other countries call me American, it's good enough for me.

>         Yeah - people from most nations refer to citizens of the US as
> Americans. Some of the same people insist that America is not just the US.

  Since there's no confusion, what's the harm?

  Nobody calls eg. a Brasilian an "American", even if he lives in the
Americal continent. The adjective "American" is reserved for citizens
of the USA, and nobody else in the continent is called like that. Everybody
else is called by their country.

  You could argue that it's unfair or pretentious or whatever, but since
it doesn't cause confusion, who cares?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   You could argue that it's unfair or pretentious or whatever, but since
> it doesn't cause confusion, who cares?

Right. Probably the most sane way of dealing with it. :)


-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> >   You could argue that it's unfair or pretentious or whatever, but since
> > it doesn't cause confusion, who cares?
>
> Right. Probably the most sane way of dealing with it. :)
>
>
> --
> ~Mike

Point taken.  I suppose part of it is that I prefer it when things as big as
countries have their own unique single-word names as most seem to.   And I
prefer it when technical correctness removes rather than adds confusion.

On a side note, my home-town was to be named after Portland, ME or Boston, MA
based on the best-two-out-of-three flips of a penny.

Charles

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   Since there's no confusion, what's the harm?

	No harm, beyond not using the terminology that the people themselves
use. In the US, the country is virtually never referred to as "America".
Well, OK - perhaps in phrases like "In today's America..." or "Only in
America...". But in formal writing, it's "US citizen", and not "American
citizen". Or "the US won n gold medals at the Olympics." Not "America
won n gold medals".

	Other than that, it's not a big deal.


-- 
If you shoot at mimes, should you use a silencer? - Steven Wright


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message

Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> But in formal writing, it's "US citizen", and not "American citizen".

  "American citizen" (in quotes) returns "only" about 1.7 million hits
in google...

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>>   Since there's no confusion, what's the harm?
> 
> 	No harm, beyond not using the terminology that the people themselves
> use. In the US, the country is virtually never referred to as "America".

I disagree. Informally, it's always America. "The American president met the 
Israel president today."   "African-American" and "ABC (American Born 
Chinese)".

Obviously in legal contexts it's going to say "US" instead of "America." 
Even there, people rarely say "USA" when speaking. If you're in a situation 
where saying "American" might actually imply the continent rather than the 
country, you would want to avoid it. If someone asks "what country are you 
from", there's no more confusion saying "I'm an American" than there is 
saying "I'm Canadian".

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 21 May 2009 13:34:46 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> "The American president met
> the Israel president today."

Actually, I usually hear/read this as "US President Barack Obama met with 
Israeli President Shimon Peres".  Maybe it's just my choice of news 
sources, though.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
>> "The American president met
>> the Israel president today."
> 
> Actually, I usually hear/read this as "US President Barack Obama met with 
> Israeli President Shimon Peres".  Maybe it's just my choice of news 
> sources, though.

	I'll agree with Darren. I hear both. Perhaps I was a bit too general.
"American" _is_ often used to refer to things from the US. My point was
that within the US, the country is rarely referred to as "America", with
the exception of certain _phrases_.

	Note where I used "the US" in the preceding paragraph. Within the US
(of A), it would be awkward to say those sentences replacing it with
"America". Some Americans do it, but they're more of an exception.
Perhaps this is a generational thing?

-- 
The beatings will continue until morale improves.


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
> Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
>> But in formal writing, it's "US citizen", and not "American citizen".
> 
>   "American citizen" (in quotes) returns "only" about 1.7 million hits
> in google...

	I meant "in formal writing within the US".

	How many of those hits are "formal writing" (e.g. official reports,
newspapers, etc)?

	Of those, how many originate from within the US?

	You of all people know that Google searches are a poor indicator -
beyond proving an existence theorem. All it takes is about 5 or so
instances that become popular and reproduced all over.

	Having said that, I'll grant that perhaps I overstated it.<G>

-- 
The beatings will continue until morale improves.


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 21 May 2009 23:05:04 -0500, Mueen Nawaz wrote:

> 	I'll agree with Darren. I hear both. Perhaps I was a bit too 
general.
> "American" _is_ often used to refer to things from the US. My point was
> that within the US, the country is rarely referred to as "America", with
> the exception of certain _phrases_.

Oh, I don't disagree with the premise, just the example he used isn't 
what I'm used to hearing or reading.

Jim

Post a reply to this message