Are you black enough?

This is something many mulattoes and light skinned blacks often hear usually from ghetto dark skinned blacks. I say ghetto because only a ghetto person would believe there was a certain way to being black, and usually that "way" is being ghetto and an embarrassment to the black race. Not all dark skinned blacks are ghetto as not all dark skinned blacks play into the "colorism issue". But the one's that do play into it are almost always the definition of someone ghetto.

The problems I have with the "are you black enough?" kind of questions, is the irony behind it. People questioned Obama as to being "black enough" yet many of those same people have no problem one-dropping him, or worse, taking credit for his achievements simply for sharing the same race (or half of it anyways). It really irks me when the same people that want to hate on you for either being light skinned or for being mixed at the same time depend on you in a sense. What I mean is, the black race has always depended on its lighter skinned blacks and mulattoes. They need mixed people to keep the race from getting smaller than it is. Most of the prominent blacks up until the 70s were light skinned.

We all know that the "field negro and house negro" argument is a lie, the light skinned blacks were not treated better than the dark skinned blacks, if anything they were treated worse! (part of that reasoning was that the light skinned person was mixed and that was considered horrible, and on top of that there was a fear that they would be confused as a member of the white family by strangers). People use this as an excuse to down on those of lighter complexion, yet at the same time, it just irks me that they "need" biracials yet will not respect at the same time. Most blacks will disregard the fact that a biracial kid has a white parent, in fact, sometimes the black person will try to pretend they are just as mixed as a biracial person (usually those that do it have a problem with being black otherwise why do it?). But while they hate on those like Halle Berry or Barack Obama, they have no problem taking credit for their achievements. Some blacks get "offended" when you dare say you are biracial. While other blacks refuse to say you are black simply because you are not apart of the majority dark skinned black.

But I hate that question, "are you black enough?" because it lives up to the stereotypes. Essentially if you are not any of the stereotypes given to blacks, and I mean any of the stereotypes, then you are not considered black and are considered an uncle tom usually. According to these rules, many dark skinned and light skinned blacks alike from before King's assassination (especially those in the Movement) would not be considered black either. But of course the blacks that make these rules today "excuse" the older generation for being of another time and of different rules. The difference between the blacks from before the 1970s and the blacks after the 1970s is a whole different post, so I will not get into that issue right now.

In the end, I just don't like it when people try to discredit who you are simply for the shade of your skin. I have said it a gazillion times before, we all endure racism from whites. So why infight over an issue that doesn't change the hatred other races have for us all regardless? Why make the situation worse?

The Majority-Minority Complex (aka The Wheel is Always Turning)

I may have done a post on this before, but whatever, I guess I will do one again.

The majority-minority complex is an interesting phenomenon. Its when you are part of the majority or minority of something, and when you find yourself in a situation where you are the opposite, you find yourself wanting to change the rules.

case in point: If you are a Christian, you are currently part of a majority in the US. Because of this you are more than likely okay with pushing your beliefs down non-Christians. But if the wheel turns and Christianity became a minority and something else became the majority, you would object to them treating you the exact same way you treated them.

An example from the minority point. Being black in America, you are subjected to the racial hatred and ignorance of the white majority. But in a few rare instances a black person becomes part of a majority by being Christian or by being against gay rights. In this case, sometimes getting to be a part of that rare joy that comes with being in a majority makes you forget what its like being a minority and you end up doing to others what you always hated others doing to you. In a sense, you get to experience just how easy it is to ignore other peoples struggles because you are in a majority where you don't have to struggle.

I gave the Majority-Minority complex the nickname "the wheel is always turning" because its supposed to mean that one should be careful about how they play out their stint as the majority cause the wheel is always turning and one day you could be in the minority and you don't want the treatment you gave to others.

But its interesting how people don't mind doling out tyrannical and hateful behavior towards others, but if you were to reverse it all of a sudden its wrong. There is a reason people say "treat others the way you would want to be treated", so one could avoid such behaviors like this in the first place. If people seriously followed the Golden rule, there would be no hatred!

South Africa-US

I had read someone's blog post in which they were saying how their visit to South Africa taught them about their own country, the US.

The apartheid in SA only ended a little over a decade ago, in the mid 90s. While Jim Crow laws only ended 40 years ago.

People have this belief that once some form of official tyranny/terror has ended that life itself is different. People assume that because Jim Crow ended 40 years ago that racism should be gone. They assume the election of Obama proves this. But so many racist incidents directed at blacks have proven that 40 years is not enough.

In fact I would argue that you lack common sense if you say racism is gone. In a country that has hundreds of years of racism, a country that only survived and existed through racism, there is no way the work that racism has created in this country will come undone in the course of 40 years. It will take hundreds of years to undo that kind of damage. In fact, there is a reason many whites try to hang on to their racism, its not just because of their privileges they get from being white buts its the fact that countries like America will fall without having a minority that it can bully and abuse. Countries like America thrive off of someone else's blood. I mean only an idiot would say America isn't blood thirsty, if you believe America isn't blood thirsty, please do yourself a favor and take a couple of history classes.

What I am curious about is just how bad SA is considering the end of tyranny happened only a decade ago. I mean you look at the US, its still majority racist, only in a new form. It is now in the covert way rather than overt way. Closeted racism is socially acceptable. This kind of racism is worse in the sense that you don't know who to trust and who not to trust.

Its hard to know who has more success right now at undoing the damage that whites have caused, considering in South Africa its majority black and the US is not. All I know is that if the US has yet to make much progress, it would be dumb to assume any other country, especially SA could make much progress.

The hardest part about being biracial?

Sometimes people are genuinely interested in knowing what the hard parts about being biracial is. Sometimes people want to know cause they are expecting and they want to be aware of some things with their own, and others just want to know out of sheer curiosity. I am the type that is not bothered by being asked questions about being biracial. It interests me that others are interested in wanting to know.

One thing that I have always pondered is "what is the hardest part about being biracial?". Most answers to these questions would usually have something to do with acceptance or being seen as what you are rather than be labeled something you are not. But for me, I would say the hardest part was being raised white in a world where I am never going to be looked at as white or even half white. I say this because the problem with being raised white when you are not is that you fail to see the world realistically. A white person can surely pretend racism doesn't exist and it will never bother them. They don't have to worry about shopping while black or driving while black. They can say they have black friends or that they are unrealistically "colorblind" and people will applaud them even when the reality is they are most likely racist or condone racism. But if you are a person of color and you do these same things, most minorities would say you are digging your own grave.

But I would have to say its hard growing up in a white world and not getting the warnings and info about the realities for being a person of color. Black kids more than likely get the "talk" from their parents about how police may attack you for simply being black and will play it off as you just being a suspect and they won't apologize and they will get away with it.

In the times I have dealt with the police, I instinctively knew that these guys could kill me and they certainly won't hesitate since they do not value my life one bit. I didn't have to be told that, I guess I knew because I knew racially I was still a 2nd class citizen. But I didn't get the tips on how to deal with racism.

Its hard being a person of color and being raised in a conservative white family that tunes themselves out from racism. When me and my mom were at the grocery store a few years back and I was followed, it made my mom angry and she was about to pick a bone with them if they said anything to me or accused me of something. But since they just followed me and left me alone, she decided not to, and I had to calm her down. I explained to her that it was "shopping while black" and thats just how the world is...my mom preferred to believe it was because I was young that I was being followed...

My mom has said some racist things in the past, and its hard for to realize that I am black also. She prefers to see me as a white girl and its her way of justifying any racist thing she said. She doesn't realize what is wrong with that whole picture.

Not having the black side in my life has caused me to miss out on the side that could help me deal with being black in America. Having my black side in my life would have balanced out being raised in the white world. But because my father was a deadbeat, it just wasn't meant to be. I am essentially learning what all black kids learn, I am only learning it a little late in the game...and worse, I have to learn it for myself as I have had no one to tell me as a kid.

Shopping While Black

I was reading someone else's blog and they did a post on something I am and millions of others are familiar with. Its called Shopping While Black. The name is a play off of the term Driving While Black, which also takes a similar premise.

