The Mysterious Biracial Baby

[MsHeartBeat]

WTF is THAT?

It cracks me up to see white women with black men that label their children as "biracial".  Chile, don't you know you have a black man and black men make BLACK BABIES?  Black women make BLACK BABIES!  Ain't no black person in this country "biracial" unless we all are because very single African American walking around in this country is mixed with something! 

If you wanted a "biracial" child you need to date an Asian or a Latino or something like that.  Once you lay down with a black man and get up pregnant, you are carrying a Black child girlfriend!

This came up because at Thanksgiving dinner the other night, two of the three sons of this couple are with white women. The white girl that just had a baby says her son is Biracial.  The father (black) and everyone else in the family (black) all refer to the child as black.  She had a hard time understanding why we were telling her she needs to get over the fact that she had a small part in producing the child because as he gets older he is going to need to identify with a particular ethnic group so that he feels a part of something, and that since his uncles, his daddy, his grandfather, and his cousins are ALL BLACK, he is going to be Black too.  Her family has pretty much disowned her but they also consider the baby Black and that is why they don't want anything to do with it or with her. 

What do you guys think about this whole "biracial" thing?  Is there any validity to it from your perspective?

Where does the "biracial" component end and the "400 shades of African Americans" come in? 

If two "biracial" (mulatto) people have a baby and one is passing for white and the other is down with his or her Afrocentric blackness, what does that make their child? 

Do you think that children that aren't decidedly on one side of the fence or another have more social and identity problems?

[Obsidian]

The problem with saying that white/black mixed children are black instead of bi-racial is that to do so lends credence to the "one drop rule". And we all know that that rule is steeped in white supremacy and historically was in place to increase slave numbers through rape of black women by their white massuhs. While we may feel that it is empowering to claim these people as "black" and not "mixed" or "biracial", on the flip side they will never be accepted as "white" by the whites (with knowledge of their black parent) because their blood is seen by them as tainted. So how empowering is that in this system?

Talking about race as a biological construction is a slippery slope anyway. But given the horrible history behind the one drop rule, I've taken to calling these people bi-racial or mixed --never mulatto since that's a very negative and racist term like the "n" word --unless they say they're black -- or white.

If two "biracial" (mulatto) people have a baby and one is passing for white and the other is down with his or her Afrocentric blackness, what does that make their child?

Whatever the child most associates with is what he/she is. Some would say it's whatever they look like the most -- but there are some racially ambiguous people (like Vin Diesel) who we have to wait on to announce what category they'll choose (if ever) since we can't tell by looking at them.

Where does the "biracial" component end and the "400 shades of African Americans" come in?

Generally, the second generation. If you're "biracial" your children might not strictly be considered biracial unless their other parent is also. Look at Tiger Woods' caublanasian label. I don't see anything wrong with acknowledging one's more recent heritage. Now, if somebody like me, who looks more black than anything else and whose parents and grandparents though of themselves as black, starts running around saying, "I'm not black, I'm a Seminole, Apache, Comanche, Choctaw, Cherokee, Irish mix! Oh yeah, and there's some African in there too!"  Then I have a problem with that! It may be true, but it comes off sounding like I don't want to be lumped in with other "regular" black people or like I think I'm somehow better. Like a lot of people, I went through my journey of deciding who I am and put down all that stuff because this culture sees me as black. Bottom line. And that applies to bi-racial people too, unfortunately, who are generally forced to make a choice to be exclusively black and deny their white parents' contribution to who they are. I don't envy them. This system is effed up enough without being born bi-racial.

BTW, I used to be offended by the whole bi-racial thing because I was still blinded by the one-drop-rule and I was mad at Tiger for a while. Now I don't think those people should have to choose either race, maybe they should start their own. I don't see white folks getting offended when "bi-racial" people call themselves black instead of white (since everyone knows white blood has got to be pure).

[MsHeartBeat]

Whether you want to lend credence to it or not does not change the fact Tiger is still a black man with a chinese momma.

Like I said, every African American in this country is mixed with something!  native American, Irish, French, Canadian, whatever.  But that is what makes us what we are!  It is nothing to be ashamed of or try to deny or pretend doesn't exist. 

The One Drop Rule is important.  Not because slave owners pointed it out or because white blood has to be "pure", but because Black genes are STRONG.  Anything mixed with Black takes on Black characteristics.  Reflecting on historical facts, that is reportedly the reason why black men and women that moved up North and were living a life "passing" as White would NOT HAVE CHILDREN.  They were terrified that the "black" genes would make their presence known at the most inconvenient time.  The threat of enlarged lips, dark skin, dark eyes or nappy hair was ever present and could mean death if the passing individual were found out. 

