Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Up comming new artist rihanna

Expand Messages
  • john
    There is a new mgm barbadian mixee.Her name is rihanna.Her song depon de replay.A mixture of reggae and dancehall in her song.The barbados has a lot of mgm
    Message 1 of 6 , Aug 4, 2005
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      There is a new mgm barbadian mixee.Her name is rihanna.Her song depon de replay.A mixture of reggae and dancehall in her song.The barbados has a lot of mgm mixed people of british blood lines and rihanna is a good example.http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/news/2005-08-01-otv-rihanna-x.htm
       


      Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
    • j s
      Ok - here goes. I have had discussions with some people I know to be biracial and they feel like being mixed for the most part means being a fusion of
      Message 2 of 6 , Aug 4, 2005
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Ok - here goes.
         
        I have had discussions with some people I know to be biracial and they feel like being mixed for the most part means being a fusion of differant pieces into a new whole. Their take on the MGM situation is that, while there may be a slight variation in appearance compared to the mainstream of one's particular ethnic group, because blacks ( since that is apparently the common denominator in most of the members here) and those who are socially and culturally identified as black, come in a variety of tones and textures ( basically thanks to one-drop mentality ) and are seen as that way moreso than being an actual mix. Also the cultural experience of MGMs generally is not the same since quite often their parents are from the same social strata, cultural background etc. and it's quite differant from having a parent who is a completely differant background/ethnicity/race/language from the other parent.
         
        Are we really expressing our external experience here since, if the majority come from a more or less common environment, the real "mixed " nature of our lives are about how others percieve us based on our differance in appearance from the majority of our group, as opposed to the more "internal" experience a biracial / bicultural person feels trying to make their pieces fit together and reconcile various conflicts.
         
        For example, the life of a New Orleans Creole who has two Creole parents and comes from that environment, is going to be quite differant from that of a biracial person who has one white and one black parent, and grew up seeing that blending of differances in their home, even if their actual DNA breakdowns are identical. A Dominican or Brazillian could easily be used for the same example. Technically they are MGM in a sense, but is it really the same?
         


        Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page

      • multiracialbookclub
        Thanks for sharing your comments and thoughts on this with us, Jeff. You have presented two very intriguing and interesting inquiries for discussion. (See:
        Message 3 of 6 , Aug 4, 2005
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Thanks for sharing your comments
          and thoughts on this with us, Jeff.

          You have presented two very intriguing
          and interesting inquiries for discussion.

          (See: "another potentially touchy subject" posting found at:
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Generation-Mixed/message/167)

          One thing I wanted to say was that (in my opinion) –
          the `appearances' and `experiences' of many of those
          who are MGM-Mixed are most definitely not always
          `the same' as that of those who are FGM-Mixed
          --- nor is there any reason for any of
          us to feel that they should 'have to be'.

          In addition --–(again, just in my humble opinion)–--
          although a number of what I would refer to as the more
          *malevolently-militant mulattoes* (MMMs) – may choose
          to use terms such as `technically'-mixed (and most often
          condescendingly so) in reference to those who are do not fit their
          preconceived or stereotypical `vision' or notion of what a mixed
          person is or is `supposed' to look like and/or `experience' in life
          --- (with the MGM-mixed populace being their most frequent target
          and, even then, certain groups targeted more so than others)
          --- there is actually no such thing as being `technically' mixed.

          A person is simply either `mixed'-raced or they are
          `mono'-racial --- and the much-quoted (and completely true)
          phrase that "there is no such thing as a `pure' race"
          --- does not in any way change the fact of this matter.

          It should be remembered that the majority of the
          Mixed-people (particularly those of MGM-Mixed
          ancestry `throughout' their familial lineage) who
          are insultingly and condescendingly referred to as
          `technically'-mixed – are not laying nor have they ever
          laid claim to any type of "ancient ancestor" theory
          ---(i.e. the one that goes `well, my one-and-only
          great, great, great `whatever ancestor'... was a
          `whatever race' – so that makes me `mixed')---
          despite the false accusation of doing so that
          is repeatedly thrown at them by people who have
          not bothered to hear a thing that they have to say
          or learn a thing about their lineages or heritage.

