Here is question 9 in the 2010 U.S. Census:
The ‘boxed’ options for race include several different kinds of Asian. “Chinese,” “Vietnamese,” “Korean,” and “Japanese” are fairly predictable Asian nationalities, rightfully listed. The census uses “Asian Indian,” presumably to differentiate from “Native American” or “American Indian,” but interestingly, hints that “Pakistani,” (and by extension, “Bangladeshi” and “Sri Lankan”) would go under “Other Asian.”
Obviously, for Sepia Mutiny, which has always defined itself as an inclusive blog for the “South Asian” diaspora, this divison of the South Asian community is a little frustrating. How am I, whose family all originate from what is now Pakistan, of a different racial background from a Mohajir Pakistani, whose family all originated in what is now India? What does it mean to ask a question concerning “race,” and then lists three definite categories that might be understood as “racial,” only to then list nine further options, most of which are clearly nationalities, not “races”?
This is a discussion post. I am curious whether readers have read any backstory on how the census might have arrived at this rather idiosyncratic way of dividing up the communities from the Indian subcontinent? (The Census has a “Race and Ethnicity Advisory Committee” with an “Asian” sub-group. However, I haven’t been able to find much evidence of discussion over categories at Census.Gov. Most of the committee’s focus, perhaps rightly, seems to have been on making sure everyone has the opportunity to fill out a census form.)
Another discussion-related question: anyone want to speculate on how or whether this division on the census form might matter for the South Asian community down the road?
Finally, for readers from Pakistani, Bangladeshi, or Sri Lankan backgrounds, who have received the census form — are any of you thinking of checking “Asian Indian”? Since the census allows us to fill out more than 1 box under race, is anyone thinking of filling out both “Asian Indian,” and “Other Asian”?
UPDATE: A nice op-ed by Susan Straight on the evolution of Census race categories is here. She doesn’t focus on the “Asian Indian” question in particular, but it’s a good read.
I know that Japanese and Koreans are different Nationalities, but if you were working on just a racial classification, I don’t see how you could say they belonged in different racial categories. Obviousley there are cultural differences, and I’m aware of the historical bad blood between them, but if Indians and Pakistanis belong in the same racial group, then you could argue that Japanese & Koreans aren’t separate racial groups either.
Mustafa,
How are Pashtuns not Desi ? Desi is just another term for South Asian, which would include Pashtuns.
I live in NYC and mainly get mistaken for Italian or Greek, and rarely Persian.
On the census, I Xed “white” and “some other race” (1/2 Italian; 1/4 Greek 1/4 Persian) boxes.
“I know that Japanese and Koreans are different Nationalities, but if you were working on just a racial classification, I don’t see how you could say they belonged in different racial categories.”
Desi Brit, race categories are social constructed— they are not based on scientific markers, but on outward appearances. Whereas someone who did not grow up there may thing “oh all east Asians belong to the same race” people who live their probably view many different racial or ethnic groups– there are various groups with their own identity and language. Some people may argue that “you can’t tell what country East Asians are from by looking” while someone else might say “I can tell if a person passing by me in the street is most likely Japanese, Chinese, Koren, or Viet Namese”.
Just think.. we call all people from Europe “white” but the Nazis made a definitive difference between their so-called “Aryan Race” and the rest of Europeans. Any group can do that, since race is not scientifically backed up, there is going to be varying opinion on what constitutes what race. I think that is one of the reason the U.S. census is so random– they have some traditionally accepted “races” in America, mixed with a bunch of Nationalities and/or ethnic groups.
I believe I have the mind of a Tamil in a light skinned warrior body. Best of both worlds.
Pushtuns have been border peoples but never an integral part of Bharat/Hindustan.
Not all South Asians are Desi. The term Desi is not used in Nepal, the term is actually derogatory. The term Desi is not used in Tibet or Afghanistan, both border regions of the subcontinent.
In Afghanistan, the elite speak Farsi or the eastern Persian dialect called Dari. The culture of Afghanistan is Indo-Persian-Turkic. The nation of Afghanistan is mentioned in the Brahmanic texts, a flourishing center of Buddhism, and the birthplace of Zoroastrianism. We have Indic overtones, but we are not Desi. South Asian yes, but not Desi or all brown. I look White.
