You have to go back in time a little. Pre slavery days. Before there were any black people in North America. There were the Native Americans. We called them "red man" They called the invaders "pale face" "white man". But you have to remember. That the black man coined the term themselves. They didn't like being called Negro. So they insisted themselves that they were "black". There's your origin of the black man. The white man didn't give him that name. He did it to himself.
.
2006-11-16 21:19:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
Stop being pedantic.
We know noone is 'black' or 'white' - the words "Black" and "White" in the racial sense dont refer to colour, but to a genetic makup and to a lesser extent cultural identity. You are as Black or White as you consider your genetics and culture are.
The majority of Afrcia - genetically more Black, the majority Western World, gentically more White - hence the Black and White reference you talk about - we use this so that we can avoid rediculuous pedantic carification such as this!
2006-11-17 06:50:45
·
answer #2
·
answered by huvgj 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think its just how it has been since ages. I mean since ages, the western region has been occupied by white people, while in africa, it has been black people. Back then, it would be so noticable if a white man went to africa or vise versa. And so, the name has stuck, that this is white and that is black.
2006-11-17 05:17:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by rooney 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
Or, why do black people want to be called African-Americans when they don't know anything about African culture?
Asians are CLOSE to white but not actually white.
Some "black" people are dark-skinned enough to be confused with the color black but are really just dark brown.
2006-11-17 05:10:20
·
answer #4
·
answered by AngryAmerican82 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
It's really just for easier classification between the two groups.
White people can have a pale complexion to a pinkish-red skin color. Black people can range from a caramel to pitch black.
2006-11-17 05:09:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Not only do we label humans with skin colors that don't exist but we describe animals with colors that aren't real.
Blue point siamese cats don't have blue fur.
Neither is the coat of a blue heeler (a dog) really blue.
A greyhound isn't necessarily gray.
2006-11-17 05:29:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by rethinker 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
When YOU come up with simpler, time-saving, yet more accurate "labels" to describe people who are dissimilar, without having me read a freaking book to explain every nuance to your new, subjective, labeling technique, I'll follow your lead.
Start writing!..:)
2006-11-17 05:59:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
America, the west = social preference & control over others
Africa, the blacks = not a social choice
2006-11-17 05:55:39
·
answer #8
·
answered by Gountha aka Triana 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Because that is just the way it is and nothing anyone can do or say is going to change it.
2006-11-17 05:11:53
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
well imagine calling them the pinks and the dark browns....lol...it just sounds weird
2006-11-17 07:18:56
·
answer #10
·
answered by elle 2
·
1⤊
0⤋