Are England's black football players actually mixed race?

DonDaddyD

notsoblue wrote:

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?

The rule may not, but some would argue that the practice is still there.

notsoblue

DonDaddyD wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

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

The rule may not, but some would argue that the practice is still there.

Where? Who would consider someone black because of recent ancestry over how they actually looked?

dhope

DonDaddyD wrote:

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.

Sorry, but 'when they are clearly not' is a load of bollocks.

Out of curiosity, in the rare cases where you have twins where one is black and the other white [skinned] then is either one of them any more clearly black than the other. Does a freak genetic occurrence change things?

Pick any criteria and some people that define themselves as black will fall out of it and some that don't will end up in. Decreeing that Ashley Cole or Anton Ferdinand isn't black because they don't meet your [/whoever's] definition is ridiculous.

marz

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.

It's not misrepresenting them if that's the term they use themselves. My wife is black, my daughter is black, I'm white and we are all ok with that terminology.

I'm having a hard time trying to work out the problem you seem to think exists.

Edit....I should add we are comfortable with our labels for purely superficial identification of physical features. When asked to describe our appearance we would interject white or black where applicable.
We do have problems when it comes to ticking the right box on forms and avoid, where possible, filling out this section of a document. Firstly it shouldn't be important and secondly, whatever box we tick will not give a complete picture of who we are.

So to clarify, we're ok with physically describing someone as black or white or whatever. We're not ok with attributing assumptions because of an individuals outward appearance.

rick_chasey

Black didn't exist as a term until the late 17th C at the earliest and as we understand the term as late as 1830s.

Like all identifiers that involve some form of discrimination the identity is formed via a binary construct. So if I'm civilised, they are by definition uncivilized or savage. (We being 19th C Europeans). Same goes for straight & gay, male female etc.

Interestingly, although there's a dominant and a dominated, those that fall inbetween (mixed, transsexual etc ) are often discriminated by both sides, as if they're somehow trying to protect the construct.

The Europeans could have picked anything to help identity themselves against Africans. They chose physical appearance. It's utterly arbitrary.

SimonAH

An interesting thing came up on QI once. If you take everyones family tree and work back up the branches you don't have to go very high until the number of 'ancestors' becomes hundreds of times the population of the world at that point. In fact you can be statistically pretty certain that, as long as part of your family is historically from Europe and not subject to a thousand years of incest, that you are related by blood to the great King Charlemagne.

So there.

I hate to say this DDD, and it is not being condescending in any way I promise (I can understand the roots of the mindset), but I think that there is often a tendency from some quarters to perceive racist intent, when in fact no such intent exists.

If I were asked to describe someone for a police report I might say the person was black (with no knowledge of their ancestry) as the descriptor for someone with african origin skin and black afro hair would be, "Black". I might modify that with say, "cafe au lait skin tone" but it would be a refiner on "Black".

If someone were to describe me (I have dark hair, dark brown eyes and slightly olive skin) they might possibly refer to me as Mediteranean - despite the fact that I am half English and half Estonian (think Viking on my dad's side). Would that offend me? No. Would I even spend half a second wondering whether the describer had malice in his mind when he described me as Mediteranean? No.... it's just a description.

If someone starts to nit pick over fine details of ancestry then it's just political posturing. We need descriptors, if people start getting arsey over being described as Black, or Latino, or Anglo, or Arabic or Slavic, or, I don't know, Brummie then they need to get a bit of a grip I think.

Now if the descriptor (pick any one from the list above, or substitute your own) is used as an obvious pejorative either by tone of voice, context or addendum ("N*gger!", "Don't sweat it, we only killed Latinos", "F*cking Anglo") then that is a different issue. To simply describe someone as Arabic is not a problem IMHO.

Long post, walking away at this point :-)

tailwindhome

nvm

CrackFox

DonDaddyD wrote:

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.

I would agree with DDD. The obvious implication is that white is pure, and therefore any mixing with other 'races' disqualifies one from being labelled as 'white'. Therefore, mixed race people must automatically be categorised as 'black'.

At the same time, mixed race celebrities may be accused of trying to distance themselves from blacks if they publicly emphasize their mixed ancestry. Tiger Woods famously described himself as 'Cablinasian' and copped a fair bit of flack for doing so.

