Talk:Mulatto/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Serious, legitimate topic for discussion

This is a serious topic for discussion. Why is the site shut down from editing? As long as race has significance and endures as a label, there must be a word for people that are neither white nor black, that is a mix of the two. Simply recognizing a word for mixed people is not to disparage the white people or the black people. It is simply recognizing the diverse backgrounds of people such as Mariah Carey or Barak Obama to use such a word. Dogru144 17:39 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Light-skinned/ color-consciousness issue

There is tension within the Black community regarding discrimination in favor of light-skinned Black people. This is a legitimate topic to be recognized. This article is an appropriate place to recognize this issue, and to recognize the literature, scholarly and first-hand memoir literature on this issue. There are also sensitive films on the issue, such as 'Imitation of Life.' Dogru144 17:39 30 July 2006 (UTC)

One Drop Rule

In the United States, because of the "one-drop rule," a person with both African and European ancestry, regardless of how little the ratio of African blood — ½ White and ½ Black, or ¾ White and ¼ Black, or lower — will always be considered to be Black. Because of this, a person who may be considered Black in the United States could be considered White in Brazil. The "one-drop rule" eh. I had to move this here. Anyone want to defend "the one-drop rule" as something that exists? Wetman 19:28, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Absolutely; if this is not of too much importance now, it certainly was very significant in the past (particularly with respect to interracial marriage). --Daniel C. Boyer 20:25, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Totally! Didn't you ever see Show Boat? :) I think it deserves an article actually. I'll see what I can cook up. jengod 20:54, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)
I was mistaken. I thought the paragraph referred to present-day standards, simply because it is couched in the present tense. I didn't realize it was a historical rule, which should be quoted from rulings. Now I've googled "One-drop rule." Looks like some sensible authentic history could be inserted into that entry, and there could be some links. But the paragraph as it stands needs to be more accurate, doesn't it.Wetman 23:52, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

mulattos in the strict sense of the term are 1/2 black. then quadroons are 1/4 black and octaroons are 1/8 black.

so are there terms for people 1/16 black or even further down the line than that? Gringo300 18:53, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

ok, i've found this: quintroons/hexadecaroons are 1/16th black. Gringo300 05:39, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)


Jesus. Can anyone actually say 'hexadecaroon' out loud without laughing? . . . toonbat@yahoo.com

Barbara Shack 12:20, 31 December 2005 (UTC)Is the following offensive?"The following which was written in the Racial purity article on Wikipedia shows how mulattos and Multiracial people generally are sometimes compared to animals. Mixed-race people and their families may find this insulting. It is also inaccurate as multiracial humans are not sterile. Since this was written the Racial purity article has been modified.

"On the other hand, although the mule has the best characteristics of both the horse and the ass, their hybrid nature leaves them sterile. "" If it is please delete it. I didn't mean it to be offensive.

Mules are actually more intelligent than both horses and donkeys but who cares where the word is derived from? (probably from muwallad anyway) Actual meaning and ethymological origin are far from the same. Fact is nobody thinks about mules or other animals when they see mulattoes and/or their families. Also nobody thinks mulattoes are sterile. These pseudoarguments are usually brought up by those who want to erase mulatto identity, ursurpate it because they have self-esteem issues, claim mulatto history for themselves and perpetuate a racist eugenist rule, simply because they suffer from inferiority complexes. Sad.xpark


ZZZZzzzZZ ---> Yawn ... Someone wake me up when it's over! Poor muleattos, nothing but oppression for us. Why won't the world drop what it's doing and pay attention to our plight - the plight of muleattos! Oh dear! .... no really, we are oppressed! Guess I'll take a number and wait in line. CreoleMe

Nobody needs to drop what they're doing. Just drop the ODR and anti-mulatto propaganda.xpark


Are you fucking serious? So out of all the groups in the world that are being oppressed or descriminated against, people are suppose to see 'muleattos' as special and just drop 'anti-muleatto' propaganda? Damn Jews, damn Whites, damn Blacks, damn Asians, damn muleattos - wait a second, they're muleattos, they don't want us to pick on them. Haha. Unbelievable! What the hell makes you so special? CreoleMe

Well... You see the difference is that those other minorities are protected and mulattoes aren't (at least so far). Nobody said mulattoes were special but we want equal protection and recognition as a group and minority. Hostile, comments like yours, in addition to being full of strawmen arguments only serve to demonstrate this even further.xpark

'Protection' depends on where you are - in Canada, you are a visible minority if you say you are - i.e. for employment equity, if your skin is in your opinion non-white enough to cause you to get discriminated against, you can tick of the 'visible minority' box. So you can't say that mulattos have 'no protection' period - it needs to be specified if/that there are places where there is no protection or a particularly unusual/discriminatory quirk in the nature of protective/minority legislation.Bridesmill 14:39, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

The fact of the matter is for any group to have "protection" it must offer some sort of economic incentive - it must show that it can add substantially to the economy. For example, there are some 300 million people in the US. A group of, say, 30,000 muleattos simply can't go to the government and ask for "protection" whereas 20 million mestizos can. Why? Because they are an economic powerhouse and there is power in numbers - don't forget that Mexico has almost 90 million mestizos. What do muleattos have to offer exactly? Whenever they start yapping it's always about not wanting to be "black" then it stops there. Muleattos are a fraction of the black population which is a fraction of the US population. If ALL American muleattos got together, they wouldn't make up more than 4 million people (that's a generous estimation). Simply wanting the government to protect you cause you want to be seen seperate from "blacks" doesn't cut it. Going around making sure people don't slander the muleatto 'race' doesn't cut it either. Minority groups have to fight for their slice of the American pie. If you can get millions and millions of muleattos to back you, and march with you and hold protests with you and so forth, then you're game. You don't get your own 'race' simply because everything looks good on paper, you have to get your hands dirty. What do muleattos have to offer save for a few models and actors? CreoleMe


These two very aggressive and hostile statements proove exactly what I'm saying. Whenever a mulatto speaks up he's attacked. What you guys need to understand is that people are entitled to be recognized as what they are and as nothing else. You need to accept that mulattoes simply ARE NOT black. We have our own identity whether you like it or not. Rather ask yourself why do you insist on trying to claim us. Looks like you're the ones with the problem. Obviously groups who are already numerically powerful don't need the same protection as groups who aren't, including protection from forced assimilation. According to your argumentation which seems to be in line with the right of the strongest rather than with justice blacks wouldn't need any protection because they don't contribute as much to the economy as Whites or other minority groups do. Don't worry about mulattoes though. Our numbers are growing anyway. Models and actors? I'd rather not comment much on that kind of ignorance. A certain minority group would never be where they are today if it wasn't for mulattoes. Btw not that it matters but 90 Million Mexicans? Maybe but not in the US labor force. Estimates vary between 5 and 10 million including the large number of illigal immigrants. Not all Mexicans are mestizos btw. and they identify by national origin first and foremost rather than by race. xpark


Heh, heh. You sound like a little baby, man. What, pray, will you do to blacks if they don't stop calling you black? Whine some more? You can't do shit. They will continue to call you black - hell whites will, too. You don't have your own identity or you wouldn't be on here whining. Blacks and whites own you and there's nothing you can do about it. Moreover, there is no mule race for the simple fact that you have no sustaining population and no central culture. Your marriage rate to whites is a whopping 70%. Whatever the rate of your "growth", it's being hindered by intermarriage to other races. Plus, the rate of black intermarriage to whites is negligable and a majority of blacks marry other blacks.

Also, are you to tell me that somehow a Nigerian Italian has the same culture as an Ethiopian German? That as soon as they are born they are automatically part of a mule culture? The best shot mules have is in nationalism; namely, proclaiming themselves proud to be Puerto Rican or Dominican and so forth.

Hey, xpark - ubangi boy - you're black. Now, how will you stop me from calling you black? You, you gonna cry a little bit for me? Maybe bitch a little here and there on different msg boards? Blacks can do whatever the fuck they want to mules. What is your plan of action? Are you going to start firebombing them? Blacks have their own problems, the last thing on their minds is "justice" for mules. Hahahaha.

There, there - your tears of anguish sustain me. CreoleMe


Many countries as well as some places within the US have sustaining mulatto populations. In the US mulatto communities were partly torn apart after the 1930s due to the racist law known as the one-drop-rule. Nevertheless many mulattoes still marry each other up to this day, further proove that regardless of their actual label they still see themselves as a distinct group.

Also, black "culture" in the US is a subculture at best. Black Americans are Americans. They are BASPs.(Black Anglo Saxon Protestants) That's the main ingredient of their cultural tradition. The rest was taken away from them during slavery. The notion of "African-Americans" as an "ethnic group" simply had to be created because it is the only thing that can be used in order to justify ongoing seperatism from mainstream society.

Yet still the last time I checked one out of ten black men married a white woman and more and more black women are doing the same. (with so many black men in prison and on drugs they hardly have any other choice) Add those black men who have children with white women without being married and you can easily see that the number of American Mulattoes is growing fast. Also unlike what you said the majority of blacks doesn't marry blacks. Actually the majority of blacks doesn't get married at all. The majority of all black children grows up in fatherless households. Maybe those are some of the reasons why CreoleMe comes on here whining, trying to force a black identity on mulattoes, but throwing insults won't change anything. xpark

The one drop rule is in itself crazy. All of the people in the list are white, if we apply the rule in a fair way. Dogru144 17:45 30 July 2006 (UTC)


CreoleMe, lol. Its interesting that i find this kind of resistence from creoles and their supporters. They are just as bad as the Black one droppists, white racists, and white liberal ODR supporters. You know what i think creoleme? I think youre afraid. You dont like the word mulatto, and so you are a creole wannabe. All mulattos are creoles anyway, so why be scared?

Kid

Ban 64.230.44.226

Suggest a ban for this self-hating, anti-mulatto terrorist guilty of vandalising all wiki pages using the word 'mulatto'.

  • I say whoever this is, they should be banned. I'm mulatto and I already get discriminated against enough in the real world, and I can guess this is the same for many other mulattos out there. 195.229.242.52 11:21, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Links?

