I've noticed that "Hispanic" is not a race in the US Census. But how come? It only has "White Hispanic" and "Black Hispanic"....but what about the millions who are mixed with indigineous Indian, making them tanned? They surely are NOT White, and they aren't Black either! And they aren't "native american", and don't relate to the native american culture either! So that seems a bit WRONG on the part of the Census not to see hispanic as a race, right? Anyone can explain that?
I also know Arabs are seen as white on US census - they are NOT! My boyfriend is Arab, tanned, and looks nowhere near White and doesn't even think of himself as White, his race everywhere else (except the US) is ARAB, not white.
Anyone can explain? Or is this a short coming of the US Census?
To 'Biracial Babe' - you are seeing it through "anthropological" eyes and even then you've left out a fourth race which they use. In any case, there are FAR more than 3 races outside anthropology, and the US census doesn't go by that! Otherwise Indians should be "Caucasian" too, and they are NOT, according to the US Census! My Arab bf is not Caucasian either, he might be in features, but certainly not skin color, and it doesn't make sense that Arabs are caucasian according to the US Census, but Indians are not!
To "SP", um Arab is a race. My bf is Arab so I should know! It is a race on its own. Middle Easterner - that's the race.
To "Biracial Babe" - Asian Indians are definitely NOT the same as "Mongoloid" /Asian as seen in Anthropology! How can they be the same when their features are so different from the Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, etc? Yes, in the US Census, Asian Indians are termed as Asian, but you are talking about how there are only 3 races, which is anthropological - and in anthropology, indians are "caucasian"! So how come they are NOT caucasian in the US census, but Arabs are? Makes no sense to me.
Hehe, to "Biracial Babe", you're mixing up the two now - first you talked about anthropologically there being only THREE races, in that case, ANTHROPOLOGICALLY speaking Indians come under "Caucasian" - this is FACT. Now you say it depends on who you ask? Well, anthropology is anthropology, it can't change according to who you ask. Indians are Caucasian ------------- anthropologically speaking. Fact.
PS ----------- and my point is that skin color ASIDE, a LOT of hispanics DO NOT look White or Black features wise! That is my point! They look NATIVE INDIAN, so they can't tick "hispanic white" or "hispanic black". That's my only simple point! The US Census form is not right.
PPS --- In the US Census, - i just checked - it says WHITE and not Caucasian! So how can Arabs like my bf be WHITE?????? That's ridiculous!!! The US Census needs an overhaul!!!
I also know Arabs are seen as white on US census - they are NOT! My boyfriend is Arab, tanned, and looks nowhere near White and doesn't even think of himself as White, his race everywhere else (except the US) is ARAB, not white.
Anyone can explain? Or is this a short coming of the US Census?
To 'Biracial Babe' - you are seeing it through "anthropological" eyes and even then you've left out a fourth race which they use. In any case, there are FAR more than 3 races outside anthropology, and the US census doesn't go by that! Otherwise Indians should be "Caucasian" too, and they are NOT, according to the US Census! My Arab bf is not Caucasian either, he might be in features, but certainly not skin color, and it doesn't make sense that Arabs are caucasian according to the US Census, but Indians are not!
To "SP", um Arab is a race. My bf is Arab so I should know! It is a race on its own. Middle Easterner - that's the race.
To "Biracial Babe" - Asian Indians are definitely NOT the same as "Mongoloid" /Asian as seen in Anthropology! How can they be the same when their features are so different from the Chinese, Koreans, Japanese, etc? Yes, in the US Census, Asian Indians are termed as Asian, but you are talking about how there are only 3 races, which is anthropological - and in anthropology, indians are "caucasian"! So how come they are NOT caucasian in the US census, but Arabs are? Makes no sense to me.
Hehe, to "Biracial Babe", you're mixing up the two now - first you talked about anthropologically there being only THREE races, in that case, ANTHROPOLOGICALLY speaking Indians come under "Caucasian" - this is FACT. Now you say it depends on who you ask? Well, anthropology is anthropology, it can't change according to who you ask. Indians are Caucasian ------------- anthropologically speaking. Fact.
PS ----------- and my point is that skin color ASIDE, a LOT of hispanics DO NOT look White or Black features wise! That is my point! They look NATIVE INDIAN, so they can't tick "hispanic white" or "hispanic black". That's my only simple point! The US Census form is not right.
PPS --- In the US Census, - i just checked - it says WHITE and not Caucasian! So how can Arabs like my bf be WHITE?????? That's ridiculous!!! The US Census needs an overhaul!!!