So it seems to me that the use of 'black' as a convenient shorthand for mixed race works well for those who see themselves exclusively as 'black' or 'white'. It suits those insecure individuals who feel the need to invest a substantial portion of their identities on these racial hooks, for one reason or another. And it also does the job for white liberals cognizant of black sensibilities. Given this apparent consensus between black and white, left and right, it's no wonder that this persists. As a mixed race guy (1/4 East African fwiw), I find it rather bemusing whenever I hear the likes of Obama, Lewis Hamilton or Theo Walcott described as 'black'.

cyclingprop

Rick Chasey wrote:

Same goes for straight & gay.

Really? What about the blend of the two? Should we just call them greedy? We need names for everything. We should invent jobs for the people who will create the names and set the rules of how to use the names. We can call them politicians and quango employees.

tailwindhome

......

Ginjafro

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.

And "pondering" is what you tend to do, for what purpose I am not sure but I have considered you are quite possibly a closet troll either in denial or trying to find a way to "come out" without being noticed. However, whilst many of England's most talented black footballers may well be of mixed race, and technically white too, this does not stop them being subject to the racist taunts and racist abuse they have all too regularly had to endure, whether it be from John Terry's mouth or the monkey chants of some sections of so called fans.

rjsterry

marz wrote:

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.

It's not misrepresenting them if that's the term they use themselves. My wife is black, my daughter is black, I'm white and we are all ok with that terminology.

I'm having a hard time trying to work out the problem you seem to think exists.

Edit....I should add we are comfortable with our labels for purely superficial identification of physical features. When asked to describe our appearance we would interject white or black where applicable.
We do have problems when it comes to ticking the right box on forms and avoid, where possible, filling out this section of a document. Firstly it shouldn't be important and secondly, whatever box we tick will not give a complete picture of who we are.

So to clarify, we're ok with physically describing someone as black or white or whatever. We're not ok with attributing assumptions because of an individuals outward appearance.

As another white person (at least as far back as photographs exist of my ancestors) that's how I've understood the terms black and white - i.e. as descriptive of a persons physical appearance and not much more. As soon as you go beyond that you start getting into difficulties: "the black community" is just as misleading as, say, "the Muslim community", as if someone from Somalia would automatically feel at home in Trindad purely because they share a skin colour (ish). Equally, to talk about a white community or culture is meaningless. If you are referring to someone's culture then you need a different adjective.

As an aside, the English Royal family was possibly mixed race at one point. Albeit somewhat tenuously.

And to lighten the mood, I feel the need to watch this.

By the way, the music being celebrated in the MOBOs is far from exclusively of black origin, and just about any pop rock or dance music can claim some influence from African* music, so why the need for a distinction?

*Mind you African is not even an accurate descriptor as Africa certainly isn't all black, for want of a better way of putting it.

DonDaddyD

Ginjafro wrote:

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.

And "pondering" is what you tend to do, for what purpose I am not sure but I have considered you are quite possibly a closet troll either in denial or trying to find a way to "come out" without being noticed.

Right, and your attempts at insulting me (unprovoked at that) are not an example of trolling. Anything else you have to say is meaningless at this point.

If you read the thread, you would realise that I have already address the issue you raised. But don't let that stop you flinging insults.

DonDaddyD

There is too much to respond to.

My view on this is thus:

Whether a person believes 'black' is the correct term to identify people from a particular ethnic background or not is about as relevant as their thoughts on whether we should have a Monarchy. As a society we have settled on the term as it carries far less negative connotations than previous words used to describe said enthic group. The fact remains it is used to identify a particular ethnic group.

People whose parents are from different ethnicitys are not one or the other. Regardless of how a person may have come to that decision, to me calling my son black would be an attempt to invalidate his mothers heritage within my son and that, to me, is very insulting. Why would a person refuse to acknowledge the other 50% of his parental heritage, especially if you are aware of it?

My son may grow up to be very proud of his Irish roots, having someone insist on refering to him as black and not acknowledge something he feels an affinity for would, in mind, be a form of prejudice/discrimination - you choose.

