While a number of pertinent issues were discussed in this weeks set of readings I felt as though the disparity of cultural attitudes between Caribbean’s and American Blacks was the most interesting. Caribbeans by and large have stronger connections with their countries of origin. This makes quite a bit of sense seeing as Caribbeans living in the United States are usually only separated from their homelands by a few generations at maximum. American blacks usually have been here for hundreds of years and many generations. As such, even though they originally came (re: were taken) from Africa the bonds that connect them to their homeland are usually much less pronounced.

When presented with the struggles of being an American Caribbeans have the support network of their paesani and family in place to ease the transition and provide them with an “escape” should living here prove too difficult. They tend to reside in ethnic enclaves to insulate themselves from American society. This is often the case for any immigrant group that comes here in substantial numbers. Blacks in America don’t segment themselves nearly as much along national lines, they have all shared a similar story in this country regardless of where they might have came from hundreds of years ago. Instead of looking for support networks, they generally tend to rely on traditionally black institutions. Among the black population there is a much higher reliance on solidarity and “working within the system” because they had no home country they could go back to. As such they put much more importance on trying to change conditions domestically. This fundamental difference in mentality led to people identifying stronger and stronger with their own.

Another equally interesting concept discussed in this weeks readings is the disparity between female and male inculcation within West Indian households in the United States. It comes as no surprise that women have had a harder time trying to build a life for themselves when migrating to a new country. What does come as a surprise, however, is how female-centric the West Indian family paradigm is. Women seemed to be looked upon in a more respectful light even though they were relegated to the stereotypical “female” lines of work. Boys coming from these families faced the brunt of racial discrimination, as such their behaviors became polarized into “acting white” and “acting black”. In each case acting in that manner promotes a sense of racial solidarity and, to me, seems like a defense mechanism to protect them from the harsh realities of discriminatory American society. Men were expected to venture out into this intimidated new society while females were generally more insulated. While this was the case, women were the ones who held the family together, established the support and trust networks and paved the way for more members of the family/community to come to America. In this vein I feel like the women coming from the Caribbean had a much greater impact than the men due to their responsibilities including being caretakers, breadwinners, and anchors in the community.

In Caribbean Transnationalism As a Gendered Process, Ho describes the role of Caribbean women.  She refers to them as “reluctant matriarchs”. While Caribbean women may be independent, they are not necessarily dominant. Men are perceived to be dominant, however they most often work low-paying jobs, and it would be unrealistic to expect that they be sole breadwinners for the family. Women uphold multiple jobs and are still expected to take care of the children and tend to the needs of the household.

They also tend to migrate first. Migration introduces tension into family relationships. Long periods of separation strain marriages, and also strain parent-child relationships. Children often spend many years living with relatives while their parents work to bring them over. As a result, children can view their parents as strangers and may still be attached to the aunt/uncle/grandparent/etc. that they grew up with. In addition to this women can find jobs more easily than men. More pressure falls on them as they uphold the family financially, and women put pressure on the men to find jobs. All these different pressures and problems can put excessive strain on family relationships and can break families apart.

Rogers’ Black Like Who? discusses group identity of American blacks. Black New Yorkers specifically are becoming increasingly more diverse. While native African Americans have outnumbered immigrant Afro-Caribbeans, the number of Caribbean immigrants will soon surpass that of native blacks. Thus, the singular group of black Americans is actually one composed of many different cultures, beliefs, ideologies, etc., and it is constantly diversifying and changing.

Additionally, African Americans tend to identify as black more than Afro-Caribbeans do. These differ in part due to diverging responses to shared experiences. Both groups fear marginalization and seek inclusion, however native blacks tend to feel more attached to the race than Caribbean immigrants who can feel less rooted in the country and can have less of a sense of belonging to the race.

According to Water’s Growing Up West Indian and African American, the ways in which the second generation balances their racial and ethnic identities are influenced by race, class, and gender. The second generation’s ideas about race are passed down from their parents as well as the values and beliefs of other family members. It’s also influenced by their peers at school and the racial discrimination they may face. The understanding that a second generation child develops greatly affects how they react to American society.

