Sociologists may have their own reasons for classifying it as they do, but from the perspective of the US Census Bureau and the Congress they report to, there are very narrow parameters for tracking race...and it is race, not ethnicity. Everyone now self-declares his or her ethnicity and is allowed to pick more than one answer. Hispanics, Greeks, Arabs and Swedes are all considered light-skinned people and there's no differentiating them from each other for the purposes of tracking by government standards.
If you want a humorous story (well not to the guy involved), there was a man from North Africa who filed an immigration form and checked "Black" as his race. He showed up for his interview and was light skinned. He was detained for immigration fraud. The case stirred a lot of attention and led to the decision that one is allowed to self-declare and that it's not a reason for fraud any longer.
As for me, I'm 1/32nd Huron and darned proud of it. Everytime I have to fill out one of those Equal Opportunity forms I check "Native American". There's not a thing the government can do and my company gets points for its "diversity".
As for the comment about "beaurocratic wonkheads", cool your precious jets. There are separate questions about country of origin. If you weren't born in another country, then your national origins are American. The US government has no need to know that your great, great grandparents were from Poland, Switzerland, Ireland, Finland, Saudi Arabia and China. It's simply a waste of time to go that route. The question at hand is the color of your skin and that's all they're asking in the race question. If you're light-skinned then you're light-skinned regardless of your ethnicity. Sheesh.
2006-08-01 11:23:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by yellow_jellybeans_rock 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
I JUST read this in my Sociology book about 10 minutes ago. It may be because the middle east holds important symbolic value that whites hope to associate with their race. the middle east is the birthplace for christianity (and the home of many biblical sites). Also the pyramids are there, and has renowned geographic landmarks associated with the cradle of civilization.
And since egyptians speak arabic(and many have a middle eastern background) , then they are put in the same category as arabs. Which puts you back at the explanation given by the book.
2006-08-01 17:44:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by I ♥ men in uniform 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Because beaurocratic wonkheads hate to have too many categories on those surveys, it means more work and bulkier databases. Why offer a whole bunch of relevent choices when you can offer just a few umbrella categories that don't mean much?
2006-08-01 19:56:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by Mutantmoose 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
because in the middle east and the arabian world, the more black you are the more ugly and bad you look.
(and they are right in that, they know better, they had civilization many ages before european countries)
2006-08-02 14:30:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by Spartan 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The same reason Italians and Russians are.
2006-08-01 17:40:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by Karma 1
·
2⤊
0⤋
Then they would have to admit that Jesus wasn't white!
It's not really a serious answer, but it's interesting.
2006-08-02 14:23:12
·
answer #6
·
answered by cobra 7
·
0⤊
1⤋