A few weeks ago we discussed a new kind of camp for Indian children adopted by white American parents. Today, via a tip on the news tab, I came across an article on Alternet by a Jewish New Yorker who adopted an Indian baby as a single mother, and was somewhat taken aback by the darkness of her child’s skin:
The first photo I received of [Redacted] showed her with fair skin. I was surprised, because from what my adoption agency told me, the child assigned to me would be much darker. After I got over that surprise, I had another: I felt relief. Suddenly — guiltily — it was a comfort to know that she would not look so different from me, and even more important, that her light skin would save her from a lifetime of prejudice. But ah, the magic of flashbulbs. A few months later I received several more photos and gaped at them in shock. The baby was much, much darker. (link)
[Redacted] has, initially, a lot of anxiety to deal with about the gap between her skin tone and that of her adopted daughter (read the whole article for examples: the kicker is the diaper change). She gets over it, but is still often surprised by the fact that no one in her social circle — including her Indian and Black friends — is as dark as her daughter:
Very soon, my daughter will have a lot to process. She’s adopted, she’s the child of a single mother, she’s an Indian Jew by conversion. We spent the summer with my father in upstate New York, and she was nearly always the darkest child in music class, gymnastics and day care. In New York City, even Blacks and Indians in [Redacted]’s and my social circle are lighter than she. Over and over I see how light skin equals privilege. Now that I have become [Redacted]’s mother, I realize: We need darker friends. (link)
I’m sure there will be some folks who will be offended that [Redacted] is publicly stating some of these things she says in this article. I personally am not: she’s expressing the shock she felt along with her embarrassment about that shock, and describing how she got past it. Yes, her initial reaction to her baby’s skin tone betrays “racism,” but it looks to me like she’s recognized and dealt with it.
Still, I wonder what people think about the solution she outlines: “We need darker friends.” Is it really damaging to a child (the baby has grown up some now) not to be around anyone who physically resembles her? And wouldn’t it be slightly strange to seek out “friends” on this basis?
[Oh, and one more thing: the Times recently had an interesting article on the growing number of cross-racial adoptions in the U.S.]
Pardesi Gori, your lectures about what “most Indians prefer” and what “most non-Indians involved in Indian religion/arts care or don’t care about” are getting extremely tiresome. That you should presume to show up anywhere — in any community, however defined or whatever your connection to it may be — and make statements about what “most” people on the different sides of an issue believe, says that you aren’t actually interested in having a conversation, or in acknowledging that there are PERHAPS some things in the world that you don’t know. It is the opposite of curiosity, and it tells me that whatever it is that attracted you to Indian religion or culture, it wasn’t curiosity, but some other force. What, I don’t know, but if you go into an encounter without a sense of curiosity or a willingness to be surprised, you are basically negating the value of the encounter from the start.
You comments about your happiness being the bottom line, are risible. UPS in comment #413 has said all that needs to be said in response.
And now a personal note: My White American mother didn’t go into her encounter with Indian culture — which included marrying an Indian and producing little macacas like myself — with ANYTHING in common with the approach you have set out in your comments. And believe me, she developed a critical stance, including on the gender issues that you seem to be obsessed with to the exclusion of all else. She even wrote about the encounter of western feminism with the complex Hindu concepts of gender such as shakti and streedharma, and she documented the ways that Indian women were negotiating this encounter and manifesting the results in cooperatives, social service organizations, feminist magazines, etc etc, in ways that were neither “Western” nor “traditional” but truly of their moment and place. She wrote a book about these things, it was published in both the US and India to critical praise and has been used as course material in universities in both countries.
She did NOT waste her time giving lectures to Auntie This or Auntie That about “eve teasing.” She had more respect than that. She did NOT believe that she possessed truths that the aunties did not possess. She did not believe that the aunties were TOO INVOLVED IN THEIR OWN CULTURE TO KNOW ITS TRUTH, as you have magnificently set out in a previous comment. She viewed life as investigation, experiment, and constant learning, not as turning up someplace and telling people what they should believe. She CERTAINLY did not believe that she should do whatever made her happy, and that that was the bottom line. And she found that if you encounter a culture with respect, you can have a deep conversation with people at every level of it, and indeed become part of its ever-evolving whole yourself.
It sure as hell wasn’t easy. It wasn’t as easy as turning up in India with the idea of liberating Indian women from gender oppression because you, the all knowing White Woman from America, have the distance from India to be able to tell Indian women what is or is not authentic own culture. My mother is a feminist, Pardesi Gori. You are an arrogant, self-indulgent loudmouth.