Where the hell have the links gone? Why are there so many people vadalising this page? --Chueyjoo 15:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Proposal to divide "United States and Puerto Rico" into two separate sections

This off-topic paragraph highlights the need to have separate sections discussing the separate histories of the two places: "Nevertheless, independent of their actual numbers, the history of the population of Puerto Rican mulattos is independent from those of the US. Prior to the Spanish-American War - when Puerto Rico became a commonwealth of the United States - Puerto Rico was an integral part of the Spanish Empire, and it still constitutes a cultural-geographic segment of Latin America, thus their history is a shared one with those from Hispanic America and Brazil." Well, duh! It seems like the article on Puerto Rico would be a better place to discuss how culturally and linguistically separate they are from the US. ThePedanticPrick 16:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

WP:NPOV

Many of the recent edits are taking a strong point of view that the term mulatto is somehow better than other words uses to describe the same sort of person, and are also displaying political rather than sociological views about racial integration. I don't want to do a massive revert, though, b/c other recent edits are good. Please re-write the article to be more neutral. Also, it desperately needs better sources: the ones provided are barely allowable under WP:CITE, especially when there are so many good books and academic articles to choose from. --M@rēino 20:05, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

  • The new edits in response to my tag eliminate my concerns; therefore, I support the editor's decision to remove the NPOV tag. --M@rēino 22:49, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Mulattoes are an oppressed minority in many places. Therefore there is an obvious imbalance of power, when it comes to academic and media influence. However embracing dominant ideologies, which were invented to serve the interests of more numerical powerful groups at the expense of mulattoes is not the same as being neutral. Also it's usually the anti-mulatto propaganda which is political rather than sociological.xpark

The reason why this page may seem to have a pro-mulatto tinge is because mulattos are oppressed in real life and non-mulattos think they can speak for us, therefore lots of mulattos come here to try and set the record straight on how they feel about the word 'mulatto' and try and counter the anti-mulattos who began to attack this article/delete links etc.

--Chueyjoo 14:16, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Sociology, the art of inventing excuses for those who have none. --Nazrac 16:37, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Exactly.That definetly applies to those who want to keep us in bondage, tied to the One-Drop-Rule, a racist eugenist law of the 1930s. They do nothing but whine, whine and whine. pentb

How many mullatos really identify themselves with being white rather than black? The one drop-rule was also widely accepted by black people as well. A mullato was thus considered a black person, which explains why there is such a preponderence of African Americans with white ancestors. Somewhere around 80% have a white ancestor in their family tree. --Nazrac 23:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Protection

Folks, please cut this out -- edit warring doesn't help anybody, and it hurts the integrity of this Wiki. I've therefore protected the article to let everybody cool down. Please explain your reasons for including/excluding various sites in your edits. Since I am not an expert on this issue, please also, if you wish, file a WP:RFC with at least an attempt at neutral language, and see if we can get some neutral editors with some expertise into the picture. Let's try to talk, rather than to impose changes, OK? --Nlu (talk) 05:16, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

On second thought, as unexpert as I am in the issue, I will file the RfC myself to try to ensure some neutrality in the request. --Nlu (talk) 05:18, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
The RFC has been filed at WP:RFC/HIST. Please let me know if you feel the RFC extends to other areas other than History/Geography (which "HIST" covers). --Nlu (talk) 05:20, 9 April 2006 (UTC)


=====

Good day Nlu.

Thank you for concern on the issue, and I do support myself, your steadfast faction. Indeed this "edit war" is absolutely unecessary and completely "immature." Yes I will admit that, however, as I have been willing to allow Creoleme to post his link, he has not done the same with me. In my attempt to contact him about this it has been only until today that the like has occured; unfortunately. As a result the disparagement turned sour and causing his childish behaviors to pass down unto me, as a way to combat and ensure my freedom of rightful/under Wikipedia LAW posting occured within ethical and genuine premises. I saw no way around it, and now I do. Through legal, and mature proceeds with you Nlu and any other neutral editors; indeed I am very much willing and happy to convene. Thank You Nlu, and thank you for your time. I stand at my position to allow both my link(s) and Creoleme; I just wish Creoleme would. All the best gentlemen.

Punt


Well, i think the issue comes in with the afro-venezuelans (i.e. Mariah Carey's heritage. Afro-Venezuelans are Africans living in Venezuela, not of Spanish blood, but many of them have Spanish names due to slavery. Mariah has said that her father is "black" but that his family is from Venezuela, she did not mention Spanish blood.


yes, she did. but i didn't know this until yesterday, so i'm not blaming you. [1]

Ethymological origin

The passage about 'muladi' is irrelevant and was probably simply thrown in in order to create confusion. Mulatto was directly derived from 'MUWALLAD', not through 'muladi'.

This being said the ethymological origin of the term 'mulato' is unimportant since it is not identical with actual meaning. Words change their actual meaning with time, independently from their ethymological origin. Many commonly used words actually had 'negative' ethymological origins. (slavic, berber etc.) "Black" when used for people used to be derrogatory but a lot of blacks choose to label themselves such. "Hapa" is said to be of derrogatory origin but a lot Hapas choose the term. Mulatto however has never been an offensive term. Xpark

RfC

Here from RfC. A few things occur to me as I read the article. 1) It isn't very well-focussed, nor does it really conform to WP standards of style, whatever people think about the content. It has always been my understanding that the word Mulatto is offensive in any context, but I wouldn't know if it were offensive in South America. In any case, a citation would be needed to support that, I think (as well as the contention that it is offensive to some). Also, the Muwallad section is way too long. It could be its own article, perhaps, but it doesn't help this article to go on at length about a minor point of etymology. Finally, the tone of the whole article is argumentative, that needs to be toned way down. IronDuke 21:22, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


Agree - the etymological debate, although interesting, does not help the article in any fashion. The article is also somewhat confusing - 50/50 'only' or 'some' deviation allowed - if so, how does a 75/25 person qualify? Bridesmill 03:20, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Of course one might also ask is a white person with 10% black ancestry black or white. Or is a black person with 10% white ancestry black or white. In real life however just like blacks and whites mulattoes also recognize their kind when they meet them. Xpark

And I'm not sure whats wrong with either of the proposed external links. Different politics perhaps, but perhaps that is exactly why they should either BOTH be there - or neither.Bridesmill 00:53, 15 April 2006 (UTC)


yIn reply to IronDuke, Mulatto is not offensive to those who indentify with the word just as the 'basters' of Namibia use their word without hesitation. See the Basters page. --Chueyjoo 09:53, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Chueyjoo, I would have no trouble believing that some people are not offended by the term. However, a good, reputable, citation would be a good addition to support that claim. IronDuke 18:37, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Also, I propose that you keep both external links [explicitly mixed/mulatto.org], what is the point of editing each others links out if they serve the same purpose of connnecting mulattos? --Chueyjoo 09:58, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

mulatto.org has not edited out explicitly mixed. In fact we have a link to them on our message board. I don't know who keeps editing out mulatto.org, but I assume that's traceable here. It seems weird that mulatto.org was edited out shortly before the page was locked, thus freezing out our mulatto community's link but not the others. At the very least, please reinclude our link. Thanks.


Also it would be good to see either more mulatto visual representations than that one painting or a more representative mulatto image (for example of a mulatto family, rather than what visually appears to be two monoracials with a young mulatto son). If there's just going to be one visual image on the page, it would be nice for it to be more representative of mulattos.


Oops; if I may interject - WP:BAI explains; if someone else feels 'your' site/biography etc is worthy of Wiki, this is good. If you are putting your own stuff up, this is generally considered bad form, as we all tend to assess our own notability etc. a little higher than perhaps is valid - human nature and all that. One possible solution may be for you to put the suggested links on the talk page, the RfC folks who have no potential conflict of interest on this can have a quick look to see if links add to encyclopedic value. I agree that additional images 'may' be useful; however, given copyright limitations this does depend on people 'donating' the appropriate images. I say 'may' in quotes because how does one provide an image and say 'this is a mulatto, and this isn't' - gets into eugenics & the 'science' of race and all that - the only images of that nature that I recall which had 'scientific' foundation come from Germany in the '30's - and that's probably a "bad" idea. (& could everyone please sign - just makes it easier to see where one post finishes & the next takes over - just type four tildes (~) thanks. Bridesmill 13:20, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh no, you think way too far. Scientific foundation? Mulattoes can simply be distinguished in the same way and according to he same criteria that blacks, whites, asians, eurasians or others are constantntly and often unconsciously distinguished from each other. For example when you say that Wesley Snipes is black or that another person is white do you base yourself on an exact scientific foundation? Probably not. The eugenics movement was what invented the ODR back in the '30's. Akso Some people tend to forget that there are many MGM mulattoes who have mulatto parents, mulatto grandparents etc. Featuring only images of FGM mulatto children with monoracial parents only serves to reinforce the idea that mulattoes should constantly refer themselves back to monoracials. Xpark

That's what I'm saying - that's why I'm not sure pics are a wonderful idea - could easily become perceived as a 'this is what mulattos looks like' freakshow. & where do we draw line on Mulatto? my perception was 'close to 50/50'; if we impose the ODR and let that count as mulatto, I could put my pic up (1/64 Moorish) and I'm blondehair/blue eyed north european looking... Curious that ODR type stuff counts for shutting people out - when it's for getting positive benefits, it tends to be the other way around, as in native staus cards in canada...Bridesmill 01:23, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

We have this is what whites looks like, what blacks look like, what asians look like or similar freakshows everywhere. However nobody suggested that here. People only suggested to put an all mulatto family in here in addition to the usual monoracials with FGM mulatto child family, just respecting mulattoes identity the same way other identities are respected without been given the irrational guilt trip, that's all. Xpark

Word Orgin

i dont think mulatto is spainsh i think its Italian

Liberalpunt's linkspamming

Liberalpunt isn't just trying to add a link to what may be HIS site here,h he's edit-warring and linkspamming at a number of other articles. He's gone over 3RR at Hapa, so I'll see what's being done about blocking him.

That site looks like it's still under construction, it's well-funded, it's commercial, and it gives off "soft porn" vibes. Zora 02:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Zora. Liberalpunt's spamlink should be immediately removed. --JereKrischel 04:51, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Mariah Carey a mulatto?

She has a very light skin for a mulatto so I don't think that she is really one.