Shopping While Black means when you go into a store, you are usually followed or watched because of the stereotype that blacks steal. The irony of this is that majority of shoplifters are white. In fact a few months ago I watched a show on WE that had to do with shoplifting, and its weird, all the women on there were white, they were all women you would never think would steal or have the need to steal.

It sucks alot to be followed and harassed simply for your skin color, and the reality is your race is less likely to steal from those stores in the first place!!!

To be a person of color and to NOT have a story of racial profiling is rare. I think almost all of us have a couple of stories.

I am one of those peoples that doesn't fight back if I don't have to. Meaning, if all they do is just follow me or say something snotty but they do not do anything physical such as calling the police then I essentially prefer not to fight the issue. White society is mostly racist, and nothing can be done about that, a white person will defend a racist white person before doing the right thing from what I have learned through past experiences. Because society is so racist, that means one will be faced with multiple racist acts in their own life time and it just seems better to be more choosy about which racist acts to fight back and which to ignore.

When you are a 2nd class citizen, you know there is nothing you can do about it other than accept your position and just deal with it and make the most of it.

There are no real tips to help someone when shopping. Some say to carry a small purse and to keep your hands out in the open. Others say shop alone, do not shop with whites as they could steal and then leave you to take the blame, and do not shop with blacks as too many blacks together may bring about more unwanted attention.

Its unpredictable because you never know which kind of hateful retail clerk you will get. You got ones that will be a bitch to you simply for your weight. And then many malls are also implementing rules about how old you can be at a certain time at the mall, so there is always the being young issue. But I don't think any tops the shopping while black issue. You can always change your weight and you will eventually get older, but you will always be black, and America will always be anti-black.

Race is not real?

We all know a colorblind society is a bad idea because it serves to ignore the problems at hand and only to make things worse. One thing that annoys me that many blacks and whites will spout is the whole notion that there is no race.

The problem with this argument is that clearly there is race. It doesn't matter how similar everyone may be genetically, we are all different enough to notice it. The problem is that people mistreat others for differences they have no real control over.

Whenever I hear someone say that there is no such thing as race and that its a social construct, I usually stop listening at that point. It sounds so silly and stupid what they say. Its another garbage line from the "colorblind society is best".

I feel people need to wake up and enter the real world. There is such a thing as race. There is such a thing as differences. Rather than try to pretend its not real, accept that it is real and learn to embrace it rather than be ashamed of it by trying to say someone is not black when they clearly are black.

Lying to yourself will only work for so long.

Hip Hop is the shame of the black race!

THIS IS A RANT POST

Its really embarrassing to know what great music the black race has been capable of. I mean black people created rock n roll, no one does soul, blues, jazz or anything for that matter better than a black person. Disco was fun. So many great genres. But rap and hip hop are a blot on the record. Music that is so horrible. I seriously can't respect a single person that finds crap like rap to be good...

I hate it when black people try do differentiate between old school rap/hip hop and then mainstream rap/hip hop. To me, either way all of it sux. Even if old school talked about the realities of the Hood, and the mainstream talks about women and money, why must it be presented in such a horrible way?

Sing! Don't rhyme!!

It annoys me when white people are surprised that I don't listen to that garbage. White people expect blacks to live on welfare, listen to rap, have 10 babies, enjoy basketball and eat fried chicken day in and day out.

Sure the fried chicken stereotype is true. But I am sick and tired of pathetic racists always slapping these atrocious stereotypes on me because they are too retarded to get an education. What makes it worse is that there are too many black people out there that make it their mission to fucking destroy the black race by acting in dispicable behavior. You are black in an anti-black society. you HAVE to get manners and be on your best behavior. Assimilate and be like the asians. Stop making our experience in this racist country worse!!!

But what about the children?

Those who are against interracial marriages but do not want to outwardly admit its because they do not like other races, will always say "but what about the children?". My grandpa died before both me and my sister were born, according to my mom, he said that very line, "but what about the children?", my uncle also said that line, but has come to accept it (at least somewhat) by now.

There is a bit of truth in that question. The reality is, some people are so caught up in love they do not think about the children.

How extreme the racism is will depend on the location. You would think it was a given that if you do not raise your kid in a mono-racial location...meaning if you are not white, do not raise them in a strictly white town...raise them in a cultural area.

But its weird...the same people who usually say "but what about the children?" are usually the same people who make it hard for biracial people in the first place.

Even though this question is ultimately ineffective, and is only spouted by racists, one must be prepared for this racist world, having biracial children in a country that still glorifies whites and supports racism against minorities, is not going to be a simple walk in the park.

2nd Generation Biracial?

I sometimes wonder, what is the child of someone biracial called? Whether the biracial parent had a child with a white man, black man, or another biracial person, what would they be called? We know automatically if the biracial parent is black and white, and they do it with someone who is neither mulatto, or isn't black or white period, then the child is multi-racial.

People have hundreds of names to call the products of biracials...its just easier to say 2nd Generation biracial...assuming that is the title the child wants.

If the child is now majority white (white parent and mulatto parent), and if they looked white, would you allow them to take on the title of a white person with some black heritage? My mom says that you should always tell them their heritage as that white child could possibly produce a black kid with a white person (well genetics are strange enough that something along those lines could happen). But at the same time, would you let them reap the benefits of being white in society?

The fear with this option is that they will grow to deny you. Self identifying as a white person is not denying you...but if the benefits of being white outweigh their love for their biracial parent they may kick you to the curb in the same way Fredi Washington's character did in Imitation of Life, because having a parent of color would hold them back.

So how does one trek a road like that? I guess its like raising 1st Gen biracials...you have to tell them what they are, but do not push your ideas of what they should be. Meaning, you should not force them to identify any certain way, you should not raise them to favor one side...just be the unbiased parent who is equal giving to both sides (whether or not the other parent is there), and then let them decide for themselves as they get older, what they want to consider themselves.

What about 2 parents that are mulatto? Is the child still considered mulatto? I would say yes, since 25% black and 25% white from each side will add up to 50% white and 50% black. Its weird how a child can be biracial with parents of the exact same race. In fact its the forming of these relationships that have resulted in why there are just so many light skinned blacks. Back in the day, blacks encouraged going with the lighter skinned blacks because lighter was considered better.

Some say that Vanessa Williams is biracial in this sense. Zoe Kravitz is biracial in this sense and even looks it.

Then there is the child of a black parent and mulatto parent. You will usually get children like the President's daughters. They will look black and be undoubetedly considered black...but like the very first scenario, one is faced with the issue of identity and letting them know of their white heritage....

Because of that 25% white heritage the child is far more likely to produce a light skinned black, than a white person producing a darker skinned white child.

In each scenario its always important to let the child know their heritage...but it is just as important to let them identify their own way. Just because you are loud and proud about being biracial, doesn't mean your child necessarily wants to go by that.

In the end, its just a matter of raising the child to be the best person they can be...to make good decisions.

I personally wish we could find a new term rather than 2nd Generation biracial...a name to call a kid whose got one mono-racial parent and a mulatto parent. We have multi-racial, if the mulatto parent does not share either race of the mono-racial parent...but what if they do, what would be a good name then?

How can you say someone doesn't have authority over something they live?

It has always annoyed me when something racist has happened, and someone of another race says it wasn't racist. The thing is, if its not directed at you, naturally you are going to be more skeptical and uncaring, because it doesn't affect you.

Ex: when blacks say something that whites did is racist, whites justify the racist act and say it isn't racist, then they accuse the black person of crying racism and playing the "race card", yet white people have no problem themselves crying racism every chance they get...
Telling someone who is of the targeted race what is or is not racist to them, is like telling a biracial person how they must identify.

When you are not of the targeted race, you really have no authority to decide if something is racist to the targeted race. You see, the problem with most in society is that they assume racism must be KKK, neo nazis, and something straight out of the Jim Crow era. Most will be quick to deny that racism is still strong and rampant. Obama did not prove that racism is gone, the racism directed and still being directed at him proves to at least those of color, what they have always known, and thats racism is still strong.

