Why is Oyster only 7% Black?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is a profound endorsement for Oyster needing to leave the Deal cluster. Like mucus, it is important somehow, yet grotesque to contemplate too deeply.

Let Oyster and Adams be forever together, in perfect harmony.

(But for those Oyster families who don't like Adams? You get Hardy. The ancient reasons that attached you to Deal have expired. Let it go. LET IT GO!) Look: your new anthem is already a hit!

Ah, the person who is pushing an "astroturf" (i.e., faux 'grass roots') campaign to push Oyster out of Deal.

As opposed to what? Those pushing for a geography-based reason to move Oyster to Hardy? Or those pushing an academically-based reason to move Oyster to Adams? Or perhaps everyone? Because if it makes sense to move Eaton to Hardy (and it does), then it makes even more sense to move Oyster to Hardy.

Oyster shouldn't feed anywhere! It HAS a middle school in place!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
By the way, that guy in the picture is totally not black. He can call himself anything he wants, but I would bet my life that he has not faced the same sort of discrimination at school, at work, on the street, or by law enforcement officials than someone who "looks" black. You can say "black" comes in all colors, but there is no way that guy is perceived by others as black first. And discrimination is all about how people perceive you.

The guy in the picture IS totally black, by US customs and practice. Back in the day he would have been barred from voting or attending white schools if anyone knew his ancestry. Heck, if he were to run into a klansman tomorrow I doubt he'd be embraced.

There is some validity (and some inaccuracies) in what both of you are saying. The guy in the photo is "black," as it is socially constructed in this country, because that is how he chooses to identify himself. However, if he chose to identify as white, few would question him (white supremacists who cling to the "one drop rule" aside). We are no longer living, for the most part, in a society that discriminates against people based solely on their racial ancestry. If someone looks white, they will generally be treated as such, whatever that entails (i.e., hailing a taxi, applying for a job, casual encounters with law enforcement, etc). If people only know that you're black because you tell them, your life experiences will be very different from those who are clearly black from a distance.

And what is your expertise in this matter?

Um, let's see: Common sense, personal experience and observation. I sure hope that my "expertise" passes muster with you

DP here. I share this pp's expertise plus have looked at racial and ethnic identity as a social scientist and I think this pp is right. It's part of human psychology to make assumptions about people based on what is most obvious about them. A guy like the guy in the picture can identify personally as black but when he walks into a store he'll be treated like a white guy and in our society being thought to be white is a winning ticket in the halls of the powerful. Not every day and not by everyone but this problem persists in our society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This person is "black," seriously ... and has always (as long as I've known him) publicly self-identified himself as such. I know him personally.

(this picture is obviously a "public" picture of him, so I don't think it compromises any privacy concerns )

be careful about your assumptions. Melanin works in mysterious ways.

I'm glad you put "black" in quotes because that is a joke. How pathetic for a white man who has 1/1000000 african heritage (like all human beings descended from the first homo sapiens in Africa) would try to latch on the black people by saying he's black. How disgusting. He actually looks a lot like that guy from the movie "Soul Man", which is about a white guys who paints himself brown to pull off some prank. People are shameless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This person is "black," seriously ... and has always (as long as I've known him) publicly self-identified himself as such. I know him personally.

(this picture is obviously a "public" picture of him, so I don't think it compromises any privacy concerns )

be careful about your assumptions. Melanin works in mysterious ways.

I'm glad you put "black" in quotes because that is a joke. How pathetic for a white man who has 1/1000000 african heritage (like all human beings descended from the first homo sapiens in Africa) would try to latch on the black people by saying he's black. How disgusting. He actually looks a lot like that guy from the movie "Soul Man", which is about a white guys who paints himself brown to pull off some prank. People are shameless.

you know all his ancestors and can state he is 1/1000000 african heritage? I know people 'whiter' than he looks with an unmistakeably african-descended parent.
I can just imagine the uproar if he claimed to be white and was 'outed'

[Anonymous]

Don't know all of his ancestors and neither does he or you. You race police are disgusting. A lot of white people have an african-descended parent. In fact, genetically nearly 10% of white people in the US have African heritage. They don't go around pretending to be black to get benefits and prove some kind of political agenda. The fact that this guy is a politician is so telling. A shameful imposter wanting to rule the people.

