Is the Federation segregated???

[Nerys Myk]

Anticitizen,



You seem to want to limit words to a single definition. Thats not gonna happen. And I;m pretty sure the way we and most of society uses the term "African-American" is the primary definition. You're the one looking for an alternative one that fits your point of view.

So what about RACE ( as you like to spell it) is bugging you, again? You keep talking about RACE but I'm still puzzled.

There is only one RACE, and thats the humans RACE. Your attempt to use "Negroid" shows you're stuck in outmoded ideas. What we really have is people of various cultures from various geographic regions. Some of whom share certain physical characteristics. African-American is cultural, history, and heritage based term. There is no "African-American" RACE.

Joel Kirk is black, so I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt on his use and preferences of black and African-American. And yes their definitions (note the plural) allow them to be use intrchangably if needed

Addressing a room full of African-Americans as "black" or visa versa is not the example you gave.

Someone will say 'African Americans' when they're not intending to specifically speak about people of African descent - they're just using it as a 'politically correct' way to speak about blacks. It happens ALL THE TIME.

Though that whole sentence makes my head hurt. And that often happens when "PC" is brought up pro or con.

 

[Anticitizen]

Anticitizen,



You seem to want to limit words to a single definition. Thats not gonna happen. And I;m pretty sure the way we and most of society uses the term "African-American" is the primary definition. You're the one looking for an alternative one that fits your point of view.

So what about RACE ( as you like to spell it) is bugging you, again? You keep talking about RACE but I'm still puzzled.

There is only one RACE, and thats the humans RACE.

Your attempt to use "Negroid" shows you're stuck in outmoded ideas. What we really have is people of various cultures from various geographic regions. Some of whom share certain physical characteristics. African-American is cultural, history, and heritage based term. There is no "African-American" RACE.

Oh, don't give me that. The census, and every medical form you will ever fill out asks for your race. Don't pretend this late in the conversation that it's a word I've been misusing in some way. Racial issues? Racial profiling? Racism? Ever heard these terms?

Why do you think anything about race is bugging me other than a slew of loose, ill-defined terms being bandied about?

As for Negroid, from the Wiki article on the topic:

In physical anthropology the term is one of the three general racial classifications of humans — Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid. Under this classification scheme, humans are divisible into broad sub-groups based on phenotypic characteristics such as cranial and skeletal morphology. Such classifications remain in use today in the fields of anthropology and forensics to help identify the ethnicity, lineage and origin of human remains."

Look, right there's an example of its scientific use. And hey, they use the word 'race.'

The word 'negroid' gets criticism because it sounds similar to a slur, but finding it offensive would be as silly as finding the word 'caucasoid' offensive for some reason.

Joel Kirk is black, so I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt on his use and preferences of black and African-American. And yes their definitions (note the plural) allow them to be use intrchangably if needed

That just makes no sense. They are two traits. One can be black. One can be African-American. One can be both black and African-American. One can be African American and not black. One can be black and not African-American. They're not interchangeable. Like I said in my previous post, they're both circles on a Venn diagram that can overlap. Problem is, they overlap so much here in the U.S. that people choose to use them interchangeably, when they are not. And that's my issue: it's a matter of precision.

It's the same reason I took issue with 'Native American' and prefer 'Aboriginal American'. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF BEING PRECISE.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Oh, don't give me that. The census, and every medical form you will ever fill out asks for your race. Don't pretend this late in the conversation that it's a word I've been misusing in some way. Racial issues? Racial profiling? Racism? Ever heard these terms?

Why do you think anything about race is bugging me other than a slew of loose, ill-defined terms being bandied about?

As for Negroid, from the Wiki article on the topic:

In physical anthropology the term is one of the three general racial classifications of humans — Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid. Under this classification scheme, humans are divisible into broad sub-groups based on phenotypic characteristics such as cranial and skeletal morphology. Such classifications remain in use today in the fields of anthropology and forensics to help identify the ethnicity, lineage and origin of human remains."

Look, right there's an example of its scientific use. And hey, they use the word 'race.'

The word 'negroid' gets criticism because it sounds similar to a slur, but finding it offensive would be as silly as finding the word 'caucasoid' offensive for some reason.