So again, no matter how people want to twist it and pretend otherwise, when you have the blood of Black folks in your family line, you are Black. 

[Ndgo]

And Biracials have a whole lot more than One drop of Black blood I'm afraid...

I too find this phenomena usually perpertrated by white women on their black children. Why BM/WW more so over BW/WM I dunno... but that's where I usually see it.

And I would have to agree again with MsHB... those that passed for white (Italian, specifically) in my family were very careful... they really Didn't have children... which was best for us because they doted on us so much... We never EVER got to visit them at their home on Long Island, NY... It was always a big family joke.... my grandfather was always threatening to move Thanksgiving Dinner over to their house...  only... now that I think about it, they REALLY weren't laughing all that hard about it 

And I wonder about my granddad too... see now, he never went over to the other side - although he was light enough - it might have been his hair too... he had very curly, kinky hair but his eyes were bright sky blue.... he married a dark chocolate colored woman, my grandmother with straight hair and elongated features and high cheekbones... now HER mother was white in coloring too -- and my great grandmoter married a very dark chocolate colored man... all the women and men in my family go for the high contrast thing... my mom was light, almost white to most people... but my dad...

and all us kids came out different colors too... so I've always taught my son that Black looks like the rainbow... It absorbs all colors...

[Obsidian]

Whether you want to lend credence to it or not does not change the fact Tiger is still a black man with a chinese momma.

That's how you view him. Fortunately, it's a free country and he can define himself.

Anything mixed with Black takes on Black characteristics.  Reflecting on historical facts, that is reportedly the reason why black men and women that moved up North and were living a life "passing" as White would NOT HAVE CHILDREN.  They were terrified that the "black" genes would make their presence known at the most inconvenient time.  The threat of enlarged lips, dark skin, dark eyes or nappy hair was ever present and could mean death if the passing individual were found out. 

Then how do you explain people being able to "pass" in the first place? They should never have looked in any way "white" if the "black" genes where so STRONG in the first place.

And if you were so settled on the answers to your questions, why ask?

[MsHeartBeat]

Obsidian, since you are new to this board and others have been around here for years, I am trying to be patient with you.  But I will EXPLAIN.

Just because me or any of the other moderators here post something with controversial ideas, thoughts, or even if we play devils advocate, does not mean we are emotionally attached to any of those posts.  What we post may or may not be what we really think!  The things we say may or may not have happened to us.  But that isn't the point.  Our job here is to stir you guys to think, and create topics for discussion and thereby active users and lots of posts. 

I will always ask questions and put things up.  99% of the time I already know the answer before I ask you the question, but I still am interested in hearing your thoughts and learning how other people think.  Their own experiences often color those thoughts.  Mz Sheel, Mr. Realgem and other long-term members that try to keep things hopping around here with the same motivations.

As for the people that are able to "pass" that is only because they are "passing" amongst White folks that don't know any better.  But Black people can ALWAYS tell another Black person, no matter how light their skin tone so wasn't nobody getting away with nothing as far as we were concerned.  White folks can't always tell someone is Black by their speech patterns either on the telephone, but most Black folks can alwasy pick up on something and get a clue. 

Black genes are strong enough that these passing folks were afraid of them jumping out and messing up their program.  So if they were that worried about it, wouldn't that mean those genes were usually dominant?  I mean, you never see two white folks have a baby that ends up brown, but you certainly have a brown and white couple end up with a brown baby.  Brown is dominant.  Gamblers bet on Black.  I mean, nobody ever worried about their Great Great Grandfather's blue eyed gene jumping out, but it occasionally happens even though blue eyes are a recessive gene and definitely not something common in dark skinned African Americans, but it does occasionally happen to everyone's surprise. 

[Obsidian]

Thanks for your patience, Ms. HB. I have to say, being new, Mr. RG gave me the warmest welcome here even though our opinions are not generally aligned, and I can respect that.

Black genes are strong enough that these passing folks were afraid of them jumping out and messing up their program.  So if they were that worried about it, wouldn't that mean those genes were usually dominant?  I mean, you never see two white folks have a baby that ends up brown, but you certainly have a brown and white couple end up with a brown baby.  Brown is dominant.  Gamblers bet on Black.  I mean, nobody ever worried about their Great Great Grandfather's blue eyed gene jumping out, but it occasionally happens even though blue eyes are a recessive gene and definitely not something common in dark skinned African Americans, but it does occasionally happen to everyone's surprise. 

Define race.