Now, I can't speak for Rio Ferdinand, Cole et al. I have never heard them refer to themselves as black, perhaps they do. But the fact that we are aware that the are mixed race, for the media to continue to refer to them as "Englands Black footballers" is misrepresenting them and misrepresentation is inaccurate and largely wrong.

cyclingprop

DonDaddyD wrote:

But don't let {the above} stop you flinging insults.

Excellent, open season!

pastey_boy

I am mixed race but I have never felt misrepresented , what should we call ourselves if not black ?

Anonymous

DonDaddyD wrote:

Now, I can't speak for Rio Ferdinand, Cole et al. I have never heard them refer to themselves as black, perhaps they do. But the fact that we are aware that the are mixed race, for the media to continue to refer to them as "Englands Black footballers" is misrepresenting them and misrepresentation is inaccurate and largely wrong.

But didn't they say above they have their own anti-racist organisation which does refer to them as being black?
The problem is (and I think it is confusing for many) is that they refer to themselves as black. So they are happy with that reference in spite of being mixed race, but you feel it is wrong as you are in fact black, and they are 'mixed race'.
It almost sounds like you are saying 'they aren't black enough to be referred to as black' but visually, they clearly aren't white. Why can't they be proud of that aspect of their family? It's all about association and sadly, I would dread to think what would happened if they referred to themselves as white.

So then we get onto the ins and outs of meeting a mixed race individual (i.e clearly a mix of white and black ancestry) and how on earth to refer to them? Rio F says black, DDD says mixed race. What if we meet someone who appears quite black in skin tone and refer to them as black, but actually they are just a very dark mixed race individual and get upset?
Then there are people who are basically white with just a touch of colour in their skin which could well have been black going back some generations. They might be very proud of that heritage and would be insulted if it wasn't referenced and that individual was referred to as white.

I always take a few seconds to think how on earth to refer to someone who isn't white as there are so many ways of referring to ethnic origin, as different people will be picky on different points. (my point from my earlier post was that I was chatting about her brother, the only non-white young guy in our office - but wasn't sure how to refer to his skin tone without upsetting her, so said 'not white'.
Now I think people should be a little less quick to be offended & correct someone when we are just trying to tiptoe around what shouldn't be an issue, in case someone we talk to is the type of person spen was referring to. By 'not white' I don't mean 'tainted' or whatever. I just mean, your skin colour isn't white, end of.


As for the footballers who insult each other for their race, it's a scandal, but governing bodies are fucking pussies when it comes to discipline and with Seb Blatter saying 'they should shake hands afterwards', it doesn't exactly set a precedent.

DonDaddyD

pastey_boy wrote:

I am mixed race but I have never felt misrepresented , what should we call ourselves if not black ?

Question? Why do you think yourself to be black? Is it because you have been referred to as that all your life? Have you ever thought about your parent who isn't black and their genetic/ethnic heritage within you?

In answer to your question:

'Mixed-race'.
Americans go for 'bi-racial'.

DonDaddyD

coriordan wrote:

But didn't they say above they have their own anti-racist organisation which does refer to them as being black?

And I'm saying the terminology used by the anti-racist organisation is wrong. Just because they are called something all their life, too the point of going along with it or believeing it, doesn't mean it is right.

Black people used to refer to themselves as 'N*gg*rs' - some still do - doesn't mean its right or correct.

The problem is (and I think it is confusing for many) is that they refer to themselves as black.

Do they, where has Ashley Cole ever referred to himself as 'black'?

So they are happy with that reference in spite of being mixed race, but you feel it is wrong as you are in fact black, and they are 'mixed race'.

The point again, if a black person is happy calling himself 'n*gg*r' I would feel that that is wrong and it is.

It almost sounds like you are saying 'they aren't black enough to be referred to as black' but visually, they clearly aren't white.

Visually, to me, Rio Ferdinand, A.Cole, Joleon Lescott, et al clearly aren't black. But then visually to me its more than a skin colour.

Why can't they be proud of that aspect of their family?

Why can't they be proud of both?

It's all about association and sadly, I would dread to think what would happened if they referred to themselves as white.

[/quote][/quote]
They shouldn't they're from both so 'mixed-race' would be correct and they should, if they are not, be proud of it.