She is a MGM mulatto. --Chueyjoo 21:06, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Mariah Carey never worked at MGM Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. She worked at Sony. CreoleMe

No. We are not talking about movies.--Chueyjoo 13:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

mgm means multi-generationaly-mixed, or something like that. it means that she doesn't have one black and one white parent, but maybe one of her parents or grandparents did. Colorfulharp233 01:54, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Very weird phrase as is the term "mixed" itself. Who isn't "mixed"? In any case, how does one know if a grandparent or great grandparent was indeed "mixed" so that one qualifies as "mgm" or whatever? CreoleMe

Awkward stuff. Almost like a reverse one-drop-rule. To me, mulatto means at least a significant percentage multi-racial. I'm 1/64 black (and can prove it, but in no way look it) this says mariah carey 'maybe' and thereofre she's mulatto becasue she looks it. That's weird.Bridesmill 03:34, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Famous Mulattoes

I can't speak for other country, but in the United States this word is racist as dirt. It's an old, archaic, and outdated word that hasn't been used to identify people in the United States since slavery days. Furthermore, noboby in the United States is dumb enough to identify someone else in the United States as a Mulatto!!! 63.153.120.158 20:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Wrong, it was still in usage until about 1920's when they wrongfully erased the catergory 'mulatto' out of existence with the ODR. --Chueyjoo 21:06, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Call yourself whatever you want to call yourself in your country. However, in the United States no one is dumb enough to call themselves a mulatto!!!!! There are major reasons why this word is obsolete. 65.129.161.46 21:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but your opinion of whether the word is "obsolete" or not shouldn't matter to the article. If you'd like to add a section regarding the fact that some people find it offensive, that is fine, but mass-deleting people off the list because you find it passe isn't appropriate. And I think your statement regarding people who identify as mulatto as "dumb" is also inappropriate. --JereKrischel 21:36, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

65.129.161.46 , First, get it through yor head that thousands of people in the united states identify with the word 'mulatto' this can be seen from user groups online, and myspace pages. Second , if you are mixed race black + white and feel that this term is offensive, that doesn't mean you can go deleting information on articles which others dont find offensive. Third, if you are not black + white then you need to SIT DOWN, you dont speak for us mulattos.--Chueyjoo 13:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I propose that we only include induviduals in the "Famous Mulatos" mix who have a quarter or more mixed blood for the simple fact and argument that a considerable amount (enough to be looked at)of African-American's contain some sort of European blood in their veins. For instance, Michael Jordan's inclusion in the list when he has ten percent "white blood", many African American's can trace ten percent and more of there blood to white roots. As a matter of fact ther are a lot more people who are famous that are directly mulato. PhoenixPrince 16:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not some exclusive ethnic enclave. As it were, articles are to remain as objective as possible. It would be ludicrous to institute a "blood quantum" on an encyclopedia page. This is not a "mulatto group." Information here is for eduational purposes and must be presented in a clear and unbaised fashion. Your POV of what a "mulatto" is is just that - a POV. It doesn't matter if you're "directly" a mulatto or an African-American mulatto, the definition is someone with black and white ancestry. If you want to exclude someone because they have too much white blood or too much black blood then I suggest you create a private internet group or forum and add/delete members as you please. CreoleMe

No you misunderstand me, what I am saying is that if you want to include Michael Jordan who according to the article is "10 %" white then include others who have 10% of something else in there bllodline that meets the definition of mulatto. No need to be aggressive and offensive.

The Pitiful Mule

The mule wikipage is pitiful and dreary compared to the Eurasian and Mestizo wiki pages. It's painful just looking at it. One reason for this is mules total ignorance to their African side. The Eurasian page lucidly mentions different Asian countries in conjunction to different European countries. The Mestizo page mentions different American countries in conjunction to Spain and Portugal. The mule page mentions: 1. the origin of "muleatto", 2. well, that's pretty much it. Perhaps muleattos should stop calling themselves mules and adopt their proper label: Eurafrican. It would be a step in the right direction. CreoleMe


The Proud Mulatto

CreoleMe, most of your statements are simply pathetic. Trying to force a black identity on others, deliberately stating false facts, making false assumptions and inappropriate, unsustained generalizations about mulattoes, and now telling us how we should call ourselves. Truth is you're afraid of the term mulatto. That's why you spend so much energy fighting against it, when you simply shouldn't care how other people call themselves. You're afraid of the term because many mulattoes feel empowered by this particular term; and - although you will never admit it- mulattoes being empowered scares the hell out of you! Xpark

I am biracial, myself. Half-Nigerian, Half-American-mutt. A proud Eurafrican, thank you. CreoleMe

Nobody cares what you are or how you call yourself, CreoleMe neither should you care what other people call themselves. The fact that you spend so much fighting against the term Mulatto, a term CHOSEN by many Mulattoes is simply suspicious. Above you defended the One-Drop-Rule by stating mulattoes were black. You should stop vandalizing this article and throwing insults. Xpark

I think we all spend far too much time trying to label ourselves and other people. Call yourself whatever you like, dont expect other people to care.

--Nazrac 16:43, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Then don't care. That's all we're asking for. Don't care how others choose to call themselves.Pentb

To me when I see the word Mulatto it basically to me feels like the word Nigger or Negro. Both were names to given to people of African descent by White racists. Putting it in that perpective, I can see why flipping Mulatto in the way Nigger has been flipped (ie. Nigga) could be empowering to certain people of mixed ethnicity. However, in the same way Civil Rights era blacks dislike the terms Nigga and Negro (at last publicly) maybe it is similar in the mixed community? This concept could be a possible compromise added to the page. Because truthfully, I live in Minneapolis, Minnesota which has one of the larger percentages of mixed (black & white) people in the United States; and I am mixed, with many mixed friends. Nobody I know uses the term Eurasian and most everyone I know finds the term Mulatto offensive. - JoCCab

Dont blame your identity crisis on Europeans. As long as you keep making yourself a victim nothing will change. Respect is earned not demanded. --Nazrac 23:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with an indentity crisis or making myself a victim, or anything personal of that sort. I am a strong advocate of personal responsibility. However, when it comes to CLASSIFICATION, I definitely feel that it is a issue to be discuss. JoCCab

Unfortunately everything can be classified based divergences. Sometimes it is more difficult, because those differences can be gradients rather than clear cut, and even more difficult for the person or people who get classified as something they aren't comfortable with. Would it be safe to say you feel uncomfortable with the word or idea because you feel it imposed on you? If so would you feel the same if it were fashionable to be mixed? If being a mullato somehow put people on a higher social strata I doubt there would be any complaints. I think this is one of the reasons some people appose mixing in the first place. People need to have a strong attachment to their culture and their people. If you're caught somewhere inbetween that can be a very difficult problem to face and lead to a difficulty in the person establishing their racial and cultural identity and identifying with others of the same. Thats just human nature. --Nazrac 21:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Add a picture

Somebody needs to add a picture. I suggest either Alicia keys, Neomie Lenoir or Derek Jeter. No its not a freak show, the Eurasian page has 2 pictures, our page should have pictures to.--Chueyjoo 10:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

CreoleMe keeps vandalising the article by deleting large chunks and replacing them with her point of view, a point of view which is not only incoherent but has already been refuted again and again. She seems to throw in large sections of text which have already proven to be irrelevant simply in order to create confusion.Xpark

The content of the article was already there before you started taking pieces of it way ultimately deleting the whole section and replacing it with your new biased material. If you want you can add your own section but don't delete what's already there. You were already warned about removing content from Wikipedia. CreoleMe

You were the first one to alter the text CreoleMe. For lack of sound arguments you just throw endless refuted text passages in that people won't be able to understand and follow in order to create confusion. You spend so much energy on fighting against the term mulatto when you simply couldn't care how other people call themselves. You already defended the One-Drop-Rule and stated that you thought mulattoes are black. That's where you're coming from.Xpark

The point I tried to make was that despite your claim: "We have our own identity whether you like it or not" - your personal identity is shaky and weak at best and being biracial myself I certainly will not be forced under a "muleatto" label. Interestingly, your house of cards easily comes down when you are called black. Basing your identity solely on race is erroneous. You imply that there is a central mule culture that all mules automatically belong to - which is not the case. This is why for many EurAfricans a nationalistic identity overrides a pan-mule identity. Consequently, white and especially blacks have more power over "mules" than you let on.

Like I said, you are entitled to add more information or create your own section, but you cannot delete a passage that doesn't fit your point of view and replace it with another passage that does. You think "muleatto" derived from muwallad? Fine. Create a new section. Don't delete the section that refutes this. Wikipedia rules state that articles must be objective. CreoleMe


Hardly anybody calls himself "Eurafrican" or "You're African" but a lot of Mulattoes like the term Mulatto.

Well, it looks as if objectivity is precisely what CreoleMe is trying to prevent by massdeleting from the article. She spends an enormous amount of time and energy telling other people how they should call themselves or see themselves. She also makes a number of strawman arguments. For example nobody ever pretended that there was a universal mulatto culture just as there is not really any "white culture" or "black culture" as such. Anybody can be of any culture and there are no pure cultures. So far CreoleMe massdeleted large sections of well documented text as well as numerous links to sources and websites she obviously doesn't personally like. Her posts are full of attacks directed at Mulattoes. Among other things she calls Mulattoes "mules" although whatever the etymological origin of mulatto might be mule and mulatto are still two very distinct words with each having it's own meaning. This is usually done by people who buy into the racism of the One-Drop-Rule. Xpark

Don't be ashamed of your African ancestry. Eurafrican parallels Eurasian. CreoleMe

Another strawman argument, another false accusation. I'm not ashamed of ANY of my ancestry. Do YOU think I should? Also, since I already know what I am I don't need any advice on that especially not from people who spend their time vandalizing Wiki pages. I'm a Mulatto. I'm not composed of two halves that can be seperated in order to suit others. Thanks. What parallels Hapa by the way? Xpark

Suggestion

For some reason, I left this article on my watchlist. I see that there is an edit war on it. I am interested in the term, but I don't have any specific opinion about who is right or wrong here. That said, you folks really need to stop this edit-war and talk (civilly) to each other on this page. I'm sure there's a compromise available here if everyone will just take a deep breath. Possible? IronDuke 19:10, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

There is no need for edit wars, all creoleme needs to do is create a eurafrican wiki page and leave this page to the real mulattos--82.17.105.193 21:00, 3 June 2006 (UTC).