          As far as `experience' goes or `features' go ...
          I personally have always wondered the following:

          "What right does any one group of mixed people
          have to imply or claim that `their experience'
          is "the experience" or that `their features'
          are "the standard" for being mixed-raced?"

          In my case, I am MGM-Mixed as a result of the
          tri-racial ancestry which has made up my family's
          heritage `throughout' our lineage (as opposed to
          "mixed 'down' the line" --- which is the offensive
          phrase I often hear used by those who favor using
          the condescending term `technically'-mixed).

          My father has a much lighter complexion and much
          more Euro features than my mother (whose features
          appear to be more of that of the African/Amerindian
          phenotype) and has typically been mistaken for every
          group ranging from Hispanic to Mediterranean.

          My parents looked like; were often assumed to be;
          and were generally treated as an `inter-racial' couple.

          Although both parents are of the same `ethnicity',
          they actually grew up in totally different social
          stratas and had very different cultural experiences,
          perceptions and worldviews in their upbringing
          and in how they decided to raise me as a child.

          Often, once a person "discovers" that I am not
          FGM-Mixed, but rather, am MGM-Mixed, they assume
          that either one or both of my parents look identical
          to me; that I could `relate' to them on all levels;
          and that my life was a social and emotional breeze.

          The truth of the matter is ... that, like many
          MGM-Mixed people, my life experiences (much like
          my features) was practically a mirror-image of
          that of so very many FGM-Mixed individuals --
          including looking like a blending of my parents
          (rather than 'the same as' either .. although
          my features are closest to that of my dad's);
          being picked on and called negative name by others;
          having all the wrong products used in my hair; etc.

          In fact, most of the FGM-Mixed people I knew growing
          up and have met throughout my life – actually received
          much more `support' (in everything ranging from social
          `acceptance' to encouragement to `embrace' one's particular
          mixed-raced lineage) than did those of us who are MGM-Mixed
          -- with identical or near identical features and experiences as
          well as with parents who had the `inter-racial' couple `appearance'.

          As a result, it just never ceases to amaze me how often
          some mixed individuals choose to make appearance-based
          assumptions about, of all things, the `experiences' of others.

          For instance, I simply cannot count the number of times
          I have heard an FGM-Mixed person make assumptions
          about the alleged `ease' of an MGM-Mixed person's
          upbringing, life `experiences' or feelings of `acceptance'
          – or – to refer to an MGM-Mixed person by the term
          `technically'-mixed or by some `mono'-racial term
          (despite the fact that the MGM-Mixed person has
          made it clear that they consider said behavior
          to be condescending, one-droppist and offensive).

          Please be aware that I am not presenting this in order to
          try to divide `our' people into two camps of FGM and MGM
          (after all, we are *a people* and should seek to
          promote *unity* among our many communities
          found throughout this nation and worldwide.)

          As mixed-raced people – whether FGM or MGM
          (or any other acronym which people may use)
          – we really must begin to work hard to stop making
          assumptions about another person's experiences,
          phenotype or genotype and stop making the divisive
          insistence that the particular experiences, phenotype
          or genotype of any one "group" should or could ever be
          considered as "the" standard for being mixed-raced.

          Thanks again for sharing your comments and presenting your
          inquiries to us all, Jeff – as I really think this will give
          us all a great opportunity for discussion and food for thought.

          Have a great day.

          :D

          [[NOTE:
          MGM==”Multi’-Generationally Mixed
          FGM==’First’-Generational Mixed]]

          In Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com,
          j s <creolescience@y...> wrote:

          Ok - here goes.

          I have had discussions with some people I know
          to be biracial and they feel like being mixed
          for the most part means being a fusion
          of differant pieces into a new whole.

          Their take on the MGM situation is that,
          while there may be a slight variation in
          appearance compared to the mainstream of
          one's particular ethnic group, because `blacks'
          (since that is apparently the common
          denominator in most of the members here)
          and those who are socially and culturally identified
          as black, come in a variety of tones and textures
          (basically thanks to one-drop mentality )
          and are seen as that way moreso than being an actual mix.

