The problem is society...not the identity.

I think I may have done this before, but oh well.

I was thinking about how biracials are stereotyped as confused...you got your racists like Keith Bardwell who go around thinking they are "saving" the world by preventing biracials.

But the same people who claim biracials are "confused" are the ones that give biracials the problems in the first place.

The problem isn't the biracial person being of mixed heritage, the problem is that the biracial is living in a society that refuses to accept biracial people.

Even though I think its okay for a biracial to choose a side of their race to identify (especially if it could help them in a situation), I also think a biracial identity is imperative. Its a job that at some point will have to be done...no one wants to do it because its grueling work to change societal ways...alot of questions would be in store.

The main thing many, both white and black would have against the idea of a "biracial identity" is how would you be able to tell who is biracial and who is not? One would be a liar or just plain delusional about society if they denied the fact that America bases everything on race. How you are treated will be based on how others decipher your race. If you look black, expect the worst treatment....if you can pass for white, people will give you that white privilege at least until they find out your not really white.

We used to be a society that looked at origination first. If you were Irish or German you were looked down on in the 1800s primarily due to language barriers and religious differences. But when the "original white people" (essentially the british line of heritage) was becoming outnumbered, white people simply broadened what is considered white. And the one drop rule made it easy to just classify all blacks in one group with no regard to cultural heritages or mixture within.

So the creation of a biracial identity would disrupt that flow, it would cause people to either redefine whats considered black and whats not or it would cause people to finally have to learn to look past race (which would not be a bad thing at all).

If society went with the first option, it would make the situation harder as you have light skinned blacks who are not the product of direct interracial relationships who can sometimes be lighter than a biracial. And sometimes you have a biracial who is as dark as a dark skinned black person.

Another issue would arise, if a biracial identity was to be made in the US, what would happen to those who choose sides? Some people choose sides because they relate better with one side over the other, and sometimes they benefit by going with one side. Self identity is NOT the same as self hatred.

The problem with the second option is that white people do not want to give up their privelage that they get from looking at race first. Society would never want to be equal.

So what happens? Like in the past people find 100 reasons to not make a societal change, the main one always being its too hard and blah blah blah...and send the problem off to the next generation who will do the same.

The same happened to slavery...everyone kept shrugging it off, and finally someone got enough balls to do the grueling work...

Its always going to be something no one wants to do, but will have to be done...the longer you wait, the worse it gets. It seems kind of pathetic and useless to do that.

A secret about change: Societal changes are not meant to benefit you, they are meant to benefit the generations after you (which is another leading reason people don't want to make the change).