'White African-American' Suing N.J. Med School

[Linda7NJ]

I hope this guy wins his lawsuit. How ridiculous to be told not to identify himself as African American when he was born in Africa and is now a naturalized American citizen. I mean, DAMN! He is more truly African American than the vast majority of those who claim that designation.

I would bet $100 and a box of donuts that every single person who complained was African American. Who else would be offended?

And I would bet that the administrator who told him never to say it again was white. Who else would be that scared of a lawsuit?

I think it is hi-freakin'-larious that the NAACP and the ACLU won't even touch this crap. I mean, they will make a lot of dumb arguments, but this is too much for them. They can't figure out which victim to support! Sooooo..."no comment" from either group.

Just when you think people cannot get more stupid, they go and prove you wrong.

Couldn't agree more!!!!!!:clap::clap::clap:

Reminds me of when I was watching the Olympics and an announcer called a black Canadian athlete African American! I was rolling for DAYS!!!!

Politically correctness is destroying the intelligence of society!

What a bunch of dumb-asses!

I hope he wins a TON of money!

 

[Linda7NJ]

I can understand how the black students feel, in a way, because to them, African American means something deep and cultural and special-----to most of them, it means they are descendants of slavery, and have faced discrimination on a daily basis due to the color of their skin."

I have friends (Caucasian) who have emigrated to USA from what was Zimbabwe. They identify themselves as Africans, because their family had been in Zimbabwe for centuries. Centuries. These people love Africa with their whole hearts and were devastated to have their land confiscated and to be kicked out of the country. That's a whole 'nother story, but I can see this from both points of view, and I'm not convinced anyone is stupid. I think they are just very passionate about the semantics!

It's ignorant to believe that every black person born in the US descended from slaves.

It's equally stupid to expect someone born in Africa not to identify themselves as such when ASKED.

To punish said person, is the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a very long time.

It is, what it is...semantics has nothing to do with it.

Perpetuating ignorance and racist ideology is wrong regardless of skin color.

 

[Linda7NJ]

It almost sounds like the student was trying to start a little trouble since he didn't say that he was born an African citizen instead of claiming the race. He probably should stick saying he's the actual racial makeup that the genome project would identify him as. I've had Hispanic social workers (who should know better even if this is Texas) try to say that my grandkids have fetal alcohol syndrome due to all 4 looking Caucasian but having the Cherokee Indian epicanthal eye folds. It's just ignorance and thinking that everyone should look a certain way. You can't always tell who someone's ancestors are just by skin color alone.

I used to do foster care and once provided respite for another foster family while they were vacationing. I had their two little sibling boys. The very first night, I tossed them into the tub with bubbles and when they hopped out I was toweling them off. I noticed HUGE black and blue and red BRUISES from the top of their tiny butts to the bottom. I immediately took them to the ER. The ER called police as well as DYFS and the foster parents were arrested.

Turns out the boys had mongolian spots or congenital dermal melanocytosis a very common occurrence found on many many mixed children and the foster parents had it well documented with their own doctor. Lucky for them!

What was super scary to me, the ER docs as well as DYFS workers didn't know!

I think the foster parents would have been smart to educate me when I picked them up!

 

[Nova]

May I just add to kgeaux's and scm's thoughtful posts above that the reason black Americans use a continent for their hyphenate ("African-American") is that many, if not most, have no way of knowing where in Africa their ancestors originated.

The plaintiff in this case could have solved the issue by showing a little sensitivity to those who feel strongly about the African-American label and identifying himself as Mozambican-American.

That said, I don't see the ground for suspension. I also think the lawsuit is silly, except to the extent the plaintiff feels it necessary to expunge this from his record.

In most cases I've seen where academia gets all crazy-PC, there's somebody just as obstinate on the other side insisting he or she is right. Usually, a simple "okay, I see your point of view" is enough to nip these things in the bud.

 

[Linda7NJ]

May I just add to kgeaux's and scm's thoughtful posts above that the reason black Americans use a continent for their hyphenate ("African-American") is that many, if not most, have no way of knowing where in Africa their ancestors originated.

The plaintiff in this case could have solved the issue by showing a little sensitivity to those who feel strongly about the African-American label and identifying himself as Mozambican-American.

That said, I don't see the ground for suspension. I also think the lawsuit is silly, except to the extent the plaintiff feels it necessary to expunge this from his record.

In most cases I've seen where academia gets all crazy-PC, there's somebody just as obstinate on the other side insisting he or she is right. Usually, a simple "okay, I see your point of view" is enough to nip these things in the bud.

That man has every right to identify HIMSELF any way he chooses.