Well, all I can say is, how would you respond if someone told you your opinions on this topic were worthless and to go edit another page? Would that make you more or less likely to edit in a friendly, constructive manner? IronDuke 22:01, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


CreoleMe obviously came here with the intention to attack. Only AFTER her numerous agressive and hostile attacks was she directed to another page in a totally constructive way.Xpark


There have been multiple aggressive and hostile attacks here, by people representing multiple viewpoints. It's a sad fact of WP, but to edit here, we have to share articles with people whose viewpoints we despise and who attack us. Trust me, I know. The only way to work (without driving you and them and everyone else crazy) is to be polite and compromise when possible. IronDuke 23:20, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I totally agree with you but on here only one person has been attacking: CreoleMe. the fact that you refuse to recognize this despite all the evidence and even defend her looks very much like partiality.Xpark

I'm not even altogether certain which one of you is expressing which view. As I have said before, and will now emphasize: I have no opinion on this dispute. That you interpret my call for civility and compromise as partiality is... depressing. IronDuke 23:52, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I mean is CreoleMe crazy? He just keeps deleting and deleting and replaces everything with his opinions. He also posts plagiarized passages of text. A google research under Liam Martin and muladi shows that he copied certain passages word for word. Pentb

CreoleMe is a woman, who hates mulattos with a passion, even though she is one herself, since theres no such thing as eurafrican. Ironduke you seem like a pro, can you legit the image for me? Thanks.--Chueyjoo 12:22, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Chueyjoo, thanks for the compliment. I'm not quite sure what you mean, though. What picture, and what did you want done with it? Happy to help if I can. IronDuke 03:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The picture of neomie lenoir , it needs legitimising, it says it will be deleted soon because I cant show a copyright or something, I m not sure what to do. Can you make it not be deleted --Chueyjoo 10:44, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm... that might be tough. It may well be a copyright violation. Do you know where the pic came from? For example, if you had taken it yourself, or you knew it was in the public domain, it could stay. But if there is some photographer out there who took and sold the picture, then we are in vioation of the law if we allow it stay on WP without paying him (which we of course won't). But if you can't show that the pic is in the public domain or that you took it and are releasing it, it'll probably be deleted, I fear. Sorry I couldn't be more helpful. IronDuke 15:08, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I found it here I dont think it was taken by a professional, I think its in the 'public domain', do you think so too? --Chueyjoo 09:12, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't really say. Honestly, I doubt it. I think someone has posted those model shots and either got permission to use them or is violating copyright themselves. But I'm sure there are public domain pics of people who fit this subject out there... good luck on that. IronDuke 14:54, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

User CreoleMe keeps on vandalizing. For an objective opinion compare vandalized and non-vandalized versions for yourself

User CreoleMe deletes everything he dislikes including useful sources and links. He tries to deliberately mislead people by making is seem as if "muwallad" as etymological origin of mulatto would depend on "muladi" which is not the case. This is confirmed by the numerous sources cited which he happily keeps deleting. I encourage everybody interested in actual information about the topic to read the non-vandalized version of the article as well as to compare the two versions here: [1] Pentb

I reverted one of his edits and he appears to have changed it back, but I'm not going to get into an edit war here. -albrozdude 01:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
====

A friend of mine who posted on here too told me about this CREOLEME guy. CreoleMe is surely a Vandalizer and posts links and sites and material HE ONLY prefers. Admin's please watch this guy, he is causing problem's that are unecessary. I am glad someone posted this notification.

-Angela


Please avoid personal attacks

Inappropriate content deleted. --JereKrischel 21:46, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Eurafrican (Eurasian)

To discuss.

Note: This was posted by previous vandalizer 70.48.42.9 who first signed as CreoleMe.


Eurafrican

Eur·af·ri·can (plural Eur·af·ri·cans)

noun Definition:

person of European and African descent: somebody of both European and African descent

Eur·af·ri·can adjective

Source: http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/eurafrican.html


Eur‧af‧ri‧can  /yʊˈræfrɪkən, yə-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[yoo-raf-ri-kuhn, yuh-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective 1. of mixed European and African descent. –noun 2. a person of European and African descent. [Origin: 1885–90; eur- + african]

Source: eurafrican. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1), Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=eurafrican&x=0&y=0 (accessed: August 28, 2006). The hobgoblin 20:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

This is no proof that the term is actually generally used for mulattoes. By the way this page is about the term mulatto, other terms have their own pages. Also don't forget that many people choose to call themselves mulatto. For example there are several websites for mulatto-identified people. Pentb

There is no "proof" that the term "mulatto" is "generally used." But there are sources which state it is offensive. The hobgoblin 21:04, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

"Eurafrican" is tied to colonialism and ideas of racial superiority

The term "Eurafrican" is tied to colonialism. It was first used by Portuguese historians in the 19th century to underline Portugal's claim to her African colonies.

It was also used by 20th century Italian anthropologist Giuseppe Sergi who considered Mediterraneans part of a "Eurafrican Race", related to some Africans and racially superior to Nordics. According to Sergi the Mediterranean race, the "greatest race of the world", was responsible for the great civilisations of ancient times, including those of Egypt, Carthage, Greece and Rome. These Mediterranean peoples were quite distinct from the peoples of northern Europe. Sergi also argued that the Mediterranean race was closely related to a Hamitic African population, which included such groups as the Tutsi. To Sergi the Semites were a branch of the Eurafricans who were closely related to the Mediterraneans (Gilette 2002). His concepts were later taken up by some African-Americans and fed into the development of Afrocentrism.[2]


It is a known fact that "mulatto" is tied to colonialism and slavery. The hobgoblin 21:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Bluropean (Blasian)

To discuss.


Also "Eurafrican" is hardly used. Wikipedia explains terms which are used and is not the place to promote terms which aren't.Pentb

Eurafrican is hardly "used" by who? That's an invalid statement. If you are Black you are of African descent; if you are White you are of European descent; and if you're a "mulatto" then you're of Eurafrican descent or you're a Eurafrican - "mulatto"/Eurafrican. CreoleMe


Eurafrican is hardly used by ANYBODY. Your own statement is invalid. You are trying to promote the term and Wikipedia is not the place for it. A mulatto is of black/negroid and white/caucasian descent. European and African refer to geographic locations which can be inhabited by anybody. White Afrikaaners are African. A Black person might be of Subsahaarian African descent but this might also be so long ago that this person no longer considers himself to be of African descent. Same for White. Also darker Indians and Australian Aborigines are even claimed as black by some people and they're not African.Pentb

Seeing that you're totally dismissing geography and its implications to "race" you'd have to define "black" and "white" and "mulatto" to make an argument against me. Furthermore, I'm not promoting anything. I am giving the truth. "Mulatto" hasn't been removed but Eurafrican was added. Eurafrican is a legitimate term for people with black and white ancestry just as Eurasian is a legitimate term for "Asian" and white ancestry.CreoleMe


You are the one totally dismissing geography and race because you refuse to acknowlege that Caucasian Northafricans are Africans and Caucasian Southafricans are Africans. After having vandalized the article for weeks you're trying to use Wikipedia to promote a term which is hardly used by anybody because it suits your personal agenda. To do so you keep on repeating the same things over and over again. This ridiculous argument further attests to it.Pentb

They are "Africans." But they are not black. Racially, African means black. CreoleMe


Exactly. If you want to talk about race then do so by saying black and white. No need to hypocritically use euphemisms like "European" and "African" which used alone are misleading. Blacks don't own Africa. You are trying to deny Caucasian Northafricans their countries and identities. Pentb


Your definition of "black" and "white", please. CreoleMe


You used those terms many times before so one can conclude that you must have some definition of them. However neither mine nor your definition of black and white is the topic here. The topic is that Caucasian Northafricans are African as well.Pentb

You're evading. You know that as soon as you give me your definition for "black" and "white" I will CRUSH you. CreoleMe

I have to agree with CreoleMe. It seems you're all dancing around the issue. --Nazrac 16:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Look up the definition of black on Wikipedia or elsewhere and choose the one you like. However don't try to impose it on mulattoes or anybody else. Thanks.Pentb

The whole victim of European oppression and colonialism thing is getting pretty old. Find some other way to deal with your cultural identity crisis besides blaming others. --Nazrac 23:41, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


No valid sources provided for "Bluropean." The hobgoblin 20:05, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


No sources needed. I simply said that I like the term Bluropean. Unlike Eurafrican it doesn't have any negative historical connotations. Therefore I suggest Bluropean.

"Eurafricans" and "EuroNatives" don't exist.

1.How mulattoes call themselves is independent from how Hapas (a term more used than Eurasian) call themselves.

2."Eurafricans" and "Euronatives" don't exist. The Caucasian/Black mix and the Caucasian/Native mix have always been called Mulatto and Mestizo.

3.Northafrican and Southafrican Caucasians are African as well, Blacks who are culturally European still remain black (meaning negroid as opposed to caucasian).

4.Many Mulattoes fully embrace and cherish the term Mulatto.Pentb


I disagree. Eurafricans do indeed exist. If one with Asian and European ancestry is called Eurasian, then one with African and European ancestry can be called Eurafrican. You can still call yourself "mulatto", but Eurafrican is a legitimate term also. CreoleMe


Hapa is more used than Eurasian. However this has got nothing to do with Mulattoes. The fact is you'll be hardpressed to find anybody who calls himself "Eurafrican". On the other hand there are many Mulattoes who call themselves Mulatto. Many mulattoes reject terms that seperate them into two halves and find them offensive. Also European and African are not even correct because Northafrican and Southafrican Caucasians are African as well and Blacks who are culturally European still remain negroid/black.Pentb


"Caucasian" dark skinned Indians are considered Asian alongside "mongoloids" from China and "negritos" from Papua New Guinea. Yet, Asian and Eurasian are still considered valid terms. Just because Arabs managed to migrate to the north of Africa doesn't invalidate the term African or the term Eurafrican. I am technically a "mulatto" yet I and many of my biracial friends call ourselves Eurafricans. Like I said, you are free to call yourself "mulatto" but Eurafrican is still a valid and 100% legitimate term to describe people with black and white ancestry. CreoleMe


The term might appear legitimate to you but not to many others for the reasons I already mentionned. Many mulattoes reject it and find it offensive to be devided into two halves. Hardly anybody calls themselves "Eurafrican". Also as I said before Caucasian Northafricans are African as well. White Southafricans are African. Blacks who are culturally European still remain negroid and Caucasians who are culturally African still remain Caucasians. Mestizos are not called "EuroNatives" but Mestizos. One-Droppists are the ones who fight against the term Mulatto out of self-interest. You have already been vandalizing this Wikipedia page for weeks. Pentb