          Also the cultural experience of MGMs generally is
          not the same since quite often their parents are from
          the same social strata, cultural background etc.
          and it's quite differant from having a parent who
          is a completely differant background/ ethnicity/
          race/ language from the other parent.

          Are we really expressing our
          external experience here since,
          if the majority come from a more
          or less common environment,
          the real "mixed " nature of our lives are about
          how others percieve us based on our differance
          in appearance from the majority of our group,
          as opposed to the more "internal" experience a
          biracial / bicultural person feels trying to make their
          pieces fit together and reconcile various conflicts.

          For example, the life of a New Orleans Creole who has
          two Creole parents and comes from that environment,
          is going to be quite differant from that of a biracial
          person who has one white and one black parent,
          and grew up seeing that blending
          of differances in their home,
          even if their actual DNA breakdowns are identical.
          A Dominican or Brazillian could easily
          be used for the same example.
          Technically they are MGM in a sense,
          but is it really the same?
        • j s
          I ve always felt that , at least in general ( not including the situation of a very divided household where the parents are almost cultural opposites ), the
          Message 4 of 6 , Aug 4, 2005
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            I've always felt that , at least in general ( not including the situation of a very divided household  where the parents are almost cultural opposites ), the "mixed" experience is basically one that is "experienced". Meaning, we are aware of our differances from others because it is so frequently pointed out and it creates internal questions, awarenesses and even self doubt ( or at least a desire to "understand") that most others don't have. Were we to never have a comment about " what are you" or other such things we'd simply be like any other kid growing up and playing.
            And it's basically because we don't look more homogenous that it is usually brought up ( that or we look so differant from our parents). But it's funny how we are only differant generally because of our variance from the local norm. We see  white couples comprised of a blond haired, blue eyed nordic and a swarthy brown eyed Italian and see them as a white couple; we see a darker skinned african with a caramel colored person whose hair may or may not be naturally straight, and see a "black" couple. It's only when the features don't "match up" (meaning the "wrong " coloring to go with a facial structure, or "wrong" hair texture for the physical type) that it is noticed. Were most of us to be living in a Latin country we would simply be a local.
             
            I will say that the first time in my life I ever truly felt "at home" was when I moved to New Orleans and saw so many people that looked like me. My appearance was nothing unusual nor remarked on ( at least not in unflattering terms ;p). It was truly liberating to finally "fit in" and , even though they knew I wasn't a true Creole, they still saw me as one of their own.
             
              
            multiracialbookclub <soaptalk@...> wrote:
            Thanks for sharing your comments
            and thoughts on this with us, Jeff.

            You have presented two very intriguing
            and interesting inquiries for discussion.

            (See: "another potentially touchy subject" posting found at:
            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Generation-Mixed/message/167)

            One thing I wanted to say was that (in my opinion) –
            the `appearances' and `experiences' of many of those
            who are MGM-Mixed are most definitely not always
            `the same' as that of those who are FGM-Mixed
            --- nor is there any reason for any of
            us to feel that they should 'have to be'.

            In addition --–(again, just in my humble opinion)–--
            although a number of what I would refer to as the more
            *malevolently-militant mulattoes* (MMMs) – may choose
            to use terms such as `technically'-mixed (and most often
            condescendingly so) in reference to those who are do not fit their
            preconceived or stereotypical `vision' or notion of what a mixed
            person is or is `supposed' to look like and/or `experience' in life
            --- (with the MGM-mixed populace being their most frequent target
            and, even then, certain groups targeted more so than others)
            --- there is actually no such thing as being `technically' mixed.

            A person is simply either `mixed'-raced or they are
            `mono'-racial --- and the much-quoted (and completely true)
            phrase that "there is no such thing as a `pure' race"
            --- does not in any way change the fact of this matter.

