[Chacmool]

I live in South Africa, and our population is made up of a very wide variety of people. As a result, racial and cultural issues are always being hotly debated. I am white, my first language is Afrikaans, and I was born in this country. All my recent ancestors were also born here; my great-great-grandfather came to South Africa from Ireland.

I would like some input on the following question: am I African or European?

[coldcreation]

Originally Posted by Chacmool

I live in South Africa, and our population is made up of a very wide variety of people. As a result, racial and cultural issues are always being hotly debated. I am white, my first language is Afrikaans, and I was born in this country. All my recent ancestors were also born here; my great-great-grandfather came to South Africa from Ireland.

I would like some input on the following question: am I African or European?

Hello Chacmool,
Thanks,
You are both African or European, just like blacks in the States are Afro-Americans.
Enjoy!
A.M. aka Coldcreation

[Chacmool]

Originally Posted by coldcreation

Hello Chacmool,
Thanks,
You are both African or European, just like blacks in the States are Afro-Americans.
Enjoy!
A.M. aka Coldcreation

That would seem to be the logical answer. However, on virtually every form you complete in South Africa, you have to indicate your race. The options usually are: White, Coloured, Indian and African. Am I not African too? Should I tick two boxes? And anyway, according to the latest research we are all descendants of an ancient Afican forefather(and "foremother", of course!). Do these distinctions really matter?

To confuse the matter even more: in our laws that govern black economic empowerment, "black" refers to everyone who is not white, i.e. Coloured and Indian as well.

[UncleAl]

All my recent ancestors were also born here; my great-great-grandfather came to South Africa from Ireland. Am I African or European?

What makes you think your ancestors' ancestors were Irish? Three generations in place makes you a local. Are Australians English prisoners who served their time? They should be allowed to go home and their property returned to them. That is obviously a silly statement.

Funny... you don't look like an African. "8^>)

[zadojla]

In the United States, where we are asked to voluntarily provide our ethnicity on more government forms, in the interest of "fairness", they foolishly use geographical terms, when they really want to ask your race.
So, "African-American" really means "negroid", "Asian-American" really means "mongoloid", etc. It is considered incorrect for a white South African to mark off "African-American" or for an Isreali to mark off "Asian-American".
To make it more confusing, they are now allowing people to specify mixed ethnicity.

[Chacmool]

Originally Posted by UncleAl

What makes you think your ancestors' ancestors were Irish? Three generations in place makes you a local. Are Australians English prisoners who served their time? They should be allowed to go home and their property returned to them. That is obviously a silly statement.

Funny... you don't look like an African. "8^>)

Exactly. I do consider myself to be a local. I have no claims whatsoever to anything in Ireland. However, I'm not being made to feel very welcome as an African either. Where does that leave me? Where do I belong?

What does an African look like? The continent is enormous, and it's home to a vast variety of people. I don't think one can say what a "typical African" looks like, because there simply is no such thing.

[Chacmool]

Originally Posted by zadojla

In the United States, where we are asked to voluntarily provide our ethnicity on more government forms, in the interest of "fairness", they foolishly use geographical terms, when they really want to ask your race.
So, "African-American" really means "negroid", "Asian-American" really means "mongoloid", etc. It is considered incorrect for a white South African to mark off "African-American" or for an Isreali to mark off "Asian-American".
To make it more confusing, they are now allowing people to specify mixed ethnicity.

Very interesting. But who determines where the line is drawn between "negroid" and "mongoloid" and "caucasian"? During the apartheid era in South Africa, families were sometimes torn apart when children with the same parents got classified into different racial groups. What about people of mixed descent? Aren't we all really of mixed descent? Is it even really necessary to distinguish between the various (arbitrary) racial categories?

What racial category would I, as a white South African, be expected to choose if I can't consider myself to be an African American (if I were to live in the US)?

[zadojla]

Originally Posted by Chacmool

Very interesting. But who determines where the line is drawn between "negroid" and "mongoloid" and "caucasian"? During the apartheid era in South Africa, families were sometimes torn apart when children with the same parents got classified into different racial groups. What about people of mixed descent? Aren't we all really of mixed descent? Is it even really necessary to distinguish between the various (arbitrary) racial categories?

What racial category would I, as a white South African, be expected to choose if I can't consider myself to be an African American (if I were to live in the US)?

This is very unlike apartheid. Each person decides what they answer, so it is perfectly possible for a person to misdescribe themselves. There is no penalty or audit. My understanding of racial classification under apartheid was that skin color was the prime determining factor, rather that race or ethnicity.
Starting with the 2000 census, people were allowed to specify mixed descent, again all self-identfied. Interestingly, there is not usually a category "European-American", that choice is usually "White". And of course, "Native American" means not only "Indian", but "Eskimo" and "Aleut".
We know a woman who is a white, English-speaking, South Afican, and she gets very huffy if I refer to her as "African-American". And her children were born here, so what are they? Whatever they want.

[Chacmool]

Originally Posted by zadojla

This is very unlike apartheid. Each person decides what they answer, so it is perfectly possible for a person to misdescribe themselves. There is no penalty or audit. My understanding of racial classification under apartheid was that skin color was the prime determining factor, rather that race or ethnicity.
Starting with the 2000 census, people were allowed to specify mixed descent, again all self-identfied. Interestingly, there is not usually a category "European-American", that choice is usually "White". And of course, "Native American" means not only "Indian", but "Eskimo" and "Aleut".
We know a woman who is a white, English-speaking, South Afican, and she gets very huffy if I refer to her as "African-American". And her children were born here, so what are they? Whatever they want.

Of course I'm not comparing my situation to apartheid - sorry if I created that impression. I merely wanted to illustrate how dividing people into arbitrary categories can have catastrophic results.

Skin colour is indeed still the basis for deciding a person's racial classification. This can be very problematic in a society with such diverse origins as ours. Due to the current policy of affirmative action, one's racial classification can have a far-reaching impact on various factors, such as job opportunities and land claims.

[sanctus]

Chacmol when you go to ireland do you feel like going home or into holidays? Your answer will tell you where you belong.
Your question if it is necessary to definy arbitrary racial differences is a personal opinion. I don't think it, there is no neccessity to create differences between humans and if there is the need to (as some humans have the need to separe themselves from others to feel "secure") it should be made on cultural diferences and not skin color as that nowadays doesn't make any sense.

And last but not least welcome to the forum.