[MsHeartBeat]

There is the scientific basis of race which since I am sure you went to high school, you already know.  There is no need to beat a dead horse just for the sake of argument.  But if you would like to read more on how people would LIKE to view themselves and create their own image of their racial identifier, read this document

http://www.fedstats.gov/qf/meta/long_68183.htm

Race
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census of Population, Public Law 94-171 Redistricting Data File. Updated every 10 years. http://factfinder.census.gov.

Definition:

The concept of race as used by the Census Bureau reflects self-identification by people according to the race or races with which they most closely identify. These categories are sociopolitical constructs and should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature. Furthermore, the race categories include both racial and national-origin groups.

The racial classifications used by the Census Bureau adhere to the October 30,1997, Federal Register Notice entitled,"Revisions to the Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity" issued by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "White" or report entries such as Irish, German, Italian, Lebanese, Near Easterner, Arab, or Polish.

Black or African American. A person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "Black, African Am., or Negro," or provide written entries such as African American, Afro American, Kenyan, Nigerian, or Haitian.

American Indian and Alaska Native. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America) and who maintain tribal affiliation or community attachment.

Asian. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam. It includes "Asian Indian," "Chinese," "Filipino," "Korean," "Japanese," "Vietnamese," and "Other Asian."

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands. It includes people who indicate their race as "Native Hawaiian," "Guamanian or Chamorro," "Samoan," and "Other Pacific Islander."

Some other race. Includes all other responses not included in the "White", "Black or African American", "American Indian and Alaska Native", "Asian" and "Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander" race categories described above. Respondents providing write-in entries such as multiracial, mixed, interracial, Wesort, or a Hispanic/Latino group (for example, Mexican, Puerto Rican, or Cuban) in the "Some other race" category are included here.

Two or more races. People may have chosen to provide two or more races either by checking two or more race response check boxes, by providing multiple write-in responses, or by some combination of check boxes and write-in responses.

Comparability. The data on race in Census 2000 are not directly comparable to those collected in previous censuses.

The concept of race is separate from the concept of Hispanic origin. Percentages for the various race categories add to 100 percent, and should not be combined with the percent Hispanic. Tallies that show race categories for Hispanics and nonHispanics separately are also available.

Scope and Methodology:

The data on race were derived from answers to the question on race that was asked of all people in Census 2000.

[Obsidian]

First of all, giving voice to the very issue you raised in the post (which was how to classify a mixed child) is beating a dead horse? That you say so, can't be seen as anything other than ironic. 

Secondly, Yes, I went to highschool and more. I did not, however, learn the falsehood that race is scientific; in fact, in my courses, that idea was debunked. So let's define it using the source you so kindly quoted:

The concept of race as used by the Census Bureau reflects self-identification by people according to the race or races with which they most closely identify. These categories are sociopolitical constructs and should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature. Furthermore, the race categories include both racial and national-origin groups.

Note that in the above excerpt, the Census Bureau states that race is A.) a CONCEPT; B.) is SELF-IDENTIFIED, C.) is a SOCIOPOLITICAL CONSTRUCT and D.) should NOT be interpreted as SCIENTIFIC or ANTHROPOLOGICAL in nature.

That being said, Tiger is free to choose his own racial category with which to identify...and so is the bi-racial child in question.

Thank you for providing the source.

[philnation]

Were I (a White man) to have a child by a Black woman, the child can identify as he/she wishes, but there will be no mistaking one thing: they will know that the world they live in sees them as Black.  The store security guard who thinks my son looks suspicious isn't going to say, "Wait! He has a White father, don't follow him!", just like the teacher who won't expect much from his work won't think, "Wait! His daddy is White, I should expect him to do exceedingly well!"  That's just not going to happen.  Many will look at my child and see a Black person.

The One Drop Rule is what it is.  Telling my child that the world sees him/her as Black isn't "lending credence" to it, it's simply telling them reality.  I could, alternatively, not tell them that, and let them get a rude awakening when someone calls them the N-word, or when they get stopped by a police officer for DWB.  As far as I'm concerned, that's just being pragmatic.  Frankly, I don't think telling a child with one Black and one White parent that the world sees them as Black gives nearly as much credence to the One Drop Rule as the folks who treat them no differently than they treat Black people.

It would be nice if I could just tell them, "You're biracial, the whole world sees you that way and it doesn't matter", but I can't honestly do that, and I'm not going to do such a disservice to my children.  Race matters in America, no matter how much I'd love it if that wasn't true.  Should my kids decide to call themselves Black, I don't see it as denying me as their dad - they'll never do that 'cause their daddy will raise them as well as any dad could!     They'll simply be acknowledging what the world sees them as.

