Are England's black football players actually mixed race?

il_principe

DonDaddyD wrote:

African's did travel for the purpose of exploration and commerce (to the Middle East, Asia and Southern Europe) as well as War. Egypt wasn't the only Empire in Africa, you could argue it was the greatest - surviving some 5000years.

Sorry to be pedantic, but Egypt never really had an empire. They did wrestle for control of what is now Syria for a time, but you'd be better off referring to Egypt as a Civilization.

mudcow007

ok so if the term "Black" is incorrect. someone should tell the people who organise the MOBO awards

then again the Music of Black And Mixed Heritage doesnt really have the same ring to it......

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

Well put it this way, I don't think ethnicity is as big a deal to white people, the ethnic majority in the UK as it is to ethnic minorities here. Race just isn't as personally relevant.

I can't speak for white people or a white person, personally. race didn't bother Ms DDD until she realised that her son "would look nothing like her". It's important now for her to teach him about his Irish/English roots.

Of the other white people I know I would say race is important to some. Italians, Irish, Jewish and Polish for example are very culturally aware. Their ethnicity and cultural background are of the utmost importance to them and they imprint this on their kids (and by they I mean people I know personally). So I think it wrong to say white people don't think ethnicity is a big a deal.

As for the relevance of ethnicity to choosing sexual partners, thats a massive can of worms.

It is but I have had a some say exactly that.

DonDaddyD

mudcow007 wrote:

ok so if the term "Black" is incorrect. someone should tell the people who organise the MOBO awards

then again the Music of Black And Mixed Heritage doesnt really have the same ring to it......

You're just being obtuse. No one is saying the term 'black' is wrong. Identifying mixed race people as black is misrepresenting them.

The MOBO's is the correct definition. The Music being celebrated is of 'black' origin.

DonDaddyD

Il Principe wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

African's did travel for the purpose of exploration and commerce (to the Middle East, Asia and Southern Europe) as well as War. Egypt wasn't the only Empire in Africa, you could argue it was the greatest - surviving some 5000years.

Sorry to be pedantic, but Egypt never really had an empire. They did wrestle for control of what is now Syria for a time, but you'd be better off referring to Egypt as a Civilization.

You're right. T'was great though.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Well put it this way, I don't think ethnicity is as big a deal to white people, the ethnic majority in the UK as it is to ethnic minorities here. Race just isn't as personally relevant.

I can't speak for white people or a white person, personally. race didn't bother Ms DDD until she realised that her son "would look nothing like her". It's important now for her to teach him about his Irish/English roots.

To be fair, he won't look like you either. He'll probably be blessed with the best bits from both of you, and double the cultural heritage that either of you have

DonDaddyD wrote:

Of the other white people I know I would say race is important to some. Italians, Irish, Jewish and Polish for example are very culturally aware. Their ethnicity and cultural background are of the utmost importance to them and they imprint this on their kids (and by they I mean people I know personally). So I think it wrong to say white people don't think ethnicity is a big a deal.

I think the key defining attribute of the people you're probably talking about here is that they're immigrants (1st or n generation. And as you say, its not their race thats important, its their cultural background. One's cultural background is more important for your personal identity if its different to the norm in the country where you live. Though I would concede that I was referring to white British people, living in Britain. In my experience race just isn't a factor to them, and they're more likely to commit the terrible faux pax of referring to a dark skinned mixed race person as being black.

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Well put it this way, I don't think ethnicity is as big a deal to white people, the ethnic majority in the UK as it is to ethnic minorities here. Race just isn't as personally relevant.

I can't speak for white people or a white person, personally. race didn't bother Ms DDD until she realised that her son "would look nothing like her". It's important now for her to teach him about his Irish/English roots.

To be fair, he won't look like you either. He'll probably be blessed with the best bits from both of you, and double the cultural heritage that either of you have

There are more times when he looks like me, but as he is getting older he is getting darker and growing into his baby features. It's important to me that he knows both his Dad and Mum's culture. I'm very much about multiculturalism but my approach is to acknowledge each facet and the differences. I'm not a fan of the Tory approach of bunging it all in a pot and saying you're all the same.

nsb wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Of the other white people I know I would say race is important to some. Italians, Irish, Jewish and Polish for example are very culturally aware. Their ethnicity and cultural background are of the utmost importance to them and they imprint this on their kids (and by they I mean people I know personally). So I think it wrong to say white people don't think ethnicity is a big a deal.

I think the key defining attribute of the people you're probably talking about here is that they're immigrants (1st or 2n generation. And as you say, its not their race thats important, its their cultural background. One's cultural background is more important for your personal identity if its different to the norm in the country where you live.