We can agree to disagree, of course. But, it can be noted that terms such as "negroid" and "caucasoid" are used seldom in the scientific community to describe "race." Race in itself doesn't exist. In fact, such terms are being used less and less in the scientific community because they are outdated "classifications." CreoleMe


We can agree to disagree but Caucasian Northafricans are still Africans. White Southafricans are still Africans. Race exists as a social construct. As for the biological existence or non-existence of race this is in reality contested in the scientific community, each side having it's arguments. Newer studies have started to reject the notion that race doesn't exist biologically. Also many merely reject the idea of race for political reasons regardless of what science says. On the other hand minorities themselves increasingly want race to be recognised because race accounts for medical differences.Pentb


Why are the Arabs "African"? Is it because they are geographically in Africa? Well, take a look at a world map. If you want to be literal, Asia includes Europe and Russia and the Middle East, yet Asian doesn't mean "Russian" or "Norwegian" it generally means people from China, Japan, and Korea. When we talk about Africans we are talking about black people not the Arabs in the north. Eurasian means one of European descent(white) and of Asian descent(chinese,japanese,korean). Eurafrican means one of European descent(white) and of African descent(black). Like I said, when one thinks about Asia (in a racial sense) one doesn't think about Russia or Europe just as when one thinks about Africa (in a racial sense) he doesn't think about Arabs - blacks come to mind. Arabs migrated to Africa but Africa is still a black continent. CreoleMe


Caucasian NorthAfricans are Africans. White SouthAfricans are Africans. Africans can be of any race. Some of them even speak a language called afrikaans. "Eurafrican" and "EuroNatives" are not used. Mulatto and Mestizo are the terms used. As for Eurasian one inadequate term in use doesn't justify the use of another. Wikipedia is not the place to promote terms which are not used. You've been vandalizing Wikipedia for weeks.Pentb

In practice, yes "Africans" can be of any "race." Just as "Asians" or "Europeans" can be of any race. You can relocate black people to China and have them procreate for years but that still doesn't make them "Asian" or "Chinese" - they're still black or of African descent. Like I said, in a racial context, African means black just as Asian means "mongolian." Even though Europe and "Asia" share the same land mass, you wouldn't call Prime Minister Tony Blair an Asian even though he is technically Asian. Arabs migrated to Africa and so did Europeans. CreoleMe


In a racial context it's black and white. Terms like African and European are misleading. Caucasian Africans are African as well. Some Blacks don't want to be considered African-Americans but black only saying they're not African. Yet their child with a Caucasian person would still be Mulatto. Also according to you black people from New Guinea would be Africans. Europe is not Asia by the way. It's a different continent. Landmass or not. Northafrica however is still Africa. So is Southafrica. So this is not even comparable with your example. Also Asian doesn't necessarily mean "mongolian". Indians are Asians as well. In the Uk the term Asian is even more usually associated with people from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Pentb


Continent - One of the principal land masses of the earth, usually regarded as including 1. Africa, 2. Antarctica, 3. Asia, 4. Australia, 5. Europe, 6. North America, and 7. South America.

Here is a map of the world: http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-continent-map.htm

Even though Russia is part of Asia, "white" Russians are not the same as "mongolian" Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese. "Asian" is generally understood to mean China, Korea, and Japan, and yes, even India. In that same light, Africa is generally understood to mean the black indigenous people there. Yes Arabs and Whites who live in Africa are "African", but certainly not "racially." African means a black person. Even though Russia is in Asia, Asian doesn't mean a "white" Russian. CreoleMe


Yes some parts of Russia inhabited by Caucasians are in Asia - further proof that Asians aren't necessarily "mongolian" as you stated before. As for Tony Blair he isn't Asian but European.

Africa isn't "generally understood" to mean black and I'm sure most Caucasian Northafricans as well as Afrikaaners would contest that as well. Again if you want to talk about race then do so and don't use misleading euphemisms. Also as I said before many black people in the Americas or Europe don't consider themselves African but Black only because their ancestors left Africa a long, long time ago.Pentb

"Africa isn't "generally understood" to mean black" <---- Haha, you're clearly bullshitting me and you know it. The Arabs in the north identify as muslims and the whites in the south identify as being of Dutch descent. It's not a matter of what you "consider" yourself. I could consider myself a cow, but that doesn't change the fact that I'm not a cow. Every black person is of African descent. Geographically, Arabs and white South Africans are "African" but NOT racially. You still haven't given me your definition of "black." CreoleMe

Religion has nothing to do with it. Many black Africans are muslims as well. Again my or your definition of black or white isn't the issue here. The issue is that Caucasian Northafricans, Caucasian and other non-black Southafricans are Africans as well. If you want to talk about race then you'll have to use black and white if you're afraid of the terms negroid and caucasian.Pentb

That's like saying Europeans are Asian which they technically are; Russians are also Asian; The Arabs in the Middle East are Asian, too. But racially they are White not "mongoloid". You're evading my question. CreoleMe

The problem is this discussion is a battle of semantics. Mullato is a very generalizing and subjective term. Its kind of like the term "latino" in that its not exactly cut and dry as to what constitutes a person to be a latino, or a mullato. I think the bigger problem is we're all trying to avoid the issue of race and make this about a cultural phenomenon. That simply doesnt work as CreoleMe has pointed out, because culture is a subjective construct, but race is something that is defined by heredity, which is what this article is about to begin with. --Nazrac 16:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Black is a very generalizing and subjective term, so is White. Latino is different. It's the only term that is not racial. Black and White both contain racial elements however you try to twist it. By the way it was me not CreoleMe who pointed out that talking about culture when you really want to talk about race doesn't work. Pentb


EurAfrican

Many people with black and white ancestry may find "mulatto" offensive because of its meaning of mule. They may better relate to Eurafrican. Prove that most "mulattos" don't "accept" the term Eurafrican. I call myself Eurafrican.CreoleMe

Many Mulattoes find "Eurafrican" offensive because it devides them into two halves. Fact is mulatto doesn't mean mule and "Eurafrican" is hardly ever used. Wikipedia is about terms that are actually used and not the place to promote terms which are not used in order to support a personal agenda.Pentb

"Mulattos" are "two halves" - they are half black and half white - European descent and African descent; hence, EurAfrican. CreoleMe

Mulattoes don't have a black leg and a white leg, a black arm and a white arm. They are blended.Pentb

Blended of black and white, European and African, yes. CreoleMe


A blend is still different from two halves, one next to the other, like a black leg next to a white leg. Also this blend is not necessarily of "European" and "African" but always of black and white.Pentb

You're starting to split hairs. How do you define "black" and "white"? CreoleMe


This is not splitting hairs but a very important distinction. A blend is very different from two halves next to each other, like in a black leg next to a white leg. A blend cannot be seperated out into it's components anymore like two halves next to each other can. This is also exactly what One-Droppists would like to do with Mulattoes and which is why they try so hard to discourage Mulattoes to use the term. Interesting also how you now suddenly no longer know what black and white means when you used these terms yourself many times before. Pentb


I asked how you define "black" and "white"? CreoleMe


Which is not the issue here at all. Again you're trying to distract from the point being made that Caucasian Northafricans are African as well and that many Blacks whose ancestors left Africa a long time ago no longer consider themselves African but Black only. That's why terms like African, European or Asian are not racial terms as such even if you personally use them as euphemisms for black and white. American is not a racial term either although some people would still like it to be.Pentb

Like I said, you can consider yourself whatever you want to but facts are facts and you can not undermine the truth of the matter. Arabs from the north of Africa are "African" but they are not black. African generally describes a black person. "African", "European", and "Asian" are indeed racial terms. "American" is not. CreoleMe

Mulatto is the term which has always been used to describe the Black/White Mix just like Mestizo has always been used to describe the White/Native mix

SOME people find "mulatto" offensive because they're very illinformed. Mulatto doesn't mean mule. Mule and Mulatto are two very distinct words in the English language, each having a meaning of it's own. Also "mulo" as etymological origin is not only very contested but also irrelevant because words constantly take on new meanings. Many call themselves Mulatto because they relate better to it than to any other term. By the way anybody can come here and claim he is of a particular race in order to support a particular agenda. That doesn't necessarily mean he actually is of that race. We all know that One-Droppists fight against the term mulatto using those tired old mule arguments because the term mulatto empowers mulattoes which is what they fear. Pentb


[Spanish mulato, small mule, person of mixed race, mulatto, from mulo, mule, from Old Spanish, from Latin mlus.] Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

mulatto Origin: Sp. & Pg. Mulato, masc, mulata, fem, of a mixed breed, fr. Mulo mule, L. Mulus. See Mule. Source: Websters dictionary CreoleMe


This is contested and there are many sources to confirm this. All of whom you kept deleting for weeks and vandalized the article. Just one example among others: Leopoldo Eguilaz y Yanguas (1886): Glosario de las palabras españolas (castellanas, catalanas, gallegas, mallorquinas, protugueses, valencianas y bascongadas), de orígen oriental (árabe, hebreo, malayo, persa y turco). Granada, La Lealtad, 1886. confirms muwallad as etymological origin of the term mulatto.