            It should be remembered that the majority of the
            Mixed-people (particularly those of MGM-Mixed
            ancestry `throughout' their familial lineage) who
            are insultingly and condescendingly referred to as
            `technically'-mixed – are not laying nor have they ever
            laid claim to any type of "ancient ancestor" theory
            ---(i.e. the one that goes `well, my one-and-only
            great, great, great `whatever ancestor'... was a
            `whatever race' – so that makes me `mixed')---
            despite the false accusation of doing so that
            is repeatedly thrown at them by people who have
            not bothered to hear a thing that they have to say
            or learn a thing about their lineages or heritage.

            As far as `experience' goes or `features' go ...
            I personally have always wondered the following:

            "What right does any one group of mixed people
            have to imply or claim that `their experience'
            is "the experience" or that `their features'
            are "the standard" for being mixed-raced?"

            In my case, I am MGM-Mixed as a result of the
            tri-racial ancestry which has made up my family's
            heritage `throughout' our lineage (as opposed to
            "mixed 'down' the line" --- which is the offensive
            phrase I often hear used by those who favor using
            the condescending term `technically'-mixed).

            My father has a much lighter complexion and much
            more Euro features than my mother (whose features
            appear to be more of that of the African/Amerindian
            phenotype) and has typically been mistaken for every
            group ranging from Hispanic to Mediterranean.

            My parents looked like; were often assumed to be;
            and were generally treated as an `inter-racial' couple.

            Although both parents are of the same `ethnicity',
            they actually grew up in totally different social
            stratas and had very different cultural experiences,
            perceptions and worldviews in their upbringing
            and in how they decided to raise me as a child.

            Often, once a person "discovers" that I am not
            FGM-Mixed, but rather, am MGM-Mixed, they assume
            that either one or both of my parents look identical
            to me; that I could `relate' to them on all levels;
            and that my life was a social and emotional breeze.

            The truth of the matter is ... that, like many
            MGM-Mixed people, my life experiences (much like
            my features) was practically a mirror-image of
            that of so very many FGM-Mixed individuals --
            including looking like a blending of my parents
            (rather than 'the same as' either .. although
            my features are closest to that of my dad's);
            being picked on and called negative name by others;
            having all the wrong products used in my hair; etc.

            In fact, most of the FGM-Mixed people I knew growing
            up and have met throughout my life – actually received
            much more `support' (in everything ranging from social
            `acceptance' to encouragement to `embrace' one's particular
            mixed-raced lineage) than did those of us who are MGM-Mixed
            -- with identical or near identical features and experiences as
            well as with parents who had the `inter-racial' couple `appearance'.

            As a result, it just never ceases to amaze me how often
            some mixed individuals choose to make appearance-based
            assumptions about, of all things, the `experiences' of others.

            For instance, I simply cannot count the number of times
            I have heard an FGM-Mixed person make assumptions
            about the alleged `ease' of an MGM-Mixed person's
            upbringing, life `experiences' or feelings of `acceptance'
            – or – to refer to an MGM-Mixed person by the term
            `technically'-mixed or by some `mono'-racial term
            (despite the fact that the MGM-Mixed person has
            made it clear that they consider said behavior
            to be condescending, one-droppist and offensive).

            Please be aware that I am not presenting this in order to
            try to divide `our' people into two camps of FGM and MGM
            (after all, we are *a people* and should seek to
            promote *unity* among our many communities
            found throughout this nation and worldwide.)

            As mixed-raced people – whether FGM or MGM
            (or any other acronym which people may use)
            – we really must begin to work hard to stop making
            assumptions about another person's experiences,
            phenotype or genotype and stop making the divisive
            insistence that the particular experiences, phenotype
            or genotype of any one "group" should or could ever be
            considered as "the" standard for being mixed-raced.

            Thanks again for sharing your comments and presenting your
            inquiries to us all, Jeff – as I really think this will give
            us all a great opportunity for discussion and food for thought.

            Have a great day.

            :D

            [[NOTE:
            MGM==”Multi’-Generationally Mixed
            FGM==’First’-Generational Mixed]]

            In Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com,
            j s <creolescience@y...> wrote:

            Ok - here goes.

            I have had discussions with some people I know
            to be biracial and they feel like being mixed
            for the most part means being a fusion
            of differant pieces into a new whole.