You comments in this thread are the kind that set back feminism, and that set back the legitimacy of the experiences of thousands of Americans, Westerners, White people or whatever, who have encountered South Asian culture in a true spirit of openness, curiosity, serendipity, grace, effort, and self-questioning. As the son of one such Westerner and the friend of many more, I am horrified and insulted by your statements. You need to tone down the arrogance that you so blithely claim, and do some serious thinking about what it is that you are trying to accomplish, how, and for the benefit of whom. I wish you well. Peace.
Over here we have a decently sized population of people who are originally of Indian descent, but who emigrated to South America in the 19th century. Because Surinam became a colony of The Netherlands, a lot of them made their home here. Often they are very keen on following Indian traditions, and make it a point to celebrate religious festivals, build temples and even shoot television programmes about India and the Hindu religion. However there are definitely differences among them and Indians, most notably that they are definitely not uptight about dating and sex, and that they spell their names according to Dutch spelling. Now there are a lot of self-righteous desis here who DO directly hail from India, and feel that ‘these people are stealing our culture’. That’s a pretty hypocritical attitude in my opinion, considering none of these people would ever lift a finger to organise any sort of cultural activity. Culture belongs to everybody in the world collectively, why should it be a certain’s group’s priviledged right to show interest in it? More props to outsiders who do. Let everybody do their own thing, as long as they’re not hurting anyone, and let’s just leave each other alone, for once.
Regarding Shazam and the possibility that s/he may be black pretending to be Indian so as to get browns on her/his/black side of the race “war”, or whatever –
My premik is an African American (prefers to be called “black”) who is “Africa centric”.
He attests that every culture, language, religion etc, originates in Egypt.
Often times I’ve come across writings that elude to the possibility that the technology for the pyramids and temples of the ancient Americas comes originally from ancient India (Bharat-varsha), as well as the ancient religions of the world ranging from Native American to Druids, etc.
Well, my premik claims that it all originated in Egypt, made it’s way to India, and then to other places. Basically he claims that Indians are descendents of Egyptians. He claims to have “evidence” in this regard.
He is thoroughly convinced that Buddha was from Africa or at least of immediate African descent, even if born in India.
Anyway, maybe Razib has some info/facts/figures on the possibilities of all of this?
(I can’t wait to see the look on Vasundhara Auntie’s face when the local neighborhood “gori” shows up with a “kala”, and that too with “jata” (dreads)like the Shiva bhaktas and left-wing aghora tantrics! Hee hee hee. Just joking. It’s all in fun. No need to take ourselves so seriously all the time).
probably not wise to jump into this stew but…..although i don’t agree with everything pardesi gori says – some of it sounds like it comes from the oprah-marie claire-bull-in-a-china-shop-slightly-condescending school of international relations — i think some of the criticism of her has been a bit harsh. i don’t find some of her comments on vasundhara aunty all that different from the comments about “evil aunty” on that thread that resulted from barmaid’s popular post on that topic, where people quite cheerfully took irreverent potshots.
Pardesi Gori:
I didn’t realise (or had forgotten) you were the Pardesi Gori from the Hare Krishna thread. From that thread, I know there is much more to you than your comments on this thread would indicate. On that thread, your comments along with another white former Hare Krishna dude were some of the best stuff I’ve read here in a long time. Why don’t you contribute here in the very positive, informative, and helpful way you did in the past? I’m sure you have a lot to share. But your tone right now is putting a lot of people off. And I have to ask; if your neighborhood in India is so insufferable, and you know it’s like that, why do you go? It’s different if outsiders move into YOUR hometown, and then proceed to molest you (or whatever). But you’re going into THEIR realm repeatedly, the characterisitics of which are well-known to you, and offering us your indignation at the outcome (which was expected by you in the first place). Which is not to say I condone their behavior.
Anyway, maybe Razib has some info/facts/figures on the possibilities of all of this?
the idea that everything is from africa (civilization wise) is as plausible that everything is from scandinavia or germany (as the white nationalists cliam).
i could give you genetic, archeological, and historical talking points to refute both the claims of nordicists (who assert that egyptians admixed with blacks form their original nordic state to light brown today) and afrocentrists (who assert that egyptians admixed with whites to go from black to light brown), but you can find the information yourself. egyptology is a venerable and well established discipline, and many egyptians are involved in it as well. the easiest way to refute the claims of afrocentrists and nordicists is too read some books on the topic, and note the illustrations. i am from a muslim background, and i have met many arabs in mosque. the egyptians look different from the syrians who look different from the iraqis, etc. these groups have been arabicized within the last 1,400 years. look at the faces of the egyptians, and look the depictions of egyptians in their art and sculpture. egyptian depiction of themselves was more stylized than the later greco-roman portrait and sculpture traditions, but you can see direct continuity in the faces of modern egypt with those of ancient egypt. the genetic and morphology (teeth, bones) do support some admixture with people from nubia (e.g., sadat’s mother was from a nubian background), as well as northern and middle eastern peoples (the mamlukes were not just turks, they were circassians, georgians, later the ottomans brough in albanians like muhamma ali). some egyptians can pass as african american (though rarely african african), and some as european. but most look…egyptian.