Biracial people have a complex position with racism. They deal with racism not only as a biracial person (meaning from both sides of their races) but they also deal with racism for the fact that in American society they are black, and being black in America, means you got the most shitty end of the deal.

Some biracials are likelier to shake of the racism they get as a black person because most are raised by their white side and are not taught to really know about it...I certainly wasn't, and from what I have seen a good majority are not.

Softball?

I am watching A League of Their Own, which is about women's baseball during WWII, in a time when women were working in factories while the men were away fighting war, some women got the chance to play baseball.

This movie, along with The Sandlot, is one of my favorite baseball movies.

I was thinking about something, I was prompted by a quick scene during a montage...a black woman who is standing with black men next to the fence (because they were not allowed to sit in the stands back then), tossed the ball back in as it went out of bounds (is that even the correct term?) and she had thrown so hard, Dottie looked at her in amazement and the black woman nodded her head and went back to her spot by the fence.

When I decided to look up this particular woman's baseball league, I came across something that mentioned 3 black women: Toni Stone, Connie Morgan, and Mamie Johnson, who played baseball for the Negro Leagues, and the only females supposedly to do so.

I couldn't believe it when I read it, but these 3 women, especially Stone, were harassed by the men in the leagues, and I couldn't believe it, here these black men were barred from major baseball because of skin, yet they turn around and mistreat women for their gender...but one shouldn't be surprised considering black men in a sense acted the very same way as white men, they were just plain ignorant.

At that point I realized something. Today its not too unusual to see black men in baseball, some of the best have been black. But I realized, women have yet to still get that opportunity to play in the major leagues.

In high school, like most high schools, you had a baseball team and a softball team. Softball is definitely not really considered popular anywhere. But its weird, you look at all sports such as the WNBA and chances are, many haven't heard of it. It seems like the only thing women can be known for in the sports arena is cheerleading, such as the Dallas cheerleaders.

Its kind of like the voting thing. Black men got the right to vote (even though they were threatened and even killed if they tried to vote anyways) before women got the right. Most black women are too affected by the racial issues than they are the gender issues to really focus on the gender issues...but it definitely seems like men value the abilities and opinion of other men (of different races), than they do of women who are the same race as they are themselves.

I could be wrong though....

English as our main language

I am one of those people that believe America should make English the official language of this country. Who cares if everyone here is the descendant of an immigrant or "immigrants" (referring to those forced here as slaves). When The United States was founded, the people spoke English. We have been speaking English for hundreds of years (okay 200 hundred years), when America had an immigration surge in the 1890s and early 1900s, the people learned English, it was do or die.

People who refuse to learn english are at a setback and often stick with each other. I also think its wrong to punish people for not knowing Spanish, this is an English speaking country not spanish, save your spanish for your home life where it belongs.

Yes people should start learning a second language of THEIR choice just to catch up with Britain, but also, like all the other countries such as France and Germany, it is important to adopt a national language, when you go to other countries, you can't expect them to know your language, likewise, when you come to America, you should learn English. Why should WE cater to YOU?

A new interest

I love old Hollywood, the movies of that era are so better than many movies today.

There are 3 women that I find to be interesting, and am looking to find more information about.

The first women is:

Lena Horne (born 1917)
Lena Horne was both an actress and a singer during the 30s and 40s.

Dorothy Dandridge (1922-1965)
Dorothy Dandridge was also a singer and actress

Fredi Washington (1903-1994)

Fredi Washington was an actress. She is probably best known for the movie Imitation of Life, in which she plays a mulatto girl who can pass for white, and tries to deny her black heritage. In real life, she was given the opportunity to have fame if she would deny her black heritage. She chose not to deny it.


All 3 of these women are black but achieved a little bit of fame in a time where blacks could only play roles such as the "mammy" like Hattie McDaniel did. I find their life stories to be interesting.

Confused?

Ugh, it irks the HELL out of me, when blacks and whites say you are confused just because you say you are biracial and black. You can be both. You can self identify however you want. The only people confused are those who are not mixed, but because they are the stupid majority, they can say biracials are confused when they are not, and end of story...ugh, I can't stand these CONFUSED monoracial people sometimes!!!!!

Likelier to be an Independent.

I just did a post that talked about how blacks are really Republicans but only vote Democrat because the Republicans are against them.

I was reading a comment section on an article that is called. "Its My Part, But I Don't Feel Part of It", one conservative black person said this

"As a conservative African American myself, I also found that my beliefs and values were too different to remain in the Democratic party. But the racial policies of the Republican party would not allow me to join it. I'm now a registered Independent."

And then I thought about myself. I voted an Independent party during the election, because I was too torn between McCain and Obama, and felt neither really were a good choice. I disliked McCain because of Palin, as I am a Moderate, and McCain is more of a moderate, and Palin exhibited the behavior of a typical racist, airheaded Republican, she was an example of everything that is currently wrong with the Republican party. And well with Obama, there were things I did not agree with.

I asked myself, has there ever been a Republican that I would have been willing to vote for myself, AFTER Franklin Roosevelt (yes he was a Democrat, but he was the first prez where blacks started voting more because Hoover had let them down)? and I realized, that I might have possibly would have been willing myself to vote for Eisenhower.

My views definitely fall in the line of "moderate to liberal", based on my mood I can be liberal on some social issues, or be moderate.

Here are some of my beliefs:

*Abortion: I believe its okay to abort for rape, incest, and medical reasons. But if you consensually do it, then you need to own up to it.

*Healthcare: I believe in universal healthcare (but I also believe there should be choices, between gov't care or private care).

*Gay rights: I am not sure, sometimes I support them and sometimes I just don't care. I have no problem with gay people being married and having equal rights in a marriage (although they probably shouldn't marry by the Bible).

*Death penalty: I used to strongly support it, but now I am not so sure...

*Immigration: Probably the most conservative part about me, I believe English should be the language of America, and immigrants should take the initiative to learn it. I believe we should stregthen our borders and fix the illegal immigration problem

*Sex: I am against premarital sex, but because our society is sooo moraless, one might as well teach moraless teens to at least protect themselves, since they will obviously do it whether they know about it or not. Abstinence should still be taught, but alongside teaching about sex and protection. The only way to reverse the effect a moraless society is having on teens, is to go back to the 1950s and make it a shame to have sex and be pregnant, send them away etc.

*I believe we need to fix the problems in each racial community.

*We need to stop being such a uber sensitive society, where people cry wolf every time they get overly offended over something stupid and trivial.

*Women, I am not a feminist or a tradionalist, I think its okay for women to work, but she must also tend to her home duties...she should be a mom and wife first. The reason people are bigger and more tech dependent is due to lack of parenting. Also I do not believe women should be in combat roles in war, and if a draft should ever return she should not be drafted at all.

*Prayer in school: the Constitution says separation of church and state, so public schools do not need to sponser religion, but if one chooses on their own time, with their own funds to do something relgious thats their choice. But private schools can inforce their own relgion since they do not use gov't funds...so if you want prayer in school, send them there.

*Education: We need to go back to the strict days of teaching, and even bring back paddling students if need be. Or maybe punish repeat offenders with labor rather than detention. The PC way is not working right now.

there are black people who are more conservative than I am as you can tell, but this relates to both my posts about how Republicans are against blacks, and how what is wrong with politics these days. Because what is wrong is that blacks vote Democrat, yet they don't seem to care for black interests, and people think they must vote D or R...

Even though I mentioned my a few of my political beliefs, I will not debate it...but I am open to one describing their beliefs the same way I did. If you do so, try to go in the same order as I did. I do not need to or want to know all of your beliefs, just mention the topics I mentioned. I will not debate my beliefs, and I DO NOT want you to debate yours.

The problem with politics today.

I am sure you have heard many state before, that politics today is so bad that politicians on opposing sides, are no longer friends. Back in the day, before the Bush era, politicians could get along. It only seems like now, they come together and say something nice, when a great politician, such as Ted Kennedy pass away.

