The one drop rule.
Until recently, people like Obama and Woods were identified simply as black because of a peculiarly American institution known informally as "the one-drop rule," which defines as black a person with as little as a single drop of "black blood." This notion derives from a long discredited belief that each race had its own blood type, which was correlated with physical appearance and social behavior. The antebellum South promoted the rule as a way of enlarging the slave population with the children of slave holders. By the nineteen-twenties, in Jim Crow America the one- drop rule was well established as the law of the land. It still is, according to a United States Supreme Court decision as late as 1986, which refused to review a lower court's ruling that a Louisiana woman whose great-great-great-great-grandmother had been the mistress of a French planter was black--even though that proportion of her ancestry amounted to no more than three thirty- seconds of her genetic heritage. "We are the only country in the world that applies the one-drop rule, and the only group that the one-drop rule applies to is people of African descent,"
2007-02-06 02:51:08
·
answer #1
·
answered by zurioluchi 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
This has some historical basis, but I think it is mostly just the color of their skin--they appear black, but black is a word that has to be carefully used by white people if they wish to avoid having someone open a whole can of worms about their racial sensitivity.
In more racist times in the US and Spanish-owned colonies, someone half-black would either be considered black, or worse, be considered part of a special half-and-half race. (In Spanish colonies, there were about seventeen races, which you belonged to depended not only on whether you were white, black, or native, but also what portion of your blood line came from each of these.)
Ancestry means less today than it ever has--which is probably a good thing. Perhaps we'll see a day where the racial lines are even more blurry than they are today, and will be merely be descriptive of people rather than something to give an identity.
2007-02-06 02:54:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by wayfaroutthere 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
In America, an age old practice identifies anyone that is mixed with African-American blood to be African-American. This was used to classify people and to stratify our society. Our social-psychology has predominately been exclusive as opposed to inclusive. To exclude based on racial heritage was the status-quo for decades.
As a matter of fact, the predominant ideology today is to include "Illegal Immigrants" at the expense of those that have followed the prescribed procedures. Racism in America is a never-ending saga. If people would afford African-Americans the same tolerance and a modicum of humanity--they would find us to be desirous of the same positive things for our community and families. And yes, racially mixed people are equally half and half!
2007-02-06 03:50:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by FunkyMcNasty 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't agree with the other answerers completely. If you are of mixed race, our society puts the label of Black on us and we just accept it. Ask white people what race Tiger and Obama are. They'll say "Black." We even invented words like mulatto, quadroon, octaroon (I don't think that's spelled right and spellcheck isn't helping) to denote the amount of Black ancestry a person has. Halle Berry is not described as half-white. She's labeled Black. I agree with what you say in principle, but Obama and Woods have not hidden their ancestry. They have been completely honest about being mixed race. They are stuck with the labels society put on them.
2007-02-06 02:57:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by David M 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Well any "white" person is Euro-American, If their "black" part was completely denied then that would open a whole new can of worms, it is both politically correct and "in" to claim one's "black" background. In FLorida High Schools everyone is Puerto Rican, that is what's "in" there. I do agree that only referring or always referring to one's "African" descent reenforces racist attitudes, Halle Berry was the first African American woman to egt a best actress Oscar, she too is half white. Mariah Carey is more recently embracing her "Blackness" more so.
2016-05-23 23:28:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because they play up the African-American side of their heritage. Answer me this; Does Obama take part in the black caucus? Nuff said!
Personally, I think of them both as Americans, period. Why can't they be content with that?
2007-02-06 02:48:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
If both sides of his heritage would like to be proud, they can. The black community has used them as mentors for their community, and the asian community can as well for Tiger!
2007-02-06 06:50:09
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
i believe society has shunned them into that culture,asians and white may not have accepted them as one of them, alot of cultures view blacks as an undesired culture,not neccasarily my opinion but the opinion of many ive known over the years that were in similar situations
2007-02-06 02:55:10
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
ARE YOU AFRAID TO SAY ASIAN FOR TIGER WOODS? IT D
ONT MATTER TO WHAT COLOR THEY WOULD LIKE TO BE
CALLED. ITS A KNOWN FACT, THAT ALL OF US BELONG TO
OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST. AND HE DONT LO
OK THROUGH THE RACIAL LINE OF THE COLOR OF OUR S
KIN, AND THE NATIONALITY OF THE RACE THAT WE WANT
TO REPRESENT.
2007-02-06 02:52:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Because pulling the "black card" gets you further.
2007-02-06 04:01:56
·
answer #10
·
answered by Fuzzy 3
·
1⤊
1⤋