SimonAH

Mixed race or bi-racial huh? So I am bi-racial too right? English and Estonian? Or am I white? I'm confused now....

Anonymous

But then you are talking about the inherent meaning of nigger - which is considered derogatory vs black, which is purely a visual thing (for me, anyway).
I think if I were to say the same thing but the other way round, this would be a right f***ing outrage.

"why does Rio call himself white, he clearly ain't. I am white and I know that he is not like me" would sound like the ramblings of Nick Griffin.

DonDaddyD

coriordan wrote:

"why does Rio call himself white, he clearly ain't. I am white and I know that he is not like me" would sound like the ramblings of Nick Griffin.

If Rio called himself white, I would want to know why he didn't acknowledge his black roots and refer to himself as mixed-race.

Same with my son. It's not that I'm saying "They're not like me, get out of my group". What I am saying is that its great you acknowledge the black side of your heritage, why do you not acknowledge the other side?

tailwindhome

DonDaddyD wrote:

My son may grow up to be very proud of his Irish roots, having someone insist on refering to him as black and not acknowledge something he feels an affinity for would, in mind, be a form of prejudice/discrimination - you choose.

To be Irish and black aren't mutually exclusive.

EKE_38BPM

TailWindHome wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

My son may grow up to be very proud of his Irish roots, having someone insist on refering to him as black and not acknowledge something he feels an affinity for would, in mind, be a form of prejudice/discrimination - you choose.

To be Irish and black aren't mutually exclusive.

Indeed.

Hows this for a can of worms, that image comes from a website called 100greatblackbritons.com

SimonAH

What about Tiger Woods? African American on one side and Thai / European on the other side. Not known as the first Asian winner of a golf major though.... And what about his daughter Sam? Will she be known as Swedish, Asian, Black or Tri-racial?

Bloodlines are way too mixed and getting more so with increased mobility.

Black is a descriptor. End of.

EKE_38BPM

SimonAH wrote:

What about Tiger Woods? African American on one side and Thai / European on the other side. Not known as the first Asian winner of a golf major though.... And what about his daughter Sam? Will she be known as Swedish, Asian, Black or Tri-racial?

Bloodlines are way too mixed and getting more so with increased mobility.

Black is a descriptor. End of.

I was going to agree with you 100% but you didn't write "FACT" at the end of it, so now I'm not so sure.

dhope

EKE_38BPM wrote:

SimonAH wrote:

What about Tiger Woods? African American on one side and Thai / European on the other side. Not known as the first Asian winner of a golf major though.... And what about his daughter Sam? Will she be known as Swedish, Asian, Black or Tri-racial?

Bloodlines are way too mixed and getting more so with increased mobility.

Black is a descriptor. End of.

I was going to agree with you 100% but you didn't write "FACT" at the end of it, so now I'm not so sure.

Indeed, I'm beginning to wonder if DDD isn't just a bit 'old-school'
Like grandparents who now sound a bit racist

tailwindhome

EKE_38BPM wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

My son may grow up to be very proud of his Irish roots, having someone insist on refering to him as black and not acknowledge something he feels an affinity for would, in mind, be a form of prejudice/discrimination - you choose.

To be Irish and black aren't mutually exclusive.

Indeed.

Hows this for a can of worms, that image comes from a website called 100greatblackbritons.com

His mother is white.

SimonAH

EKE_38BPM wrote:

SimonAH wrote:

What about Tiger Woods? African American on one side and Thai / European on the other side. Not known as the first Asian winner of a golf major though.... And what about his daughter Sam? Will she be known as Swedish, Asian, Black or Tri-racial?

Bloodlines are way too mixed and getting more so with increased mobility.

Black is a descriptor. End of.

I was going to agree with you 100% but you didn't write "FACT" at the end of it, so now I'm not so sure.

:-D I think your Avatar actually kinda sums this up EKE.

We all need an identity, but I reckon we're going to have to find things other than skin colour to pin one on.

rjsterry

Did a bit of googling around the subject last night and there's a fair bit of fairly nasty stuff about black celebrities who aren't "100% black" - i.e. have some white ancestry - pretty depressing, but not all that surprising.