[Anonymous]

This stuff gets ridiculous. Part of Fenty's problem was that some didn't consider him "black enough"...

This divisiveness on race and arbitrary criteria on what somebody is or isn't is pointless and destructive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is a profound endorsement for Oyster needing to leave the Deal cluster. Like mucus, it is important somehow, yet grotesque to contemplate too deeply.

Let Oyster and Adams be forever together, in perfect harmony.

(But for those Oyster families who don't like Adams? You get Hardy. The ancient reasons that attached you to Deal have expired. Let it go. LET IT GO!) Look: your new anthem is already a hit!

Ah, the person who is pushing an "astroturf" (i.e., faux 'grass roots') campaign to push Oyster out of Deal.

As opposed to what? Those pushing for a geography-based reason to move Oyster to Hardy? Or those pushing an academically-based reason to move Oyster to Adams? Or perhaps everyone? Because if it makes sense to move Eaton to Hardy (and it does), then it makes even more sense to move Oyster to Hardy.

It makes the most sense to acknowledge Rock Creek Park as the natural demarcation for school zones. There are actually very few east west routes to get across the Park.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This person is "black," seriously ... and has always (as long as I've known him) publicly self-identified himself as such. I know him personally.

(this picture is obviously a "public" picture of him, so I don't think it compromises any privacy concerns )

be careful about your assumptions. Melanin works in mysterious ways.

I'm glad you put "black" in quotes because that is a joke. How pathetic for a white man who has 1/1000000 african heritage (like all human beings descended from the first homo sapiens in Africa) would try to latch on the black people by saying he's black. How disgusting. He actually looks a lot like that guy from the movie "Soul Man", which is about a white guys who paints himself brown to pull off some prank. People are shameless.

you know all his ancestors and can state he is 1/1000000 african heritage? I know people 'whiter' than he looks with an unmistakeably african-descended parent.
I can just imagine the uproar if he claimed to be white and was 'outed'

Good point. To me, that pic looks like a well-known female Native American politician now in the Senate. But I may be wrong.

[Anonymous]

Plessy v Ferguson institutionalize the one drop rule in the U S. That is, if you have a drop of Black blood then you are Black. Unlike other countries like Brazil, for instance, in the U S blackness is not based on looks but based on heritage. So the man in the picture can identify as Black and his doing so should not be derided given that for the most part we still live by the one drop rule. Plessy looked White and was only one eighth Black but still had to ride in the Blacks only railroad car. Doesn't matter that this was hundreds if years ago b/c the rule is alive and well today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Plessy v Ferguson institutionalize the one drop rule in the U S. That is, if you have a drop of Black blood then you are Black. Unlike other countries like Brazil, for instance, in the U S blackness is not based on looks but based on heritage. So the man in the picture can identify as Black and his doing so should not be derided given that for the most part we still live by the one drop rule. Plessy looked White and was only one eighth Black but still had to ride in the Blacks only railroad car. Doesn't matter that this was hundreds if years ago b/c the rule is alive and well today.

Who still lives by the one drop rule? You, skinheads and other ignoramuses?!? And who is enforcing this "rule," exactly? Do you actually think the man in the picture has cab drivers inquiring about the quantum of black blood in his veins before they agree to pick him up and deliver him to his destination? He is treated the way he looks/how others perceive him: As a white man. Why is that so hard for you to understand? And why are you so invested in perpetuating the myth of white racial purity? Are only "pure" whites allowed to be white in your world? Why is it that Arabs and Hispanics can have buckets (not drops) of black blood running through their veins and they are allowed to simply be (white) Arabs and (white) Hispanics in this country...as long as they look "white"? Please stop trying to enforce white supremacists notions of race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Plessy v Ferguson institutionalize the one drop rule in the U S. That is, if you have a drop of Black blood then you are Black. Unlike other countries like Brazil, for instance, in the U S blackness is not based on looks but based on heritage. So the man in the picture can identify as Black and his doing so should not be derided given that for the most part we still live by the one drop rule. Plessy looked White and was only one eighth Black but still had to ride in the Blacks only railroad car. Doesn't matter that this was hundreds if years ago b/c the rule is alive and well today.