While reading this weeks articles, I began to reflect on my parents’ experiences as immigrants and consider my own experiences with racial and ethnic identity. Both my mother and father work full-time, and my mother is also in charge of household responsibilities. I’ve realized that there are many dynamics I have never considered that are present when one migrates from one country to another. It’s challenges one physically and mentally, and it challenges relationships. I have a greater appreciation that my parents were able to successfully immigrate, take care of our family, and allow me to live this lifestyle that I often take for granted.

The readings for week 8 attempted to evaluate the processes of transnational migration according to separate veins of influence. Ho’s writings observed transnational migration as an engendered process. Rogers’ writings in “Black Like Who?” observed the transnational process in the West Indian diaspora according the way that West Indian and American blacks identify themselves. Waters observed the effects of transnational migration on the entire family as a means to highlight the changes in attitudes towards one’s West Indian heritage according to class and place in the family line. All of these writings added to the entire picture of the effects of transnational migration on the individual and their family.

“Caribbean Transnationalism as a Gendered Process” by Christine G. T. Ho observes the differences in the role that each sex plays in the process of migration. This article was initially intriguing because none of the other articles that we have read have observed the power of gender in the process of West Indian migration. Gender is a very important part of West Indian culture as the societal expectations for the male and female sexes are clearly defined and heartily observed. I most enjoyed Ho’s analysis of the matrifocality of the Caribbean household as being different from concept of a female-headed household. I felt that this idea correlated well with the familial structure that we observed while reading “Brown Girl Brownstones” by Paule Marshall. This is to say that the same matrifocal but male-headed household described in Ho’s writings was exemplified in Marshall’s writings.

Reuel Rogers’ article entitled “Black Like Who: Afro-Caribbean Immigrants, African Americans, and the Politics of Group Identity” helped to define the differences in the ways that African Americans and West Indians differ in terms of the ways that they associate with their countrymen. Generally, Rogers illustrates American blacks as being concerned with the success of their race because they perceive it as being strongly related to their own success. In contrast, Rogers asserts that West Indian blacks see their own success as separate from the success or failure of their entire group (i.e. other West Indians). The part of this issue that I find most interesting is the idea that West Indian migrants in America- especially those in the middle class- identify most with their West Indian roots yet, they do not see their successes or failures as having anything to do with their constituents. Still, the well being of the families of transnational migrants is deeply intertwined with the success of their family members abroad. Many of he ideas presented in Rogers’ writings compete with ideas that we have seen throughout the semester.

Lastly, “Growing Up West Indian and African America: Gender and Class differences in the Second Generation” by Mary C. Waters uses data that she collected through research to characterize first and second generation West Indian immigrants according to their class and their association with their West Indian culture. One of the main assertions that Waters made- which was also discussed in Rogers writings- is the idea that West Indian immigrants (especially those in the middle class) don’t see racism as an insurmountable issue. I struggled with this idea because Waters’ findings also show that middle class Caribbean migrants are least likely to identify as being black. How can one honestly assert that he can overcome racism when he works to avoid being associated with the most racially oppressed race? This is analogous to a person who’s never been on well fare saying that well fare is not so bad. With this in mind, I thin that the middle class West Indian –American assertion that racism can be overcome by hard work is misinformed and hypocritical in that West Indian Americans make every effort to not be associated with the black race in order to avoid racism. In other words, they are not overcoming racism but rather cheating/ avoiding it by staying outside of the span of racism’s scope.

What Rogers is Refuting-
Article refutes common belief that blacks are homogeneous, conforming to all the same political beliefs. This belief is misleading, especially since Afro- Caribbean are a rapidly increasing part of blacks in America and ignores differences within native blacks as well.
Other common thinking also leads to the reasoning that Afro-Caribbean immigrants must chose between being predominantly racial identified, which groups them with African Americans and conforming with their political views, or being predominantly ethnically identified, which isolates the them from African Americans.
Thesis: Black Diversity in the formation of different political beliefs
However, Rogers argues that Afro- Caribbean immigrants can hold multiple identities, simultaneously without contradiction, and that Caribbean people have a distinctly different view on politics than African Americans due to their separate backgrounds.
Conducted his research on 59 first generation, working class Afro-Caribbean immigrants.

Difference between Group Identity and Group Consciousness/ Linked Racial Outlook
Group Identity = self awareness of one’s membership to a group and psychological feeling of belonging to that group.

