Should white Americans be called "Indigenous Europeans?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

NP. I agree with you, but there might be a point to be made here. To some extent, white Americans are not allowed the same pride of socio-identity/heritage as everyone else. So that leads to them acting out in unfortunate ways, politically and otherwise.

Eh? What's Saint Patrick's Day, for example?

A generic holiday for wearing green and drinking? It may feel special for some whites, but I don't know lots of white people who think it is all about honoring their heritage. Do you find there to be a lot of white people who take that holiday quite seriously?

No. It is an Irish-American holiday. Maybe next year go to a St. Patrick's Day parade? There's one in Gaithersburg.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Persian is an ethnicity. Iran is 61% Persian, so Iranian and Persian is not interchangeable, since a good chunk of the population is not Persian.

Thank you.

The title of this post is beyond stupid. Obviously the OP has zero idea what the word indigenous means. However, I'm appalled that people don't know the difference between ethnicity and geopolitical boundaries for countries or empires.

Romans weren't all "Roman," but they all lived under the same empire. Do you understand Prussia poster and the rest of you lunkheads?

Everybody in the Austro-Hungarian empire was Austro-Hungarian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

NP. I agree with you, but there might be a point to be made here. To some extent, white Americans are not allowed the same pride of socio-identity/heritage as everyone else. So that leads to them acting out in unfortunate ways, politically and otherwise.

Eh? What's Saint Patrick's Day, for example?

A generic holiday for wearing green and drinking? It may feel special for some whites, but I don't know lots of white people who think it is all about honoring their heritage. Do you find there to be a lot of white people who take that holiday quite seriously?

No. It is an Irish-American holiday. Maybe next year go to a St. Patrick's Day parade? There's one in Gaithersburg.

Lol. As someone who used to live in Boston, I enjoy your attempt at condescion. For sure, there are Irish Americans who find the holiday important for reasons of heritage. As a percentage of whites in the U.S., that's gonna be a very small number. Trust that whites in general aren't uniting in pride every March (except maybe for the NCAA tournament).

[Anonymous]

Why is it that white Americans are the only group not allowed to describe themselves according to their ancestry, whereas there are African Americans, Asian and Pacific Islander Americans, Latinos, etc. I think that's OP's point. White is an outdated term and does not describe ancestral origin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is it that white Americans are the only group not allowed to describe themselves according to their ancestry, whereas there are African Americans, Asian and Pacific Islander Americans, Latinos, etc. I think that's OP's point. White is an outdated term and does not describe ancestral origin.

That maybe, but OP still doesn't know the definition of "indigenous."

[Anonymous]

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/blue-skinned-people-kentucky-reveal-todays-genetic-lesson/story?id=15759819

Pink people aren't inbred but blue people are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're not indigenous to here though. European American is fine with me. In another thread, pink skinned people are associated with being inbred, so I no longer like being described as white or pink as a skin color. You might need Eastern, Western, Southern, and Northern European American classifications, or multiracial European American.

Pink skin is considered inbred?

Read the thread about blondes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is it that white Americans are the only group not allowed to describe themselves according to their ancestry, whereas there are African Americans, Asian and Pacific Islander Americans, Latinos, etc. I think that's OP's point. White is an outdated term and does not describe ancestral origin.

This is not their choice, I think, it is government making people fill out stupid forms asking for this information. Racism in the US comes from the top, always has and the way things are looking always will, no matter we have African American president. Some of the first immigrants, the celebrated Puritans, cheered and believed that all indigenous people should be killed as they are an obstacle to their God's country.... Manifest destiny, immigration laws meant to limit diverse immigration, prejudice was not only aimed at non-whites here, Slavic, Italian, Irish, Greek, you name it it existed and still exists. Now you even have racism of old African Americans towards new African immigrants here, you have evangelists voting for person using profane language, which is considered a huge offense, why? Because they are first and foremost racist, no matter religion and proper behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it that white Americans are the only group not allowed to describe themselves according to their ancestry, whereas there are African Americans, Asian and Pacific Islander Americans, Latinos, etc. I think that's OP's point. White is an outdated term and does not describe ancestral origin.

That maybe, but OP still doesn't know the definition of "indigenous."

Ok. You're totally right. You win the award for showing that someone didn't quite use a word correctly. Good job.

[Anonymous]

Persian/Iranian poster, you totally missed my point.

Not all "white" people have roots in Europe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is it that white Americans are the only group not allowed to describe themselves according to their ancestry, whereas there are African Americans, Asian and Pacific Islander Americans, Latinos, etc. I think that's OP's point. White is an outdated term and does not describe ancestral origin.

And what is the problem with a white person from European descent saying they are of French or Hungrian descent? I have no problem with that. However it is not accurate for all American whites to be called Euromerican, American European, or Indigenous European. As another pp pointed out you conveniently ignore a long history of migration. You do know there are very fair skinned throughout the world who would be perhaps called white yet don't hail from Europe? In America there are people of this type of background that you would never outwardly know are non Euro descent yet you would be incorrectly lumping them as such with your weird Indigenous European name.


What exactly are you trying to "name"? Is it color? Is it descent/ethnicity/heritage? If it's the latter we have that already with many populations who gladly identify as Irish American, Italian American, and of X country heritage or simply of X country.

[Anonymous]

Pretty sure some group would be offended by it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I dislike the term "white" as it is not very descriptive. White people have Euro ancestry. Do you like the term "white" or would you prefer another term to refer to your skin color or ancestral background?

White Americans who live here now lived in Europe for thousands of years, and are thus indigenous to that continent. What would be a better term for them?

What do you that you have time to waste thinking about things like this?

Who cares if you dislike a term? No one cares about your preferences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is it that white Americans are the only group not allowed to describe themselves according to their ancestry, whereas there are African Americans, Asian and Pacific Islander Americans, Latinos, etc. I think that's OP's point. White is an outdated term and does not describe ancestral origin.

Who is doing this supposed not allowing? I am a white American, and I describe myself according to my ancestry whenever it's relevant. Nobody has ever arrested me or fined me or otherwise stopped me from doing this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What if you're Persian, for instance?

Persia does not exist. How can you be Persian?

It did exist and carries enough historic importance that it is still used today as a descriptor

For Iranians who don't want to be associated with current day barbaric Arabs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it that white Americans are the only group not allowed to describe themselves according to their ancestry, whereas there are African Americans, Asian and Pacific Islander Americans, Latinos, etc. I think that's OP's point. White is an outdated term and does not describe ancestral origin.

Who is doing this supposed not allowing? I am a white American, and I describe myself according to my ancestry whenever it's relevant. Nobody has ever arrested me or fined me or otherwise stopped me from doing this.

Right? I know lots of people who are openly proud about their Irish, or Italian, or German, or Scottish, or Polish, or whatever ancestry. Have you heard of St. Patrick's Day or Oktoberfest? Were you aware that there is not only a Black History Month and Women's History Month, but also an official Irish-American Heritage Month, during which there is a ceremony IN THE WHITE HOUSE? Or Jewish American Heritage Month? Or German-American Day? General Pulaski Memorial Day? Italian-American Heritage and Culture Month?

This idea that it's whites who are the real persecuted minority is just bullshit. Yes, our existing racial classification system is stupid, but it's not because it disadvantages white people.