Said like a true Klansman! Good for you. Let me remind you that Congress decided at one point that African Americans were 2/3s of a person. Many courts also decided that slaves shouldn't be allowed to hold property. So, I'm sure you're okay with this.

The rest of us know that our government has gotten it wrong. And not just to people of color- to the Japanese during WWII to Native Americans, etc... Racism, whether government sanctioned or not, is wrong. That is why there is still so much hate in the world and specifically in the US.

[Anonymous]

Don't make assumptions. I am the poster who wrote the info re Plessy and I am Af American and very obviously Black. My point is that because of the history of this country w/r/t race it is perfectly logical that this man should identify as Black and he should not be derided for doing so. And by the way there are plenty of people who agree with the notion that Blacks are 3/5 (it was 3/5 not 2/3) a White person to this day, so don't get it twisted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don't make assumptions. I am the poster who wrote the info re Plessy and I am Af American and very obviously Black. My point is that because of the history of this country w/r/t race it is perfectly logical that this man should identify as Black and he should not be derided for doing so. And by the way there are plenty of people who agree with the notion that Blacks are 3/5 (it was 3/5 not 2/3) a White person to this day, so don't get it twisted.

I assumed that you were black, because in my experience, the most ardent supporters of the one drop "rule" are white supremacists and certain black people (who are unwittingly trying to enforce white supremacist notions of whiteness). People who believe that blacks are 3/5 of a person were/are wrong. People who believe that one drop of black blood makes you black (if that's not how you choose to identify) are wrong. If you believe this man is treated as anything other than a white man the vast majority of the time, YOU are wrong. I believe that people should be called what they want to be called. So if he identifies as black, that is completely fine with me. One last word of advice: As I stated in my earlier post, you really should think about why you're perpetuating the myth of white racial purity. As a black person, that REALLY should not be you fight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This person is "black," seriously ... and has always (as long as I've known him) publicly self-identified himself as such. I know him personally.

(this picture is obviously a "public" picture of him, so I don't think it compromises any privacy concerns )

be careful about your assumptions. Melanin works in mysterious ways.

I'm glad you put "black" in quotes because that is a joke. How pathetic for a white man who has 1/1000000 african heritage (like all human beings descended from the first homo sapiens in Africa) would try to latch on the black people by saying he's black. How disgusting. He actually looks a lot like that guy from the movie "Soul Man", which is about a white guys who paints himself brown to pull off some prank. People are shameless.

you know all his ancestors and can state he is 1/1000000 african heritage? I know people 'whiter' than he looks with an unmistakeably african-descended parent.
I can just imagine the uproar if he claimed to be white and was 'outed'

Good point. To me, that pic looks like a well-known female Native American politician now in the Senate. But I may be wrong.

Not for you to question or criticize, given she has as much native american blood as the chief of the tribe does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't make assumptions. I am the poster who wrote the info re Plessy and I am Af American and very obviously Black. My point is that because of the history of this country w/r/t race it is perfectly logical that this man should identify as Black and he should not be derided for doing so. And by the way there are plenty of people who agree with the notion that Blacks are 3/5 (it was 3/5 not 2/3) a White person to this day, so don't get it twisted.

I assumed that you were black, because in my experience, the most ardent supporters of the one drop "rule" are white supremacists and certain black people (who are unwittingly trying to enforce white supremacist notions of whiteness). People who believe that blacks are 3/5 of a person were/are wrong. People who believe that one drop of black blood makes you black (if that's not how you choose to identify) are wrong. If you believe this man is treated as anything other than a white man the vast majority of the time, YOU are wrong. I believe that people should be called what they want to be called. So if he identifies as black, that is completely fine with me. One last word of advice: As I stated in my earlier post, you really should think about why you're perpetuating the myth of white racial purity. As a black person, that REALLY should not be you fight.

The "one drop" rule is so idiotic because if the logic is that "one drop" makes you "black", then so too does "one drop" make you "white" or whatever else.

The idea of "racial purity" is ridiculous given how much people have moved and migrated and intermarried across the millennia. Anyone who thinks they are "pure" anything is likely ignorant of history and/or delusional.