Nowadays they stick together, and regular people are starting to, if they already haven't, repeat the same thing. It seems like the only people who can possibly get along with people with different political beliefs are those who do not discuss beliefs.

I am one of those people who doesn't like to talk much about politics with other people. I have no desire to debate issues. I have my beliefs, and I have no reason to change them or change other peoples beliefs. If people want to be wrong, that is their choice, I am not their mom, its not my job to correctly guide them.

But politics today are just out of hand. People causing a stir over every little thing, crying wolf over the fact that Obama had spoken to kids at a school. People are not choosing their battles properly.

I and many others have said this before, but if you take away all the things each party stands for, you got two identical parties with the same agenda, and that agenda is looking out for themselves. Are they to blame? no, because we are all human, and you would be a liar if you said you cared for others first, a Mother Theresa is a rare oddity today.

The only people to blame is society. The one thing I kept hearing in the 2008 election was "vote for the lesser of 2 evils". For some that Obama was the lesser evil (McCain wasn't the evil, Palin was), and for others McCain was the lesser evil. Those who prefer to vote Libertarian or vote Independent (Independent is NOT Libertarian its a vague term that has no party attachments), were told they were throwing their votes away, but where they really?

A true American wouldn't vote for the lesser evil. They would vote who they believe in. Most people foolishly believe they must vote Republican or Democrat, they fail to realize, that isn't the only choice. But they are unaware of other choices because the way all the Independent parties are set up is unorganized...you have some parties that are on ballots in only some states, so how can the maximum votes be acquired?

That isn't the only problem. Another problem is the fact that politicians play two horrible games that the public themselves feed into. Its the Blame game and the all or nothing game. The blame game is where Republicans and Democrats do nothing but blame each other for problems, problems that neither party opt to fix. Because they are so busy blaming, nothing is getting done because nobody is doing what they are supposed to, to get it fixed. And then there is the All or nothing game, which is the fatal blow in why politics these days are messed up.

The All or nothing game is essentially where the parities would rather have nothing if they can't have it all. Neither party will compromise. One side is Pro Life, the other is Pro Choice, the obvious solution would be to meet half way. Put a limit on abortions one could have OR make it only legal for cases of rape, incest, and medical issues. This way you meet half way...which is alot better than debating for over 30 years whether its right or wrong. Why deny half the country their rights, for your own selfish reasons?

The all or nothing game prevents this country from moving forward, because the reality is, no party can really have it all...and most often you will end up with nothing...and because you keep fighting to have it all and always get nothing, you never take the initiative to just meet half way for the good of the country.

America is going backwards...its behind most developed countries....

Politics today are horrible, most people lack common sense, are full of paranoia, and media and people like Limbaugh and Beck only serve to make things worse by throwing out lies and inaccurate information.

In the end, its only a matter of time before the political parties of today crash. First it will be Republicans (unless they decide to finally official call themselves a white power group rather than an implied white power group), followed by the Democrats. And yes, a party can fall. If the Republican party can go from supporting human rights to denying human rights, then I would say these parties can also fall...just look at the Whig Party and the Federalist Party, they are LONG GONE.

Someone made a good point once...

Someone once told me that if the Republicans cared about blacks and not just whites, then blacks would more than likely be Republican. In fact, blacks were once Republican. Remember, before the 60s (40s if you really want to consider it), both parties were conservative compared to the Democrat party of today.

But someone had outlined how many blacks (at least the older blacks above ages 20 or 25), are conservative Democrats. The only thing that keeps them from voting Republican is the fact that Republicans do not care for blacks and have often show racist behavior towards blacks....

Its interesting, but true. Blacks are very Christian, and quite possibly more Christian and abiding by the Bible than many white people these days...but there is a difference in how whites and blacks show their Christianity.

In a sense, it makes you wonder, why hasn't the Republican party ever attempted to reclaim the hold they once had on black people? I mean, most blacks vote Democrat because the Democrats went from being the party that denied human rights to being the party that supported human rights. If Republicans looked out for blacks the same way they look out for white people, their party would be much more invincible. I guess the problem with the Republican party is that they have become too much like the Nazi party from Germany. Blacks just simply want their rights, and if Republicans weren't so against them, more blacks would vote for them, because for the most part, most blacks agree with the Christian politics (even though their Christian life and experience is different from whites).

Is racial attractions genetic or environmental?

Both my sister and I are mulatto. Both of us prefer white guys. My sis also likes hispanics, and I also like Asians. Both of us are least attracted to black guys. I have had some major crushes on guys who were mulatto. My sister has also had a couple of crushes on mulatto guys.

Sometimes I wonder about interracial dating. In my city it is quite rare to see white guys go for a girl who has any visible "blackness" (features) in her.

I had mentioned in the previous post about gays and the how guys saying they like black girls is practically the same thing...what if a guy liking a black girl, is genetic just like with gays?

But it is a complex thing to figure out. My mom had an attraction to white and black men. She was the only one in the family to have that attraction. She grew up in a very small town that was racist and segregated. There were blacks there, and she did know a few. But she was the only one of her siblings to ever have any kind of attraction to a black man. My cousin, has an attraction to black men, and just like my mom, is the only one in the family with said attraction. She also grew up in an environment with a low black population.

Both my mom and cousin represent the possibility that one's racial attraction could be attributed to genetics rather than environment, since their environment wasn't a surrounding full of black people.

But then, me and my sister can possibly prove the contrary. Both my sister and I were raised in the white world, surrounded by white. We were exposed to white guys. We had very little black influence growing up. Our liking white guys could come from the fact that we were raised in the white world. Yet that does not explain how my sis also has an attraction to hispanics, and I have an attraction to Asians and Mulatto guys.

Some easily pass of this whole thing as just an attraction thing, but come on! There is more to it than that. There has to be a driving force behind what one finds attractive. There has to be an explanation...a genetic one or environmental one, that explains why we like what we like.

Thats not good.

Someone said something I never thought about. The last thing almost any parent wants to hear is that their kid is gay. But somebody said that sometimes (at least with the majority of parents), the kid admitting he likes black girls (and/or biracial girls too) can almost be equated to a boy telling his parents gay.

Its weird right? considering at least with black women he can have kids, and can legally marry and will (or may) have less problems than that of a gay couple.

But shockingly enough, many families have yet to accept interracial relationships. No surprise since its only been 40 years since Loving vs. Virginia and one would have to be a fool to believe America has truly changed much in 40 years (America's problems run so deep and for so long, it would take 100s of years to undo 100s of years worth of damage).

But the question that one must ask is, what is considered worse to many parents: a white daughter admitting she likes black men, or a white son admitting he likes black women. I am going to take a guess and say its the latter. The former is becoming more acceptable, but at least where I live, its highly rare to see white men and black women, but its very common to see white women with biracial kids (believe me, its VERY common).

But its still sad, that a kid bringing home is black girlfriend, or admitting to his parents he likes a black girl, could be and is often still equated to a guy telling his parent's he is gay.

Maybe because its political....

I came across this article in which the "blogger" was asking why there is a double standard in how Condoleezza Rice and Michelle Obama are shown in political cartoons. This "blogger" was saying how Condi is shown in overtly racist ways while Michelle is rarely shown in racist ways in the political cartoons.

He asked why the double standard. Well the answer is that its not a racial issue to begin with. Its a political issue. If you look at many of the cartoons, they were making fun of politics and not race. Blacks didn't care that Condi was being made fun of because, like Bush, they disagreed with his politics. People of course would get mad if you made fun of Michelle, as she is not politically active in the same way Condi is. Michelle is the First Lady. Not to mention Michelle is not in the party with the worst President of the 21st Century (at least as of now).

Its really not a double standard that Condi was made fun of more than Michelle...its all about the political party you affiliate with.

Its like a tan...

I have been told by at least 2 (if not more) white girls that I am lucky for my skin color.

Some say blacks bleach to achieve it, and whites tan to achieve it. I say they are all wrong. My skin is a tone is darker than a tan. Yet this doesn't stop white girls from commenting that somehow I am "lucky".

