What makes biracial and multiracial people a threat in this racially obsessed Am

1. 83

   gmwilliamsposted 11 years ago

   What makes biracial and multiracial people a threat in this racially obsessed American society?
   
   There is only one race- the human race.  The concept of race is totally a human and artifical construct to separate humankind and to distract from the full potential of humanities.  In the future, there will be a progressive intermingling of peoples so that racial boundaries as they are now will be indistinct. 
   
   

   replyreport
2. 69

   HLKeeleyposted 11 years ago

   I don't understand what you mean by "threat." I think these people are among the most beautiful because they are unique and creating a new "race." I think that they are the future. I think that presently we are just coming out of thousands of years where races have been separated. While we will always have the elite (determined by whatever is the most valued), I think that the race lines will dim as it becomes less of an issue.

   replyreport
   1. 83

      gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      There are many among us who are UNCOMFORTABLE with biracial and multiracial people for one reason or another.

      replyreport
   2. 69

      HLKeeleyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      That is true because of the short span of time that races have become "equal."

      replyreport
3. 73

   CraftytotheCoreposted 11 years ago

   GM, I would love to sit down with you for lunch. I have a lot to learn from you.  Thank you for providing these thought-provoking and enlightening questions.
   
   I am Italian.  That was kept from me my entire life until last year.  I did some skip-tracing and found my bio father and his big Italian family.  I don't think I missed out on anything growing up not knowing them.  Thankfully, without me ever knowing my bio dad, my grandfather showed me Italian culture from birth.
   
   My children are Spanish.  From what I've heard being a "white" mom with Spanish kids is that there is a "feeling in the air" that some people think "us" people who are intermingling with other ethnicities are ruining one whole race. 
   
   In fact, when I got divorced, people made the point of telling me I should have never become unequally yoked with someone outside of my own race.  (My children are not mistakes.  They are precious, unique individuals, and I love them with all my heart.)

   replyreport
4. 58

   retief2000posted 11 years ago

   The only race obsessed people I can see on a daily basis are liberal politicians, race industry practitioners and celebrities like Oprah. I have told people for years that if you don't think we are one race needs to look more closely at Halle Berry or Angela Basset.  I am wondering where the whole idea that America is racially obsessed comes from, weren't we supposed to be in the post-racial world of Barrack Obama by now?

   replyreport
   1. 78

      Express10posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Unfortunately Retief2000, there is no post-racial world. It appears to some that having a multi-racial President/person with any visible color as President has really emboldened some who have bias or hatred in their hearts.

      replyreport
   2. 58

      retief2000posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It seems obvious to many the direction of that bias as people like Oprah vomit comments like whites don't value black lives.It is obvious in the hatred aimed at rodeo clowns who now face job loss and reeducation camps.

      replyreport
   3. 78

      Express10posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      There's no way I could ever agree with that rodeo clown who wore a mask of the President's face. I'd feel the same if he wore a mask of Reagan, Bush, Clinton, etc. That was off/offensive to many. As for jobs he can only apologize to his coworkers.

      replyreport
   4. 58

      retief2000posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      There was an entire British satire called Spitting Images that mocked political figures.I couldn't disagree more.It is our natural right protected by the First Amendment to mock and ridicule our political leaders.There is no right to not be offended.

      replyreport
   5. 78

      Express10posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Many people believe the office of the President shouldn't be disrespected & that's why the clown got himself & other people fired. We have free speech but sometimes having more restraint is a better route to take. I agree to disagree with you

      replyreport
   6. 58

      retief2000posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It doesn't matter what many people think, it is the law of the land.We are not ruled by mobs but by laws, or at least we used to  be ruled by laws.Free Speech is our natural right, despots hate that.

      replyreport
5. 74

   AMFredenburgposted 11 years ago

   I can only speak for myself, and I don't feel threatened. I'm interested in people's backgrounds because it's part of what makes them who they are. I have a friend who says that people from every culture should marry people from other cultures and have kids until no one knows what the heck anyone is in terms of racial or ethnic background, and then these prejudices will end. Sounds good to me!

   replyreport
6. 78

   Express10posted 11 years ago

   I have noticed that there is a fair number of people who for some reason truly act as if they are threatened by multi-racial people whether on an individual basis or as a group, but not all people are that way.
   Actions speak louder than words so you may see the angry or threatened types staring at mixed couples and individuals to make them uncomfortable, starting confrontations, not ever having anyone of another race as a friend or employee, let alone having people of other races over for dinner or going out to socialize.
   As a woman, I have seen some really nasty actions from women against mixed women that really appeared to be jealousy more than anything else. There are also more than a few people that act as if all of human life revolves around one race being against every other and separated. The earth is too small for that and I hope they can move on or off themselves because young people today are much more tolerant, accepting, and open than their parents and grandparents.

   replyreport
7. 60

   wingedcentaurposted 8 years ago

   This is a question with deep historical roots. It goes to the history of race relations in the United States of America; and its interesting to contrast these to, say, the Caribbean where the "mulatto," so-called is generally not a problem.
   
   The first thing to say is that the United States is the land of the "one-drop rule," which meant that any discernible non-white feature rendered one "black," and therefore to be subject to the same oppression as "full-blooded Africans" in the United States.
   
   We have to face the historical fact that this rule was good for American slave society --- as it, shall we say, maximized the workforce.
   
   In the Caribbean, Africans usually vastly outnumbered European "whites," for reasons that need not detain us here. As a result, the Europeans had to incorporate some of the blacks to form, essentially, a middle management layer to protect themselves.
   
   This gave rise to a "colored," mixed-race group of people generally promoted to middle class status. For this reason, by the way, mixed-race people in the Caribbean never had the need to "pass," as was the case in America.
   
   In the United States, "whites" always vastly outnumbered the Africans. For this reason, the Euro-American elite never had the need to incorporate any part of the African population into the ruling social control structure. Therefore, segregation was the order of the day in British America.
   
   We also have to recall that during the slavery era, the conception of a mixed-race person was indicative of sexual victimization, by the white male slave owner and his black female slave.
   
   This was particularly true after 1662, when the Virginia colony changed the law about the status of children. English common law held that a child's status comes from her father.
   
   The Virginia legislature changed that to the mother. A child would derive her status from the mother. Think Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings. The children that came from this rape legally belonged to Sally Hemmings, which means legally they were slaves.
   
   To the extent that a "threat" is operative, then, we are talking about historical memory

   replyreport