Comments on: Interracial unions destroy culture

By: Sydney

Sydney — Tue, 13 Jun 2006 13:12:32 +0000

The origin of human kind shows that human can intermarry what ever color they want. Culture is man made and is changing as the time goes on.

If it was wrong, then those who did would not bring birth to normal children. If intermariage is wrong, then that could tell us why so much prejudice. There is no race better than the other. If you are a human, then you would feel as human, we are human family and no race was created seperate other race.

By: amalia

amalia — Mon, 22 May 2006 21:31:03 +0000

Christy I applaud your decision to emphasise BOTH of the cultures in your children’s background, but you are not typical. Hopefully, there will be more and more people like you.

If, however, you think that all families composed of people from different “races” are based on love, and untouched by all of the racial drama that affects society as a whole, especially in terms of superiority/inferiority, negative stereotyping. . . you are sorely mistaken. From my experience, many aren’t. I know a lot of mixed race people who harbor negative views towards one or even both sides of their family, because people in their family have taught them these prejudices.

Other times they have picked them up from peers because their parents out of naivete or ignorance, didn’t bother to foster a positive and honest perception of people from both of their cultures.

I have a friend who is of Sri Lankan and Welsh parentage and she says she is not Sri Lankan or Welsh. She has plenty of subtly negative things to say about people from her own South Asian background. She is also embarassed when her Dad tries to speak to her in Welsh in public saying it “sounds funny” and she doesn’t want to learn. Sadly she is just one of numerous examples.

By: Christy

Christy — Thu, 04 May 2006 03:19:14 +0000

I have an IR marriage and two children from this marriage. We have a solid family and relationship. He is a man and I am a woman, and yes, it is that simple! Why does it have to be taught that our color is a reason for us to not be a family. Our children will be raised with OUR values and will understand that they have the best of two cultures and will be taught to embrace it and be proud of it. Children are taught at home what the difference between races are. Never once have my children asked why their skin is a different color than their cousins. I am sure that one day when they are in school and someone who did teach their children that black, asian, hispanic, etc.. are different than white people, approach my kids, that I will have to explain that not everyone understands how to let children grow up and learn about how they feel about a person and not a color. Wake up people, whether or not you think it is right ,( I love the no one is pure but cousins marrying by the way,) people will love who they love and it is not your place or your right to judge.

By: Alas, a blog » Blog Archive » Grouping People Together: The Problems and Prospects of Panethnic Language

Sun, 30 Apr 2006 19:16:05 +0000

[…] Some people lament panethnic categories because they believe that it leads to the loss of cultures, languages, and customs. Once groups are combined together whether by force or by choice people worry that some traditions will necessarily disappear as a new panethnic culture and identity emerges. This attitude comes up frequently in discussions about intermarriage. Many people who oppose interethnic and interracial marriage do so out of a concern that the hybridization of cultures will lead to the loss of traditions and language. I have mixed feelings about this because my sense is that global capitalism and the modern communication and transportation technology will inevitably lead to a mishmash of cultures (what Kwame Anthony Appiah calls the new Cosmopolitanism) In fact, one of the ideas that comes up frequently is the notion that a “mixed” ethnic identity inherently involves the loss of some traits from either side. Personally, I am skeptical of that argument because I think a much larger force is at work–global capitalism and the one world culture that it encourages. Given the trend toward a global culture dominated by capitalist superpowers like the US, the creation of panethnic categories can in fact be a way to retain aspects of cultures that are being over run by western countries (put more simply for those who might be losing me—if local ethnic groups can unite they stand a greater chance of keeping their traditions in the face of corporations like McDonalds. Corporations are some powerful that small ethnic and regional groups can’t do much to keep them out, but by uniting diverse groups, they stand a chance.). Here, there seems to be a tension between humanism and identity based politics. Humanism emphasizes universal human rights, while coalitions along panethnic lines represent one of the last bastion of unique, traditional cultural identities. (Here is an interesting essay on this subject I should forewarn everybody that it is written in the typical post modern academic language, so it is really hard to follow if you are unfamiliar with the jargon.) The irony here is that both the new cosmopolitanism and panethnic identities lead to a flattening of culture. The unique traits of groups are going to be lost under both ideas. The question is just a matter of how much local culture will be lost and how fast it will be lost. […]

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 13:31:31 +0000

Many members of so-called sub-cultures or “ethnicities” want exactly the same thing, which is to maintain their racial group identity. They just disguise it better. Some of the so-called “ethnicities” are just artificial constructs which were created in order to achieve just that. Why would these “ethnicities” need to be maintained? They don’t. The world is an ever changing place. Real cultures usually blend because they are for sharing.

By: Damie_Troy

Damie_Troy — Fri, 21 Apr 2006 05:00:17 +0000

Your correct. We have a society that allows sub-cultural/ethnic differences, which is a natural effect of a free society, we’re not North Korea.

If we can evolve in future generations where these sub-ethnic/cultural differences still exist, but become subordinate to a shared American identity, then our nation will be more harmonious.

I don’t want my children and grandchildren to live in the society we’re in now, where people are judged by their phenotype or by stereotypes, and broad generalizations of their backgrounds.

By: Lyonside

Lyonside — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 15:21:42 +0000

That’s true, Damie.

I still think that there is not a monolithic “american” culture in the way most people consider culture, and that that in inself is a good thing.

By: Damie_Troy

Damie_Troy — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 00:58:21 +0000

For America’s “racial”or ethnic diversity to become more harmonious in the future, we need to stop making “race” or ethnic differences more important than our commonality as fellow countrymen/women.

On 9-11, our enemies goal was to murder Americans, and they didn’t care what “race” or ethnic origin we were.

By: Lyonside

Lyonside — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 20:20:03 +0000

I get you Damie, I really do, but it’s the diversity that makes America strong, and that goes from the Puerto Ricans and the santos de palos and parades to Russian enclaves to Native peoples to Gullah, etc.

“Race” isn’t real. Ethnicity, however, is, and should be embraced.

By: Unlisted

Unlisted — Wed, 19 Apr 2006 13:03:44 +0000

I agree with your last post Damie_Troy