Joel Kirk is black, so I'm gonna give him the benefit of the doubt on his use and preferences of black and African-American. And yes their definitions (note the plural) allow them to be use intrchangably if needed

That just makes no sense. They are two traits. One can be black. One can be African-American. One can be both black and African-American. One can be African American and not black. One can be black and not African-American. They're not interchangeable. Like I said in my previous post, they're both circles on a Venn diagram that can overlap. Problem is, they overlap so much here in the U.S. that people choose to use them interchangeably, when they are not. And that's my issue: it's a matter of precision.

Wiki? No thanks. In broader scientific circles its fallen in to disfavor along with Caucasoid and Mongoloid and the whole three races idea.

I didn't say you were misusing "Race" but that you keep bringing up Race as the point of your arguement but never actually discuss how it fits in. "Its about RACE, not culture or Heritage" Isnt that your oft repeated line?

Yes we get to tick all sorts of boxes on forms. But how much of that is "accounting" ? From a scientitific, rather than accounting stand point there is one race. And yes I know all of those terms. But they dont contribute to the discusion we are having: the use of terms black and African-American is society,

And I again I say the "black" in a certain context means An American of African ancestry as does "African-American". And in that particular context they are interchangable. So for me, Joel Kirk or Whoopie Goldberg using either term to describe themselves is 100 percent correct. When Charliez Theron uses "African-American", while true its more or less a punchline. Why? Because "African" in that context is limited to certain Africans and their decendents. Ones who's famlial residency is a bit longer than a hand full of centuries. Thats what the term means in American English. Especially in an informal context. One could add "black" to the mix making it Black African-American. But why bother? Most people know what you mean.

Good luck on your quest to correct the language and define the races.

 

[Nerys Myk]

It's the same reason I took issue with 'Native American' and prefer 'Aboriginal American'. IT'S JUST A MATTER OF BEING PRECISE.

Why?

aboriginal
Synonyms: native, autochthonous, born, domestic, endemic, indigenous
Antonyms: nonindigenous, nonnative

 

[-Brett-]

 

[Joel_Kirk]

I just want to give a to No North Pole Penguins. He (or she, if I'm incorrect) is definitely making some good points.

Holy Surak. Apparently, I'm speaking Klingon or something, because you keep responding that I don't think people should be proud or their heritage or some shit. You're completely missing the point.

There was also a 'black' captain. Oh frankly, I'd hate to use that term and differentiate a "white person" from a "black person".

I don't mind "black"...

"African-American" is okay...

Okay. See that? Right there? Where you said "African-American" is an okay way to differentiate between a white person or a black person?

Last I checked, there are Indians in Africa too, so depending their preference, they may be called Indo-African-Americans...

Again, that previous comment of mine is for me personally. Another African-American may prefer to use the term 'black' or 'brown.'

Avery Brooks, in an interview, preferred the term 'brown,' IIRC. Morgan Freeman didn't like the term 'African-American' or 'black.'

We--African-Americans/black individuals--are not monolithic.

Again, if a white individual such as Charlize Theron or Alice Krige wants to call themselves 'African-American'...more power to them. However, to identify with the struggles that many African-Americans (who look like me, or LeVar Burton, or Michael Dorn) have gone through...is going to be bit iffy.

On that same note, there are black people who are 'black' that grew up in Asia: Lou Jing is half-black/half-Chinese...yet, she can call herself Chinese or Afro-Asian. Crystal Kay is half-Korean/half-black...and she can be Japanese-Korean-African-American..what have you...

It's their call.

There, Penguin, is an example of interchanging the terms that you say never happens. Right there.

I'm talking about race. RACE! Not heritage, culture, whatever. It's you guys that are bringing that stuff up. But all you're doing is using an alternate definition for the term "African (or whatever) American" by using it to describe culture and heritage. You're NOT addressing the complete lack of usefulness to describe race. "African American" and "Black" are NOT interchangeable. A person may be BOTH African American and black, but that doesn't mean they're synonyms. They're two different categories that can overlap, like a Venn diagram.

After culture was brought up, I made a completely separate point about its lack of usefulness in describing culture, by way of Africa being a huge continent, with very many different cultures. Hence my invocation of 'Asian American' as a counterexample - "Japanese-American" might have a utility in describing your heritage to someone. "Indian American" might as well, once you clarify that you're not talking about aboriginal Americans.

But "Asian American" is so broad and so vague, covering hundreds of cultures across the largest continent in the world, so as to be completely useless. It describes precisely *neither* race nor culture.

Judging from my research and my close friends who are Asian-Americans, they will tell you the same thing. Basically, they have roots in Asia...and they are American.

Very simple.

Then there are various ethnicities: Korean-American, Japanese-American, Vietnamese-American, and so forth.