British Black (Caribbean) is both my ethnicity and Cultural background.

Though I would concede that I was referring to white British people, living in Britain. In my experience race just isn't a factor to them, and they're more likely to commit the terrible faux pax of referring to a dark skinned mixed race person as being black.

My experience is different but I take your point. Its the refusal to accept that calling them black is wrong it ignores the fact that they are equally white.

rjsterry

DonDaddyD wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

spen666 wrote:

some people like to play the race card and do more to stir up racial problems than currently exist.

some people are happy to play race card when it suits them and call anyone who disagrees a racist

This post does not surprise me.

He's not wrong, but I'm not sure it moves the discussion on.

A couple of points:
When you say before slavery, I assume you mean in the Triangle Trade sense. Slavery is obviously as old as the hills and is not limited to any one ethnic group. The idea of second class citizens is also nothing new.

Also, does anyone have an official or personal definition of "black"? It has always seemed like one of those things that everyone is sure they know, until you ask them to write it down. If nobody is sure what the definition is, then how can we say that people are/are not black, let alone whether that is a positive, negative or neutral statement.

I'm not sure what nonsense Spen is on about today, in principle it is correct how it relates to the thread I don't know. Unless of course he is saying that it is right to ignore the fact that a group of people are being misrepresented.

Your couple of points:
Before slavery = the period of time known as the 'African slave trade', I think this ranges between 1450 - 1850 (give or take a decade). So yes, triangle trade.

If you were deemed black towards the end of that period but were also 'free' you were still a second class citizen. During this period there were quite a few mixed raced people who attempted to pass themselves as white because of this. There were also some born to slaves who were given freedom due to their visual closeness to being white.

Definition of black has changed many times in the dictionary. In terms of ethnicity - a person who is directly from African (the ethnicity not the Country) or Caribbean (same as before) descent. The reason I put those brackets in is because you could be a 6th generation white African. Its confusing.

From what you've posted previously about people being mixed race as opposed to black, I'm surprised that you haven't included this in your definition. I'd guess that the number of people who can claim exclusively "black" ancestry is pretty small; similarly, there aren't many who can claim to be exclusively from any other ethnicity beyond a handful of generations.

DonDaddyD

rjsterry wrote:

`
From what you've posted previously about people being mixed race as opposed to black, I'm surprised that you haven't included this in your definition. I'd guess that the number of people who can claim exclusively "black" ancestry is pretty small; similarly, there aren't many who can claim to be exclusively from any other ethnicity beyond a handful of generations.

le sigh..

You are filling out the Census:

Your Mum is black and your Dad is white.

Do you fill out:
Black
White
Black and White mixed ethnic group

Paulie W

DonDaddyD wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

African's did travel for the purpose of exploration and commerce (to the Middle East, Asia and Southern Europe) as well as War. Egypt wasn't the only Empire in Africa, you could argue it was the greatest - surviving some 5000years.

Sorry to be pedantic, but Egypt never really had an empire. They did wrestle for control of what is now Syria for a time, but you'd be better off referring to Egypt as a Civilization.

You're right. T'was great though.

Depends what you mean by Empire doesnt it? Clearly at various points Egypt had control of territories much beyond the region we might think of as Egypt but its cultural influence extended much further. I'm perfectly comfortable with the term Empire.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

British Black (Caribbean) is both my ethnicity and Cultural background.

Well to be pedantic, I'd say that definition implies both ethnicity and cultural background. My point was that even for immigrants (or offspring of immigrants) whose culture isn't partly defined by their race, cultural background is probably important to personal identity. Its not all about race.

veronese68

I think people pick up on what's different. When I'm in Italy I'm described as English, when I'm here I'm described as Italian by those that know. You'd never tell by looking at me.
My Mother is fiercely Italian, far more so than if she'd stayed over there. This is because she's holding on to part of her identity.
Due to being distracted by work this thread has probably moved on quite a bit from when that was relevant, sorry.

walkingbootweather

Didn't the entire human population have it's roots in Africa?

Aren't we all simply an accident of evolution, geography and circumstance?

rjsterry

DonDaddyD wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

`
From what you've posted previously about people being mixed race as opposed to black, I'm surprised that you haven't included this in your definition. I'd guess that the number of people who can claim exclusively "black" ancestry is pretty small; similarly, there aren't many who can claim to be exclusively from any other ethnicity beyond a handful of generations.

le sigh..

You are filling out the Census:

Your Mum is black and your Dad is white.