Group Consciousness= political/ ideological awareness of group’s position in society and collective interest in pursuing the group’s interest

Linked Racial Outlook= Individual’s fate is primarily based on the position/ social perception of their race
How African Americans identity/ interpret the American society
Radical group racial consciousness- more liberal, race plays large part in most of society’s interplay. Collective race ideas in community lead to further progression/ opportunities in America for black

Belief in linked racial fate- individual fates based on advancing the entire race

Believe in government aid to help lessen some socio/ economic racial inequalities in American society, currently and historically, yet cynical of government

Middle class blacks are more likely to subscribe to this group racial consciousness than lower class blacks.

How Caribbean people identify/ interpret American society
American citizens but ultimately ethnically distinguished by a region in the Caribbean

Both identified ethnically and racially- group identification with African Americans but do not necessarily have the same group racial consciousness.

Recognize racism as a barrier in American society, yet are not preoccupied with it as much as African Americans. Believe it can be overcome with hard work and time.

Admire African Americans progress in Civil Rights and resilience throughout American history

Do not put much stock in Linked Racial Fate, believe it does have some impact but fate is usually more individualistic or circumstantial

*Not usually as strongly political in America as African Americans.

Question?
Why and how do Caribbean people differ from African Americans in these regards?
List of reasons:
Commonalities in history/ collective memory, yet key differentiating factors like voluntary/ involuntary migration and segregation under Jim Crow, resulting in different perception of racism and black/ white relations
Transnational networks verse black institutions, differentiating cultural/ social/ political beliefs being instilled- highlighting difference between group identification and consciousness as result of varying socialization
Sense of Home- Caribbean feel accepted within homeland they identify with; while native blacks mostly identify with US but do not feel accepted due to race.

List of Reasons (continued)
Leads into Myth of the Return/ Sojourn Mentality- Caribbean have a form of escape into their homeland, when between two places they can choose a better option; while native blacks do not have an ‘exit option’ and must make do in America.
Alternative Frame of Reference- Caribbean immigrants compare life in America to the Caribbean, which they usually have elevated status just for immigrating; while native blacks compare themselves to whites and the inequalities between them.

Question?
Is Rogers right? Is there a certain affinity between Afro- Caribbean blacks and African American blacks? Or is the divide between ethnic identification and racial consciousness too wide to close?
Why are transnational ties more important to Afro- Caribbeans than other ethnic groups, like the Chinese or Latinos?
Growing Up West Indian and African American:

Gender and Class Differences in the Second Generation
Thesis/ How research was conducted
Explore Caribbean immigrants’ adaptation and accommodation in the United States
Explore how they develop their ethnic/ racial identities
Explore the different dynamics of ethnic/ racial identities between 1st and 2nd generations
Explore reactions between 1st and 2nd generation to American race relations.

This study was conducted on 72 first generation Caribbean immigrants- either teachers or fast food workers, 30 black co workers and 27 white employers in the fast food industry 83 adolescent second generation immigrants- 74 in lower class neighbor with varying educational/ institutional influence and 9 who moved into a middle class neighborhood

How First Generation Caribbean immigrants identity/ affect children
-They identify themselves according to their ethnicity/ national origins, in an attempt to differentiate themselves from black Americans with the assumption that white Americans treat foreigners better.
-Voice negative opinions about black Americans and support the embrace of ethnic heritage to their children
-Face difficulties in passing on ethnic mindsets to children because the children grew up with separate society/ place, therefore, have different perspectives, and do not distinguishing ethnic characteristics that they have.
-Believe that they can overcome racism through hard work, time, and right values/ attitudes
-Fear losing parental control over children or their children losing ethnic identity and identify as a black American because belief it results in social downwards mobility
How Second Generation Identify/ Characteristics (3 Types)
Ethnic American
distancing from Black Americans, emphasizing ethnic Pan Caribbean background
31%, mostly middle class
agree with parents differentiating between native blacks and Caribbean people, most likely view themselves in a superior light
better performance in school
strong national ties either with ethnic institutions or frequent trips to parent’s home
can achieve higher opportunity despite racism
more positive view of being an American

