ESPN Feature On Lack Of White American Players

[Brunch@Five]

So anyone that as any black person in his lineage is considered black, but only those who are purely of white decent are considered white?





both seem more white than black.

back in the day they used to have different names: black, mulatto, quadroon, octroon. Kidd and Bibby probably are quadroons or octroons. I do see that those terms are problematic though, due to their history in slave trade.
To call someone who is 1 4th black and 3 4ths white black is wrong thout

[krikit]

I'm not looking to participate in the back and forth going on here but I do have a simple question:

My little brother asked me the other day why Delonte West and Tayshaun Prince are both declared "black" even though they have a lighter pigment. I explained there's a number of variations of skin color for African Americans and every other race and nationality. My brother then asked, if there were an NBA player with one black parent and one white (Blake Griffin) what is he considered? I responded that he'd be declared "black" but I couldn't explain why. Is this correct? Further, is there a logical way to break this down?

Back in the days several states in the USA passed legislation called "one drop rule" to make sure the off-spring between white slave holders and black slaves couldn't make any claims of rights and to discourage interracial relationship, the formal law was drafted so that if a person had single drop of black blood (or 1/32 part black) they would be considered black and therefore be subject of Jim Crow law and segregation (the segregation laws were written in terms om black people and white people so they needed to classify ppl as either one to make it an efficient tool). So through slavery and then segregation all mixed people were considered black no matter if they were 15 or 25-50-75% black. Now the one drop ruled was deemed unconstitutional in 1967 but since both society and the goverment have seen all black/white mixed ppl as black for 200 years or so it still lives on so most people identify a 50% black / 50% white offspring as black still today.

[Lakas Fan Yo]

So anyone that as any black person in his lineage is considered black, but only those who are purely of white decent are considered white?





both seem more white than black.

back in the day they used to have different names: black, mulatto, quadroon, octroon. Kidd and Bibby probably are quadroons or octroons. I do see that those terms are problematic though, due to their history in slave trade.
To call someone who is 1 4th black and 3 4ths white black is wrong thout

Only in the US is it considered acceptable and not extremely racist to call half black and half white people as only black. Anywhere else in the world it's extremely racist. The same with calling half Asian and half black people only black and so forth. In the US Obama and Tiger Woods are "black", but everywhere else in the world that would be considered racist.

[twolvesfan]

Back in the days several states in the USA passed legislation called "one drop rule" to make sure the off-spring between white slave holders and black slaves couldn't make any claims of rights and to discourage interracial relationship, the formal law was drafted so that if a person had single drop of black blood (or 1/32 part black) they would be considered black and therefore be subject of Jim Crow law and segregation (the segregation laws were written in terms om black people and white people so they needed to classify ppl as either one to make it an efficient tool). So through slavery and then segregation all mixed people were considered black no matter if they were 15 or 25-50-75% black. Now the one drop ruled was deemed unconstitutional in 1967 but since both society and the goverment have seen all black/white mixed ppl as black for 200 years or so it still lives on so most people identify a 50% black / 50% white offspring as black still today.

good job trying to use something that was passed in the days of slavery to justify it today

[krikit]

good job trying to use something that was passed in the days of slavery to justify it today

It's not abut justification, but understanding how history shapes our perception today, we aren't born or developed our norms, values and worldview in a vacuum. Norms and values that have been developed, constructed and reconstructed generation after generation doesn't just change over night because a court said it was wrong 40 years ago (which isn't far back in history at all), those idea still shape our society today. Race is largerly a social construct and of course the heritage of slavery, segregation and the one-drop rule shape how race is viewed and how people are classified in America today. Vince Carter, Tracy Mcgrady etc. Are probably not 100% black (a minority of african-americans are) but we still view them as black not 75% black or whatever. Why do you think Tiger Woods was so ridiculed over his "I'm not black, I'm Cablasuain" statements? Factually he's of course correct but we still mostly classify people as white or black. How many people would say Halle Berry is white even though she's probably more white then black in terms of heritage. How many people would say he's black? Now why is that?

[sergiorodriguez]

That's a pretty uneducated or simply racist statement. The fact is, the vast majority of sports are not dominated by any one "race". Granted, if all you watch is basketball, football, and track & field the majority of top players are black. However, if you step outside of those categories it becomes much more diverse.

so in other words, the sports that require the most explosive athleticism are dominated by black players? and the ones with less of an athletic requirement to succeed have more diversity?

[Revelation]

so in other words, the sports that require the most explosive athleticism are dominated by black players? and the ones with less of an athletic requirement to succeed have more diversity?

Actually, yes. For the most part, black athletes do dominate sports which require the most explosiveness. No one should deny that. As I said earlier:

[...] Some obvious examples are, Caucasian men almost always being the strongest in the world. Or, African Americans almost always being the best leapers and sprinters.

This is not to say that black people always dominate sports which require athleticism. Soccer, Tennis, Gymnastics, and MMA are a few examples of very athletic sports which are not "dominated" by any one race.

[DKLaker]

It's not abut justification, but understanding how history shapes our perception today, we aren't born or developed our norms, values and worldview in a vacuum. Norms and values that have been developed, constructed and reconstructed generation after generation doesn't just change over night because a court said it was wrong 40 years ago (which isn't far back in history at all), those idea still shape our society today. Race is largerly a social construct and of course the heritage of slavery, segregation and the one-drop rule shape how race is viewed and how people are classified in America today. Vince Carter, Tracy Mcgrady etc. Are probably not 100% black (a minority of african-americans are) but we still view them as black not 75% black or whatever. Why do you think Tiger Woods was so ridiculed over his "I'm not black, I'm Cablasuain" statements? Factually he's of course correct but we still mostly classify people as white or black. How many people would say Halle Berry is white even though she's probably more white then black in terms of heritage. How many people would say he's black? Now why is that?

Thank you for trying to educate the knuckleheads on here as to history......most are too dumb to get it.

Nowdays it's pretty much open to a person calling themself whatever they want.....within reason....if they can look the part.
I know members of the Bibby family and they will tell you they are Black....period, same with Kidd.

I think it's sad that some are so obsessed with race, thankfully with the election of Obama things are starting to change.....but in America this process is slow.

[Number2]

I think it's more about economics. Poor people tend to become the athletes of the world. Think about the history of baseball. In the 20s and 30s, most players were farmers and miners while growing up. They worked hard, were in good shape, and baseball offered them a way out. City folk just weren't playing baseball; they were working in offices and restaurants. A few factory folk. Mining and farming are quite different these days. Poor people live in cities, and are generally minorities. The black culture is extremely focused on basketball and football, for obvious reasons. Mexicans box. And so on.