Razib – yes, you’re right, my comments were a caricature. Apologies to the more worldly and informed and balanced neocons and cons out there. My post was an attempt to tell Sunny to spend his energy on those who would not invest the time and effort in learning about India, living there, and participating in a majority-desi blog.
Siddhartha – generally you are a voice of reason, respectfulness, sanity, tolerance on this blog. Either I am missing a large part of the story, or your reaction to pardesi gori is out of proportion to her comments. My own mother (100% desi) tells off her brothers and other people for being sexist. She lectures the women of the family about their subjugation to gender norms (not quite in those terms, I grant you). My Dad used to lecture people about how they treated and paid their servants. If they were white, they’d fall into your category of arrogant close-minded whiteys who don’t try to understand a culture from within. I know the type you are talking about very well, but rarely are they the sort who become addicted to Indian culture, live in India, chat on desi blogs etc. Pardesi gori may seem a little defensive and in-your-face – but can you really say that a single one of us ABDs has not felt the SAME when faced with the insularity of certain Indian people? Just as we have in the face of the closet racism of many white liberals?
um….sorry, but what is a premik?
Pardesi Gori: While you’re studying Indian culture, please take the time to read about the history of colonialism in India before making statements like “I am quite frankly happy I did not take birth within it, and I feel there are alot of things that need to be improved upon (as it is with any culture), and I am not apologetic about sharing my opinions about what exactly needs to be improved upon and how.”
You are in a long line of people thinking they are carrying a white (wo)man’s burden. George Harrison is one of my favorite musicians, so there’s nothing about your interest in Indian culture that bothers me. It’s your approach.
Siddhartha:
I agree with the following statments by you 100%. I never want to put non-desis off of Indian culture, I think it’s great when they embrace it (respectfully) but there’s something about the attitude being expressed on this thread which is a little hard to stomach.
That being said, Dharma Queen’s comments are compelling too (far more so than the person’s she’s trying to defend, namely Pardesi Gori). That’s why I read this blog…you do come away with a lot of different perspectives, that at the least, make you think about things a little more than you otherwise might.
I have an idea. Lets invade another country- say somewhere in the middle east, ruled by a dictator- and spread a little democracy. They may not like it at first, but once they get a taste of it, they’ll know it’s a universal principle. They may even detest us for it at first, but ultimately who can argue with universal principles. I don’t begrudge Fatima Auntie but she may begrudge me.
DQ,
but they aren’t. and therein is a big difference, and the difference with pardesi gori’s method.
rarely, yes, but apparently not never. we seem to have a live one here, and her method of talking to us is rather similar to the one she reports that she uses with the aunties in desh. at least she’s consistent, i guess.
more than a little… and when she “jokes” about showing up with a dreadlock black man and seeing how the aunty will react, it’s a case of objectifying one Other in order to shock another Other, which is, not to put too fine a point of it, the colonizer’s mentality at work.
i completely agree with you here, DQ, but the question is what we do with those feelings. how do we put them into action, and with what openness of mind on our parts. for pardesi to make suggestions to the aunties is fine, but by her own admission she does so with a mind that is closed to conversation, learning, adjustment, or the possibility of surprise. there’s little more annoying than an incurious mind, especially one that tries to force opinions or actions on other people. witness the one that lives at 1600 pennsylvania avenue.
thanks for the nice things you said, by the way. i do try to be tolerant, sane, etc., but every once in a while something comes along that really offends me, and i need to call it out. i hope that i have at least managed to explain why.
Let Vasundhara Auntie next door be appalled that this mandir attending gori also physically touches her male friends in public. There is nothing in our religion (which Gori shares with Vasundhara Auntie) forbidding that, despite the fact that Vasundhara Auntie may deem it a “cultural norm”, hence refraining from touching even her own husband of 20+ years in public.
I’m (hopefully) going to India (for the first time) in December… have already told my husband that making out on the street is really Not An Ok Thing. I don’t want to go to India to change it, nor have it change me, just attend a wedding, visit my friends and their families, and I don’t mind doing as the Romans (or Mumbaikars) do. My “connection with India,” for lack of a better term, is about relationships, not ideals. It’s about my friends and adopted family that I’m lucky to have. Cultural norms are cultural norms, and if you don’t want to follow them, fine … but be prepared to be seen as an outsider, just as a guy with a pink mohawk would be seen here. You are deliberately avoiding the cultural norms because they don’t seem right to you, which is your right and privilege, but it doesn’t mean that others won’t be shocked and appalled, and in no way should you try to influence people happy in those norms to change their ways. And education comes from the inside. There’s a lot of articles that are worth reading about how Western feminism doesn’t work very well in non-Western societies; the issue of Eve-teasing is a big one, but it is one that Indians are finding ways to solve all on their own. They don’t need the white wo-man to tell them HOW to solve their problems.