LinZi,
I agree that the common view of racial categories is not really ‘scientific’ . This question is just a way to find out how people self identify, and in that regard I guess it covers most possibilities. It is interesting that it gave you the option to tick multiple categories, I don’t remember the last census that I completed in the UK giving you that option.
Desi Brit,
My attachment to the subcontinent is rooted via Islam. Muslim South Asians were influential in forging what we consider modern Desi culture. When I visited the Agra Fort, I made namaz (prayer) in the Nagina Masjid, the mosque reserved for the wives of the Mughal emperors.
Growing up, Farsi not Urdu was the home language. I learned the kathak and learned both the Persian and Desi sitar. But my South Asian identity is “Persian” in cultural orientation.
Race is a social construct and complex. To the average layperson in America, Asian Indians are not “Asian” at all bur commonly mistaken for being Middle Eastern.
It’s not commonly used in India, Pakistan, or Bangladesh either. “Desi” is the name those of us abroad use for ourselves, in certain contexts, while outside our motherland. Relative to the differences between ourselves and Whitey, the differences of nationality and linguistic boundaries between ourselves seem insignificant so it’s more salient to sometimes lump ourselves together.
It’s as “scientific” as any other socially constructed phenomenon like a tribe or a “culture” or a nationality. All forms of self-identity are self-defined and fuzzy. The fact is, people identify each other by race. As long as we do that it’s every bit as real as anything else.
Desi = from or of the country videshi = foreigner pardesi = of the same country pardes (a movie with a catchy song invovling Shak Rukh Khan and an R.V.) 🙂
Yun hi chala, chala raahi Yunhi chala, chal raahi Kitni haseen hai ye duniya
Pardesi and Videsi are actually the same, I think the movie you are referring to is Swades
I know that LinZi.
Just saying that not all South Asians speak Hindi or Urdu, both derived from the language Hindavi, the language of Delhi during the time of Central Asian Muslim rule. The face of India that most foreigners know has the syncretic Muslim stamp.
“Pardesi and Videsi are actually the same, I think the movie you are referring to is Swades”
oops. sorry I always get those two confused…
“Just saying that not all South Asians speak Hindi or Urdu, both derived from the language Hindavi, the language of Delhi during the time of Central Asian Muslim rule. The face of India that most foreigners know has the syncretic Muslim stamp.”
I tend to disagree… I don’t think most people view South Asians as Middle Eastern or Asian.. they just see them as a third and distinct group if people… I think the only people who mistake Indians for Middle Eastern are more confused (and ignorant) and they think things like Sikhs beard/turban is a “Middle eastern” thing.
The modern kathak, the national dance of Pakistan is largely devoid of its Hindu religious rooots. When I was a kid, my family ruled learning Odissi or kuchipudi dance because those were deemed Hindu dances.
The Taj Mahal is the face of India, a monument to a Muslim emperor’s wife. The monument is a testament to Persian architecture and the inscriptions inlaid in white marble is in Farsi, the former court language of the Mughals. Islam became “Indianized.”
except for the taj mahal, most people from outside the area do not really know much about the muslim influence (and even in that instance, don’t know the history of muslim rule in india, so much so that they may not even know that it was built by a muslim king). many of the people i meet in the states associate india with hinduism, and are quite surprised when they find out e.g. that india has a bigger muslim population than pakistan.
As we speak right now, Muslims and Hindus are clashing in Andra Pradesh over green and saffron flags, colors of India’s two major religious communities and the colors of the national Indian ensign. I guess communal violence is alive and thriving in this capital of India’s tech capital, home to multinationals like Google, Microsoft, and IBM.
LinZi,
I appreciate non-South Asians on here, but realize I take offense to your correlation of Islam being a Middle Eastern faith.
Check the following issues with Arbas, Hispanics and Iranians.
Still Black or White: Why the Census Misreads Hispanics
The 2010 Census: Don’t Put Me In A Big White Box Iranian
Arab-American Census Activists Say ‘Check It Right’
“LinZi,
I appreciate non-South Asians on here, but realize I take offense to your correlation of Islam being a Middle Eastern faith.”
Huh? Since when are we talking about Islam? And where did I say it was a Middle Eastern faith? Are you confusing my comments with someone else?
Ah, re-reading, I see I made a mistake in comment #115. It was supposed to be a response to this statement:
“Race is a social construct and complex. To the average layperson in America, Asian Indians are not “Asian” at all bur commonly mistaken for being Middle Eastern.”
