When you think of Africans

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have a feeling I'm going back and forward with the same two Jamaican/something else women. This is no longer an exercise in education, but rather one to argue and nitpick.

So.......I'm out. But in the meantime, READ people and for the love of God, LEARN.

*back and forth

[Anonymous]

Black is still black and the white man doesn't see any of us as different so I don't get all this divisive crap. Others calling themselves African American doesn't diminish what your ancestors endured PP so relax please. African American is not some special exclusive club that ordinary folks with no direct ties to slavery cannot join. I play this thread in my head and switched the characters for white, the whole thing just sounds ridiculous!.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You are DEFINITELY white. LOL...Why do you even care about this issue? You aren't black, you aren't African-American....and you aren't a factor in this discussion. Please note that the days of whites telling blacks what we're allowed to call ourselves are long over. You are about 60 years too late in the making.

NP here - but it appears the only person who is telling others what they call themselves is you. You have a problen with 2nd or 3rd generation descendants of African immigrants referring to themselves as African American. Or rather, you say, "well, they can self-identify as AA, but that's not the correct usage of the term."

The only problem is, the "authority" (not that I consider Wikipedia an authority on anything, but you brought it up) directly contradicts your statement: "African Americans (also referred to as Black Americans or Afro-Americans, and formerly as American Negroes) are citizens or residents of the United States who have at least partial ancestry from any of the native populations of Sub-Saharan Africa."

So now you've resorted to dismissing other posters' statements with, "You must be white so your opinion doesn't matter." The lack of intellectual integrity is stunning.

I'm simply providing the definition. Don't blame me if you don't like this definition. It is what it is.

I'm EXTREMELY proud of my ancestors and the way in which they persevered in the US. I honor them by calling myself African American. So, while I don't begrudge anyone the right to call themselves African American, I don't get why they would even need/want to. Doesn't make any sense at all. What's even more ironic is that most African/Caribbean immigrants don't want to be called AAs and recognize that they aren't. The only ones bent out of shape are folks who were misguided in their Black American identity.

Oh here we go, Sistah Souljah over here. "You don't begrudge anyone calling themselves African American but you don't get why they would need to, doesnt' make sense at all" , if that's not a contradictory statement, I don't know what is.

You seem to think you have dibs on that term - African American-, that is the part I don't get. If you are so insistent on honoring your ancestors, wouldn't you be proud that other people want to be associated with that term? Isn't imitation the highest form of flattery?

OMG....What is wrong with you? Trust me, in America, being African-American is no damn prize. So, cool it with the "dibs on AA" term. Do you honestly think a racist cares if I'm AA vs. Jamaican?

Your need to name call shows your insecurity on this issue. I suggest you read up and educate yourself. Visit Ebsco and get you some scholarly articles. I don't engage in a debate with people who sink to name calling, so........enjoy that.

Well obviously you seem to think it is, hence the smug attitude- only you have the right to be called AAs because your ancestors sacrified and endured so much. Please, cry me a river, like African Americans are the only race to have ever been enslaved.

You visit ebsco and post your so called scholarly articles, prove your point. And I hope these ones say something different because the ones you've posted so far haven't supported your argument.

[Anonymous]

The real basis for this arguing:

1) Blacks that are not African Americans do not want to be associated with African Americans.
2) African Americans are constantly trying to break the stereotypes causing #1.
3) If you have what is considered to be Black features in America, you are considered African American and most people do not see a difference between Black and African American other than group #1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a feeling I'm going back and forward with the same two Jamaican/something else women. This is no longer an exercise in education, but rather one to argue and nitpick.

So.......I'm out. But in the meantime, READ people and for the love of God, LEARN.

*back and forth

I am one of the ones you've been going back and forth with. I'm not Jamaican or other West Indian (at least directly) myself - but both of my parents are of West Indian descent and neither of them have ancestors who were US slaves. They have been in this country for generations. My point is not about whether people who have immigrated to the US can call themselves AA. I am not trying to nitpick, but just really want to know where you got this definition from. I've seen references to City Data and ebsco made, but I don't readily see the references that support your defintion, so I'd just like to see them. I went to an HBCU, took several African American history classes (and was actually a history major) and I have never seen this stipulation that AAs must have had US slave ancestors. That is the point I keep harping on, and one that so far as I can tell, you have not answered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Usain Bolt - Black not AA
Jesse Jackson- AA

[/quot

But Obama is AA, because he's American.

Wrong, he is not AA bc none of his black ancestors were slaves in the U.S. He would be Kenyan-American. Oh Boy, the birthers just got more ammunitions!!! He is in trouble now!.

Well if one is a descendant of free blacks in America, and the free blacks had only intermingled with other free blacks, does that mean they are not AA. After all, their ancestors were not slaves. You see how your definition makes little sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a feeling I'm going back and forward with the same two Jamaican/something else women. This is no longer an exercise in education, but rather one to argue and nitpick.

So.......I'm out. But in the meantime, READ people and for the love of God, LEARN.

*back and forth

I am one of the ones you've been going back and forth with. I'm not Jamaican or other West Indian (at least directly) myself - but both of my parents are of West Indian descent and neither of them have ancestors who were US slaves. They have been in this country for generations. My point is not about whether people who have immigrated to the US can call themselves AA. I am not trying to nitpick, but just really want to know where you got this definition from. I've seen references to City Data and ebsco made, but I don't readily see the references that support your defintion, so I'd just like to see them. I went to an HBCU, took several African American history classes (and was actually a history major) and I have never seen this stipulation that AAs must have had US slave ancestors. That is the point I keep harping on, and one that so far as I can tell, you have not answered.