            Their take on the MGM situation is that,
            while there may be a slight variation in
            appearance compared to the mainstream of
            one's particular ethnic group, because `blacks'
            (since that is apparently the common
            denominator in most of the members here)
            and those who are socially and culturally identified
            as black, come in a variety of tones and textures
            (basically thanks to one-drop mentality )
            and are seen as that way moreso than being an actual mix.

            Also the cultural experience of MGMs generally is
            not the same since quite often their parents are from
            the same social strata, cultural background etc.
            and it's quite differant from having a parent who
            is a completely differant background/ ethnicity/
            race/ language from the other parent.

            Are we really expressing our
            external experience here since,
            if the majority come from a more
            or less common environment,
            the real "mixed " nature of our lives are about
            how others percieve us based on our differance
            in appearance from the majority of our group,
            as opposed to the more "internal" experience a
            biracial / bicultural person feels trying to make their
            pieces fit together and reconcile various conflicts.

            For example, the life of a New Orleans Creole who has
            two Creole parents and comes from that environment,
            is going to be quite differant from that of a biracial
            person who has one white and one black parent,
            and grew up seeing that blending
            of differances in their home,
            even if their actual DNA breakdowns are identical.
            A Dominican or Brazillian could easily
            be used for the same example.
            Technically they are MGM in a sense,
            but is it really the same?



            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            http://mail.yahoo.com

          • sudoangel2000
            I will say that the first time in my life I ever truly felt at home was when I moved to New Orleans and saw so many people that looked like me. My
            Message 5 of 6 , Aug 4, 2005
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              "I will say that the first time in my life I ever truly felt "at
              home" was when I moved to New Orleans and saw so many people that
              looked like me. My appearance was nothing unusual nor remarked on (
              at least not in unflattering terms ;p). It was truly liberating to
              finally "fit in" and , even though they knew I wasn't a true Creole,
              they still saw me as one of their own."


              I think that feeling is what most want in this world. I felt the
              same in France as you do in New Orleans. No strange looks, no
              questions, just acceptance of who I am as a person.


              In Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com,
              j s <creolescience@y...wrote:

              I've always felt that , at least in general ( not including the
              situation of a very divided household where the parents are almost
              cultural opposites ), the "mixed" experience is basically one that
              is "experienced". Meaning, we are aware of our differances from
              others because it is so frequently pointed out and it creates
              internal questions, awarenesses and even self doubt ( or at least a
              desire to "understand") that most others don't have. Were we to never
              have a comment about " what are you" or other such things we'd simply
              be like any other kid growing up and playing.
              And it's basically because we don't look more homogenous that it is
              usually brought up ( that or we look so differant from our parents).
              But it's funny how we are only differant generally because of our
              variance from the local norm. We see white couples comprised of a
              blond haired, blue eyed nordic and a swarthy brown eyed Italian and
              see them as a white couple; we see a darker skinned african with a
              caramel colored person whose hair may or may not be naturally
              straight, and see a "black" couple. It's only when the features
              don't "match up" (meaning the "wrong " coloring to go with a facial
              structure, or "wrong" hair texture for the physical type) that it is
              noticed. Were most of us to be living in a Latin country we would
              simply be a local.

              I will say that the first time in my life I ever truly felt "at
              home" was when I moved to New Orleans and saw so many people that
              looked like me. My appearance was nothing unusual nor remarked on (
              at least not in unflattering terms ;p). It was truly liberating to
              finally "fit in" and , even though they knew I wasn't a true Creole,
              they still saw me as one of their own.


              multiracialbookclub <soaptalk@h...> wrote:


              Thanks for sharing your comments
              and thoughts on this with us, Jeff.

              You have presented two very intriguing
              and interesting inquiries for discussion.

              (See: "another potentially touchy subject" posting found at:
              http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Generation-Mixed/message/167)

              One thing I wanted to say was that (in my opinion) –
              the `appearances' and `experiences' of many of those
              who are MGM-Mixed are most definitely not always
              `the same' as that of those who are FGM-Mixed
              --- nor is there any reason for any of
              us to feel that they should 'have to be'.