However most importantly the etymological origin of the term is irrelevant. Mule and Mulatto are two very distinct words in the English language, each having a meaning of it's own. Mulatto doesn't mean mule. Words change their meaning independently from their etymological origin.Pentb

Everything is contested one way or the other. "Irrelavant" to what? I just gave you two English sources that state "mulatto" is indeed derived from mule. Being that we are using English Wikipedia, I would not understand your Spanish sources. There is a Spanish Wikipedia for Spanish speakers to edit: http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulato CreoleMe


The etymological origin of a term is irrelevant in the sense that it is different from it's actual meaning. In the Enlish language mulatto and mule have ALWAYS been two very distinct words, each having a meaning of it's own. Also the English word mulatto being a word of Arabic and Spanish origin the Spanish and Arabic sources (not the Spanish Wikipedia page) are much more important than the two English dicitionaries you gave regardless of whether you personally understand Spanish or not, because other Englishspeakers do and are grateful for this information and many of those who don't speak Spanish are grateful for this information as well. Furthermore "mulo" has two meanings in Spanish. The second one being "a person characterized by strength and vigour". Pentb


No matter how "distinct" the two words may have become, that doesn't change the fact that "mulatto" was derived from mule. Sorry. CreoleMe


Which is highly contested. Mulatto might well have been derived from the Arabic term for mixed-race muwallad. Also the second meaning of mulo in Spanish is "a person characterized by strength and vigour". However once a term takes on a new meaning most people no longer care about the etymological origin anyway. The only ones who do usually have an agenda. The term "kid" originally meant "young goat" but it took on a new meaning. The term "black" used for people was once very derrogatory. Pentb


Contested by who? Well, the fact that we're here debating the origin of the word "mulatto" attests to the fact that people, maybe a few or maybe a lot, but definately more than one, do care about the origin of this word. And in the same respect, there are people, definately more than one, who don't care about the origin of the word "mulatto." Also, you are naive to believe that the racial label "black" is not still "very derrogatory." Surely in many parts of Latin America "black" is actually an insult. In Africa, the "black" concept isn't even understood or well taken as people there mainly identify by tribe not color or "race." CreoleMe


It's contested by numerous sources and scholars. The fact that we're here "debating" the word mulatto in such a repetetive and ridiculous way attests mainly to the fact that people who have an agenda (usually One-Droppists) don't respect mulattoes right to identify as such and have spread a lot of misinformation for years in order to discourage mulattoes from using the term. They stubbornly insist that mulatto means mule when this is not the case because mulatto always meant mulatto in English and mule means mule. As for the etymological origin of the term for all we can say is that the etymological origin is uncertain with lots of eveidence also pointing towards muwallad. Also you've been trying to twist my arguments for quite a while now. My point wasn't whether black is still derrogatory or not but rather that it is used by Blacks despite the derrogatory origin. By the way any term can be an insult.If you say "Jew" the wrong way it will be perceived as an insult. Pentb

I didn't tell you how to "identify." Eurafrican is a legitimate term and because you "don't like it" is no reason to remove it. "Mulatto" is still up. CreoleMe


It may appear legitimate to you but it's hardly used and especially not in relation to mulattoes. As an encyclopedia Wikipedia explains terms which are used but is not a place to promote terms which aren't in order to support a personal agenda. This however is what you're trying to do after having vandalized the article for weeks trying to supress any information that doesn't suit your "mulatto means mule" agenda.Pentb

That's your opinion - that it's "hardly used." I, however, am of the opinion that it is a valid and legitimate term that can be used as an alternative to "mulatto." I am of black and white ancestry. Who are you to tell me I can't call myself Eurafrican? I embrace this term wholeheartedly. You can still call yourself a "mulatto" I have not denied you that, but I DID open a space for an alternative term to be used, whether you like it or not - that of EurAfrican. CreoleMe

It's not used. That's not an opinion. Also don't twist things. You are the one trying to tell mulattoes how they should or shouldn't call themselves. First you started throwing insults, then you started vandalising the article. I'm not trying to tell you how you should call yourself because I'm not the least bit interested in it. Also on the internet anybody can claim to be of any race. This doesn't mean it's true. I'm just pointing out that this term is not usually used in relation to mulattoes and that you're trying to use Wikipedia to promote a term which serves your personal agenda which is not the purpose of an encyclopedia. Anybody could come and use an encyclopedia to promote any term he personally prefers. For example people could come and promote terms like "Zambo" or "Nigger" (since some people refer to themselves like that) and present them as if they have been adopted by many people.Pentb

Where did I tell ANYONE how he or she should "identify"? Provide links. I provided an alternative term for "mulatto" which is Eurafrican. I don't know if you have black and white ancestry, but I do and I describe myself as Eurafrican. Respect my identification. You call yourself "mulatto" I am assuming. That is fine I have no problems with that. But there are of course different terms to describe black and white ancestry. For those who find "mulatto" offensive I have opened a door to the term Eurafrican - but you certainly don't have to adopt that term for yourself - but others may want to. CreoleMe


Bluropean

Many people are obviously unhappy with the term Eurafrican. I like mulatto but I suggest Bluropean as possible alternative for pc fanatics. Blasian - Bluropean



Since this is an encyclopedia, where is your source for "Bluropean"?

Eurafrican

Eur·af·ri·can (plural Eur·af·ri·cans)

noun Definition:

person of European and African descent: somebody of both European and African descent

Eur·af·ri·can adjective

Source: http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/eurafrican.html


Eur‧af‧ri‧can  /yʊˈræfrɪkən, yə-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[yoo-raf-ri-kuhn, yuh-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective 1. of mixed European and African descent. –noun 2. a person of European and African descent. [Origin: 1885–90; eur- + african]

Source: eurafrican. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1), Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=eurafrican&x=0&y=0 (accessed: August 28, 2006). The hobgoblin 19:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)



No sources needed. I simply like the term Bluropean. It doesn't have the negative historical connotations of Eurafrican.

Blasian - Bluropean.


"Eurafrican" is tied to colonialism and ideas of racial superiority

The term "Eurafrican" is tied to colonialism. It was first used by Portuguese historians in the 19th century to underline Portugal's claim to her African colonies.

It was also used by 20th century Italian anthropologist Giuseppe Sergi who considered Mediterraneans part of a "Eurafrican Race", related to some Africans and racially superior to Nordics. According to Sergi the Mediterranean race, the "greatest race of the world", was responsible for the great civilisations of ancient times, including those of Egypt, Carthage, Greece and Rome. These Mediterranean peoples were quite distinct from the peoples of northern Europe. Sergi also argued that the Mediterranean race was closely related to a Hamitic African population, which included such groups as the Tutsi. To Sergi the Semites were a branch of the Eurafricans who were closely related to the Mediterraneans (Gilette 2002). His concepts were later taken up by some African-Americans and fed into the development of Afrocentrism.[3]


"mulatto" is tied to colonialism, slavery and "ideas of racial superiority." The hobgoblin 07:40, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Hispanics

Hispanics - A majority of hispanics are mestizos from Mexico or Chicanos. There are also considerable numbers of white hispanics. "Mulattos" and blacks make up a small percentage of the overall "hispanic" population. Prove me otherwise.CreoleMe

No, the majority of people from Latin America are not Mestizo.Your just a one-sided Mestizo who thinks he knows Latin America. Brazil, Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, Colombia, all have mulatto majorities or at least a significant number of mulattoes. Brazil has the largest population of African descent outside of Africa. Colombia has the third largest.


The actual numbers of Mestizo and Mulatto Hispanics isn't the issue here. The point is that many Hispanic mulattoes call themselves such. Blacks make up a very small percentage in Latinamerica. Mulatto Hispanics are much more numerous than black Hispanics. Mulattoes also outnumber Whites in some parts of Latinamerica. The fact that Mulattoes are outnumbered by Mestizos in other parts of Latinamerica doesn't change that.Pentb

RE:Somewhat true, but trust me, mestizos are not the majority of Latin America. Countries like Peru and Guatemala have indigenous majorities. Mulatto Hispanics are probably twice as numerous than blacks. Still, there are many parts of Latin American nations where blacks are the majority.Relaxx


Yes, Haiti for example. In Haiti, which is by definition part of Latin America blacks constitute the majority.


It remains to be seen that "many" "hispanics" with black and white ancestry call themselves "mulatto." People from countries such as Cuba, Dominican Republic, or Puerto Rico identify nationalistically, for the most part. Yes, they may acknowledge their different ancestries such as European, African and Native, but "race" isn't prioritized. CreoleMe

RE:TrueRelaxx


I still remains to be see seen that Hispanic Mulattoes and Hispanic Mestizos want to acknowledge their different ancestries seperatly or that this would even be possible given their high level of intermixture. One-Droppists may dislike this but a considerable number of Hispanic Mulattoes call themselves Mulatto regardless of the emphasis they place on nationalitiy. One can be Cuban and still be mulatto. It's not one or the other.Pentb

Prove that a "considerable" number of hispanics call themselves "mulattos." CreoleMe


Prove that it's not true that many Hispanic Mulattoes call themselves mulatto. Pentb

You made an assertion. I could say frogs like to call themselves yellow, but I would have to prove that. The burden is on you not me. You prove a "positive" not a "negative." CreoleMe


The burden is on you because you're trying to contest something which is common knowledge. "Frogs like to call themselves yellow" is not common knowledge but that many Hispanic mulattoes refer to themselves as such is. Above you've already tried to build an argument on false premises after you've been vandalizing this article for weeks. Pentb

"Common knowledge" is something that is "generally known." It is not generally known what a "mulatto" is let alone what a "hispanic mulatto" is. Hell, there is no consensus on what an actually "hispanic" is or what one looks like. We can go back in forth in a "he said, she said" manner, but the bottomline is that you're assertion adds no encyclopedic value to the article. CreoleMe


Funny that you talk about "encyclopedic value" when you've been vandalizing and throwing insults for weeks. It's indeed generally known to many. If you want to contest that you'll have to prove it. By the way there is no concensus either what a white person is or what he looks like. This however doesn't stop most people from using the term. Pentb

It's still of no encyclopedic value in and of itself. "Mulatto" is defined in the first line. If you want to get into how "hispanics" identify and how that relates to "mulattos" create an "Hispanic" section in the article and right a few paragraphs about it. CreoleMe


The usage of a term (in this case by Hispanics) relates very much to an article about said term. Also it's pretty obvious that you want to suppress information. You not only suppressed the information that Hispanics use the term mulatto but you also tried to suppress sources and information about muwallad as possible origin of mulatto. However it's not of encyclopedic value to vandalize articles for weeks like you did and still do in order to suit personal agendas.Pentb

Like I said then make a contribution to the article. Make a section talking about "hispanics" and "mulattos." CreoleMe


You didn't do that. You vandalised the article (now for several weeks). Also this was not the only information you tried to suppress. Pentb

Non sequitur. CreoleMe

RE:Hispanics

Hispanics - A majority of hispanics are mestizos from Mexico or Chicanos. There are also considerable numbers of white hispanics. "Mulattos" and blacks make up a small percentage of the overall "hispanic" population. Prove me otherwise

No, the majority of people from Latin America are not Mestizo.Your just a one-sided person who thinks he knows Latin America. Brazil, Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, Colombia, all have mulatto majorities or at least a significant number of mulattoes. Brazil has the largest population of African descent outside of Africa. Colombia has the third largest.