Hopefully that clarifies, Mustafa.
Bollywood is essentially a continuation of mughal culture. As is Qawalli popularized in the West by Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, North Indian cuisine like kebab. biryani, chicken tikka etc, sufism, clothing like shalwar kameez, language (urdu, persianized hini), the Red Fort and other mughal buildings etc etc.
The legacy of the mughals is pervasive.
Yes. Like that infamous, stupid lady at a McCain rally who thought Obama was arab.
“The legacy of the mughals is pervasive.”
So do you count Mughal architecture, cultural influences, etc part of Indian history? I mean, sure they came from outside but they became part of India. Modern India is influenced by many different influences, including Mughal.
I am just trying to clarify what people think, because it sounds like people are arguing that Mughal influenced culture in India is “Middle Eastern”, not “Indian”. When I think of Mughal architecture in India, I think of has a specific Indian style and context– it would not be exactly the same as a Middle Eastern Style of architecture. Also, much about the way Islam is practiced in India/Pakistan is much different from the Middle East– with it’s own South Asian cultural flair. Just because there are Muslims in South Asia doesn’t mean it is synonymous with Middle Eastern. You can say the same about Islamic Eastern European countries, or Christian Japanese people (etc), or Greek or Roman architectural influence in an American governmental building.
This was more true in the past. Times are a changin’ and the influence of Wahabbist missionaries (with their South Asian Deobandi kin) have initiated a program going back to the Khalifat movement before independence to create a sense of Islamic nationalism. This process has been accelerated with the flood of money from the Gulf towards Islamic causes and charities around the world that have all worked to Arabize the practice of Islam in places like India or Indonesia.
On top of the Arabic influence on the modern practice of Islam, you also have Pakistani culture trying to Iranianize themselves to set themselves apart from India. The Urdu of today, for example, uses way more Arab and Farsi vocabulary than the original Hindustani does just as the Hindi of today is slightly more Sanskritized.
i was not commenting on what is – just what mustafa thinks foreigner’ perception of india is. most foreigners are not very well-versed on the muslim and islamic influences in current india, nor about their part in indian history. for many foreigners, india is still largely associated with its hindu cultural and historical aspects.
but only insofar as it applies to areas fully ruled by mughals. if you go to a city like madras, the influence is much less pervasive, relatively speaking.
“Except” for Taj Mahal? “Taj Mahal” is a Hindu palace-temple complex! See the book, Taj Mahal: The True Story.
What people think of traditional Chinese culture is influenced by the Manchu (non-Han) dynasty. Basically, “traditional” Chinese culture is modern.
At the same time North India which is the most familiar form of South Asian culture known to the West was forged by Muslim civilization in India. This is also relatively modern, being forged in the 17th century. Queen Victoria, Empress of India favored her Muslim Desi subjects over her Hindu Desi subjects. This was probably due to her Munshi.
Arjit,
In the pagan religion of Hinduism, the entire subcontinent is sacred real estate. However, the Taj Mahal was a monument to Islamic civilization, the dominant cultural force before Europeans secured their power base in the Indian Ocean basin.
Furthermore, Muslims are the “Jews of Bollywood.”. The classic Indian films all feature Mughal period Muslim women in distress.
“pagan” religion of Hinduism?? “I look white.” How has this troll not been banned already??
WTF,
I’m not the only person of a South Asian background to say on this thread that I’m not brown in skin phenotype. Pagan is not derogatory, if you look up the definition, the term is used in Western languages to refer to the non-Abrahamic religious traditions which are polytheistic in nature. It is a blanket term not only applicable to Hinduism but other traditions like Shintoism in Japan. Even Yoga Fire has the term pagan in that context. Based on his writings, I’m assuming his Hindu. Furthermore, to stereotype all South Asians as “brown” in skin color fails to capture the diversity of the subcontinent. Some Arabs are black while others are white, Arabs constitute an ethnicity, not a single race of people. The Muslim conquests “Arabized” large sections of Western Asia and Africa.
I’ve been quite tolerant in my stances as a Muslim South Asian. I’m not a troll. I am staying on topic. Identity is complex and varies from person to person. That is the beauty of America, here South Asians can agree to disagree without resorting to communal violence, which tends to emerge from time to time.