I never understood the tanning phenomenon. I can understand the bleaching phenom, but not the tanning. I can see those who are pasty wanting to tan, but why do white girls who are not pasty wanting to tan???

I one time asked this and a white girl told me that I was lucky because my skin was brown and was the "right shade"...And just less than 30 mins ago, I was told by a white girl who doesn't tan that my skin color is the "right shade".

I have seen people tan enough that would make one think they are mixed or mexican or something, but my tone is a little bit darker than tans...so it eludes me.

I hate it when people say they are the same thing. I, myself can tan, but I do not like it when people people say my skin color is the "right shade". Right shade for what? Its darker than a tan, and a little bit lighter than the shade those who bleach themselves are trying to achieve....

My skincolor is yellowish brown, reddish brown, and on a very pale day a white-ish brown. Nowhere close to a tan.

Why Barack and Michelle is not considered an interracial relationship.

Okay, people need to understand the racial system in America. I don't know how many times it must be said. America goes by skincolor, not title. Your title is Biracial, your skin color is black. It is simplified because they want to easily categorize and it makes it easier to be racist.

Some biracials, such as Tiffany of Mulatto Diaries, has yet to grasp this reality. How can you possibly work on race issues, if you are too deluded about the realities of race in America? Usually I like what she posts, but her PC nature tends to piss me off.

Okay, in order to better understand this, I need to shed some light on my PC views. PC-Politically Correct, is when you try to be correct about things, so you don't offend people, in other words you try to be sensitive about things. It came around to make words like "nigger" from being used in public. I am against PC because it has weakened ourselves and has made us overly sensitive, people get offended by the smallest little things and make some of the biggest cases out of it. I think PC had a good start, but then people just made it flat out silly and pathetic. Its like PC has thrown common sense out the door!

Anyways, PC people will often say that Barack and Michelle are an interracial couple, just because people like Halle and her boyfriend Gabriel are considered one.

Well, this is not true. You see, in AMERICA, race goes by skincolor, therefore, in an interracial relationship, it goes by skincolor. Meaning, when you see Barack and his wife, and you did not know anything about them, you would consider them two black people. But when you see Halle and her man, you would assume its an interracial relationship because he is white and she so obviously does not look white.

You see, you can't possibly change race issues in America, when you are not willing to accept and see race issues for what they are in America. Saying that either all are interracial or all are not, doesn't mean anything....because you haven't changed the actual problem because you are too busy trying to pretend there is no problem, saying it doesn't make it happen.

That PC post I Tiffany did, was by far, one her worst posts ever. Its not the first time I have disagreed with her, but on that post, it was just lacking any thought or knowledge about the way America works.

BARACK AND MICHELLE ARE NOT AN INTERRACIAL COUPLE. GABRIEL AND HALLE ARE AN INTERRACIAL COUPLE. END OF STORY.

Why is it easer to talk about race relations that pertain to whites only?

Each minority group seems to have the guts and courage to make it known about the reality of race relations between them and whites, and how its not so good. But I realized something, seldom do you really hear many conversations about race relations between minorities.

You would think that because all are minorities and deal with racism from whites, that they would all get along, but there is so much animosity between them, many hate blacks (ironic considering it was the civil rights fight that would give all minorities rights and not just blacks in the end).

But very little do any of the minority races speak of their animosity against each other, nor do they ever take united fronts against the racism they all deal with from white people.

Maybe they have no reason to openly discuss it since, the ones in power are mostly white, and they are the majority, therefore what they do or decide affect them far more than what the minority race decides.

Or maybe all the minorities refuse to discuss their animosity for other minority races because it will make them look weaker, and will make their argument against the majority race much more harder.

In the end, its not a question of if other minorities hate other minorities. Its a question of why they don't want to talk fight it or really discuss it the same way they all want to with white people.

The Perpetual Foreigner?

What is the "perpetual foreigner"? It is when a minority (usually Asian American or Indian American) is mistaken for a foreigner. They get asked that question "Where are you from?" They answer and then get the question "No, really, where are you from?".

We all know the "Where are you from?" question. We all get asked that question by strangers, who are curious about our locations. Some people are surprised, maybe because they live there or know someone who lives there, or because we do not behave in a way that would allude us from being from that location (examples: if you are a city person but are so good at farm life, that one would be surprised if you said you are a city person, or if you are so knowledgeable about city life, yet never been in the city, people would be surprised by that).

But what makes questions like these take a turn for the worst, is when you get the question "No, really where are you from?" or variations of it.

I never knew about this, and for me its hard to imagine that it happens, it sounds soooo stupid. But it does happen. This happens because some people find it hard to believe that Americans are not just white people.

Asians and Indian Americans often get the brunt of this due to the fact that their history in American isn't as extensive as it is for Native Americans, African Americans, and whites.

In a bit of irony, as I was researching this a bit more, I found that Africans (or blacks that are not American at all in general), deal with this in opposite form. They are always classified as African American, even if they are from Britain, Jamaica, the Caribbean, etc. People have more trouble seeing them for what they are, and not as African American. Don't get me wrong, all minorities that don't look white are seen as less American (and white American brand of "patriotism" aka nationalism (like the Neo Nazi kind), make it even harder).

The perpetual foreigner pretty much denotes anyone of Asian or Indian descent to not be automatically assumed as Americans. My university has a major body of international students from India and China, which would means people may mistake those who are American for a foreigner.

The perpetual foreigner is found anywhere. Someone talked about the difference between being a black American in Britain, and then being African.

They mentioned how Africans are not seen as British and people treat anyone with black skin (even Americans, as if they do not belong). But the difference lies in the fact that the black American is NOT British and once it is discovered they are American, all of a sudden those who know will treat them a little bit better than the native born blacks and African immigrants of Britain. Why? Because a tourist from another country (especially another continent), means money. At least that is the rationale used in all countries when it comes to tourism.

The perpetual foreigner isn't extreme racism, but it is an aggravating one. It usually derives from peoples own ignorance about America and what an American is. A minority (even blacks) will face this more than a white person ever will. Blacks are not seen as Americans, but very few times do people question if they were born in America. Unless they looked too exotic to be "black".

Yet they, like the Asians, Blacks get similar comments like "go back to your country (insert things such as China, Japan, Africa)" and things such as "you speak english so well" (this alludes to broken English (for Asians) and Ebonics (for blacks)).

Debating Online.

The topic of this would normally go over to my "Me vs. the World" blog, but this is something that I feel should belong in BOTH blogs, simply for its nature.

Debating. Its when two people are on opposing sides, and must present evidence or argue for their side and their reasoning. Debating could be interesting and a good way to make a final decision on something, if done correctly.

Real debating takes place face to face. It also takes place in a moderated environment, which means someone takes the position of moderating the opponents by making sure they stay on subject and keeping the people from name calling.

When you look at politics, for the most part the politicians themselves are able to act more accordingly during things such as Presidential debates. Even though we live in an era where politicians are unable to be friends for the fact that they are on opposing sides.

Then you have online debating. In this form, it takes place in areas such as comments. The problem with this form of debating is that there usually are no moderators. You are not debating face to face. People often resort to calling names and throwing insults. People pretty much become stupid.

What is worse is you often have people butting into a debate, without being invited. In a REAL debate, if one is not a part of the debate from the beginning, they are not allowed to be in the debate.

In fact the immaturity one often sees in these so called debates in comment sections of blogs, Youtube, and news websites, often represent how stupid and pathetic our society is becoming. How ill mannered and crazy people are.

In fact one should ask themselves if its worth debating online. Sometimes you got a blog or a Youtube video to put in your 2 cents worth, and then someone wants to bait you into a debate. We often give in, we do not want to lose, and we think we can save someone from thinking the wrong way. Also, we don't want to be considered chickens or losers for not debating.

The problem is, those who bait you into debating, aren't doing it to actually debate. They pretty much are not going to change their views, they just want to get you as angry as possible, they want you to lose your temper. They simply want to harass you.