At one time I faced alot of prejudice in India. Not from the Indians in my social circle, but from the wider populace of locals in the area where I resided. There’s only so much ignoring of it and pretending it’s not there that someone can do until they have to wake up and smell the prejudicial java. The same thing that Gautham was saying about his experiences in the US… you’re right, the blade of prejudice does cut both ways. But at the same time, it’s important to be sensitive to the history of what’s gone on in India in very, very recent times. Vasundhara Auntie may even REMEMBER the days of the British Empire herself. This is a very new and raw wound that is going to take much time to close and heal. Coming in and claiming that you have the solutions to their problems can evoke some pretty painful memories… even though you weren’t there commandeering the goings-on of the Empire, it’s still important to be sensitive. You don’t play gangsta rap songs about shootings in the car on the way back from a funeral for a drive-by victim.
Me believe my personal values have universal claim? Only the ones that do. But which ones would those be? Democracy ? Feminism ? Christianity? Equal rights for all? Eradication of poverty ? Capitalism ? Socialism ? There are people who will tell you that at least one, if not more, of the above is universal, and they believe it stronger than anything. Then there are others who will debate them for hours on any of those. Even our absolutes are subjective, and subject to our upbringing, education and environment.
I miss a day or so and I’m completely out of the conversation.
I wanted to comment on the one person who says it seems as though black people come here to try and sway the discussion toward the “black side.” Whatever that is. I’ll say this: I just think I’m right. Everybody should be on MY side… but i’ll respect a person who isn’t (most of the time)
This is on a tangent, but I really appreciate this blog because it gives me an opportunity to see a variety of different opinions without having to search the net far and wide. There are other groups in America that don’t seem to have this same level of dissonance within their communities, so I was pleasantly surprised to see the variance…
“I wanted to comment on the one person who says it seems as though black people come here to try and sway the discussion toward the “black side.” Whatever that is.”
we are black, brother. most indians would be offended, insulted even, at the implication that they aren’t.
Damnit. I am FEMALE.
Jai wrote:
How much is a “hell of a lot” or “disproportionate”? No one with a clue will mistake a crowd of UK punjabis for spaniards or israelis. Look at a crowd scene from Lahore or Amritsar. They may not look as black as bengalis, biharis or tamils but they certainly dont look latin. You are desperately latching on to exceptions. Its the majority that counts as representative of the whole. Its your racial self-loathing and inferiority complex, exacerbated by Bollywood escapism, that makes you wish to be seen as a non-indian.
More hogwash. She is lighter than your average punjabi. Gujaratis (which I suspect you are) are substantially blacker. Take a look at the most famaous of gujaratis Mahatma Gandhi, “black Gandhi” to some non-PC westerners.
I am sure they do. For quite a few UK south asians do try to emulate their looks and style, hoping to get just as successful as them in the inter-racial mating scene. For carribean and african blacks, both men and women, intermarry with whites at a FAR higher frequency than south asians.
Meena wrote:
Silly of you to think that I am blaming whites and japanese for their revulsion. Thats an understandable reaction to the horrible conditions in India, for which Indians alone deserve the blame. Indians too must be repelled. Why else the widespread desperation to get the hell out of India, by hook or by crook?
“For carribean and african blacks, both men and women, intermarry with whites at a FAR higher frequency than south asians.”
most carribean and african blacks would be offended, insulted even, at the comparison with south asians in the same sentence!
(ok, this is my last feeding-the-troll 🙂
Damnit. I am FEMALE.
sorry 🙂 you have a male text voice? :=)
Poor Razib is losing it. Point out that he is black and watch him go bananas. 🙂
Hey, I am just repeating what your erstwhile rulers, the west pakistani punjabis and pathans (and before them the british colonials), used to call you bengalis.
Imitating his idol Dinesh D’Souza, razib_the_atheist is trying to carve out a niche for himself in conservative circles by pandering to white supremacism. This black bengali has an unhealthy fetish for blondes. Probably with an eye to improving the genetic stock of his descendants. Its funny, in a pathetic way, to see him express contempt even for brunette whites!
No she doesn’t. She sounds like a black woman who’s learned to be patient.