“At the same time North India which is the most familiar form of South Asian culture known to the West was forged by Muslim civilization in India. This is also relatively modern, being forged in the 17th century. “
I think it is incorrect to say modern Indian culture was “forged my Muslim civilization”. Muslim influence is there, but so is Hindu, British, and more. (Portuguese, French, American, etc). You can’t say modern India is solely from one group– the interactions between the groups into something unique is what made India what it is today.
WTF,
By calling someone a troll, your intention is to question my motives. I like debating, I don’t always agree with everything posted here, but I don’t dismiss someone through name calling. I simply argue the point I disagree with, without insulting them. In Hindi, we have the concept of “adaab” which refers to etiquette and manners. A loan word from Arabic and a religious concept borrowed from Islam, but one that reminds us to act civilly towards each other.
Mustafa,
There is also the hindi word padhati, which derives from the hindu sacred tongue of Sanskrit and also means “etiquette and manners”. Incidentally, it dovetails very nicely with my point. While it does not appear to me that you were trying to provoke people here, you might see how people could get such an idea–though perhaps not prima facie offensive, the word pagan certainly does grate on the ears and in the wrong context could very well be a slur. I myself reread to make sure I did not misinterpret.
That said, perhaps it could be said that it may strike the overly polite here as not wholly informed with SM etiquette. More specifically, it might appear as overly assertive of only one perspective. After all, hindavi is essentially the indigenous dialect of khari bholi, which itself is descended from Prakrit and Sanskrit, informed with persian loan words. Kathak, no matter how de-hinduised in modern Pakistan, is a classical dance that stems from Bharata muni’s magnum opus natya shastra and is related to odissi, kuchipudi, and bharatanatyam. In essence, persian and islamic influences, though admittedly significant and in many respects welcome (i.e. the shayari, the kebab, etc etc), do not imply creation (or forging). After all, the impact of the great North Indian poet Kalidasa has had its stamp on drama, philosophy (see Nietzche) and film (see the movie Water); cuisines continue to retain various traditional elements such as kheers, chutneys and assorted rice dishes; and the Indian flute continues to charm damsels as it did 5,000 years ago in the land of Braj. Even Pakistani generals in ’71 used the continuing influence of hindu culture and tradition on the Bengali muslim as a casus bellum for Operation Searchlight (March 26).
While I myself find that there are many things to admire about this synthesis, it could also be said that the continuing nature of this synthetic culture (even in films as Mr. Akhtar continues to prove) is as much a product of design as it is pervasiveness. After all, there are those (a certain CNN-IBN anchorwoman comes to mind) would have have us believe that culture in the north was always a product of this synthesis, and that culture itself arrived with the horse archers of Ghori, which is false. The traditions (parampara) of the ancient culture continue to motivate that region, whatever the medieval and modern influences. Although I hope to avoid the political here, it could be said that the BJP essentially stands for recognition and retention of that ancient culture. I suppose determining a way to achieve that without alienating others is the million dollar “secular” culture. However, if Iran can find a way to effectively juggle its pre Islamic and Islamic cultures and histories, I think India–and South Asia in general–can find a way to do that too. Finally, I think the point about the Taj Mahal was that it was actually constructed over and included elements of a preceding hindu complex, a la Babri, and is considered an example of “Indo Saracenic” architecture not persian. However, given that there is already enough clashing between Green and Saffron in Hyderabad, I’ll leave that point alone and just give it context.
In sum, I think you asserted a number of fair points and outright facts. The pashtun identity is very much a hybrid of persian and indian elements, and was considered “beyond the pale” (pun not intended) in the Madhyadesha of centuries past. I suppose it is fair to say the desi identity on your part is indeed a matter of choice. Just to bring it all back to the original point however, even the idea of white or looking white is subject to interpretation and evolution (I think a previous comment or post might have already mentioned it): http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/books/review/Gordon-t.html. And just like your non central asian brothers to the south east have a wide range of complexions, including the timeless “wheatish”, it’s fair to say that whiteness itself includes a range that often includes salmon, creamy and lillith sternin crane.
adaab
WTF,
Although I’m always up for a good repartee, he’s not a troll. He’s made some interesting points, especially on Afghan self-identity. What’s say we give him a pass…
It seems SM and its obsession with identity is based on a very US phenomenon of identity politics found on colleges and universities. I once villified all things European or white, embraced an identity that was largely rejected by my community, and viewed as an Ivory Tower liberal out of touch with those less fortunate than me.