How Second Generation Identify/ Characteristics (continued)
2. Black American
identified with other black Americans, minimized ethnic backgrounds
42% , mostly poorer
Oppositional, disagree with parents trying to differentiate between groups
view race as predominant limiting factor in life, limiting their upwards mobility
opposition to school system, which is seen as ‘white’
less optimistic view of being an American

How Second Generation Identify/ Characteristics (continued)
3. Immigrant
did not chose to be categorized in the American sense
27%, mostly lower class
dress/ speech/behavior clearly indicate foreign birth
include people born in US but visit the islands frequently
strong ethnic identity based on experience in homeland, without distance from native blacks
good in school with advantage of ethnic ties in workplace

Gender Altering Meaning of American identity
Gender did not reflect in choice of identification, but rather the effect of having an American identity.
-Boys have more of a sense of racial solidarity than girls due to exclusion/ disapproval by society. Results in the increased likeliness to differentiate among themselves as ‘acting white’ or ‘acting black.’ Face more racial harassment and perceive little job opportunities available to them. This perception results in their pursue of the opposition of mainstream values.
– Girls do not face the same degree of hostility and exclusion from society. View themselves as having more job opportunities. To be an American, girls view as having freedom from parental control, which parents exercise over girls more than boys.
West Indians as Model Minority versus becoming American
Traditionally immigrating to America means assimilating into society and abandon ethnic ties.
This theory connects to the fact that decision to become American is based on economic success
However, West Indian immigrants are rewarded for maintaining their ethnic identity, resulting in upward mobility because they are perceived as harder working and can then develop trade networks. Being an American means integration into marginalized, race structure, which is perceived to result in downward mobility and worse characteristics.
There is a want to become American but maintaining ethnic ties and having a support networks are the most beneficial. This results in distancing themselves from black Americans and other non-white immigrant groups. The poorer/ more uneducated the immigrant, the more difficult to have long sustaining these ties

Color Line in America in response to Racism and Class (Structural Problems)
-Continual racial inequality in society reflected in its institutions, such as education, public safety, and the job market, will increase oppositional attitudes rather than increase striving among black Americans or second generation Afro- Caribbean immigrants.
-Cultural Racism theory= ‘whiteness’ becomes distinguisher for high classes and better values while ‘blackness’ implies lower class with lower values
-Reflected in how Afro- Caribbean immigrants chose to distance themselves from black Americans, and as Americans in general. Even if they rise in economic standing, there is this perceived inconsistency with ‘blackness’ and middle class values and wealth.
Color Line in America in response to Racism and Class (Structural Problems) (continued).
Ultimately, race hierarchy that cause blacks to be disadvantages and left as a lower class, in association with urban residency problems, result an overall American problem- not just an immigrant problem.

Waters suggests to resolve this issue by eliminating cultural and biological forms of racism (stereotypes/ based on skin), large and small, and instituting policies that help make up for some of the socio- economic racial disparities.

Question?
Compare and Contrast Roger’s and Waters’s Article- How do their views on racism in America effecting Afro- Caribbean immigrants differ or match?

Waters is more negative, and views race and ethnic identification to class and gender into a larger critique of American society and how race is viewed. She does not focus on trans nationalism and mostly works off the concepts of assimilation. Rogers mostly focuses on trans nationalism and difference within the black community, and not larger American society perceptions of blacks and how it results in class difference like Waters did.

Ho speaks about traditional Caribbean matri-focal lifestyles, and how it rose through history. She speaks about how Caribbean people usually focus on family raising children rather than just the parents like an American nuclear family. She also mentions women immigrants must work hard and support their child.

Transnationalism as a Gendered Process

In this article, the role of Caribbean women in transnationalism is discussed. Back in the Caribbean, as in many countries, men were the ones who went out to work, and they were the ones who typically put food on the table. Thus, they were thought of as superior to women who depended on them to survive. However, as the Caribbean was infiltrated by the global economy, a switch began to take place. This is because women were able to obtain employment, thus they grew less dependent on their husbands and rose in social order. Furthermore, Caribbean families are usually described as “matrifocal”. Meaning, that women were at the head of the family and made the significant decisions. Furthermore, the article touches upon the naturally stronger relationship a mother will have with her kids, as compared to one the father will have. Such a family formation in the Caribbean led to families in which strong burdens were placed on mothers, as opposed to father, as mothers can support their families both financially and parentally.