Do you fill out:
Black
White
Black and White mixed ethnic group

Point is, both your Mum and Dad are likely to be more mixed than they realise. It's trying to roll far too much into a single word.

notsoblue

Veronese68 wrote:

I think people pick up on what's different. When I'm in Italy I'm described as English, when I'm here I'm described as Italian by those that know. You'd never tell by looking at me.
My Mother is fiercely Italian, far more so than if she'd stayed over there. This is because she's holding on to part of her identity.

Exactly. Also totally agree with the notion that immigrants often tend to identify far more with the culture and nationality they're from than the people who actually live there.

notsoblue

rjsterry wrote:

Point is, both your Mum and Dad are likely to be more mixed than they realise. It's trying to roll far too much into a single word.

I always thought that for Afro-Caribbeans and Afro-Americans this was pretty much taken as read? Unless you're from somewhere like Haiti, you're probably mixed somewhere in your history.

DonDaddyD

rjsterry wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

`
From what you've posted previously about people being mixed race as opposed to black, I'm surprised that you haven't included this in your definition. I'd guess that the number of people who can claim exclusively "black" ancestry is pretty small; similarly, there aren't many who can claim to be exclusively from any other ethnicity beyond a handful of generations.

le sigh..

You are filling out the Census:

Your Mum is black and your Dad is white.

Do you fill out:
Black
White
Black and White mixed ethnic group

Point is, both your Mum and Dad are likely to be more mixed than they realise. It's trying to roll far too much into a single word.

My Mum's parents are black and all of her grandparents were black except one who was mixed race. I think black is a fair assumption.

My Dad's parents are black, his grandparents are black, his great grandparents are black. We know this because a lot of that generation were alive in his/my lifetime, we have a photo of 'Progenitor D' and the part of Jamaica he is from there weren't really any white people. 'Progenitor D' was born in the 1800s (his parents were alive in the early 1800s) and died in the early to mid 1900s. He owned what would have been a plantation my roots are West African.

I think black is a fair assumption.

EKE_38BPM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBPBrJ74C8I&t=7s

rjsterry

DonDaddyD wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

`
From what you've posted previously about people being mixed race as opposed to black, I'm surprised that you haven't included this in your definition. I'd guess that the number of people who can claim exclusively "black" ancestry is pretty small; similarly, there aren't many who can claim to be exclusively from any other ethnicity beyond a handful of generations.

le sigh..

You are filling out the Census:

Your Mum is black and your Dad is white.

Do you fill out:
Black
White
Black and White mixed ethnic group

Point is, both your Mum and Dad are likely to be more mixed than they realise. It's trying to roll far too much into a single word.

My Mum's parents are black and all of her grandparents were black except one who was mixed race. I think black is a fair assumption.

My Dad's parents are black, his grandparents are black, his great grandparents are black. We know this because a lot of that generation were alive in his/my lifetime, we have a photo of 'Progenitor D' and the part of Jamaica he is from there weren't really any white people. 'Progenitor D' was born in the 1800s (his parents were alive in the early 1800s) and died in the early to mid 1900s. He owned what would have been a plantation my roots are West African.

I think black is a fair assumption.

Sorry, I should have said 'one' rather than 'you' - I wasn't meaning that to be personal. I just remember seeing this http://www.bbc.co.uk/whodoyouthinkyouare/past-stories/ainsley-harriott.shtml and one other episode (can't remember who) featuring someone with Carribean ancestry, but not quite what they thought they knew.

My Mum has traced the family name back to 1753 near Ipswich, but that's only one of 128 of my direct ancestors, so to claim Ii have much to do with Suffolk is a bit of a stretch.

cyclingprop

DonDaddyD wrote:

mudcow007 wrote:

ok so if the term "Black" is incorrect. someone should tell the people who organise the MOBO awards

then again the Music of Black And Mixed Heritage doesnt really have the same ring to it......

You're just being obtuse. No one is saying the term 'black' is wrong. Identifying mixed race people as black is misrepresenting them.

The MOBO's is the correct definition. The Music being celebrated is of 'black' origin.

Actually, black is a visual term, and vision is communicated by light. So no music can be of black origin because music is sound not light.

DonDaddyD

That's just semantics and taking the term out of the context of which it is being used.

The term black in the context of the MOBO's is to identify a particular ethnic group whose genetic roots tie directly if not immediately (i.e. their parents or Grandparents) with Africa and/or the Caribbean.

What that has to do with the OP I don't know.

Calling mixed raced people black is misrepresenting them and that is wrong.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

Calling mixed raced people black is misrepresenting them and that is wrong.

Is this considered to be a huge problem? Also, I know why its inaccurate, but why is it wrong?

dhope

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Calling mixed raced people black is misrepresenting them and that is wrong.

Is this considered to be a huge problem? Also, I know why its inaccurate, but why is it wrong?