Being in the military on deployment in southern Iraq, I had time to reflect about things like self-identity and my South Asian identity was reinforced on a royal Bahraini camel farm when I encountered Desi mathouts of various faiths worship communally and sharing a moment of respite from the sun and manual labor. While in the Middle East, I interacted with more South Asians intimately than local Arabs. In the Gulf kingdoms, home to many Iranian expatriots, I felt home.
Afghanistan was not created by British design like Pakistan, our nationalism is not rooted in Islam, being a Muslim is a given, and Palistan has failed to integrate the Pushtun heartland with the Punjab and Sindh. Pakistan spends less on education than India as a percentage of its GDP, and Afghanistan is one of the most pro-American and pro-Indian Muslim countries in the world. Growing up, the “Aryan” myth was part of my upbringing.
In 2000, 98% of Afghan Americans identified themselves as white while 25% of Pakistani Americans identified themselves as white. Going to UCLA, many Pakistani friends I had who were clearly brown , insisted on their whiteness. This may be distressing to some Mutineers, but identity among South Asians in the Diaspora is far from settled or agreed upon.
Spending relative to GDP is only a reliable metric in countries where you expect the vast majority of the money to actually go where it’s supposed to. This is not the case in either India or Pakistan.
Race categories and definitions in much of US documentation is tied up with the history of racism in this country. Black and white are not racial definitions in any scientific discourse but are part of the racial public discourse that permeates life in the United States. Have you ever actually seen a “white” person? I never have, although some albinos come close. In census documents, race in the political sense is simply a matter of determining entitlement for various politically defined “race” categories. There is a parallel here to constitutional and legislative practice in many countries depending on their prejudice hierarchies. Take India for example. The constitution requires that the extreme aspects of the caste system such as untouchability (read segregation) be unlawful. However in practice, affirmative action protocols are rife in India as a result of a variety of entitlement legislation based on the very same caste system. Unfortunately this notion of entitlement based on prejudice extends even to electoral districts where some castes may not seek election, thus curtailing the notion of democracy. That is precisely similar to what is mentioned as a reason for question 9 on the US census form.
How is asking a question about your race is about as similar to instituting caste-based quotas as swords are to plowshares. That is to say, not similar at all unless you count the fact that they’re made from the same raw material.
Hey all, interesting comment thread. The “race” question is loaded, to be sure. As a born American with ancestry in both West Bengal and Bangladesh, I typically consider myself a “Bengali-American.” In the 2000 Census, I simply considered myself “Asian Indian” (or whatever the equivalent was). Since then, though, I’ve gotten more active in the Bangladeshi community and I realize that, regardless of what you think your “race” is (I know Bangladeshis who claim descent from the Prophet and think they’re white, hah), nonetheless, it is in the interest of most non-Indian South Asians (like Bangadeshis) to be counted as such. It has numerous policy implications—and the lifestyles, wealth, etc. of Bangladeshis in the U.S. is different from those of Indians. The group South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT) has the following clarification on the 2010 Census:
IF I WANT TO BE COUNTED AS INDIAN, PAKISTANI, BANGLADESHI, SRI LANKAN OR NEPALI, HOW SHOULD I ANSWER THE RACE QUESTION? -To be counted as Indian → check “Asian Indian” box -To be counted as Pakistani → check “Other Asian” box and write in “Pakistani” -To be counted as Bangladeshi → check “Other Asian” box and write in “Bangladeshi” -To be counted as Sri Lankan → check “Other Asian” box and write in “Sri Lankan” -To be counted as Nepali → check “Other Asian” box and write in “Nepali” NOTE: If you check the “Asian Indian” box and write in a response under the “Other Asian” box, your race will only be coded as “Other Asian.”
That’s a bold claim that I’d need to see some evidence for. If you subdivide groups enough you’ll always find some distinction and be able to call it a difference, but the only important thing is whether this is actually relevant to what the Census is trying to do.
The Census is a nationwide survey. They necessarily need to lump big groups together. If you want a sub-survey about the needs of South Asians then make a public-private partnership and raise money to do a sample survey. That kind of specificity is not what the general Census is for.
