Mulatto: Is it social labeling?

Post Reply
Leoneljb
Posts: 222
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 10:29 pm

Mulatto: Is it social labeling?

Post by Leoneljb » Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:11 am

Although labeling is our way of identifiying one's ethnicity, I have a problem with whom we identify as a "mulatto".

Is a "mulatto" the son/daughter of a Black and a White? Or is it also the offspring of any mixed race?

Is a "mulatto" someone with the color or texture of hair closer to a White person?

Or is "mulatto" associated with a specific socio-economic group?

It is also raising the question of who is considered White? For, based on some experts, One Drop of Black blood from any of one's ancestors makes you Black!

If we use that "One Drop" Formula. What would we say of people from Northern Africa, Middle East, India, Italy, Spain, Greece etc?

Can we consider Obama a mulatto? How about millions of kids born of mixed couples with darker skin and drier texture of hair (sa oun seri de granmoun di, li pa gen bon cheve, cheve siwo)?

Anyway, let me know your input on that matter.

Annou wè kote sijè sa-a ap mennen nou.

Love is the only answer!
Leonel

User avatar
Guysanto
Site Admin
Posts: 1289
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 6:32 pm

Post by Guysanto » Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:55 pm

Of course, it is social labeling Leonel. What else could it be? You would not think there is anything scientific to this, would you? By the way, who invented the "one drop = black" concept and for what specific purpose? Why have so many of us bought that "social construct" without any reflexion on its legitimacy or the racial ideology that created it for the concentration and preservation of economic privileges to one group of people's advantage over all others?

The "one drop" concept derives from the determination of pure races of human beings. What is the biological definition of the White race, the Black race, and all other races? If there are pure races that can be discretely defined, biologically speaking, how many human beings today (in thousands, millions, or billions) belong to the pure races? How did those pure races come about? Certainly not from Adam and Eve! (whether you believe or not, a single point of origin stands in contrast to the concept of purity... unless purity is defined as "far enough back in time that we cannot tell when any mixing occurred").

By the way, one corollary of the Adam and Eve theory is that we are all children of incest (Eve must have had children with her sons, Adam with his daughters, and the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve between themselves, by order of the Almighty himself: "Croissez et multipliez!!!" But at what point in Biblical History did the favorite tool of multiplication (incest) become forbidden and against the changing will of God? At some point in time, Abraham, Moses or some other venerable Elder must have said: "Bon, fòk bagy sa yo sispann! Apatidojoudui, frè ak sè pa gen dwa fè bagay ankò, manman ak pitit gason, papa ak pitit fi nonplis, paske nou peple ase deja pou kouzen ak kouzin kab demele gèt yo jan yo kapab san papa, manman, frè ak sè rantre nan jwèt la!" But which Biblical Elder came up with the new rules of breeding etiquette?

Before I close my biblical parenthesis and go back to the question of race, I am also curious about this: since Abel was killed by Cain and Cain was expelled from the Garden of Eden, how did Cain come to have any descendants of his own? Ak kiyès Cain te fè pitit? Se yon senp ti kesyon ki entrige mwen. Also, Adam and Eve's grandchildren... how exactly and by whom were they conceived? The Bible seems strangely silent on this question. And yet we are talking of God's creation! One would not think that any part of God's masterwork should be left unexposed. What do the strict believers and passionate defenders of the Literal Truth in the Bible have to say about those questions, and also what do they have to say about the emergence of human races and that of the Chosen People?

Now to go back to Leonel's query about "mulatto" (which sounds truly as derogatory as it was intended to be), I would say that first we need to come more or less to a common understanding term "race". Here's a PBS production that may shed some light in that area: http://www.pbs.org/race/000_General/000_00-Home.htm . But let me end with a question of my own. Blacks and Whites alike generally accept the notion that their mixed offspring are Black. What does this translate to? Here are some options:
  • White purity as opposed to "Black Radioactive Strength or Power of Contamination"??? Anything less than white cannot be white, and must be cast aside to preserve the purity (or privileges?) of Whites. [/*:m]
  • Black's instinctive or maternal yearning to claim its own, regardless of mixing. This may seem to accommodate the view of White purity, but results in greater strength through the numbers.[/*:m]
  • and then, there's Tiger Woods, a "multiracial" superhero whom everyone would like to adopt as their own.[/*:m]
Confused by all this? Well, maybe you're not, but if you aren't: please explain what the rest of us are missing.

Post Reply