1. You have an issue with labels. 2. You also have an issue with grammar. 3. Race and Ethnicity are not the same thing.
Ethnicity is defined as an ethnic group is a population of human beings whose members identify with each other, on the basis of a real or a presumed common genealogy or ancestry. Your ROOTS are not in Louisiana sweet girl. Even though your family history may be.
Africa is a continent that, has in fact gave way to a tremendous amount of WORLD ANCESTRY. There are numerous people, in various countries whose ancestry is in Africa, thanks to the slave ships who made multiple stops before coming to America. But, its not Black History Month, so I digress.
Oddly enough, Raven is defining herself as a RACE, which is social construct that refers to the concept of dividing people into populations or groups on the basis of various sets of physical characteristics. Race is a man made concept which is exactly what a label is,which is precisely what she hopes to avoid.
I am a BLACK AMERICAN WOMAN who’s roots, at its core, are based in Africa. But because I am completely unable to find those roots, thanks to historical events that shall remain left unsaid, I trace it back as far as I can. Which leaves me to the post slavery and Native American history, thus making me identify as a black woman.
Moral of the story, define yourself however you want. But understand, that in defining yourself, you are in fact labeling yourself at the same time. Labels are apart of the world in which we live in. They can create a sense of commonality. They are only negative if you allow them to be. How easily we get caught up on a few things when there are billions of words we can define as.
It seems that Raven feels like labeling, in and of its self, is negative. To that I say, be bigger than the label. Be more than what people see. And what they may expect. I am Black American Woman, who’s ancestors where slaves. I am a Christian, I am educated, straight, a daughter, a friend, a dancer, and a host of other things. Nothing about that was negative. Actually seems pretty awesome.
Be the best you, whoever that is, whatever you define that as.
[[so ever since Shafiq appeared in the Sacred Twenty-Eight list on Pottermore it’s become a growingly-popular last name in fanfic, but there are some uses of Shafiq that kind of make me wince, even if unfairly.
The most jarring ones are the names where Shafiq is paired with a very bog-standard Anglo name - say Bob Shafiq or Jane Shafiq. Because the Potterverse isn’t white-washed enough as it is? I often have to check myself when I see this happen because my own name is an English word (Tiara) and there are Anglo names that travel (Daniel, Sara), but even within my family tree that’s fairly unusual.
The other extreme of this is picking very Arabic names and setting the characters as being from the Middle East. Yes, Shafiq is from Arab origin, but names travel! It’s a common-ish Muslim name, and Islam has a lot of roots outside the Middle East - hell there are a lot more Muslims in Asia than Arabia. A lot of Africa is Muslim, Bosnia and surrounding Central Asia/Eastern Europe esque countries are Muslim, and there’s all the converts and enclaves and intermarriages etc etc etc.
I’ve seen Bangladeshi Shafiqs and Malay Shafiqs (as well as variations on the spelling, such as Shafik and Syafiq) and I’m sure that there are Shafiqs of all sorts of ethnicities. I would love to see a lot more diversity not just in the naming, but also in the origin stories of these characters. How about, say, a Ali Shafiq, Malay wizard from Singapore? Or a Siti Nurain Shafiq from Jakarta? Or an Afroz Shafiq from the East Indian diaspora based in Kenya? Or or or…
So many possibilities for names, let’s look outside the bog standard!]]
The 2020 Census data, released on Thursday, reveals the most recent U.S. demographic data. This map depicts the percent change in U.S. population by county compared to the 2010 Census. The Census Bureau’s goal is to count every American once a decade, and undercounts and overcounts from this year’s census survey won’t be released until next year.
These data will be used to draw new congressional districts as well as dictate how $1.5 trillion dollars of annual public spending is distributed. Regional trends showed that Americans continued to migrate to the South and West at the expense of the Midwest and Northeast. In addition, the U.S. has become more urban and more diverse, as the non-Hispanic white population decreased for the first time on record. Lower birth rates for white women compared to Asian and Hispanic women drove this ethnic change.