              In addition --–(again, just in my humble opinion)–--
              although a number of what I would refer to as the more
              *malevolently-militant mulattoes* (MMMs) – may choose
              to use terms such as `technically'-mixed (and most often
              condescendingly so) in reference to those who are do not fit their
              preconceived or stereotypical `vision' or notion of what a mixed
              person is or is `supposed' to look like and/or `experience' in life
              --- (with the MGM-mixed populace being their most frequent target
              and, even then, certain groups targeted more so than others)
              --- there is actually no such thing as being `technically' mixed.

              A person is simply either `mixed'-raced or they are
              `mono'-racial --- and the much-quoted (and completely true)
              phrase that "there is no such thing as a `pure' race"
              --- does not in any way change the fact of this matter.

              It should be remembered that the majority of the
              Mixed-people (particularly those of MGM-Mixed
              ancestry `throughout' their familial lineage) who
              are insultingly and condescendingly referred to as
              `technically'-mixed – are not laying nor have they ever
              laid claim to any type of "ancient ancestor" theory
              ---(i.e. the one that goes `well, my one-and-only
              great, great, great `whatever ancestor'... was a
              `whatever race' – so that makes me `mixed')---
              despite the false accusation of doing so that
              is repeatedly thrown at them by people who have
              not bothered to hear a thing that they have to say
              or learn a thing about their lineages or heritage.

              As far as `experience' goes or `features' go ...
              I personally have always wondered the following:

              "What right does any one group of mixed people
              have to imply or claim that `their experience'
              is "the experience" or that `their features'
              are "the standard" for being mixed-raced?"

              In my case, I am MGM-Mixed as a result of the
              tri-racial ancestry which has made up my family's
              heritage `throughout' our lineage (as opposed to
              "mixed 'down' the line" --- which is the offensive
              phrase I often hear used by those who favor using
              the condescending term `technically'-mixed).

              My father has a much lighter complexion and much
              more Euro features than my mother (whose features
              appear to be more of that of the African/Amerindian
              phenotype) and has typically been mistaken for every
              group ranging from Hispanic to Mediterranean.

              My parents looked like; were often assumed to be;
              and were generally treated as an `inter-racial' couple.

              Although both parents are of the same `ethnicity',
              they actually grew up in totally different social
              stratas and had very different cultural experiences,
              perceptions and worldviews in their upbringing
              and in how they decided to raise me as a child.

              Often, once a person "discovers" that I am not
              FGM-Mixed, but rather, am MGM-Mixed, they assume
              that either one or both of my parents look identical
              to me; that I could `relate' to them on all levels;
              and that my life was a social and emotional breeze.

              The truth of the matter is ... that, like many
              MGM-Mixed people, my life experiences (much like
              my features) was practically a mirror-image of
              that of so very many FGM-Mixed individuals --
              including looking like a blending of my parents
              (rather than 'the same as' either .. although
              my features are closest to that of my dad's);
              being picked on and called negative name by others;
              having all the wrong products used in my hair; etc.

              In fact, most of the FGM-Mixed people I knew growing
              up and have met throughout my life – actually received
              much more `support' (in everything ranging from social
              `acceptance' to encouragement to `embrace' one's particular
              mixed-raced lineage) than did those of us who are MGM-Mixed
              -- with identical or near identical features and experiences as
              well as with parents who had the `inter-racial' couple `appearance'.

              As a result, it just never ceases to amaze me how often
              some mixed individuals choose to make appearance-based
              assumptions about, of all things, the `experiences' of others.

              For instance, I simply cannot count the number of times
              I have heard an FGM-Mixed person make assumptions
              about the alleged `ease' of an MGM-Mixed person's
              upbringing, life `experiences' or feelings of `acceptance'
              – or – to refer to an MGM-Mixed person by the term
              `technically'-mixed or by some `mono'-racial term
              (despite the fact that the MGM-Mixed person has
              made it clear that they consider said behavior
              to be condescending, one-droppist and offensive).

