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

Appearances, Experiences and other matters

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 6 , Aug 4, 2005
    • 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 2 of 6 , Aug 4, 2005
      • 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 3 of 6 , Aug 4, 2005
        • 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 4 of 6 , Aug 18, 2005
          • 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.