We do not live in an age where we respect one's differing opinion, or just take the opinions at face value and do not let it penetrate us. We are a weak society, a society that is very sensitive, that is very PC. We are so weak that we will engage in a useless and hopeless debate.

Online debating is often futile. It usually ends in circles, with the people hurling insults at one another, everyone ends up walking away believing the same things as they did before.

But what if you take the debate and its going nowhere, or what if you do want to debate, but not sure when you should bail out should it take a sour turn, well here are some tips to consider when online debating:

1. The minute insulting starts happening, tell the person(s) that you will not engage with them if they act immature. This response will end up causing them to throw out more insults. They will also question your character. These are childish attempts at keeping you from ending the "debate".

2. When they start questioning your character and you have already told them you will not engage in conversation with someone with those behaviors, you have one of two choices, you can keep repeating that you will not engage with them, or you can completely ignore them. They will still taunt you, and use your silence as an excuse that they have "won" the battle. These are childish people who will stoop very low and are desperate to keep the "debate" going (mostly because they have nothing better to do).

3. At this point, you should pretty much ignore what they say and not look back. You can't talk any sense into a brainless and immature person.

4. In the rare event that they cease name calling or hurling insults (and apologize for it), and promise to be mature again, you could go back into debate, but it is strongly advised that you don't

5. Another tip, when more people start ganging up on you, its probably a good idea to stop debating, some people are okay with being rude and entering other peoples' conversations.

Sometimes, the fear of some moron wanting to debate you, makes you reluctant to give your 2 cents worth on something. The thing is you do not have to take the bait.

Ignore them and simply tell them "I do not debate online". Again, these kinds of people will say the lowliest of things.

In the end, on must really think thoroughly if its even worth debating online in the first place. Or commenting on blogs or Youtube, or news sites and etc. Some people really have nothing better to do than to pick fights with anyone that disagrees with them. You do not have to give them the satisfaction. Let them suffer. This is the internet, why waste time or even get upset over losers who want to "debate" with you over things that shouldn't be debated online anyways. I mean, what does the opinions of some stranger really matter?

This is why I simply delete certain comments from the beginning, sometimes I will explain my stances in which I have done on this blog before and maybe answer a few questions about it usually, but I will not debate it.

My belief is debating should not be done online, unless there was a moderator, because the internet is full of many of the world's rejects and garbage.

Some people will do anything to justify a racist.

It sucks when the news is revealed that people like James Stewart, Walt Disney, Henry Ford, and John Wayne (and possibly Robert Mitchum) and Charles Lindbergh, are racists. They got away with it in their time, because it was the norm. But how are people generations later supposed to look at them?

Some are lucky to never know the truth, while others are not so lucky. That is when one is faced with the question of What should one do with this information?

I was at a blog where a guy by the name of Cowboy Bob, was desperately trying to justify racist comments John Wayne Made about blacks and Indians in a Playboy Magazine article.

I don't feel we did wrong in taking this great country away from them if that's what you're asking. Our so called stealing of this country was just a question of survival. There were great numbers of people who needed new land the Indians were selfishly trying to keep it for themselves.... I'm quite sure that the concept of a Government-run reservation... seems to be what the socialists are working for now — to have everyone cared for from cradle to grave.... But you can't whine and bellyache 'cause somebody else got a break and you didn't, like those Indians are. We'll all be on a reservation soon if the socialists keep subsidizing groups like them with our tax money.

I believe in white supremacy until blacks are educated to a point of responsibility. I don't believe in giving authority and positions of leadership and judgment to irresponsible people.... The academic community has developed certain tests that determine whether the blacks are sufficiently equipped scholastically.... I don't feel guilty about the fact that five or ten generations ago these people were slaves. Now I'm not condoning slavery. It's just a fact of life, like the kid who gets infantile paralysis and can't play football like the rest of us.

By going to school. I don't know why people insist that blacks have been forbidden to go to school. They were allowed in public schools wherever I've been. I think any black man who can compete with a white can get a better break than a white man. I wish they'd tell me where in the world they have it better than right here in America

John Wayne not only showed how ignorant he was when it came to race relations, but showed how proud he was of it. He had no qualms admitting his true colors and white supremacy. People like Cowboy Bob say that none of what was mentioned was racist. They use excuses such as "he was married to a Mexican woman!", which pretty much means nothing since one can like one minority group and hate another, which still makes you a racist.

Other excuses used is that John Wayne worked with a black man, something James Stewart himself and Robert Mitchum himself did not want to do (although the Mitchum one is questionable as to his reasons for it are still not quite clear). Ever heard of the "my best friend is black!" argument? This is essentially a version of that that people are using. One can be racist regardless of the token minority. Relations with a black person, or being kind to their face does not make you less of a racist.

Some people are so desperate to justify any comments a racist celebrity said, because of fear of being called racist themselves for liking them.

But you know what? Defending them, makes you look more like a racist more than ever...because its disgusting how anyone could try to say something that is racist isn't. People like Cowboy Bob are race deraliers. If you point out a racist act, they will call you a racist simply for pointing out the truth. In other words, they do not like the truth.

Most often, people will justify it by saying these people were a product of their time, so its okay. Yet what is not okay is how we overlook that part. As much as we love to look at their achievements, shouldn't we also look at what made them a bad person? If they are going to make their views known, then shouldn't we make mention of them then?

The problem lies in the fact that society idolizes these people to the point that anything bad about them ruins their perfect image therefore one must either hide that tidbit of info, justify that bit of info, or somehow make it seem like it has no bearing.

Society looks at celebrities and innovators as inhuman, incapable of human faults, which makes it painful generations later to realize people who have done so much good were such horrible people later on in life. Society doesn't want to deal with who the person behind the great act of whatever, was such a bad person, they do not want to be realistic.

Minorities, are not given a choice in the matter, they must look at these people realistic. They have to take the good and the bad, its hard to ignore their bad side when they were against you. I look at people like Dr. Suess, he had apparently made some racist cartoons about the Japanese in the 1940s during WWII, many today justify these cartoons by saying "well we were at war with Japan then, and they did bomb pearl harbor", others would say "he made fun of hitler and the germans so I don't get why you are upset". For myself, and others, its hard to want to look at him realistically because we are unaffected by his racism. He denounced what was happening to the Jews in the Holocaust, and the mistreatment and discrimination faced by African Americans, yet he supported the Japanese interment camps.

Society wants to ignore these people as human, and as a result, we never learn how to properly cope with the reality that they were not good people. Justifying their racism is inexcusable.

Why do we only insist honoring them for their good, and looking away when it comes to who they are personally? If they are going to be public about their personal beliefs, then shouldn't we pay attention to that?

So how should one deal with the discovery that someone who has done good acting, or was an innovater, is a horrible person in their personal life?

One could still watch the movies or use their products, but one should not idolize them. Enjoy the show for what it is, a show.

In the end, nothing can be done to change the past. But at the same time, we should not give a free pass to them just because they came from a more blatantly hateful time. We should stop honoring them and holding them so high that they are inhuman. We must look at what they really are, and take them for their faults. We should openly admit that they are racist, and stop trying to hide it or justify it. The question of condemning them as a whole should be left up to the individual.

We should remain objective, we should try to use these people as lessons. Hiding who they really are, or denying what they really are, does no good and it only hurts those most affected by their hateful comments and actions.

What we really need to do is stop idolizing them and trying to make them inhuman and incapable of doing evil things. We need to stop looking at them unrealistically. We need to stop hiding their nature just because its upsetting to whatever good they did.

This also brings up a good question of, if celebrities should even be letting their personal views be known. Should they just do what they are being paid to do?

Painting with the same brush.

A few nights ago, I was talking with 2 white kids. They were talking about a klan run town a few hours away. They both grew up in small towns, where there were few to none minorities.

Both started speaking about blacks. In front of my face, they started saying that some of the blacks in their towns got mistreated. But then the guy said that "how you act matters".

He was referring to the fact that they exhibited "ghetto behaviors"....But the reality is they probably would have been mistreated regardless.