The article then discusses how men who immigrated to new countries, specifically the U.S., did not find good jobs. Of course women didn’t find good jobs either, but in the case of men, they can decide to immigrate once more, but as for women, they must remain with families due to the burden of children. However, when a man chose to leave, women would struggle more due to the lack of direct support economically and with the children. Thus, women would immigrate as well.

When women immigrated, they would leave their children with family members back home, maybe grandparents. In their country of emigration, women would establish transnational trust networks. These networks were built upon the belief that mothers would work in the new country to be able to send money back home for their children and family members. Sometimes however, things would not work out, as the fathers who also immigrated would abandon the family. This is a break of the trust network and would only destroy the family’s efforts. Ho also touches upon how that in working class families, women are the only ones that tend to immigrate. This signifies that women lay the foundation for transnational networks that seeks to bring over families.

These trust networks, paved by women, were very significant for the Caribbean immigrant. Trust networks provided economic support for families back at home, specifically for children left with family members waiting to be brought over. Over time, these trust networks sort of die out within families as those taking care of the children are brought over to the U.S., thanks to their care of the children. Thus, dues are sort of paid by both sides of the network.

Black Like Who?

In this article, Reuel Rogers discusses the relationship among native African Americans and Foreign Caribbean people within the black community in the United States. Specifically, Rogers goes into analysis of how these groups identify with race. Rogers states that as more Caribbean people enter the U.S., the homogenous body of black Americans is slowly disappearing and separate groups within the black community are forming. These groups consist of African Americans or West Indians. Both these groups separate them selves from one another. Although West Indians understand they have roots in Africa, they still uphold their West Indian nationalities and do homogenize to simply being black Americans. Still however, both groups face the same problem: racism. When coming to the U.S. West Indians find that they are grouped with African Americans and vice versa. This racial discrimination and generalization has actually united the two groups under the fight for civil rights.

Furthermore, Roger touches upon how first generation immigrants have a much easier time separating themselves from the black homogeny, naturally. However, for their children it is not so easy. This is because 2 nd generation immigrants are often Americanized and lack traits such as accents that clearly make their nationality recognizable. Thus, the children of West Indians are often mistaken as African American.

Although both groups are similar, both, and even the subgroups within them, choose to identify with their nation of origin. Even if West Indians are from Africa, they want to be considered as either Jamaican, Haitian, etc. This, however, is seen in many other groups. For example South Americans, although similar to central Americans, speak differently and want to be identified with their own nation. Thus, this problem isn’t unique to Afro-Caribbeaners or African Americans, but rather this is one of the more complex ones.

Growing Up West Indian and African American

In this reading, similar to the last one, a discussion ensues about the development of identity between second-generation immigrants. Unlike the first generation Caribbean immigrants, the second generation was raised in the same inequality and racism of America, as African- Americans grew up with. Thus, second generation immigrants can actually relate and identify with Native blacks, unlike their parents. Both groups too, lack another homeland. African-Americans are so far removed from their African heritage, that the U.S. is their only homeland. Meanwhile, many second-generation immigrants lack the knowledge their parents had of their homeland and thus they associate with being American, then with being a complete Caribbean foreigner. This, however, is a problem. First generation Caribbean immigrants came from a background of struggle where they could not succeed. They came hopeful to the U.S. to find employment and hopefully wealth. However, such dreams are not evident in their children. 2^nd generation Caribbean immigrants actually lack the same motivation their parents had, and thus decided not to succeed in school or society. Furthermore, they experienced a racism their parents didn’t, and thus continue to lose hope due to the color of their skin. Of course there are exceptions. 2^nd generations Caribbean immigrants who hold on their background and affiliate with their parents actually achieve more than those who don’t. These children hold on to the same American dream their parents had and continue to resonate it.

Adrian Horczak

Professor J. Lutton

People of New York

March 16, 2015

Weekly journal 8

Global capitalism and gender roles brought on by Caribbean transnationalism are described in Caribbean Transnationalism as a Gendered Process, written by Christine Ho. In the reading, Ho discloses West Indians’ family structures and how women have to struggle more than their male counterparts when they migrate to other countries. They are burdened with the responsibilities of taking care of children, running the household, and working for low wages. Therefore, they must rely on their male partners for economic support. This makes men seem like very important.