 

[believe09]

It almost sounds like the student was trying to start a little trouble since he didn't say that he was born an African citizen instead of claiming the race. He probably should stick saying he's the actual racial makeup that the genome project would identify him as. I've had Hispanic social workers (who should know better even if this is Texas) try to say that my grandkids have fetal alcohol syndrome due to all 4 looking Caucasian but having the Cherokee Indian epicanthal eyefolds. It's just ignorance and thinking that everyone should look a certain way. You can't always tell who someone's ancestors are just by skin color alone.

my bold and italics-??? I think the point, at least as I am getting it, is that African is NOT a race. Being African has to do with a continent. Sort of like being Jewish is a religion and not an ethnicity. This man could claim African descent, as others in his med school class may have been able to. Where things go awry for me, as SCM points out, is that everyone could have had a dialogue about what the term meant to them so there was understanding on both sides. But I am guessing that did not happen if this is where it led.

 

[angelmom]

It almost sounds like the student was trying to start a little trouble since he didn't say that he was born an African citizen instead of claiming the race. He probably should stick saying he's the actual racial makeup that the genome project would identify him as. I've had Hispanic social workers (who should know better even if this is Texas) try to say that my grandkids have fetal alcohol syndrome due to all 4 looking Caucasian but having the Cherokee Indian epicanthal eyefolds. It's just ignorance and thinking that everyone should look a certain way. You can't always tell who someone's ancestors are just by skin color alone.

How do you figure? From the original link, "each student was asked to define themselves for a discussion on culture and medicine."

May I just add to kgeaux's and scm's thoughtful posts above that the reason black Americans use a continent for their hyphenate ("African-American") is that many, if not most, have no way of knowing where in Africa their ancestors originated.

The plaintiff in this case could have solved the issue by showing a little sensitivity to those who feel strongly about the African-American label and identifying himself as Mozambican-American.

That said, I don't see the ground for suspension. I also think the lawsuit is silly, except to the extent the plaintiff feels it necessary to expunge this from his record.

In most cases I've seen where academia gets all crazy-PC, there's somebody just as obstinate on the other side insisting he or she is right. Usually, a simple "okay, I see your point of view" is enough to nip these things in the bud.

Who should decide how he defines himself? And how could anyone possibly argue with his definition? Dollars to donuts, he is more African than anyone who was offended.

As for being sensitive to those people, do they wear nametags? How would one possibly begin to know which people are "sensitive" to such ridiculous things as claiming the continent on which he was born and which, I'd bet, none of them have ever seen?

Seriously? This man has to SUE to be reinstated because of how he defines himself?


Academia is as bad as politics. What a bunch of egotistical blowhards.

 

[Nova]

That man has every right to identify HIMSELF any way he chooses.

I don't believe I ever said otherwise. What I said was I think the problem could have been solved without digging a trench and declaring war.

 

[Nova]

Who should decide how he defines himself? And how could anyone possibly argue with his definition? Dollars to donuts, he is more African than anyone who was offended.

As for being sensitive to those people, do they wear nametags? How would one possibly begin to know which people are "sensitive" to such ridiculous things as claiming the continent on which he was born and which, I'd bet, none of them have ever seen?

Seriously? This man has to SUE to be reinstated because of how he defines himself?

Academia is as bad as politics. What a bunch of egotistical blowhards.

You know, angel, I've attended at least seven different universities and spent about 10 years as a student in academia. I taught at a well-known "liberal" university for another decade.

Yes, the combination of the theoretical bent of intellectuals and the passions of the young can sometimes be combustible, but on the whole, academia is a lot less "PC" than these occasional instances suggest.

Certainly, the plaintiff in this case was technically correct: he is an American originally from Africa. But he was also incorrect in that the term "African-American" has a specific meaning in his adopted homeland, a meaning that does not include him.

Now I might call myself a "person of color," on the technical ground that white and pink are colors, too, and my skin is what is sometimes (rather ethnocentrically) called "flesh" tone. And you and I would agree I have a free speech right to say such a thing, just as anyone has the right to say anything short of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

But surely we can also understand why members of ethnic minorities might feel that my calling myself a "person of color" makes a mockery of them, their history and their experiences. "African-American" in our culture is even more specific.

Are we to suppose the plaintiff couldn't figure this out? What the hell was he trying to prove?

I agree that suspending hiim seems an overreaction, but the plaintiff is no innocent victim in this, nor is he a hero.

 

[Nova]

Also and BTW, where is the usual chorus of WSers screaming that "foreigners" who come to the U.S. "should learn our language"? The term African-American is part of our language. Why shouldn't this Mozambican-American learn what it means?

 

[Nova]

Indeed. Those in the school administration could use your wisdom.