The problem was they were going on and on about how a black person should act right. I then said, well the problem with all of this is that you paint all blacks with the same brush. He would talk over me and discard what I was saying, which was that you can't assume one is ghetto for certain things. In an all white town, a black person will be mistreated, not because he is ghetto, but because he is black.

I was with a whole group of people and we all went to Burger King after this event, there was me, a black dude, a couple of whites and a couple of asians all of us together as a group.

This very old white woman sitting down, was giving me one of the most dirtiest looks ever and just watching all of us...eventually she left. She wasn't the first to do it, as my town is extremely racist and white people often do this all the time to blacks.

After we left, I was talking with this white girl, about her roommate. Her roommate is black (I am the only girl of color in my room).

She was talking about how they did not get along. I haven't spoken to this roommate. But I could tell what kind of girl she was as I have seen her. She was the type that I did not get along with in high school, she was the wannabe ghetto girl, who was loud and obnoxious, rude to everyone, always gave mean looks to you (she does this to me every time I walk by the lounge to go downstairs or back to my room, she and her buddies have taken over the lounge and do not allow others to enter unless they are in with her).

She then told me how her roommate represents a "ghetto black girl" and said she makes the black race look bad...it was then all of a sudden I started thinking about that label. I myself use it all the time, but then I realized, why are black girls labeled "ghetto" for being bitchy, I had only just a few minutes earlier spoken of my white roommate, who hates me and never even spoken to me. Although my problems with her have yet to get as intense as theirs...aren't both roommates practically one in the same?

It confirmed what I always knew to be true. When you are black, you really do not get individuality, let alone a fair analysis. If you don't act white, you are considered ghetto.

But I think what really angered me was the fact that, white people will often let the actions of one black person to speak for an entire race.

Just look at the Kanye incident. Beyonce does a stand up thing and is forgotten. You can know a good black, and it won't matter, as long as that bad black person is existant. People measure the black race not by its good people, but by its bad, and then they punish the good regardless simply because of the bad.

BET, TVOne...

Biracial Christian Girl commented me asking what I thought of BET and TV One considering the music on BET is often played on MTV. I believe it is necessary to have these channels. I personally do not watch BET (other than for the occasional episode of Sister Sister).

These channels are around because 90% of television does not portray blacks very well, they often portray them in stereotypical ways, or has the friend to the white main character. In a sense, these channels exist to try to balance television the best way it can since the other channels refuse to do anything themselves.

The problem with BET is that its too stereotypical in itself to be of any good. They should follow TVOne's direction (TVOne is a family oriented channel for blacks).

Blacks are NOT the only ones to have their own channel. And it often angers me how whites portray this as just blacks having something.

Whites have the majority of tv, they don't need a channel. The Spanish have their own channel because they speak Spanish and they don't want to learn English. Asians did have their own tv (and probably still do, pending on your provider). Women have over 3 channels under Lifetime, followed by 2 to 3 more other female oriented channels. Men have one channel of their own.

So seriously, the only people who complain about whites not having their own channel are usually racists who don't think its right for blacks to have half the things whites have. I mean its the same with Black History Month. In order to understand why things are the way they are today, people need to look at history. History explains today, and so far little has been done to correct history (meaning correcting today), so that tomorrow doesn't have to be like today.

I never noticed this until now...

Society believes its hard to raise a kid who is biracial because society is not open to them. We all know how pointless "other" and "2 or more races" is on forms (as biracial is vague and there are different mixes so its not the same).

Society makes no attempts to make it easy for biracials...yet raising a kid with 2 different races, is by far, more simple than raising a kid of 2 different cultures, or 2 different religions.

I never realized that before, but when raising a child of 2 different races, it is more simple for them if the parents are similar and share the same culture. Meaning, if both eat and like the same foods, dress the same (meaning both clean cut for example), if they listen to similar music, share the same beliefs, etc.

I am not saying its easy to raise biracial kids, because its not easy. But it may not necessarily be the hardest either.

Culture isn't always related to race. It usually is, but sometimes isn't. Look at black americans and then people from different tribes of Africa, you have completely different cultures there. Yet they are all the same race.

Raising a kid in 2 cultures can be complex. You have to give them the best of both worlds, and often, one has to choose (just like with race), in the end, we always lean more one way on something in life than the other, no matter how balanced we try to say. We all know how moderation is the key of life, but at the same time moderation is one of the most hardest things to maintain.

When it comes to religion, that may be even harder than culture. Because with religion you have so much conflict. How do you fairly give both religions to your kid? Its bad to say people should marry within their race only. Its bad to say people should marry within their culture only. Its bad to say people should marry within in their social status only. But is it bad to say people should marry within in their religion only?

If one can make it work, they should go for it, but they should really really think about how they are going to make it work.

How does an Atheist and Christian tolerate each other when it comes to religion? Naturally one will influence them more.

I do believe the kid should get the final decision in what they believe, but this can only be done by giving them the same equal amount of exposure...

I see the same problems coming up in marriages between different religions, that I see in marriages between people with different political beliefs.

In some cases, marrying out is okay and should not be looked down on...such as race and culture. But in the case of religion...that is questionable.

One should be with who they love, but they should think about the children. And I mean that for any kind of mixing, race, culture, religion, language, etc. One should talk about it and have an idea in mind...one needs to realize, in a mixing, that means you have to abide by rules slightly different from non-mixed marriages.

The realistic view is the most disappointing view

Race...a hard thing to talk about in a time where people get offended over anything and everything. (which is found in all races).

People get offended and then make a case out if. Just look at how the Republicans (with their Nazi-Hitler like leader Rush Limbaugh) act.

Its a miracle in this day and age to say something without someone getting on the defensive. It used to be how one says the message will determine the response, but these days you can go out of your way trying NOT to offend, and someone will still get offended (most likely for the sake of just getting offended).

I was thinking about something...is the realistic view of how America truly is so painful that people do everything to avoid it? The realistic view pretty much would mean each race would have its own list of problems to work out and fix....

The realistic view holds no sugarcoated solutions or truths.

You have people who are optimistic in life, or pessimistic, and then you have the realist.

For example, in a game of soccer, the optimist may not be good at the sport, but they have hope and faith that they will finally do really good for a game or two, at the least. They never give up. The pessimist, has never played soccer, but has seen the game. They ASSUME they are bad at it just based on watching it. The realist though has played, and if they are a positive realist,they know they are good, if they are a negative realistic, then they know they are not good, and its based fully on facts (meaning they have played it enough to know their abilities).

Yes, there are 2 types of realistics...one is the Postive, the other is the Negative, the positive have hope but look at it realistically so the hope and happiness are well within its proper confines, while the negatives have no hope, yet still are reasonable with realism.

We all know how grim reality is...so how do we deal with it? We take a more sickeningly approach that gives a whole new meaning to "optimism"...we essentially pretend its not such a problem and try to look beyond it. The problem is, we are looking for a solution that doesn't offend us, nor causes us to have to work hard, and by work hard, i mean look within one's self and see how they fit in this problem.

No one is innocent, all is guilty in this problem...but the realistic view is disappointing, partly because some want to just blame all problems on one, and also people are in way too much denial to fix the problems.

I guess what I am saying is that if America doesn't start getting realistic about everything, race relations are only going to get worse, they are already deteriorating. Each race has a long list of things to work on, so neither race should be telling what the other race needs to work on as no race is innocent in this.

Its great to have an optimistic view, but a positive realistic view is better.

The Biracial Card

The "biracial card" is a card, mostly used by whites. It was coined during the Obama election. The "biracial card" is essentially when a white person always makes mentioning of Obama being biracial, as if it matters in the situation. It is their way of trying to conceal the fact that Obama is the first black man in the presidency.

The problem with this is that those who use the "biracial card" are only using it in this situation. These are people that see biracials the same as black, and assume they are black. These are people who do not care for the biracial problems in America. These are essentially people who are taking advantage of a real problem, simply so they could whine and find controversy about Obama.