Reuel Rogers compares Caribbean immigrants’ thoughts on racism with African American thoughts on the topic in Black Like Who? Moreover, he looks at how the two groups of people relate with their ethnic and racial identity. Their strong ties with their race make them participate in politics with similar values. West Indians tend to associate with their ethnicity much more than they do with their race. However, Africans tend to categorize themselves with their race much more.

Growing Up West Indian and African American discusses the ways in which West Indians identify themselves and involves a study with different people in New York. In the article, Mary Waters explains how West Indians feel treated in the USA and how others perceive them. West Indians who immigrate to New York do not feel the presence of racism as much as African Americans because they feel their situation in this country is better than in the Caribbean. However, future generations of West Indians tend to feel a much closer affinity to African Americans because they notice that people treat them poorly. Waters explains at the end of the article that if blacks were shown more respect, they would not feel the presence of racism and people of all races will be equal.

I like the point Waters makes at the end because she recognizes that although racism officially has been stopped, there are prejuduces present. Blacks find it difficult at this point to stop this kind of racism because some whites are friendly to them while others are not. Now they do not know who is good and who is evil, so confronting all of them would not work properly. This makes me see how racism is really present and why it is difficult to completely end it.

Ho’s article presents something different than the other two because she describes the hardships transnational women face. I was always aware that there are certain gender roles that function in society and I was finally made aware of why these roles make women’s lives more difficult.

We briefly discussed before on the roles women played towards the migration. Ho’s Caribbean Transnationalism as a Gendered Process further explores this idea. Caribbean households tended to be matrifocal, which refers to the patterns of relationship that puts emphasis on women. This doesn’t mean that women lead the household, but that the Caribbean households value the mother-child bond deeply. Along with this matrifocality, Caribbean culture sanctions separated gender roles. Mothers may not always have someone to help her support and raise the family, which is why many enter the workforce. However, a majority of the immigrant women have low education, and were left with low-paying, low-skilled jobs. They were often seen as a reserve to the labor pool. As a result of unemployment and low wages, women couldn’t support their families by themselves. Many engaged in relationships with multiple men to gain financial support for their family.

Identity becomes a big issue after 1965, when Afro-Caribbean once again migrates to the states in large numbers. Although the segregation ended, white American views of black Americans did not change. The afro-Caribbean group and the native black group had strong identity views. When Caribbean migrants came to the states in large numbers, both groups started to have conflict with each other. They didn’t want to be viewed as similar to each other. This divide was further separated by how white-Americans viewed both groups in the working environment. Caribbean immigrants in the job force was favored over the native blacks because they were viewed as being better educated than their native counterparts. At the same time, these two groups were brought together by these views. Both the native black groups and afro-Caribbean groups had common ancestry in the Africa, and a common skin. People who have saw Caribbean migrants as the model minority made comments that showed their ignorance. They thought that they were automatically better than the blacks. The ignorance behind comments like these enraged many people. It is people like these that continue to maintain the color line.

The three articles related to Caribbean identity were very interesting reads. I found that most were accurate and the content can be connected to the experience of people from other cultures. It is amazing how much immigration can affect a person and his/her family’s life. I always wondered why my father suffered through a depression. I guess that coming here very little is a much more different experience than coming here as an adult. Since you do not remember ever being in your homeland, then you do not miss anything or anyone. Adults on the other hand miss their origins. It is even worse when these people do not have any transnational networks or ties to anyone because then they have to make something of themselves on their own. In “Caribbean Transnationalism As a Gendered Process,” Ho discusses the role that Caribbean women play in transnationalism and the suffering that they go through due to the system. Ho starts out by describing the effects of capitalism and a global economy on men and women. Men were usually the ones who worked, made a living, bought the food and supported their families economically. However, having this position made them superior to women because women often depended on their husbands to come to their aid. As capitalism and globalization came into place in the Caribbean islands, women began to work as well, making them less dependent on their husbands. Caribbean families tend to be matrifocal. There is also a stronger relationship between a mother and her children than the relationship between a father and his children. This familial structure led to less-involved fathers, placing a greater burden or role on the mother, who would provide for her children both economically and emotionally.