Quote:The actual numbers of Mestizo and Mulatto Hispanics isn't the issue here. The point is that many Hispanic mulattoes call themselves such. Blacks make up a very small percentage in Latinamerica. Mulatto Hispanics are much more numerous than black Hispanics. Mulattoes also outnumber Whites in some parts of Latinamerica. The fact that Mulattoes are outnumbered by Mestizos in other parts of Latinamerica doesn't change that

Somewhat true, but trust me, mestizos are not the majority of Latin America. Countries like Peru and Guatemala have indigenous majorities. Mulatto Hispanics are probably twice as numerous than blacks. Still, there are many parts of Latin American nations where blacks are the majority.Relaxx

It remains to be seen that "many" "hispanics" with black and white ancestry call themselves "mulatto." People from countries such as Cuba, Dominican Republic, or Puerto Rico identify nationalistically, for the most part. Yes, they may acknowledge their different ancestries such as European, African and Native, but "race" isn't prioritized.

RE:True, but Latin America's caste system is constantly overlooked. In Latin America white supremacy still exists and many people are discriminated against.

Black America's caste system is also constantly overlooked or downplayed in comments about Latin America. It's covered up by the odr.


Mestizos don't cease being mestizos because indians are discriminatied against. Identity is much more than that. It's actually very discriminating towards mulattos or mestizos to reduce their identities to agendas which suit others. Also Amerindians are discriminated against by black organizations who commit symbolic genocide against indians by trying to claim native/black mixes and other brown people with indian ancestry for themselves in order to artificially increase their numbers. Pentb

Protection

Everbody, calm down. I could have, but I'm not going to, block everybody involved in the most recent edit war for 3RR and NPA violations. Please calm down and then discuss your arguments in a calm, non-personally-attacking manner. --Nlu (talk) 01:22, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Someone mentioned that 70.48.42.9 was an IP used by CreoleMe. If this is the case, it would suggest that CreoleMe is located in Ottawa. So maybe mulatto is still seen as an offensive word in Canada (and possibly the rest of the English speaking world - I personally wouldn't use it in Aus), but not the USA.


Muwalladi as feel good pseudo history

The term of art used in the scholarly community is "people of color" or "people of mixed ancestry"or some such. The term "mulatto" specifically refers to people of more or less half African and half European ancestry (at least in the French Caribbean which is what I study). Maybe there should just be a definition here with a little comment on how the term is thought pejorative in modern context and refer the reader to the entry "free people of color" (which I just got done expanding a bit) for a fuller discussion of their role in slave society.

On a personal note, I am an American, generally reputed to be white, born in the south in 1960. My wife is African, and our children are thus of (more or less) half African and half European ancestry. If anybody called one of my kids a "mulatto" I'd be insulted on his or her behalf. I also lived in Haiti for several years and study the history of Haiti and the term has some special resonance there. This is another argument for reducing the profile of this particular page.

BTW, the section on Haiti in this page needs revision. I'd be happy to give it a stab if this page is going to remain as large as it presently is.


Concerning your "kids"... the term "kid" originally meant "young goat".

Concerning "history"...we all know that all history is subject to interpretation...

Pentb


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"Mule" as feel good pseudo-meaning for One-Droppists

Mulatos, the plural form occurs for the first time in a document dated 1560 by Francisco Cervantes de Salazar also alongside mestizos. The etymological origin of the term as given by many dictionaries is from the Spanish word mulo. However dictionaries who mention mulo as etymology for mulato also express doubt about the suffix -ato whose origin is obscure to them.

Incorrect. It has been shown that the ending ato has existed not only in mulato, but in other animal forms as well

Yes, but still it hasn't been shown that this was the case for mulatto since the ending -ato can have different meanings. You took your assumtion for a fact and then tried to proove it. Pentb

It's prove. And it is not an assumption. It is a fact. It has been used to refer to the animal. Salsassin

The suffix -ato can have several different meanings in Spanish. That's the only fact. The rest is speculation.Pentb


Another etymology which can also be found in some dictionaries and scholarly works traces its origins to the Arabic term muwallad, which means "a person of mixed ancestry". Muwallad literally means, "born, begotten, produced, generated; brought up, raised; born and raised among Arabs (but not of pure Arab blood)." Muwallad is derived from the root word WaLaD (Arabic spelling: waw, lam, dal). Walad means, "descendant, offspring, scion; child; son; boy; young animal, young one." Muwallad referred to the offspring of Arab men and foreign, non-Arab women. The term muwalladin is used in arabic up to this day to describe the children between Arab fathers and foreign mothers. According to Julio Izquierdo Labrado [1] as well as Leopoldo Eguilaz y Yanguas and others as well as different arabian sources [2] muwallad is the etymological origin of mulato.


only problem is the timeline of usage doesn't match this hypothesis nor does the pronounciation. mu LAH to. Mu la DIH. Does not match.

You don't see muladi until 1855. And the usage is of converts to Islam, not mixed people. muladí. (Del ár. hisp. muwalladín, pl. de *muwállad, y este del ár. clás. muwallad, engendrado de madre no árabe). 1. adj. Se dice del cristiano español que, durante la dominación de los árabes en España, abrazaba el islamismo y vivía entre los musulmanes. U. t. c. s.

It doesn't need to match because mulatto is not derived from muladi but they simply might share the same etymological origin. Again you're trying to contest a false premise. Pentb

Nice Try. The usage of muwallad in the area does not predate it either. Furthermore, mu WA lad, does not show any progresion in pronounciation to Mu LA to either.. Salsassin

Muwallad had been used in Arabic long before the 16th century. The word came to Spain together with the Arabs.Pentb


In this context mulato would have been derived DIRECTLY from muwallad and NOT through muladi, a term which applied to Spanish christians who had converted to islam during the arab domination of Spain. Rather do the two words share the analogous etymology of muwallad. The arab origin of mulatto would not be surprising given the importance of Arabic at a time when Latin was rejected in favour of Arabic. Arabic is the seventh on the list of languages that has contributed to the the English vocabulary. Islamic Moors also traveled over to the New World with the Spaniards.


Firt off, we don't find muwallad in the Spanish dictionary or the RAE database or its usage. Second. Mu wa LLAD has no Mu lAH toh sound to it.

Of course not, muwallad is an Arabic term not a Spanish one. Concerning your second point same false premise as above.Pentb

It is still phonetics. And if you make a claim one came from the other you have to show there is a progression from one to another. You have failed to show that.. Salsassin


muwallad, mulad, mulado, mulato

By the way in Portuguese mulado is still sometimes used for mulatto.Pentb


This is a typical attempt at using a word that isn't even a true hmonym to give a feel good story to a word. Words change with time, and we should not compromise historical accuracy for feel good solutions.

Exactly. Words change their meaning with time and etymological origin and actual meaning are not the same. Who cares about etymological origins. In English mulatto has always meant mulatto and the "mule" propaganda only makes one-droppists feel good.


Nobody is claiming certainties. We are analyzing the different possibilities. Those who claim that mulatto would have been derived from mule are the ones who claim to be certain because they have an agenda. By the way you modified this discussion page which is against the rules of Wikipedia. You deleted a comment made by another user and modified another user's comment. I suppose you do have an agenda.Pentb

You wish. I did not violate any rules. I posted under a second paragraph. The agenda is factualism. If you were truly exploring possibilities you would not ignore the facts that diverge from your claims, nor edit those problem issues out of the article. The mulato nationalism agenda is clear. Salsassin

You present specultaion as facts and you also deleted a poster's comment on the discussion page. It's locked in the history of this page. This violates the rules of Wikipedia. By the way identifying as mulatto and being a "nationalist" is completely different. Resorting to false accusations is not a valid rebuttal.Pentb


References

  1. ^ 'what i have to say, well my my mum is white and my father is african american and part venezualan, hes not a black venezualan, which is what they always wanted to write. his mum lived in alabama, they migrated to new york, he grew up in the bronx and later moved to harmlem. he grew up as a black man in america, and his father was part spanish. it's just a typical story of someone of colour in america everyone's a little mixed with something.

[4]

Mulatto/Mulattains

Colin Luther Powell 65th United States Secretary American Mulatto

Emiliano Zapata

In the Famous Mulattoes section, Emiliano Zapato should be changed to Emiliano Zapata when editing resumes. (Sorry for butting in) davewho2 04:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Problem with list:

The list of mulattos is drastically uninformative and unencyclopedic:

"Ben Harper, (1/2 Jewish/American - 1/2 African/American) American musician"

(notwithstanding that the concept of 'race' is flawed ab initio) Just exactly what does 'Jewish' ancestry mean? Now mix that with a little 'American'... what race is that? How could I tell if I have 'American' blood? Same thing with 'African'... is it being asserted as a plausible fact that all 'Africans' are of the same race? and again, mix that up with a bit of 'American'... What exactly is the origin of the American race??? So, just for Ben Harper we have a person who is born of parents that are in the first case 1/2 of one race, (which is described by what I thought was a religion) and half of another race (which described by what I thought was a a reference to two continents, or at best a country) and then in the second case, the other parent was half someone-from-somewhere-on-the-continent-of-Africa, and someone-from-somewhere-on-one-of-two-continents.

Does anyone else see this as vague, impossible to be accurate, and fundamentally flawed (see: Montagu (1942). Man’s Most Dangerous Myth: The Fallacy of Race) by the impossibility of "race" being in any way a definable thing? Please correct me if you know more about this than I do, as I can only find absurdity and pseudoscience here. User:Pedant 16:30, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Race exists as a social construct. Also while some scientists argue against the existence of race, others don't. Newer studies seem to point more towards the existence of race than previous ones. However some people simply reject race for political reasons. There is a lot of anti-race bullying also.

Many errors in the Haitian section

It seems like someone translated poorly from another language perhaps? "Being part of their time,". Both "mulattoes" and "mulattos" used for the plural(I know that both spellings are ok, but only one form should be used throughout an article). Various other minor punctuation mistakes. And the logical inconsistency of claiming mulattos were looked down on and "used" but claiming they were part of the educated and wealthy elite.

That's not a logical inconsistency. Being looked down upon and being part of an educated and wealthy elite is not contradictory. The same happened and happens to Jews.

recent reversions to the article

1. As far as I can tell, "Bluropean" is not a real word. Frankly, "Eurafrican" sounds sort of contrived and ugly to me as well, but at least you can find that in dictionaries. I intend to revert "Bluropean" on sight unless someone can make a good case for its inclusion here.


"Eurafrican" has very negative historical connotations and is hardly used. If people want to call themselves "Bluropean" they are free to do so. "Blasian" couldn't be found in dictionaries when it was invented and maybe it still can't be found in dictionaries.