Surely calling someone black who is actually mixed race is misrepresenting them. I've missed the 5 pages since my first post - have we defined how black someone needs to be black yet and what the margin of error is. Was it ancestry or skin colour or did we end up with a figure - also, while I'm being flippant, can we label this weighted figure a figger.

Btw, on forms that ask for your ethnic origin they don't say
"Are you black/white/etc"
they say "Would you describe yourself as black/white etc"

Which strikes me as the most correct way of doing things. If you want to describe yourself as black then go right ahead.

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Calling mixed raced people black is misrepresenting them and that is wrong.

Is this considered to be a huge problem? Also, I know why its inaccurate, but why is it wrong?

I never said it was a huge problem. It is something I have pondered for a while, yes. My life will go on however, even if this issue isn't resolved in the course of this conversation.

But to answer your question:

It is wrong because it is inaccurate.

It is wrong because it only acknowledges one aspect of that persons paternal/maternal heritage while dismissing the other. The action invalidates part of who they are, and I know at least a few mixed race people - all women with their own children - who take issue with people dismissing them as black.

msmancunia

It's all just a matter of opinion, and how you feel.

There was quite a lot of coverage earlier this year about Halle Berry and her daughter. Halle Berry's mother is white, and the father of her daughter is white. Theoretically, her daughter is only 25% black. But she subscribes to the one-drop theory - if you have one drop of black blood, then you're black. But there will be others who feel differently.

DonDaddyD

msmancunia wrote:

It's all just a matter of opinion, and how you feel.

There was quite a lot of coverage earlier this year about Halle Berry and her daughter. Halle Berry's mother is white, and the father of her daughter is white. Theoretically, her daughter is only 25% black. But she subscribes to the one-drop theory - if you have one drop of black blood, then you're black. But there will be others who feel differently.

I'm so glad someone else said this, it is partly why - unspoken racial prejudices that still exist to this day but aren't acknowledged - I think mixed raced people are referred to as black.

The one drop theory dates back to the days of slavery and continues till this day. The offspring of a black and white person is considered black, the racist element is that their blood isn't pure enough for them to be considered white.

I've been trying to say this for a while. But THERE, I've said it. I've got it off my chest. Thanks Msmanc

Halle Berry in Queen

They are clearly not black and misrepresenting them is wrong, whether this is rooted in 'unspoken racial undertones' or not.

cyclingprop

dhope wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Calling mixed raced people black is misrepresenting them and that is wrong.

Is this considered to be a huge problem? Also, I know why its inaccurate, but why is it wrong?

Surely calling someone black who is actually mixed race is misrepresenting them. I've missed the 5 pages since my first post - have we defined how black someone needs to be black yet and what the margin of error is. Was it ancestry or skin colour or did we end up with a figure - also, while I'm being flippant, can we label this weighted figure a figger.

Btw, on forms that ask for your ethnic origin they don't say
"Are you black/white/etc"
they say "Would you describe yourself as black/white etc"

Which strikes me as the most correct way of doing things. If you want to describe yourself as black then go right ahead.

I would like to know the normalised standard deviation from the mean of people calling themselves black who may be defined as black, the proportion of those who may be distributed in the sample as statistically relevant, and statistically irrelevant.

GIVE ME SOME NUMBERS DAMMIT!

dhope

msmancunia wrote:

But she subscribes to the one-drop theory - if you have one drop of black blood, then you're black.

No matter how far back... which makes everyone in the world black, without exception.
And White.
And Asian.

And Christian.

And Communist.

DonDaddyD

dhope wrote:

msmancunia wrote:

But she subscribes to the one-drop theory - if you have one drop of black blood, then you're black.

No matter how far back... which makes everyone in the world black, without exception.
And White.
And Asian.

And Christian.

And Communist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-drop_rule

You could argue that insisting on referring to mixed-raced people (in this case footballers) as black, when they clearly are not, is an extension of that.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

msmancunia wrote:

It's all just a matter of opinion, and how you feel.

There was quite a lot of coverage earlier this year about Halle Berry and her daughter. Halle Berry's mother is white, and the father of her daughter is white. Theoretically, her daughter is only 25% black. But she subscribes to the one-drop theory - if you have one drop of black blood, then you're black. But there will be others who feel differently.

I'm so glad someone else said this, it is partly why - unspoken racial prejudices that still exist to this day but aren't acknowledged - I think mixed raced people are referred to as black.

The one drop theory dates back to the days of slavery and continues till this day. The offspring of a black and white person is considered black, the racist element is that their blood isn't pure enough for them to be considered white.

The One Drop Rule relates back to 19th century anti-miscegenation laws in the US, is it really relevant at all any more?