I agree the administrator overreacted. I suspect that like any bureaucrat, his priority was to restore order: suspending the plaintiff seemed the quickest and easiest way. I imagine he has learned his lesson now.

Or maybe not. Maybe the entire incident, as this thread seems to suggest, is merely a "proxy war" for both sides, everyone taking a side in terms of our society's traditional racial tensions.

 

[angelmom]

You know, angel, I've attended at least seven different universities and spent about 10 years as a student in academia. I taught at a well-known "liberal" university for another decade.

Yes, the combination of the theoretical bent of intellectuals and the passions of the young can sometimes be combustible, but on the whole, academia is a lot less "PC" than these occasional instances suggest.

Certainly, the plaintiff in this case was technically correct: he is an American originally from Africa. But he was also incorrect in that the term "African-American" has a specific meaning in his adopted homeland, a meaning that does not include him.

Now I might call myself a "person of color," on the technical ground that white and pink are colors, too, and my skin is what is sometimes (rather ethnocentrically) called "flesh" tone. And you and I would agree I have a free speech right to say such a thing, just as anyone has the right to say anything short of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

But surely we can also understand why members of ethnic minorities might feel that my calling myself a "person of color" makes a mockery of them, their history and their experiences. "African-American" in our culture is even more specific.

Are we to suppose the plaintiff couldn't figure this out? What the hell was he trying to prove?

I agree that suspending hiim seems an overreaction, but the plaintiff is no innocent victim in this, nor is he a hero.

I stand by my position. The plaintiff was asked, in a class on culture, how HE defined HIMSELF.

I could define myself as gay because I'm a happy person. If that offended you because you use the more current and accepted definition of that word to define yourself and are offended by my personal view, then tough crap. It might not be appropriate for me to use that on an official form, or to mislead others by using it to accept a scholarship or special consideration for something, but to define my own self I can use whatever words I find appropriate.

I cannot believe that you, of all people, think that this man should be worried about offending the other people when he is, in fact, African and American. He is not hurting them or costing them money by defining himself (in his own mind) that way. Why do they even care how he thinks of himself? Why can't they listen to the discussion and realize there are African people who think of themselves as African who aren't black.

In the words of Herman Cain..."pay attention. You might learn something."

 

[believe09]

You know, angel, I've attended at least seven different universities and spent about 10 years as a student in academia. I taught at a well-known "liberal" university for another decade.

Yes, the combination of the theoretical bent of intellectuals and the passions of the young can sometimes be combustible, but on the whole, academia is a lot less "PC" than these occasional instances suggest.

Certainly, the plaintiff in this case was technically correct: he is an American originally from Africa. But he was also incorrect in that the term "African-American" has a specific meaning in his adopted homeland, a meaning that does not include him.

Now I might call myself a "person of color," on the technical ground that white and pink are colors, too, and my skin is what is sometimes (rather ethnocentrically) called "flesh" tone. And you and I would agree I have a free speech right to say such a thing, just as anyone has the right to say anything short of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

But surely we can also understand why members of ethnic minorities might feel that my calling myself a "person of color" makes a mockery of them, their history and their experiences. "African-American" in our culture is even more specific.

Are we to suppose the plaintiff couldn't figure this out? What the hell was he trying to prove?

I agree that suspending hiim seems an overreaction, but the plaintiff is no innocent victim in this, nor is he a hero.

The class and statement were about cultural identity, not racial...at least this is my understanding. It is appropriate for the guy to identify himself as African. It's like being Cuban, or Mexican, or Venezuelan, or Colombian or South American. As far as I know being any of the groups I listed has nothing to do with racial identity.

What I like about this controversy is that it brings a brand new set of ideas to me regarding the term African-American. To me, it is perhaps inappropriately "owned" in the United States. If someone wants to define themselves by racial identity, then there is always Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid...right? If you want to define yourself by culture, how does an 8th generation person of Negroid or Caucasoid background do that? What Irish culture or ritual remains in my life or family so that I can define myself as Irish? What South African or Rhodesian culture remains in my life or family so that I can define myself as African? The person at the center of this controversy is a transplant from the particular continent. It is likely that his cultural background contains elements that would be recognizable to his original country of origin....in any case, he can say that he is Andalusian, or Vulcan or Western European for that matter. He can define himself as he chooses, and people have the right to disagree but they should be prepared to back up their arguments, just like here.

 

[believe09]

I agree the administrator overreacted. I suspect that like any bureaucrat, his priority was to restore order: suspending the plaintiff seemed the quickest and easiest way. I imagine he has learned his lesson now.