Sorry, that was to Razib 🙂
I wanted to comment on the one person who says it seems as though black people come here to try and sway the discussion toward the “black side.” Whatever that is. I’ll say this: I just think I’m right. Everybody should be on MY side… but i’ll respect a person who isn’t (most of the time)
the reference was toward shazzam. but i’m not convinced this individual is really interested in a sincere conversation, or, what their identity is. every post by this individual seems to be in bad faith. i mean, you obviously won’t win brownz over to the idea that they are black by insulting them and implying that others have reason to hate them because they are such a detestable culture 🙂
“This black bengali has an unhealthy fetish for blondes. Probably with an eye to improving the genetic stock of his descendants.”
many white supremacists have said the same.
sorry, hand to make the analogy, since i have “hit pages” on me from both the radical left and the racist right.
intermarry with whites at a FAR higher frequency than south asians.
No one intermarries much in UK, but the group that intermarries the most are the “Mixed” peeps, for obvious reasons.. Only Two Percent in England and Wales are crossing the ethnic lines in marriage; don’t know about dating tho. We’ll see how that number has changed in the 2011 census. Overall, I wouldnt worry about intermarrage rates. It’s not as if it’s something harmful if a group fails to intermarry.
you little turd – you were only boring till this point. this sewage crosses the limit. get lost. you’re not welcome here.
Meena, Razib and other apologists please go out and read Pat Buchanan’s latest book. It’s your bible.
Compare the rate of dating, co-habiting and marriage between carribean blacks and chinese with white brits, to that between south asians and whites. Big difference.
In the US, for Census 2000 there were approx. 860,000 White+Asians counted — less population than the borough of Queens, NYC. Now, if we could only decompose Asian, and see how much South Asian intermarriage accounted for. Btw, the occurance of intermarriage here in the US is similar to that for the UK, less than 3 percent.
Compare the rate of dating, co-habiting and marriage between carribean blacks and chinese with white brits, to that between south asians and whites. Big difference.
Well, yea and most of this crossing of the color line includes someone of white brit ancestry, but even they don’t cross the color line upward of 3%. Similar here in the US, and less than 3% mixed heritage of the pop.
Intermarriage aside, South Asians don’t number very many in the US, e.g. Indians numbered 1.7M, Pakistanis = 150K Bangladeshis = 40.5K, Ceylon = 20K Totals probably less than over a couple M.
Okay Siddharth, now I’m curious :): what is your mother’s name? Now you have to tell!
And I agree with your observations re pardesi gori.
Many lifetimes ago 🙂 I assumed that those who’d travelled a lot were of a certain ‘mindset’ (tolerant, sensitive etc etc)…but it slowly began to dawn on me that this was not always the case. I suspect that people who travel/are interested in other cultures (and this applies to Indians too) broadly speaking fall into two categories …one, those who are genuinely interested in learning about other cultures/people, who are open to learn from them in return and who approach the whole thing with EMPATHY, openness and affection….and then there are those who yes, are ‘interested’ in other cultures/countries but BOTTOM LINE their main interest is in seeing how different aspects of the other culture does not measure up to whatever it is that they represent. It is almost as if such people enjoy travelling just to be able to talk about all the things that are wrong with those other places and people…of course, they will often be appreciative of certain select aspects of the culture (architecture, music, whatever) but basically the mindset they take into the other experience is one of arrogance and superiority.
Well put, Pardesi Gori. Foreigners come to my country (USA) all the time and critize, especially our treatment of women and minorities; and i think we are all the better for it. glad to see you are doing it to the Indians. I especially like the part about “showing up with a dreadlock black man and seeing how the aunty will react” (as Siddhartha puts it) which almost puts you in the lenny bruce category as social satirist. Offend away, I say.
i suspect those who were offended by you would not feel the same way if you were saying the same things about American culture. we only feel protective of that which we think is weak, naturally.
imo, you are among the least patronizing and condescending of non-Indians in love with Indian culture.
hairy_D wrote:
Shut your potty mouth boy.
R. K. Khan wrote:
Use your brain: what percentage of the british population is non-white? About 8%.
The observable trend is this: white men are far more attracted to east asian females than to south asian or african women; and white women much prefer men of african ancestry to subcontinental men.
Too true, Dharma Queen, too true 🙂
I think measuring ‘tolerance’ by looking at how many white friends or black friends we have may be a bit misguided, as is judging it by looking at intermarriages or those -Pardesi Gori being an excellent example – who claim to be knowledgable about other cultures.
What everyone seems to be lookin’ for -and why this thread has so many comments…is a bit of SPACE 🙂 I hope the tiny Indian Jewish dark-skinned child who inspired this thread finds hers when she grows up, oh and the overanalysing amateur sociologist brown people on here too 🙂
Most of the recent comments by “Shazam” on this thread are of little value. They are also pointlessly antagonistic and accusatory.