Idk how to feel about my attractions. I feel guilty…. but I know I’m attracted to East Asian men more than any other man. I’ve gotten over the whole “I don’t see race.” “I’m color blind” Lie I used to tell myself. Yes I do see race and color- in all its beauty and complexities and diversities.
What is it that attracts me to them. And this isn’t a wiaboo/Koreaboo thing. I’ve felt this way loooooong before I knew anything about Idols and Kdramas. This been a thing for since high school, well over a decade. In fact the first major Asian crush I had happend to be Soutest Asian; Hmong. And the next guy I was into for yearswas Vietnamese. Nationalities that are very much slept on.
But is it fetishizing if when one particular race stands out to me? Is it ok for me to be attracted to them more? It’s not that I’m not attracted to men of evey other race. There is no ethnicity that I think isn’t beautiful. ….however Asian men just do something different for me. I know I’m an eye person. When I was in Korea is was shocked at how down they are on their eyes shape. With their “corrective ” surgeries and double eyelid glue/tape. However when I see a man with monolided eyes, I swoon.
But I do feel tad guilty sometimes. I know fetishizing is very bad. But on the other hand I feel like that isn’t what I’m really doing. And now that BTS has gotten so popular Asian men are “the wave.” But I was on that team for a long long time. I’ve always been rooting for y'all.
Idk idk. It’s my porogotive, right? In the big picture I’m single as a pringle and forever alone anyway.
Part of the beauty of an object, or a museum collection, lies in its capacity to respond to more than one gaze and to unlock more than one story. We’re committed to hearing and telling as many of those stories as possible.
One of the ways we’re doing this is through ‘Our Museum: Our Voices’, a programme in which we asked 24 students to write alternative labels for objects on display in our galleries. The labels are written from personal experience as well as expertise, with participants considering their ethnicity, gender and sexuality in responding to the collections.
Keep an eye out for 'Our Museum: Our Voices’ labels as you roam the galleries during your next visit, and explore a virtual exhibition of the objects and their labels here: https://www.ashmolean.org/omov
Afghanistan is a loosily knit conglomeration of number of ethnic groups, chief of whom are Pashtuns, Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras. These ehtnic groups have obvious dissimilarity, despite collectively residing in the region for hundreds of years. These ethnic groups of Afghanistan have their own way of living, defined by unwritten code.
Ethnic Groups Population Ratio Pashtun 42-60%, Tajik 27%, Hazara 9%, Uzbek 9%, Aimak 4%, Turkmen 3%, Baloch 2%, other 4%
Mainstream Ethnic Groups Pashtuns Pashtuns or Pakhtuns or Pathans or Afghans are the largest ethnic group in Afghanistan. They constitute about two-fifth of Afghan population. Pashtoons can be further segregated into tribes, most famous among whom are Durrani and Ghilzai. Other major tribes are Wardak, Jaji, Tani, Jadran, Mangal, Khugiani, Safi, Mohmand and Shinwari etc. They can be easily recognised from other Afghan ethnic groups, due to their Pashto language and peculiar way of living, called Pashtunwali.
Homeland of Pashtuns lies south of the Hindu Kush, but Pashtun groups are scattered all over the country. Most Pashtuns work in farmlands to earn their livelihood. Many of them live nomadic lifestyle too. These nomads live in tents made of black goat hair.
Tajiks Tajiks or Tadzhiks constitute the second largest ethnic group in Afghanistan. Populating around 4.5 million in early 1995, by the early 21st century they constituted about 1/5 of the population. They live in the Panjsher Valley north of Kabul and in the northern and northeastern provinces of Parwan, Takhar, Badakhshan, and also Baghlan and Samangan. Few Tajik people extend into the central mountains. Most Tajiks speak Dari Persian language.