Or maybe not. Maybe the entire incident, as this thread seems to suggest, is merely a "proxy war" for both sides, everyone taking a side in terms of our society's traditional racial tensions.

This would be an interesting test case for whether or not there is a place for racial identification in our world...is it necessary for any reason beyond a need to categorize and define in the simplest terms?

 

[Linda7NJ]

Also and BTW, where is the usual chorus of WSers screaming that "foreigners" who come to the U.S. "should learn our language"? The term African-American is part of our language. Why shouldn't this Mozambican-American learn what it means?

I refuse to use "African American". IMO It's just silly.

 

[jannuncutt]

I refuse to use "African American". IMO It's just silly.

Why do you think it is silly?

 

[kittenish]

I like to call myself a "halfrican," as I am half African-American, half Irish. When (white) people ask why I don't look black at all, I tell them my mom is just really, really white. Ha!

What I find interesting is that blacks can tell I'm black and whites assume I'm white. When I first started college, I was sitting in the advising office. Mind you, this was like two weeks before school started so it was packed. Anyway, on the little sheet I had to fill out, I was told to check one box, and figured, "hey, I look white, so I'll check african-american and they'll figure out the fact that I'm mixed..." Well that didn't quite happen, as they relied on those to see who was left to be called and when they picked up my sheet, and didn't see any black people in the waiting room, they threw away my sheet. I had been waiting for three hours, watching people that came in after me go in first and they didn't even call my name to see if I was there! I just laughed it off, cause I figure they won't make that mistake again. Had I gotten pissed off, they might have argued that I should have checked the box that I most resembled, but I'm no less African-American as I am Irish.

Most frustrating of all is when people assume I'm 100% white, and feel free to make ethnic jokes. :furious:

 

[Nova]

I stand by my position. The plaintiff was asked, in a class on culture, how HE defined HIMSELF.

I could define myself as gay because I'm a happy person. If that offended you because you use the more current and accepted definition of that word to define yourself and are offended by my personal view, then tough crap. It might not be appropriate for me to use that on an official form, or to mislead others by using it to accept a scholarship or special consideration for something, but to define my own self I can use whatever words I find appropriate.

I cannot believe that you, of all people, think that this man should be worried about offending the other people when he is, in fact, African and American. He is not hurting them or costing them money by defining himself (in his own mind) that way. Why do they even care how he thinks of himself? Why can't they listen to the discussion and realize there are African people who think of themselves as African who aren't black.

In the words of Herman Cain..."pay attention. You might learn something."

Oh, please, the defendant here knew exactly what he was doing. He wasn't "self-identifying" as an act of personal immancipation (pun intended); he was being deliberately provocative.

Now that's no crime in my book and I still agree it's ridiculous this ever got to the point of suspension (or any administrative action whatsoever), but let's don't pretend that what this person did is the same as what minority groups do when they claim the right to name their own labels. For one thing, blacks didn't decide to announce they were "gay," nor did gays as a whole just decide to announce they were "Jews."

 

[Nova]

I refuse to use "African American". IMO It's just silly.

So this one dude from Mozambique has the right to self-identify, but millions of African-Americans don't? That's interesting.

(Before you start, I am aware that not all black people like the term "African-American." But it seems to be the most common choice at the moment.)

 

[Nova]

The class and statement were about cultural identity, not racial...at least this is my understanding. It is appropriate for the guy to identify himself as African. It's like being Cuban, or Mexican, or Venezuelan, or Colombian or South American. As far as I know being any of the groups I listed has nothing to do with racial identity.

What I like about this controversy is that it brings a brand new set of ideas to me regarding the term African-American. To me, it is perhaps inappropriately "owned" in the United States. If someone wants to define themselves by racial identity, then there is always Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid...right? If you want to define yourself by culture, how does an 8th generation person of Negroid or Caucasoid background do that? What Irish culture or ritual remains in my life or family so that I can define myself as Irish? What South African or Rhodesian culture remains in my life or family so that I can define myself as African? The person at the center of this controversy is a transplant from the particular continent. It is likely that his cultural background contains elements that would be recognizable to his original country of origin....in any case, he can say that he is Andalusian, or Vulcan or Western European for that matter. He can define himself as he chooses, and people have the right to disagree but they should be prepared to back up their arguments, just like here.

Sorry, but you're behind the times and the latest research on this one.

What we call "race" IS a cultural issue, albeit one that was long falsely and pseudo-scientifically attributed to biology.

And, yes, "African-American" is a cultural term with cultural roots, as everyone here knows perfectly well and as the defendent in this case knew, too.

Its meaning derives from usage, not from the defendant and some posters here dissecting its component parts, as if they'd all just discovered their first dictionary.