Shazam, quit accusing everyone who disagrees with you of racial self-loathing. Learn to make your point without ad hominems.
Razib –
Thanks for the info. I’ve seen quite a few depictions of ancient Egyptians and they look black (African) to me, albeit of what is often referred to as the “afro-asiatic” look. There are a wide variety of colors and features within the black African gene pool. What is considered the “ethnic background” or “race” of ancient Egyptians, if not black African? My boyfriend reads alot of John Henrick Clark, don’t know if you’ve heard of him or not. He is also influenced by various black scholars and authors who are of the “Africa centric” (pan-Africanism?) mindset and quite a few have hooked up with South Indian (Dravidian) causes, such as the ideology that separates the (black) Dravidians from the more fair skinned “Aryan descendents” of India (although how they explain that the so-called Aryan descendents are not always more fair, I don’t know). Anyway, the two groups have formed an aliance asserting that Dravidians are black Africans. They seek to separate themselves from what they refer to as “North Indian Aryan Culture”, seeing Sri Rama as an “Aryan God” whereas Ravana is their Dravidian Hero. See http://www.dalitistan.org. There is a call for Dravidians to unite with black people world wide and fight “Aryan oppression”.
You said in comment number 440 “we are black, brother. most indians would be offended, insulted even, at the implication that they aren’t.” Most Indians where would not be offended? By “black” did you mean of African descent? If so, that has not been my experience.
Meena –
Your observation about Indians from Surinam being less uptight regarding dating and sex than the Indians from India in your country (Holland?) also holds true to some extent of Carribbean Indians in USA from Trinidad and Guyana. There is alot of tension however between Carribbean Indians and Carribbean Africans, from what I have observed between my friends of both communities. In my opinion that can all be chalked up to cultural differences, as most racism I have seen or experienced is.
To all of those who feel offended by my presentation – I’m sorry. Perhaps my choice of words in relaying my experience was not what it could have been.
I’ve noticed that a few people here were majorly offended, like Siddhartha and Amitabh, a few people agreed with me or liked what I said, like Dharma Queen and Manju, and the others were more or less neutral or didn’t care whatsoever.
Just want to clarify that I did not set out to India in order to change it. Quite the opposite, I was all open and accepting and curious and all that good stuff for a solid 3 years. But once you settle down in a place and get to know all (or alot of) it’s sides, well, the negative comes out as well and I am not an apologist for that. Also, having been sexually harrassed literally countless times does not exactly help either. There comes a time when one has to stand up for yes, UNIVERSAL principles, such as respect for another person’s private parts, and when one notices a pattern, not just notices, but experiences a certain pattern of continuous behaviour amongst a certain section of society, well, after some years, I think some conclusions can be drawn.
As for the person who asked why do I keep going back – I covered that in my #424 comment.
Manju – You are spot on with your #459 comment. Foriegners come to America all the time and criticize it. Many of them still wish to settle down here despite the prejudices they may face. No need for apologists, on either side of the globe. If something is wrong, speak up. Perhaps a policy, country, society, culture or just one neighbor can change for the better. And in doing so maybe you yourself, or me myself, can also grow and change – hopefully for the better…..
………..still dying to see that look on Vasundhara Auntie’s face!
I’m still struggling with some of the reactions to Pardesi’s comments (thanks Siddhartha for your explanation, though I disagree – I don’t believe whites should be barred from taking the same ideological stances as browns). On one of the other threads a little bigot named Bryant has been proclaiming that America needs to retain its white majority to remain a world power, and for some unfathomable reason, he gets treated like a reasonable human being. Pardesi, who to all appearances is someone with a good spirit, and generous attitude (she’s apologized for the defensiveness in her tone) gets slammed. What I suspect is this: that people who open themselves up to other cultures become extremely vulnerable, and that vulnerability makes them easy targets, symbols rather than individuals. Think lone macaca at a Republican rally in Virginia. Think skinny white guy who tries to fit in among black gangstas. Think the Irishwoman, head of Care, married to an Iraqi, killed for representing the evil West. Let’s have the grace not to mistake such wanderers and nomads for the real villains.
Actually you are incorrect. The bigot Bryant was allowed to vent for a while, then banned. He resurfaced and was banned again. His comments were allowed to stand as they are, um, quite instructive. Pardesi Gori, on the other hand, is right here with us.
