Discussion in 'Congress' started by ScreamingEagle, Mar 13, 2008.
Who is pretending someone isn't what they are?
Larkin, for one.
I'm not seeing it.
Sorry but in our society being half black counts as being black, not as being bi-racial.
Its fucked up and racist, but then again so is our society.
Maybe he just has a different definition of racism than I do.
First, no reason to be sorry. Second, only the first part of your statement is true. Yes, by and large being black is viewed as a yes/no thing. However, it's not mutually exclusive with being multi-racial, it's mutually exclusive with being not black.
Is Obama black? Yes.
Is Obama multi-racial? Yes
I don't see what you're so conflicted about.
Sorry, I wasn't saying "sorry" to you.
I read this sentence several times and don't understand it. Could you clarify before I comment on your post?
However, it's not mutually exclusive with being multi-racial, it's mutually exclusive with being not black.
It means you can answer yes to both questions without being contradictory.
Obama is both black and multi-racial.
I don't disagree with that. Seems that Larkin does.
Though if you want to get technical, he's biracial, not multiracial.
And if you want to get really technical, he's the same race as the rest of us are--human.
Wrong. But mostly in a nitpicky way. "Technically," if he is biracial, he is also multiracial. Biracial is merely more specific, it doesn't mean, as you state, that he is not multiracial.
As for your last statement, I guess it depends on how you define "race." If you consider it analogous to species, then yes, we are all the same race. If you consider it more analogous to breed, then we are certainly not all the same race. As you ponder this, consider that a saint bernard and a yorkshire terrier are the same species too...
Separate names with a comma.