You might be right. 13,971$ is the annual per capita income for Bangladeshi-Americans. 27,514$ is the annual per capita income for Indian Americans. I found the info in the 2000 Census (via Wiki). In the UK, immigrants from India and those of Bangladesh have differing incomes so the same thing in the US might be unsurprising.
Just as a note, the census is not asking for the race of those with South Asian descent. Otherwise the census would not put Indian Americans in one category and Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Sri Lankans or Nepalis in another as “Other Asian”.
RJU,
In traditional Islamic sources, Muhammad is described as being white in skin color, therefore it is not be surprising that the Syed clan, people of South Asian ancestry living in Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, or Bangladesh would claim themselves as being white. The Syeds are the Muslim equivalent to the Brahmin caste, even though Islam rejects caste and class prejudice. In medieval Islamic texts, Arabs described themselves as “white” while Europeans were classified as “red” in skin color and collectively called Franks.
I was oversimplifying when I said there was a South Asian Race.
For an example of a Syeda in India, a look at Khair un Nissa would suffice. I can’t find it online but her son and daughter with a white brit in White Mughals had brown and red hair and looked 100% white. Of course, this look is incredibly rare. Most muslims from the subcontinent don’t look white. Even the fair ones look beige.
“Most muslims from the subcontinent don’t look white. Even the fair ones look beige.”
Who does look white, anyways?
On a lighter note, he does.
“Who does look white, anyways?”
I see what you’re getting at. There’s no objective demarcator that says, if a persons skin reflectance is X ft-candles, they are white. It’s a perceptual-based term that each individual really has socialized onto them. Biologically speaking, race doesnt exist. That doesn’t mean that the concept of race doesn’t exist in people’s heads or that it doesn’t have real, tangible effects.
Obama (even though he’s “half-white”) will never be considered a white person. George Clooney will never be considered black.
If I asked you to point to me where your hand ended and your finger began, you could point to your knuckle. but I could point to 1 micron next to it and say “no it’s here” and neither of us would be right. yet I couldn’t point to your palm’s center , nor could you point to your finger tip and say “here” Get me? the concepts “finger” and “hand” while they have no scientific, objective separator, doesn’t mean at a gross macro level they don’t have meaning and implication. It’s the same thing with race
Shilip, I agree with what you’re saying, but terms can be changed… it seems weird that “white” has persisted so long as a category since it doesn’t really mean anything in regards to race (it does socially, but it works to the detriment rather than for any positive reason).
“Most muslims from the subcontinent don’t look white. Even the fair ones look beige.”
I found this comment really telling in that regard… people are saying whether or not someone “looks” white to decide whether or not they can claim “whiteness”. But it’s not really about that. When I lived in Jaipur, there were some Indians (mostly from the Punjab) who could put their hand next to mine and it would look the same (or some were lighter than me, even). Yet I am “white” and they are “brown”. It’s really not about color at all.
In Muslim circles on the subcontinent, there is a tendency to claim whiteness to differentiate from Hindus. In Afghanistan, many people have rather fair complexions including blonde hair, red hair, and freckles. My Afghan mother is a dirty blonde with fair skin so white people would never assume she is South Asian. However, my oldest sister is brown with dark brown hair. My sister looks quinessentially Desi while I look “white and something else.”. In Afghan families, whiteness is the standard of beauty. Hazara are denigrated because of their East Asian appearance and Mongolian ancestry.
Many Desi Muslims claim either Persian, Arab, or Turkic ancestry. And while wealthier Muslims tend to be of foreign origins, most Muslims are indigenous converts from the subcontinent. However, there sizeable pockets of “white Desis” in the Punjab and Kashmir.
“it seems weird that “white” has persisted so long as a category since it doesn’t really mean anything in regards to race”
I disagree. because something can’t be pinpointed with a discrete scientific boundary (where if you’re on this side of it, your THIS, and if you’re on that side, your THAT) doesn’t mean it doesn’t have any meaning. Re look at my example. It’s like saying the terms “hand” and “finger” dont mean anything because they cannot be accurately defined (where one starts, and the other ends)
“Yet I am “white” and they are “brown”. It’s really not about color at all.”
Well, in India its a different animal. No one is “brown” in India. you’re just a person there, that’s the norm. I agree that much of racial designations have to do with culture, and social root causes, but to say “it’s not about color” is a bit lazy. In the USA, I can never be white. no matter how “internally white” I am. I will never be considered as such, it’s a reality that must be acknowledged.