I’ve seen quite a few depictions of ancient Egyptians and they look black (African) to me, albeit of what is often referred to as the “afro-asiatic” look. There are a wide variety of colors and features within the black African gene pool. What is considered the “ethnic background” or “race” of ancient Egyptians, if not black African?
the morphology (teeth, bones, etc.) and a few ancient DNA extractions seem to indicate the closest relationship with west asian populations, e.g., levantines. the peoples to the north of the sahara seem to have long have more genetically in common with eurasians than they do with sub-saharan africans. to be precise, it seems that around 10,000 years ago there was a demographic expansion out of iraq and syria related to agriculture which swept north africa all the way to the maghred. there was a sister expansion through southern europe, so it was a two-pronged movement of farmers. in africa south of the sahara and agriculture kit emerged later, and the ‘bantu expansion’ probably didn’t start until ~3,000 years ago, and that has reshaped the demography of most of sub-saharan africa. before that expansion it seems likely that khoisan related groups were much more frequent in east african, as evidenced by the relict click languages like that of the hazda in tanzania (also, i believe that. and just an FYI, ecologically north africa is often clustered with eurasia as well, so it isn’t just humans (the Palaearctic Region). “africa” as a single continent is a geological relaity, but biologically the portion which exhibits discontinuity with eurasian starts south of the sahara.
(this is not to say there isn’t admixture between north africans and sub-saharan africans, but, it seems that this process accelerated after the rise of islam and the trans-saharan slave trade, there is genetic data which shows lots of admixture with city “arabs” [arabicized berbers], but little with the isolated berbers in the mountains [who couldn’t afford foreign slaves], this implies little admixture before the domestication of the camel because travel was difficult)
My boyfriend reads alot of John Henrick Clark, don’t know if you’ve heard of him or not.
i’ve read him. he writes entertaining fantasy. frankly, i became enraged as i was reading his books, because it resembles creationism, it has the look & feel of scholarship, but it only exists to promote a hypothesis which he is going to “prove” no matter the facts.
dalitstan is politically motivated. i think their politics are somewhat justified (prejudice is a problem), but that doesn’t imply that you have to make stuff up. e.g., Polarity and Temporality of High Resolution Y-chromosome Distributions in India Identify Both Indigenous and Exogenous Expansions and Reveal Minor Genetic Influence of Central Asian Pastoralists. the genetic data in the last 5 years strongly points to genetic continuity of all south asians in relation to outgroups (e.g., iranians). in other words, though there is variation among south asians, and though there is overlap with other groups (e., many iranians with punjabis, some bengalis with burmese, etc.), on average any given south asian is genetically closest to another south asian. there are differences between north and south, east and west, and local differences due to endogamy, but, the best analogy is probably europe. europe is genetically, culturally and phenotypically a unit when compared to outgroups like east asians for africans. to use a specific example, a north indian brahmin on overall genome content (as opposed to one specific gene) is more likely to share more with a “low caste” south indian than they are with an iranian, arab or european (though the two populations do differ quite a bit).
as far as afrocentrism, clarke’s fantasy has to face up to the genetic data which reaffirms the nearest genetic cousins of south indians are north indians, and that south asians are probably somewhat closer to west eurasians than they are to east eurasians (though i think it is too much to say they are just a form of west eurasian, as the older anthropology texts assert, i.e., ‘caucasoid), and that eursians are closest to northeast africans, from whom they derive.
You said in comment number 440 “we are black, brother. most indians would be offended, insulted even, at the implication that they aren’t.” Most Indians where would not be offended? By “black” did you mean of African descent? If so, that has not been my experience.
i was making fun of shazzam.
I think Pardesi is off… and I think the things that really put me off were her expression of how grateful she is that she wasn’t born Indian, and her whole “let me walk in with a black guy and see what happens,” it reduces her black friend, whether he agrees to be a pawn or not. She may have had some overall good intentions with her post, but I think it’s little details like that which make people less receptive and ready to pounce.
That said, I have to agree with the above. I am very frequently in situations where I am the ONLY black person around. Yesterday I was at a Vietnamese wedding… I spent an entire day and a half with the family, and I was surrounded by people who only spoke vietnamese. People were largely friendly, but there is still a feeling that you are a topic of discussion, and not necessarily in a good way. And it can get to you.
Even then though, I wouldn’t think to come to a predominantly viet forum and air out my frustrations..
…..As indicated by all those Rajput-themed 55s I write, along with the fact that I occasionally make references to certain religious principles and the associated historical figures. Riiiight…..
Small hint: “Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh”.
I’m not going to feed the troll any further. As Razib mentioned, he’s just making facts up and appears to have no direct first-hand experience of the United Kingdom or its British (South) Asian inhabitants, along with several of the other groups that have been mentioned. So I am terminating my discussion with him on this particular thread.
Oh yes, by the way…..
I posted this earlier in the thread :
….Aaaand right on cue:
Selective memory is a wonderful thing, isn’t it Dharma Queen ? As is the ability to make wild extrapolations about complete strangers based on a handful of randomly-selected posts.