We have already established Obama's right to self identify as the way he wants. I was reading a comment and someone said that Obama's decision to go with black, is good for blacks, as it gives them better role models than rappers and gangbangers, and deadbeat fathers. This is true. The black community is in peril, and it needs all the good role models it can get that share the same race and features and stories of racism as others.

The biracial card angers me. These people pretend to care for the biracial cause, but the reality is, they just want to find something about Obama to stir the pot with, on top of that, they just want to make his election more meaningless...

Most who use this card, are racists, those who hate blacks, and to soften the blow of a black man being elected, they elevate the white side. Often you hear some say a biracial person is "saved" by their white side, alluding to how most are raised by their white side, and that somehow makes them smarter. I have seen it happen, and it has happened to me once....

As soon as Obama is out of office, those who were using the biracial card will all of a sudden stop "caring" for the movement, as if they even cared to begin with.

There is this on going joke I hear from people (that may become true more than likely), the joke is that if Obama does bad, whites will consider him black, and blacks will consider him biracial....but if he does good, both are going to try to take credit for it as if they did it themselves (we all know how people in America define achievements by race, and take claim of peoples achievements of the past simply for sharing the same race).

The biracial card is ineffective, no matter how much you say he is half white, it honestly does not matter in the grand scheme of things. The majority has the tendency to change the rules of the game when they start losing, we see this with slavery and its end. They started losing, so what way to win again? Bring in Jim Crow laws.

I usually know people are pulling the "biracial card" when they cite Obama and his being half white....you know very well they did not care before then, and they won't care after him. True people who care about the biracial issues, have more to say, more personal things to say....

Right now, those who use the biracial card, are making the situation for biracials worse...they are like a wolf in sheeps clothing.

Answers desperately needed...

Ugh, my own aunt has no idea, nor does my sister...so I am left searching the internet for 2 answers to, 2 questions.

Why did Jesus condone slavery (in the bible he doesn't condemn it at all)...

and Is the Curse of Cain really about blacks. Thinking about it, it does feel like we are cursed considering the racism we deal with, and the different texture hair and the trouble that comes with it...but at the same time, blacks probably would not have been treated as bad as they were if not for the Bible condoning slavery and the mentioning of the mark of Cain.

Also, while we are at it, was Moses' wife really black?

Does a black person in America need an African culture?

Or better yet, would they even embrace it?

My roommate yesterday had returned from her observations at a elementary school that is predominately black...one thing she kept complaining about was the whole name thing.

She made a major fuss about it. These names are what one would call "black names". I personally do not like black names. The idea and concept of black names is to have some identity with Africa, only problem is, that these names are not African. In fact, one name she started complaining about actually sounded African, and I was like, "that one sounds African, is he African?" she says no, only to say 2 seconds later that the boy's mom is from Africa, and then she said that name could be excused.

She was making fun of the names because she couldn't pronounce them. She found it funny that these names are not pronounced how they look.

I was kinda annoyed at this. Even though I do not like these black names myself...I still felt she and my other roommate were being insensitive about it. But I wasn't surprised, she spent 30 mins telling me she was scared of going to this school because she is white and is from an upperclass town and this is an urban school...(her idea of urban is anything next to or within the city)....she kept on worrying how she was going to be treated, and I said, that she shouldn't bring attention to herself, and she'd be fine. Don't go in there with the whole "I am better than you" attitude.

Her complaining of African names, plus a video I watched earlier in English were the girls at the end talk about Africa, made me think for a little bit.

The reason I hate black names, is that they draw too much attention. One should be unique enough that there name isn't too common, but is normal enough. One should not pair a common name with a common last name, if the last name is uncommon, then a common first name is encouraged. Also, professionally, a "white name" could help you out more....a very Afrocentric name could work against someone, it almost confines them into a box without being seen or known. And besides, nothing worse than one who can't pronounce your name.

My name is a white name, I am the only minority I know with my name, but its common enough that I have known other girls with my name, but it was just enough uncommon that I did not have too many classes with people who had my name (most classes I would be the only one with my name).

But I was thinking about the African culture. Many of the black girls in the video (i posted in the last post), talked about missing that piece of identity. But I can't help but ask, would they even embrace it? Most likely they just want to know where they hail from, but more than likely would not embrace it. Its the same with all the people who go around bragging they are Irish (even though that happened 100 years before them), other than St. Patrick's Day, they do nothing that would be considered in the spirit of the Irish.

We as Americans have the tendency to pretend America has no culture, therefore creating the need to say we are from such and such place, even though ourselves, our parents, grandparents, etc were never there.

This actually annoys Europeans and Africans, and Native Americans, when people do this.

I can understand wanting to know about your African roots...I was never too affected by not knowing, I guess its because I know some of my white side (not all of it though, as my mom doesn't know much about it)...But none of those ever honestly shaped my identity. Having Irish, Blackfoot Indian, and African in me, has not shaped me at all, I celebrate none of these heritages. But being black and white has shaped me though....

Does one who never stepped foot in a country, need that country (or continent) to help their identity, to feel more complete?

Sometimes I wonder, whats the point in knowing, if you don't bother to embrace it, or if you don't have any recent connections with it.

I guess, what I am saying is that America should just accept that it does have a culture of its own, and no, its not a culture that is a mix of other cultures. America does have its own culture (think along the lines of the British). We are quick to point out what is mainstream. What is mainstream stands for what is the culture of this country. Yes each indvidual has their own culture within this culture, but they still live in a country with a national identity.

Why race conversations never succeed in anything.

Lets face it, its next to impossible to talk about race in America. God forbid you say racism against blacks is still prevalent...just saying that will cause some racist white person to call you racist for admitting the truth rather than hiding it. I have seen it so much.

Recently my English 1100 class talked about black culture. Mostly about hair and the light vs dark issue. We watched a video called A Girl Like Me which talked about black girls in a world that idolizes white.

After the video, the white kids in my class (its overwhelmingly white in this class), pretty much said it was a sad video (that also invoked anger in some), and they all said that these girls should be proud and love the skin they are in.

Never do they connect the dots to figure out exactly why they aren't happy about it in the first place. Its not just a problem they deal with from the black community, but mainstream (white) standards, also make it harder for them to love who they are.

It was strongly apparent how indifferent many of the white kids were to the whole issue. But one white kid made it his goal to turn this into a "why can't white girls be upset about curly hair if black girls can?" problem, when the class started talking about hair and whats acceptable and not.

I thin had to explain exactly why by comparing my hair and our teacher's hair. While my hair was in its natural state at the time, it was also curly (but thick and kinky too). I was wearing it down.

I explained that the teacher's hair could be easily fixed should a problem arise, it wouldn't take long. She could even go into the pool with it. Mine on the other hand takes hours to fix, and I can't go into the water. I have to be careful with it. He even started putting words in the teacher's mouth. It looked like he was trying to find reasons to oppose from the very beginning.

He proved why race conversations are dreaded and are hard to have...because people go into it wanting to oppose rather than listen. The other white kids refused to accept that white culture played a role in why those girls felt the way they did. One white guy asked me if black girls want to be white, and I said, "its not that they want to be white, they just don't want to be treated like second class citizens anymore".

In the end, the only thing this conversation did was teach white kids some of the process to maintaining black hair...

But I realized something, and its something I realized happens in all conversations about race. Not only is the person you talking to always trying to oppose and be the victim (such as my roommate, who doesn't hide her "I am better than you" attitude at all), but also, people never talk about a solution.

Some are bent on telling the world there is a problem, and others are bent on saying there isn't one. But neither bother to accept there is a problem and to just find the solution, so neither have to keep debating if there is a problem or not.

I mean, talking about race often does not succeed in anything other than causing anger or disappointment. Even if you are successful in finding someone you can talk about race to, who won't get defensive (or to the extreme someone who derails the conversation about race), what good is talking about it, without finding ways to fix it?

One thing we established in class, as our unit pertains to images and identity (mostly its all about females, to the boys annoyances), is that media isn't strictly to blame. That society does nothing to fight the stereotypes or negative images, that we allow it and follow them religiously...so society is more to blame than the media, as society knows what the media is doing is wrong, yet does nothing about it except bitch.