Again, very simple.

As aforementioned, I do hope your upset that people of color referring themselves to 'insert-American' is the same upset when white people refer to themselves as Irish-American, Italian, Russo-American, Franco-American...and flaunt their cultural pride.

I addressed it in my second post in this thread on the topic.

I didn't see that addressed.

If it was, it wasn't clear.

I don't care what people call themselves. Charlize can call herself an "African American" all she wants. All I've done is point out the complete lack of utility of the term to describe race, and, secondary, the lack of utility of the term to describe a culture, as there's no such thing as 'African culture'. There are many African cultures.

I disagree.

'American culture' differs now than it did back in the 30s. However, America has is made up of many different people...beliefs...and cultures.

'American culture' is baseball, basketball, hot dogs, the idea of democracy, etc....etc...etc. Yet, African-Americans, Asian-Americans, Euro-Americans all enjoy those aspects to various degrees.

I own and have read Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. Is that a good start?

Judging from this conversation, you might want to broaden that library. (Not only in regards to 'African-Americans'...but 'Asian-Americans'...and 'Latino-Americans).

Off the top of my head: Asian-Americans: The Movement and the Moment by Steve Louie and Glenn Omatsu..some writings by James Baldwin...Alex Haley...

You might want to view the documentary by Rene Tajima-Pena (if you can get your hands on it) called: 'My America...or Honk if You Love Buddha.'

And, I've noticed that you like to quote Wikipedia a lot. It's good for minor things, but shouldn't be the end all be all for something like this.

I actually want to do a project in the future about how Trek isn't as progressive as it claims; and I'm keeping track of threads like this that pop up. (It's some good and interesting stuff).

I missed this the first time around. In that regard, one could look at how Trek portrays each alien race as being one stereotypical group, with the same language, religion, etc. The Klingon Language. The Vulcan Philosphy. Etc.

You know, just like how most people think of 'Asian Americans'.

Or 'African-Americans'...or 'people of color' in general; yes, usually viewed through a monolithic lens...

 

[Nerys Myk]

You're welcome, Joel Kirk.

 

[Gary7]

This has been a fascinating thread. I wanted to post earlier, but held back... kind of spark near the kindling at times.

From what I can see, AntiCitizen has been missing an important point. Why should we be concerned with identifying someone of a specific race? "Asian" is rather ambiguous. So is "African American" and "Caucasian." There are so many variations to human genetics, especially at this point in time where there has been so much intermixing (due to the technology of travel making it readily possible). As such, I think these categories that have been conjured up are really losing their meaning. I do appreciate how there is a need for identification. We have height, weight, eye color, hair color, etc. Genetic heritage is obviously another... Asian, Caucasian, Indian, etc. But due to the melting pot effect, it's becoming harder to apply it accurately. Is it necessary? In this day and age of digitized photos, perhaps not.

Anyway, the OP started off on this assumption that the Federation appears segregated, based on their observation of not seeing very many black people. Even insinuating it being like the old south. Now with something so outlandish like that, I'm surprised a moderator didn't come on by and close it down. In any case, it did seem to continue on rather tame... until AntiCitizen started his (assuming male) participation with needing to identify "phenotype" and thinks "African American" is a lame ethnic designation because it is ambiguous. Um... why? This really didn't have anything to do with the topic. A member here who identifies himself as black, said he's OK with being called "black" or "African American." Need we go any further? Is this really the appropriate place to debate about whether or not "African American" is an appropriate term?

 

[Anticitizen]

I didn't say you were misusing "Race" but that you keep bringing up Race as the point of your arguement but never actually discuss how it fits in. "Its about RACE, not culture or Heritage" Isnt that your oft repeated line?

You did say I was misusing 'race'.

Race is the point of the topic. If you've missed how race fits in to a discussion about race, then I don't know what to tell you. Quite frankly, I have no idea where you're coming from, here.

And I again I say the "black" in a certain context means An American of African ancestry as does "African-American". And in that particular context they are interchangable. So for me, Joel Kirk or Whoopie Goldberg using either term to describe themselves is 100 percent correct. When Charliez Theron uses "African-American", while true its more or less a punchline.

This last line here highlights exactly what bugs me about the term. You've more or less just admitted that you think African American = black, regardless of whether that's true or not. And you don't care.

That's your prerogative. I'm not going to stop you from doing it. I can't. But it's wrong. And annoying. And helps reinforce stereotypes.