Tajik community is not divided into tribes. In Afghanistan, the Tajiks do not organize themselves by tribes like Pashtuns instead they refer to themselves by the region, province, city, town, or village they are from; such as Badakhshi,Baghlani,Mazari,Panjsheri,Kabuli,Herati,Kohistani etc. For earning livelihood, Tajiks do sedentary mountain farming and sheep/goat herding. Tajiks grow variety of fine fruits and nuts.
Hazara Central regions of Afghanistan, known as Hazarat, are inhabited by the Hazaras. Good number of Hazaras also dwell in Badakhshan. Most of them are farmers and shepherds. Most Hazaras are the followers of the Shia sect of Islam. The Hazaras have their ancestors in Xinjiang region of north-western China. For a long time, the Hazaras were a neglected lot. However, they are now trying to get rid of their inferior status. Hazaras living in Afghanistan were estimated in 1995 at about one million and now Their population is estimated to be 1.5 to 3 million.
Uzbeks Uzbeks living in Afghanistan were estimated in the 1990s at approximately 1.3 million but are now believed to be 2 million. They live all across the northern areas of Afghanistan, mixed with Tajik population. The Uzbeks are the followers of Sunni sect of Islam and speak central Turkic dialects like Uzbeki. Most Uzbeks earn livelihood by farming and herding. However, several Uzbeks have become successful businessmen and skilled artisans. Uzbek social structure is patriarchal and leaders having the title beg, arbab or khan enjoy considerable power. The Uzbeks have no hesitation marrying with Uzbek and Tajik, but are averse to nuptial relations with Pushtuns.
Turkmens Turkmens dwell along the southern side of Amu Darya. Most Turkmens are nomadic poeple who herd yaks. Turkmens speak both archaic form of Turkish and Persian. Many nomadic Turkmens still live in dome-shaped tents based on wooden frames. Men wear coats with long sleeves, while women also wear long dresses to cover their hands in cold weather.
Nuristanis The Nuristanis live in eastern Afghanistan bordering Pakistan. The region is so densily forested and rugged that it can be reached only by foot. They speak various dialects of Nuristani and Dardic. Usually, the Nuristanis are farmers, mountain herders and farmers. However, many of them have earned respectable place in the social order by getting into the army.
Baluchs Baluchs in Afghanistan live in thinly populated deserts and semi-deserts of Helmand Province. Few Baluch enclaves can also be found in Faryab province. Number of Baluchs in Afghanistan is estimated around 100,000 in 90’s. Most people of Baluch ethnicity live in Pakistan and Iran. Most Baluchis can speak and understand Baluchi, Dari and Pashto. Chiefs of Baluch society are called sardars.
Other Ethnic Groups Aimaqs live among nontribal people in the western regions of Badghis, Ghor and Herat provinces. They are Sunni Muslims and speak dialects resembling Dari. Several Arab enclaves can also be found in north-western Afghanistan. They are pastoralists who rear sheep and grow cotton and wheat. They speak not Arabic but Dari and Uzbeki. The Qizilbash are scattered all over Afghanistan. Traditionally, they have been holding administrative and professional positions. Sunni Brahui is a group living in the desert regions of south-western Afghanistan. Low in social heirarchy, they work as tenant farmers and hired herders for Baluch or Pashtun chieftains. The Wakhis live in small, remote hamlets in lower areas of Wakhan corridor and upper Badakhshan. The Farsiwans live near the Iran border or in some districts of Kandahar, Herat and Ghazni provinces. They are Dari-speaking agriculturalists.
Non-Muslim Population Hindu-Sikh population in Afghanistan in 1990 was approximate 30,000. Under the reigns of Taliban, the Hindus were forced to wear yellow badges to identify themselves. Continuous violence caused rapid decline in Hindu-Sikh population.
Here is a link to a good BBC key map, it furthur illustrates the geographical locations of the ethnicities.
Kidagakash was Atlantian, and she was brown-skinned, but she was not Black. She was a woman of color, yes, but she was not Black. “Black“ is not interchangeable for anyone who is darker than snow white. ”Black“ is not simply being brown-skinned. Blackis being Black.