2. This:

It is important to note that etymological origin and actual meaning are not identical. Many words of common usage can for example be traced to a 'negative' etymological origin. Among those are words like berber, slavic (which is thought to be related to the word slave), Hapa, hysterical (sexist origin) or even the innocent "kid" (which at its roots meant young goat) . However neither of these words are used in any way shape or form to mean what their roots mean, and neither is mulatto. It's also important to note that the term "black" referring to people was once (and for some people still is) a derrogatory term.

is an irrelevant essay and original research. --Birdmessenger 18:24, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


This information is relevant to the article. Some people are unaware that there are significant differences between a word's etymology and it's meaning. Pentb

Picture of a real mulatto?=

how come we don`t have a picture of a real mulatto insted of artwork that show a mulatto you can`t even see.look at euroasian page and they have a real euroasian peroson.

==========================

LOL at "Euroasian". The correct term is "Eurasian". I think you're scared to death of the term "Eurafrican". I think that is the mulatto or Eurafrican man's burden. On one hand, "European" and "Asian" or accepted terms. On the other, "African" is vilified. Someone said: ""Eurafrican" sounds sort of contrived and ugly to me..." So some biracials want to have their cake and eat it, too. They wanted to be accepted by Whites, but at the same time want their African or Black part down played as much as possible. Interestingly, instituting a sort of rule by which even someone of a mulatto parent and a White parent is still a mulatto: correctly they'd be a quadroon, octoroon, etc. Factually, a mulatto can never have blue eyes or green eyes. A quadroon or octoroon, yes. Not to digress, but I think as "Eurasian" becomes more popular, "Eurafrican" will, too. Why would it not? Unless members of the Eurafrican community actively try to suppress it because it stresses "African." "African" isn't such a bad word. Don't be scared. :-)

Sincerely,

A proud Eurafrican  :) The hobgoblin 00:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Eurafrican sound cool


That's what I'm talking about, bro. :-) - (Hey, after your replies put "~ ~ ~~" without the spaces and without the quotations to sign them so people know who left the reply without looking at the history log) The hobgoblin 04:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

"mulattos" obviously have more than "one drop" of Black blood most definitely

I myself am indifferent to these "drop" rules or whatever they are called. But I honestly don't see how someone half-Black can be "one dropped" when being 50% Black you sure as damn hell have more than "one drop" of Black blood. At the very least a "mulatto" or a half-Black can be "a thousand dropped" (whatever it is that 'dropping' entails)..Hence, Make way for the "thousand(or so) droppists" .. LOL. The hobgoblin 04:16, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Light skinned black or Light skinned African american

Light skinned blacks are also mixedrace mulatto MGM.

Format page similar to this?

Eurasian (mixed ancestry) is a page similar to this, in that it deals with people of mixed races. That page is very easy to read, and adds a lot of information. This page should be formatted similar to that page. Casey14 00:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Major Factual Errors

{{Editprotected}} A note on the dating of mulatto (mulato) in Spanish sources: the Real Academia's date of 1549 is most likely a reference to the first use of mulato in Spanish literature. The term mulato was used in offical documentation before that time. A quick example would be two Inquisition cases from Mexico in 1536. One was against a man named Alonso Garavito, mulato, for swearing; the second was against Maria de Espinosa, mulata, also for blasphemy. These cases are from Inquisition vol. 14 in the Archivo General de la Nacion, Mexico City. This term was probably first used in Iberia during the 15th c as the descendents of African slaves became a visible segment of society.

The reference to Slavs is also reversed. The term slav and slave are historically related. Individuals from eastern Europe were traded as slaves in the Mediterrainian world. The term slave, schiavo, esclavo, etc. derives from the root Slav.

--Airflorida 02:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Who did this?

"One criticism of the term is that it is said to ignore the high rate of racial intermixing in North America. Although most African Americans are predominantly of African ancestry (average of 17% European ancestry according to geneticist Marc Shriver), many African Americans are often even more than 50% European in ancestry. 30% of European Americans also have black ancestry."

Umm, African-American is not a synonym for mulatto, neither was it during the antebellum period. The sheer ignorance of many lead people to believe the two terms can be intertwined.

Shall we discuss this first? Or should I make changes? Shakam


Well, what is your definition of an African American? What is your definition of a "mulato"? African Americans are a "mixed" people, generally. But then again who isn't mixed, however we want to define "mixed". The hobgoblin 22:54, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Oprah had her DNA checked to confirm if she was descendant from a specific tribe in Africa, Maasai. She was not. But DNA confirmed she had no European ancestors or of any caucasian mixed race. All her ancestors came from the Western region of Africa with Sahara-Indi mixed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.240.82.58 (talk) 05:25, 22 November 2007 (UTC)


- Allow me,Partheth, to enter this discussion -

I strongly agree with Shakam, as he says, mulatto is at its core as different to african-american as it is to european-american. Mulatto is traditionally viewed as being of african and european ancestry, that is a clearcut definition. It is in as stark constrast to African-american, as it is to European-american. And i dont see you criticizing the article for not mentioning the fact that European-americans also are to an extent mixed.

There are definitions, you choose yourself which one you identify yourself as, and there are definitions to help you along. A mulatto is defined by being of mainly mixed african and european ancestry. Now your entire post, The hobgoblin, i am afraid is some awkward try to, as Shakam, said interwine the term Mulatto and african-american, which is outright flawed. Mulatto is at its core about being of european and african ancestry, which is as different from european-americans as it is to african-americans. And the hobgoblin if you still do not catch the drift, African-americans and european-americans define themselves, which you can logically deduce from the name, as having mainly african or european ancestry. There you go, this is the natural end.--Partheth 22:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


First of all if you feel that way, then why is there even a Mulatto wiki if Mulattos are African-American?

Connotatively, African-American in the US still abides by the ironic One drop rule. But definitively, you can't be African-American if you have a white parent. Mulattos aren't one or the other they're both. Shakam 03:03, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a reference for that? Or is it simply your opinion? Anecdotally, I know many people with white parents who consider themselves African-American. And although the one drop rule certainly was true in the past, I can't think of any legislation in existence today that defines anyone with one drop of "african" blood as "african-american"...do you? --JereKrischel 04:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
Realistically speaking, humans are visual and I'm loath to believe that African Americans torment White people with distant African ancestry as is implied by your "dropping rule". Of course if someone has substantial, visible African ancestry, or more than one drop, then I think we could discuss those individuals. But, I think really any minority group in the United States be it Asian, Hispanic, African American, will try to delineate an ethnic boundary and enforce it by either trying to add members or exclude members; and I'm sure in this process some people will feel smitten and will harbor feelings of resentment. This is a continuous process of which the dymanics are complex. Not to say that all all people who are "mixed" are African American or that all African Americans are "mixed", but being that African Americans have endured mixing in their bloodline over hundreds of years, especially in regard to White blood, the notion that "mixed"(however this is qualified) and African American are mutually exclusive terms is ludicrous. The hobgoblin 04:05, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

To JereKrischel: There is no reference to give for what a person must identify with, but if you have a white parent and a black parent, you are most definately not African-American, but Mulatto. It's people's opinions and ignorance that tell Mulattos to identify as black.

To Hobgoblin: What? I don't understand maybe I'm retarded.

This isn't my "one dropping rule", people just accept it as fact, as you do, without thinking for themselves about the matter.

Why not rename the article, light-skinned African-Americans? You can't take something from two different things and expect the outcome to be one or the other, this is simple logic. Shakam 04:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

To be honest there is no real substance to any of the article other than it provides a definition of an actual mulato and what it may look like. Considering African Americans are indeed mixed, the extent of which is debatable, I think there really is no ground for you are me to "deny" someone with more than 50% of non African ancestry membership into this ethnic group. I think it's plausable that there is atleast one African American living in the United States at this time with more "other" ancestry than African.
The paragraph in question mentions that the term mulato may ignore the fact that Blacks in the United States may have a lot of admixture. If this fact is irrelevant to the article, then abruptly introducing talk of dropping "rules" in the "United States and Puerto Rico" section is irrelevant. Anyway that particular concept has a wiki page of its own. In fact, substance is lost because instead of talking about the mulatos culture or habits in the United States and Puerto Rico it seems as if it's only finger pointing to conjure up feelings of sympathy. The hobgoblin 06:02, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

This "fact"?????

Real African-Americans may have some admixture but they are still mostly sub-saharan African. People identify the way they do because that is how most of society tries to label them. It is up to the individual to think for him/herself and not listen to ignorance. (and I'm just here helping them) Shakam 15:53, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

- This post is in reply to Hobgoblinby partheth - Hobgoblin your entire arguing seems to have an undercurrent that states ´- mulattos should not be allowed to state their race, because you feel it somehow excludes african americans. This is utterly ludicrous and completely misguided.

Just like african-americans are mixed of course, so is european-americans, some to a larger extent than others, but take note now, the definitions revolve around mainly african or european, so in the event you define yourself as an african-american its because you consider yourself mainly african-american.

Mulattos define themselves as a mix of european and african, and thats the central trait, those are clearcut definitions. im sorry to say this but your argument was quite thin from the beginning hobgoblin--Partheth 18:06, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

"Why not rename the article, light-skinned African-Americans?"

because we would hope that you would actually READ the article, African-Americans can be light-skinned, but they may have black parents and mostly (or sometimes all) black heritage, mulattoes have immediate Black\White Heritage and also, although they can reject and"pretend" to be only black or only white, they are still by definition mulatto because of they're mixture...4.154.80.58 17:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I feel a need to remind y'all that this is NOT an American Wikipedia, it's an English language Wikipedia aimed at ALL the English speaking people of the world. And the term African American is of no relevance whatsoever outside the United States. Allan Akbar (talk) 11:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, let's keep in mind that some African Americans are mulattos. In some cases you have an individual who is mixed with black and white hence making them mulatto. In most cases, the only way to continue considering yourself a mulatto is if you were born of parents who were both mixed themselves. Now, if your mixed and you marry someone black who is not consider mulatto whatsoever, then your offspring will be considered black in most cases... I guess the reality of it all is how far removed you are from the individual that was white or black in your family history. Aslo keep in mind that regardless of what you consider yourself, black or mulatto, in America you will most often be consider black regardless due to our culture. Rarely do you come across a black American that would consider themselves mulatto, regardless of whether they were mixed or not. Most will just say black. (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuck2578 (talkcontribs) 00:59, 15 August 2008 (UTC)