Why? Because "African" in that context is limited to certain Africans and their decendents. Ones who's famlial residency is a bit longer than a hand full of centuries. Thats what the term means in American English. Especially in an informal context. One could add "black" to the mix making it Black African-American. But why bother? Most people know what you mean.

Most people probably think dolphins are fish, too.

Why?

aboriginal
Synonyms: native, autochthonous, born, domestic, endemic, indigenous
Antonyms: nonindigenous, nonnative

Yeah, but see, anyone born in America is a native American. But only the original residents are aboriginal Americans. 'Aboriginal American' is more precise than 'Native American'.

I just want to give a to No North Pole Penguins. He (or she, if I'm incorrect) is definitely making some good points.

Holy Surak. Apparently, I'm speaking Klingon or something, because you keep responding that I don't think people should be proud or their heritage or some shit. You're completely missing the point.

I don't mind "black"...

"African-American" is okay...

Okay. See that? Right there? Where you said "African-American" is an okay way to differentiate between a white person or a black person?

Last I checked, there are Indians in Africa too, so depending their preference, they may be called Indo-African-Americans...

Again, that previous comment of mine is for me personally. Another African-American may prefer to use the term 'black' or 'brown.'

Avery Brooks, in an interview, preferred the term 'brown,' IIRC. Morgan Freeman didn't like the term 'African-American' or 'black.'

We--African-Americans/black individuals--are not monolithic.

Well, that's kinda been my point all along...

Again, if a white individual such as Charlize Theron or Alice Krige wants to call themselves 'African-American'...more power to them. However, to identify with the struggles that many African-Americans (who look like me, or LeVar Burton, or Michael Dorn) have gone through...is going to be bit iffy.

Right. Why did Charlize have it so much easier? She's an African-American just like Levar, Michael, and yourself, right?

See why that definition is lacking...?

On that same note, there are black people who are 'black' that grew up in Asia: Lou Jing is half-black/half-Chinese...yet, she can call herself Chinese or Afro-Asian. Crystal Kay is half-Korean/half-black...and she can be Japanese-Korean-African-American..what have you...

It's their call.

Judging from my research and my close friends who are Asian-Americans, they will tell you the same thing. Basically, they have roots in Asia...and they are American.

Very simple.

Then there are various ethnicities: Korean-American, Japanese-American, Vietnamese-American, and so forth.

Again, very simple.

I didn't see that addressed.

If it was, it wasn't clear.

It was. I was the one who first mentioned 'Asian American' as being imprecise. Why not just skip right to 'Vietnamese American'? The reason is not a pleasant one. It's grouping all Asians as vaguely the same, right down to how they look - despite phenotypes varying widely across the Asian continent.

In a recent PBS interview, a panel of Asian American writers discussed how some groups include people from the Middle East in the Asian American category.[26] Asian American author Stewart Ikeda has noted, "The definition of “Asian American” also frequently depends on who’s asking, who’s defining, in what context, and why... the possible definitions of "Asian-Pacific American" are many, complex, and shifting... some scholars in Asian American Studies conferences suggest that Russians, Iranians, and Israelis all might fit the field’s subject of study."[27]

Yeah, another Wiki quote. See why it's not a great descriptor?

Off the top of my head: Asian-Americans: The Movement and the Moment by Steve Louie and Glenn Omatsu..some writings by James Baldwin...Alex Haley...

You might want to view the documentary by Rene Tajima-Pena (if you can get your hands on it) called: 'My America...or Honk if You Love Buddha.'

I actually met Alex Haley once, not long before he died. Saw "Roots", never read it. I'll add those authors to my (ever-growing) list.

And, I've noticed that you like to quote Wikipedia a lot. It's good for minor things, but shouldn't be the end all be all for something like this.

A study last year found more errors on average in Britannica than Wikipedia, believe it or not. Just gotta make sure those sources are cited.

AntiCitizen has been missing an important point. Why should we be concerned with identifying someone of a specific race?

What? I'm not running around saying it's important to identify everyone as a race. I'm just pointing out how it's often done imprecisely, or sometimes downright incorrectly.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

This last line here highlights exactly what bugs me about the term. You've more or less just admitted that you think African American = black, regardless of whether that's true or not. And you don't care.

That's your prerogative. I'm not going to stop you from doing it. I can't. But it's wrong. And annoying. And helps reinforce stereotypes.