I don’t know much about Atlantis but the few things I have read are of Atlantis originating from or having ties to Africa. Critias said Atlanteans had conquered parts of Libya and Eygpt.
If people want to code Kida as Black, that’s alright with me.
Surely though, if Disney announced her as the first Black Princess back in 2001, people would be offended as her African heritage is not apparent and her skin is light. Only after Tiana, do people stretch and say she’s the first in defense of Disney’s lack of representation. There is actually some people who are proud of being represented by Nala rather Tiana, as Nala kept her “true Africanness throughout the film” while Tiana was a frog for majority.
While Atlantis is fictional like Maldonia. I think the reason why these people above thought Naveen was Black is because Fictional Country + Brown Skin = Black to them.
There are extensive mythos on Atlantis, and I haven’t read all of them but I do know that the Greeks believe that Atlantis was the realm of Poseidon and Cleito. Regardless, they are still myths and don’t have much to do with Disney’sportrayal of Kida, which was not being “Black”. Someone who is Black is someone who is of African descent; given that she is part of a mythical race of people, she isa woman of color because she is not White, but calling her “Black” is completely inaccurate, and diminishing Tiana’s role as the first Black princess is completely unfair.
Her not being Black has nothing to do with her skin color; I’ve seen Black people who are that light, but that doesn’t change the fact that Kidagakash is Atlantean. The Disney story was that Atlanteans were a human race like everyone else around 10000 B.C., but then a comet crashed and broke off a large chunk of Earth which fell into the sea; the people somehow adapted and built their fortress underwater. They were never meant to be Black, they were not presented as Black, because they are not Black by any means. They’re people of color, though fictionally, which is great in and of itself, but they are a fantasy race presented with 0 ties to Africa or any other continent for that matter.
Thus, like I said, I’m willing to smack anyone who says that Kidagakash was the ‘first Black princess’ and that Tiana shouldn’t be heralded as such because she was “second” or “typical”. Kidagakash is a wonderful character. I absolutely lover her, as I love Tiana. They were bothmonumental parts of my childhood—though one a LOT later—but taking away the fact that Kidagakash represented a strong, fantasy woman of color to diminish Tiana’s being Black is ridiculous. It’s not about being “truly African”, or skin color or whatever, it’s the fact that she wasn’t Black and was never presented as Black.
It robs the series of its diversity anyway, considering that Dr. Sweet was a non-stereotypical Black man who was unquestionably Black and not mixed, Audrey was unquestionably Latina and even spoke Spanish, and Kidagakash was the strong, woman of color deurotagonist who came from a fantasy race. That doesn’t mean she can’t be inspirational to women / girls of color, to me it means the opposite; making her “Black” just misses the point for me.
Very insightful, thank you for the correction!
May I just add that even though Princess Kida is ‘Atlantian,’ millennia of ancient lore depicted Atlantis at the Strait of Gilbatrar, which is where Spain and Africa meet.
Kida was also voiced by Cree Summer, an African American voice actress, who’s known for voicing Susan Charmichael in Rug Rats and Valerie Gray in Danny Phantom.
Both female characters were also established as African American.
A lot of the Atlantian culture Disney gave the animation was also inspired by multiple African ethnicities—especially their masks. I’m not labeling Kida as any race, those are just additional facts.
Signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on October 3, 1965, the Immigration Act of 1965 was a significant milestone in American immigration history.
The passage of this act abolished the quota system established by the Immigration Act of 1924, which had prohibited Asian immigrants, limited Latin American immigrants, and set up strict immigration quotas for European countries. The Immigration Act of 1965 also eliminated the formally racial character of immigration to the United States by distinguishing between hemispheres of origin, rather than discriminating on the basis of ethnicity or race.