              Please be aware that I am not presenting this in order to
              try to divide `our' people into two camps of FGM and MGM
              (after all, we are *a people* and should seek to
              promote *unity* among our many communities
              found throughout this nation and worldwide.)

              As mixed-raced people – whether FGM or MGM
              (or any other acronym which people may use)
              – we really must begin to work hard to stop making
              assumptions about another person's experiences,
              phenotype or genotype and stop making the divisive
              insistence that the particular experiences, phenotype
              or genotype of any one "group" should or could ever be
              considered as "the" standard for being mixed-raced.

              Thanks again for sharing your comments and presenting your
              inquiries to us all, Jeff – as I really think this will give
              us all a great opportunity for discussion and food for thought.

              Have a great day.

              :D

              [[NOTE:
              MGM===="Multi'-Generationally Mixed
              FGM===='First'-Generational Mixed]]

              In Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com,
              j s <creolescience@y...> wrote:

              Ok - here goes.

              I have had discussions with some people I know
              to be biracial and they feel like being mixed
              for the most part means being a fusion
              of differant pieces into a new whole.

              Their take on the MGM situation is that,
              while there may be a slight variation in
              appearance compared to the mainstream of
              one's particular ethnic group, because `blacks'
              (since that is apparently the common
              denominator in most of the members here)
              and those who are socially and culturally identified
              as black, come in a variety of tones and textures
              (basically thanks to one-drop mentality )
              and are seen as that way moreso than being an actual mix.

              Also the cultural experience of MGMs generally is
              not the same since quite often their parents are from
              the same social strata, cultural background etc.
              and it's quite differant from having a parent who
              is a completely differant background/ ethnicity/
              race/ language from the other parent.

              Are we really expressing our
              external experience here since,
              if the majority come from a more
              or less common environment,
              the real "mixed " nature of our lives are about
              how others percieve us based on our differance
              in appearance from the majority of our group,
              as opposed to the more "internal" experience a
              biracial / bicultural person feels trying to make their
              pieces fit together and reconcile various conflicts.

              For example, the life of a New Orleans Creole who has
              two Creole parents and comes from that environment,
              is going to be quite differant from that of a biracial
              person who has one white and one black parent,
              and grew up seeing that blending
              of differances in their home,
              even if their actual DNA breakdowns are identical.
              A Dominican or Brazillian could easily
              be used for the same example.
              Technically they are MGM in a sense,
              but is it really the same?
            • Brittany Link
              their is a diff in the way we d be raised and ethic identiy, but we d still be mixed. j s wrote:Ok - here goes. I have had
              Message 6 of 6 , Aug 18, 2005
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                their is a diff in the way we'd be raised and ethic identiy, but we'd still be mixed.

                j s <creolescience@...> wrote:
                Ok - here goes.
                 
                I have had discussions with some people I know to be biracial and they feel like being mixed for the most part means being a fusion of differant pieces into a new whole. Their take on the MGM situation is that, while there may be a slight variation in appearance compared to the mainstream of one's particular ethnic group, because blacks ( since that is apparently the common denominator in most of the members here) and those who are socially and culturally identified as black, come in a variety of tones and textures ( basically thanks to one-drop mentality ) and are seen as that way moreso than being an actual mix. Also the cultural experience of MGMs generally is not the same since quite often their parents are from the same social strata, cultural background etc. and it's quite differant from having a parent who is a completely differant background/ethnicity/race/language from the other parent.
                 
                Are we really expressing our external experience here since, if the majority come from a more or less common environment, the real "mixed " nature of our lives are about how others percieve us based on our differance in appearance from the majority of our group, as opposed to the more "internal" experience a biracial / bicultural person feels trying to make their pieces fit together and reconcile various conflicts.
                 
                For example, the life of a New Orleans Creole who has two Creole parents and comes from that environment, is going to be quite differant from that of a biracial person who has one white and one black parent, and grew up seeing that blending of differances in their home, even if their actual DNA breakdowns are identical. A Dominican or Brazillian could easily be used for the same example. Technically they are MGM in a sense, but is it really the same?
                 


                Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page

                __________________________________________________
                Do You Yahoo!?
                Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                http://mail.yahoo.com

              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.