That person gave you answers. You just want to argue because you don't agree. Have you even bothered to do some research? Why are you looking for others to do your homework?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Usain Bolt - Black not AA
Jesse Jackson- AA

[/quot

But Obama is AA, because he's American.

Wrong, he is not AA bc none of his black ancestors were slaves in the U.S. He would be Kenyan-American. Oh Boy, the birthers just got more ammunitions!!! He is in trouble now!.

Well if one is a descendant of free blacks in America, and the free blacks had only intermingled with other free blacks, does that mean they are not AA. After all, their ancestors were not slaves. You see how your definition makes little sense.

If you are a descendant of free blacks in America, somewhere along the lines there was a slave. It is your analogy that makes little sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a feeling I'm going back and forward with the same two Jamaican/something else women. This is no longer an exercise in education, but rather one to argue and nitpick.

So.......I'm out. But in the meantime, READ people and for the love of God, LEARN.

*back and forth

I am one of the ones you've been going back and forth with. I'm not Jamaican or other West Indian (at least directly) myself - but both of my parents are of West Indian descent and neither of them have ancestors who were US slaves. They have been in this country for generations. My point is not about whether people who have immigrated to the US can call themselves AA. I am not trying to nitpick, but just really want to know where you got this definition from. I've seen references to City Data and ebsco made, but I don't readily see the references that support your defintion, so I'd just like to see them. I went to an HBCU, took several African American history classes (and was actually a history major) and I have never seen this stipulation that AAs must have had US slave ancestors. That is the point I keep harping on, and one that so far as I can tell, you have not answered.

That person gave you answers. You just want to argue because you don't agree. Have you even bothered to do some research? Why are you looking for others to do your homework?

Um, yes! I have been looking for this information ever since it was brought up on this thread. Since others have mentioned the sources for this information/defintion, yes, I was hoping they would make them easily accessible for all. And no, the pp did not give any answers, other than quoting the poet that came up with the term, who, by my reading, supports a much broader definition for the term than is being advanced here. So yes, please, do my homework for me, because I haven't found anything yet.

[Anonymous]

You do know that not all Blacks in America were slaves, right. As a matter of fact, there is a history of free Blacks who actually owned slaves.

It is not necessarily true that eventually, somewhere down the line descendants of free BLacks mated with descendants of slaves of USA. What if they mated with descendants of slaves, but the descendants ancestors were slaves from Trinidad. Would they be African American or not. We are using your definition of course.

[Anonymous]

21:25 you sound a bit desperate and insecure and need to let it go. Damn! Call yourself what you want...nothing anyone says will make you comfortable anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You do know that not all Blacks in America were slaves, right. As a matter of fact, there is a history of free Blacks who actually owned slaves.

It is not necessarily true that eventually, somewhere down the line descendants of free BLacks mated with descendants of slaves of USA. What if they mated with descendants of slaves, but the descendants ancestors were slaves from Trinidad. Would they be African American or not. We are using your definition of course.

Free blacks were those who were eventually emancipated. Do you have evidence that Africans came directly here and were free?

[Anonymous]

Back to the original topic, Hoda Kotb is Egyptian. Is she Caucasian, yes right? In the USA, she fits the "look" of a biracial or AA but as an Egyptian, she would be of what ancestry?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:21:25 you sound a bit desperate and insecure and need to let it go. Damn! Call yourself what you want...nothing anyone says will make you comfortable anyway.

Don't worry - there is absolutely nothing here to make me stop calling myself AA, and I am comfortable with it. It's just that I think your definition is WRONG and I want to see where your actual support is. But I will admit to being a bit peeved with the AA posters who insist that those of us with West Indian heritage cannot call ourselves AA, as if we are somehow impostors when we claim AA heritage. As if my parents' generation weren't right there fighting in the US wars, suffering through Jim Crow and marching on Washington with your parents. My ancestors weren't here for the emancipation, but we share the much of the same history and heritage and it quite frankly never occurred to me that some of my AA "brothers and sisters" don't think we are also AA. But oh well, you're right, I probably need to let it go. Still would like to see those scholarly articles though ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:21:25 you sound a bit desperate and insecure and need to let it go. Damn! Call yourself what you want...nothing anyone says will make you comfortable anyway.

Don't worry - there is absolutely nothing here to make me stop calling myself AA, and I am comfortable with it. It's just that I think your definition is WRONG and I want to see where your actual support is. But I will admit to being a bit peeved with the AA posters who insist that those of us with West Indian heritage cannot call ourselves AA, as if we are somehow impostors when we claim AA heritage. As if my parents' generation weren't right there fighting in the US wars, suffering through Jim Crow and marching on Washington with your parents. My ancestors weren't here for the emancipation, but we share the much of the same history and heritage and it quite frankly never occurred to me that some of my AA "brothers and sisters" don't think we are also AA. But oh well, you're right, I probably need to let it go. Still would like to see those scholarly articles though ...

I am not the poster that you have been going back and forth with. See how paranoid and defensive you are? It's really weird seeing you come unglued. While you might still call yourself AA, I get a feeling that this thread will come to mind when you do so.

BTW, how did your ancestors get to the US prior to the Civil Rights Movement? Just curious. Because I know that prior to the passing of The Immigration and Naturalization Act, it was damn near impossible for blacks to migrate to America.