On November 19, join us as we explore the complicated issues of immigration throughout history and in the modern era in our next National Conversation on Rights and Justice–Immigration: Barriers and Access. Learn more and register at archivesfoundation.org/attend
As a person of color, I’ve learned to expect a certain level of whitewashing from Hollywood. Jake Gyllenhaal as The Prince of Persia? Dude, wtf? Random white dude as Goku – wow, WOW, take it easy, buddy!
And yet, Hollywood execs surprised us with yet another bottle of fuckery by casting Emma Stone as Allison Ng, a character described as a quarter Hawaiian and a quarter Chinese. Let me lean in closer so I can say that again:
Emma Stone, a blonde haired, blue eyed WHITE WOMAN, was chosen to portray an ASIAN-HAWAIIAN PERSON with an Asian last name. I don’t approve of whitewashing, especially when Asian characters get swapped with white ones (see: Ghost in the Shell), but this is a new level of lazy bullshit. How can you go 80% of the way, write a script ABOUT AN ASIAN PERSON but not cast an Asian actress? That’s like making a movie about the Jackson 5 set in the 1960s but casting Honey Boo Boo as Tito and a ham sandwich as Michael – did you even try, bro?!
Hollywood continues to whitewash because white folks don’t see ethnicity as an IDENTITY. They don’t believe race and ethnicity can effect your opportunities and personality in real life, or in a fictional movie. Instead, race is treated like a COSTUME you steal from one person and give to another. In fact, white culture has ALWAYS taken ethnic labels and slapped them onto white products.
We needed more R&B artists so we slapped a label on Justin Timberlake. We lacked diversity in the workplace so we made a category called “White Latinos.”
And yet, when they do consider our ethnicity it’s used in a way to exploit us: to paint us as uneducated thugs, awkward math nerds, and illegal immigrants. They never meet us half-way and write a script about normal ass POCs, acting as if we’re either born into our designated stereotype or we’re colorblind.
If you wanna know how white folks feel truly feel about us, take a look at ANY Hollywood movie and observe the POC characters. When white men were at their peak of Black male intimidation, they made ‘Mandingo’ and 'Birth of a Nation.’ When they were afraid of Asians, they filmed 'Fu Manchu’ and 'The Interview.’
If we can accept the writings of Langston Hughes and Zora Neale Hurston as expressions of Black thought, why aren’t we accepting racist Hollywood films as expressions of white ones?
This past weekend the world took to social media to dissect the events surrounding Rachel Dolezal, the former president of Spokane’s NAACP chapter who came under heavy scrutiny for falsely representing herself as black. As part of this real-time discussion, the term transracial is being co-opted to describe Dolezal identifying as black despite being born white.
As members of the adoption community — particularly those of us who identify as transracial adoptees — we are deeply alarmed by the gross mischaracterization of this term. We find the misuse of “transracial,” describing the phenomenon of a white woman assuming perceived markers of “blackness” in order to pass as “black,” to be erroneous, ahistorical, and dangerous.
Transracial is a term that has long since been defined as the adoption of a child that is of a different race than the adoptive parents. The term most often refers to children of color adopted by white families in the Global North, and has been extensively examined and documented for more than 50 years by academics and members of the adoption triad: adoptees, birth parents, and adoptive parents.
Dolezal and others have perpetuated the false notion that a person can simply choose to identify as a different race or ethnicity. As extensive evidence-based research and first-person narratives have shown, we do not live in a so-called “post-racial society.” Damaging forces like racism make it virtually impossible for those with black or brown bodies to simply “put on” or “take off” race in the same or similar manner that Dolezal has employed. For transracial adoptees, navigating and negotiating the racism in our families, schools, and communities is a regular and compulsory part of our lives.
We also join others who have raised concerns about the misappropriation of the word “trans,” and the analogy made between Dolezal’s deception and the experiences of transgender people. For transgender people who have struggled to live their truths in the face of horrific violence and discrimination, we reject this flawed comparison and find it to be irresponsible and offensive.