As the SM Intern said a couple of weeks ago, the Mutiny did not spring into existence the moment a commenter decided to participate here. It existed for a very long time beforehand, and there is frequently a history behind some conversations, particularly if they involve one or two “regulars” (which may be part of a much longer discussion stretching back an extensive period of time, sometimes a year or more).
Too “long-winded” ? Here’s a shorter version: Don’t preach to the converted. Find another target for your preconceptions and assumptions before you alienate even further someone who is actually on the same page as you.
Many thanks in advance.
just to be explicit, afrocentrist history is overall (though there are details which are interesting and correct) quite similar in style hindu nationalist fantasy literature, or the white supremacist histories of the early 20th century. in other words, the modus is pretty similar if the “root race” in question differences, the standard ploy to recast the origins of all civilizations as the result of an expanding super-race. interestingly, the egyptians are a good case in case to illustrate the process. some ancient egyptians could pass as black americans, they had noticeable admixture with sub-saharan africans. from what i know thutmose iii’s mother was nubian, so like anwar sadat he would likely exhibited a physical appearence which drew in part from sub-saharan africa (sadat’s mother was nubian from what i recall as well, a point of mockery by some of his rivals). on the other hand, ramses i is recorded as having reddish hair. this fact is emphasized by white nationalists to show that the egyptian upper class was european in provenance. but neither of these individuals are typical of the ancient egyptian population from what i can, they simply exhibt a range.
Jai, you resemble those white liberals who go on and on about how white their neighbourhoods are, how blond they and their children are, how privileged they’ve always been, the whole time implying that these things are matters of no moment – yet somehow, they still seem to go on and on about them. If you really didn’t care about colour, I wouldn’t have found you on three different posts (so far) pontificating on how light-skinned British desis and Punjabis in particular are. You happen to fall into both categories. You’re not on the same page as me at all – you just pretend you are.
SM Intern: Thanks.
DQ,
can you look into jai’s heart? i tend to be on the opposite side of jai on the color topic in many ways (though there is some factual grounding in what he says, i am skeptical of the magnitude), but casting aspersions on the character ofa long time participants seems like a tactic that isn’t going to elevate the discourse.
one last thing on scholarship. there was a study in the late 1990s on HLAs of iyers vs. other tamils. the phylogeny generated by these loci implied that iyers were closer to central asians than to other tamils. there are to types of sites which promote this work, brahmin sites, and dalit sites. both have their own reasons to emphasize this result. the reality is that this was an outlier result, it also was a paper which hypothesized that the iyers came via southeast asians because they were genetically close to southeast asians even more than central asians. using HLA to generate phylogenies is problematic, but the point is that this paper (from what i can see) was picked selectively out of a host of papers because it forwards the self-perceptions of the dalit and brahmin activists who want to emphasize difference. myself, i sympathize with the dalits insofar as the way they are treated is a human rights crisis, and is a blight on south asian society (i apologize for the use of the word south asian, perhaps some would like me to say indian? 🙂 which compromises its economic competativeness. i also oppose reservations because i believe it is a short term palliation of deep rooted problems. nevertheless, the point is that the scholarship should be respected, and not used and abused to further political ends.
Pardesi Gori wrote:
Exactly. Here for example are some murals from ancient Egypt that leave no doubt that the ancient egyptians were far closer to ethiopians than to west asians (iraq, iran, levant etc):
http://www.pbs.org/empires/egypt/special/virtual_library/soldiers_tomb.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Seti1a.jpg
The ancient greeks didn’t see the egyptians as a west asian people not too different from themselves, either. These white supremacist attempts to claim the achievements of ancient Egypt and India (the aryan invasion theory) for themselves, originated in the 19th century which was the high water mark of european racism. Europeans saw how inferior compared to them the indian and african natives were, and couldn’t accept that these same blacks they had colonized/enslaved could have built the pyramids or written the Vedas.
Its testimony to the servility of indians that many still believe in the aryan invasion theory, and pander to white supremacism in regards to africans as well. Some such as Dinesh D’Souza, and wannabe dineshes such as our bangladeshi friend here, even make a career out of this uncle tomism.
The greeks and romans also saw themselves as different from the barbarians north of the Alps. If englishmen and germans can take pride in the achievements of ancient Greece and Rome, why cant west africans and other subsaharan africans take pride in the achievements of ancient Egypt?
Jai wrote:
Manmohan Singh and Harbhajan Singh are probably the two most famous punjabi sikhs today, and they are stereotypical of the sikh phenotype. One would have to be seriously deluded to see them as looking like latins or israelis. Or to claim that sikh children are pink!