[Obsidian]

Hello, philnation. I’m glad to get your opinion on this subject.

Were I (a White man) to have a child by a Black woman, the child can identify as he/she wishes, but there will be no mistaking one thing: they will know that the world they live in sees them as Black.

That depends heavily on the child's physical characteristics. Depending on the gene-poole, some biracials come out looking white, or even latin. When knowledge of his/her parentage comes into play, THEN that child becomes BLACK by default to people who may have wondered once before about the kid’s “racial identity.”

The One Drop Rule is what it is.  Telling my child that the world sees him/her as Black isn't "lending credence" to it, it's simply telling them reality.  I could, alternatively, not tell them that, and let them get a rude awakening when someone calls them the N-word, or when they get stopped by a police officer for DWB.  As far as I'm concerned, that's just being pragmatic. 

I'm not saying that it gives credence to the One Drop Rule to inform a child that that the world sees her as black (if they LOOK black). I'm saying that it gives credence to that rule if you say a child is NECESSARILY black ONLY because they have a black parent, grandparent, etc. REGARDLESS of how that child looks and is consequently received by society. I feel it's a disservice to keep people from knowing and expressing their COMPLETE heritage should they be interested in doing so. 

Frankly, I don't think telling a child with one Black and one White parent that the world sees them as Black gives nearly as much credence to the One Drop Rule as the folks who treat them no differently than they treat Black people.

No, it just indulges a widely accepted falsehood, however ambivalently.

It would be nice if I could just tell them, "You're biracial, the whole world sees you that way and it doesn't matter", but I can't honestly do that, and I'm not going to do such a disservice to my children.

Biracial children are generally forced to be BLACK because of the either/or binary logic of Western thought. It doesn't mean that it's wrong to tell them that they're biracial or for them to assert their biracial heritage as adults. They'll be aware of what THAT (being biracial) means and entails when the white AND black children treat them differently, anyway.  My point is that despite what society says, a person has a right to define themselves, and that contrary to the sentiments expressed on this board, they are not wrong to do so.

...Should my kids decide to call themselves Black, I don't see it as denying me as their dad - they'll <B>never</B> do that 'cause their daddy will raise them as well as any dad could!     They'll simply be acknowledging what the world sees them as.

But if the child looks white, would you be so willing to allow for her to say she’s white and deny her mother – or still tell her she’s black? That’s what the one drop rule is about.

[Legacy]

Vin Diesel..

I could have sworn the guy was white the first time I was him. Then, after seeing him in a few roles,  I wasn't really sure what "race" he was.


The point is "race" is somewhat ambigious depending on the situation & not all that well defined to begin with. Even when using the physical distinction model, not all children of black/<insert other race here> parents "look" distinctly "black".

[Luna]

I think it all depends on what part of the world you are from.
I have a some african friends, ( I am from Denmark where most black people are africans or have parents from africa)  and they would never consider a person half white half black as solely black.

Luna

[Susa]

That depends heavily on the child's physical characteristics. Depending on the gene-poole, some biracials come out looking white, or even latin. When knowledge of his/her parentage comes into play, THEN that child becomes BLACK by default to people who may have wondered once before about the kid’s “racial identity.”

I don't think that it's healthy to let people on the outside determine what you are; you have to determine that for yourself. So the world looks at your characteristics and determines that you're Black, that doesn't change your culture or who you are. There are millions of Black people who are Hispanic; that doesn't make them Black in terms of culture. So why should it make a bi-racial person Black if they were raised with another culture, for example Asian. Putting people in nice little buckets and trying to insist that they be something their not is racism and something we should do to each other.

[Legacy]

That depends heavily on the child's physical characteristics. Depending on the gene-poole, some biracials come out looking white, or even latin. When knowledge of his/her parentage comes into play, THEN that child becomes BLACK by default to people who may have wondered once before about the kid’s “racial identity.”

I don't think that it's healthy to let people on the outside determine what you are; you have to determine that for yourself. So the world looks at your characteristics and determines that you're Black, that doesn't change your culture or who you are. There are millions of Black people who are Hispanic; that doesn't make them Black in terms of culture. So why should it make a bi-racial person Black if they were raised with another culture, for example Asian. Putting people in nice little buckets and trying to insist that they be something their not is racism and something we should do to each other.

You're right, people do have a right to define themselves. Tiger Woods is half black/asian. Hallie is half black/white, etc. However, it's necessary to also know how your defined by others esp if it's looked at unfavorably. Tiger Woods & Halle Berry are probably aware that the KKK sees them as  ngaz.