But you said you don't care....yet, you continually contradict yourself by disliking the terms people of color use; and, you seem to not have any issue with what Euro-Americans call themselves. (That sounds like someone who really is caring. One doesn't put that much energy into something he doesn't care about).

Also, you claim it's 'wrong' with the terms people of color use.
Um, no it isn't. You are wrong, however, in getting upset (again, despite saying that you don't care) in regards to how a group of people--of color--decide to refer to themselves.

That's not your call to make.

Yeah, but see, anyone born in America is a native American. But only the original residents are aboriginal Americans. 'Aboriginal American' is more precise than 'Native American'.

Obviously. However, the term generally means those Indians in America who initially had their land taken away from them.

As was said with African-Americans, will be said for 'Native Americans': If they want to change the name, that will be their call. A white individual who is 'bugged' by certain terms that people of color use (and has no issue with whites who do the same) is not going to be taken seriously. Or, at least looked at as someone who has bigotry issues.

Right. Why did Charlize have it so much easier? She's an African-American just like Levar, Michael, and yourself, right?

Indeed she could be called 'African-American'...but, unless you haven't noticed...she's a white, blond-haired/blue-eyed female....as already been aforementioned.

It was.

Well, since you typed it...of course, it may be clear to you. The idea is to make it clear for others to understand what you are saying.

I was the one who first mentioned 'Asian American' as being imprecise. Why not just skip right to 'Vietnamese American'? The reason is not a pleasant one. It's grouping all Asians as vaguely the same, right down to how they look - despite phenotypes varying widely across the Asian continent.

In a recent PBS interview, a panel of Asian American writers discussed how some groups include people from the Middle East in the Asian American category.[26] Asian American author Stewart Ikeda has noted, "The definition of “Asian American” also frequently depends on who’s asking, who’s defining, in what context, and why... the possible definitions of "Asian-Pacific American" are many, complex, and shifting... some scholars in Asian American Studies conferences suggest that Russians, Iranians, and Israelis all might fit the field’s subject of study."[27]

Yeah, another Wiki quote. See why it's not a great descriptor?

This is very old news. I was part of a club called the APASA (Asian Pacific American Student Association) and an white male, like yourself, decided to sit in on a meeting and do what you're doing: Tell them why their name is supposedly wrong in his eyes. He was disrespectful, and thankfully (for his sake) didn't show up.

The book Orientalism by Edward Said already speaks about certain Middle Eastern cultures being considered Asian. Of course, there are Russians who are Asian...and so forth.

However, just like I mentioned with black/African-Americans and Native Americans, so it is with Asian-Americans to use whatever terms they choose. Such as: Asian-American or Asian Pacific American. With sub-groups denoting specific countries.

Again, as I've repeated many times: You seem to have no problems with whites who call themselves Irish-American, or Italian-American, etc...

I actually met Alex Haley once, not long before he died. Saw "Roots", never read it. I'll add those authors to my (ever-growing) list.

Hopefully, you learn something, and be a little more tolerant.

Now, we've gone around and around in circles over this subject. I don't think there is any more to say.

Changing gears: In regards to the OP's initial post about Starfleet acting somewhat like the American South.

Hmmm....

I wouldn't go that far, but I would say that there are some things that mimic real-world attitudes (or actions) for the worse; as aforementioned, things I would like to cover in a critical literary project a couple of years from now.

 

[CoveTom]

Wow. This started as a blatently stupid thread about whether or not the Trek universe was segregated, and now has devolved into a totally un-Trek-related argument about the proper terminology to use in describing people of various races and cultures? Wow. Just, wow.

 

[Andymator]

Hopefully, you learn something, and be a little more tolerant.

I don't mean to get too involved in this, but is everybody skipping over the part where Anticitizen repeatedly clarifies that his issue is not with Americans of African descent calling themselves "African American"?

The issue he has seems to be with the use of "African American" to describe a black American who has immigrated from Southeast Asia or Australia.

I see absolutely no intolerance or prejudice of any kind in his words.

 

[Holdfast]

Original thread topic was an acceptable topic for discussion, albeit almost completely unsupported by evidence on screen.

The current discussion has nothing to do with TNG, and since the original topic has now been exhausted, I'm closing this thread.

The current discussion topic could be continued in one of the other parts of the board if participants wish to start it there. eg TNZ if participants wish to "let loose", or Misc if participants wish to continue keeping it civil as in this thread.

Apologies for closing it, but some ongoing degree of relevance to TNG is needed to keep threads in this forum, and it's really gone way beyond that for some posts now.