Caribbean men often did not have the best jobs in their countries or even when they arrived in the United States due to racism. Women would have to go to work as well to make ends meet. However, them getting a job did not take away the other responsibilities they had at home. Women were still expected to do household chores, take care of the kids, and serve their husband. The jobs that were offered to women were often menial and low paying. A lack of job for the husband was not good because many times, the husband would decide immigrate, leaving behind his family and his other responsibilities. Although the husband’s intentions were good, once the husband immigrated, the wife and children inevitably suffered. They no longer had that support right next to them to provide aid. Thus, many Caribbean women resorted to migration. They did not want to experience the suffering that came from the economic situation they were in.

According to Ho, women play an important role in immigration and the establishment of transnational networks and overseas familial ties. Women often immigrated to the U.S. to work, make money and send that money back to their families in the Caribbean. Remittances were an important part of the lives of these people and their families. Immigration had a huge effect on the family and sometimes it led to a family’s disintegration. In some situations, a mother immigrated to the U.S. to work, the father abandoned the family, and the children are left with family members in the Caribbean. This separation is very dangerous and heartbreaking. Parents do not have bad intentions when they immigrate to the United States. Rather they want their whole family to move up the social ladder. I personally view immigrating to a different country to make money and be successful as a sweet and bitter type of action. You can never have anything complete in life. What I mean to say is that, after immigrating to the U.S. you can have a better life than you did in your homeland and send back remittances, but you do not experience a family life since your family is back in your country. And the relationship between you and your family becomes strained. Also, like we mentioned last Thursday, sometimes your family members, who live in the homeland, begin to take advantage of you because they ignorantly come to believe that you have a lot of money just because you live in New York. However, they do not know the backbreaking labor you have to do just to get by.

Something interesting that Ho mentions in the beginning of his article is that the Caribbean elite tend to migrate to New York in families, but that for the working class only women migrate. These women pave way for their families. So in a way women can be considered the leaders of their families. Although it is always believed that men are the heads of the household, I think that women are the heads of the households because they are the ones who raise the kids, have side jobs and provide both emotional and financial support for their families. It is truly shocking to me when I see that men get more credit than women do for their role in the family. Women do all the back stage work so that the family can continue to remain “united.”

Lastly, Ho reminds us of trust networks and their importance to both Caribbean immigrants and their families back at home. Many times Caribbean people would immigrate to work for their nuclear family and their extended family’s economic benefit. However, in exchange for the money they would send back, some Caribbean people left behind their children to be cared for by others. The children were often times why the trust network continued. Both ends had dues for each other. However, once the second or third generations grew up, the networks were gone because neither people in the Caribbean nor the people here in New York felt that they owed anything to each other.

In “Black Like Who?” Rogers explores the issue of Afro-Caribbean group identification and underlying political implications. On a side note, the issues and themes that Rogers presents in his article can be related to any non-white race that has immigrated to this country. In the same way that West Indians did not want to be associated with black people, there are many Latinos that do not want to be meshed into the whole minority group. I have experienced this where I am often confused as Mexican because of the stereotype that most Hispanic immigrants come from Mexico. There is a complicated relationship between regional pride and national pride. I think that it depends on the situation. When you are amongst people of the same region, you want to stand out by portraying national pride. But when you are amongst people who do not know that much about your nation and have a vague idea of the area where you are from, your portray regional pride. Any ways, Rogers mentions that as the amount of Caribbean immigrants in New York increase, the notion of a homogeneous group of black people is disappearing. The presence of Afro-Caribbeans in the city has made the black race more complex. There are ethnic and class differences amongst people from different countries. Although Caribbean people acknowledge that they have roots in Africa, they do not consider themselves African nor do they have the same culture as Africans. The important question that Rogers had was whether, immigrants and second and third generations, identified themselves as West Indian, black, American or the country from where they were from.

It was discovered that some West Indians identify ethnically to avoid being even remotely associated with native blacks. They know how much native blacks suffer due to race in this country and so some believe that coming off as a foreigner would make success more attainable. However, an issue that unites both native and foreign blacks is that of racial discrimination. To an ignorant outsider, an Afro-Caribbean person and a person of African descent look the same, talk the same and have similar impressions. Thus, racism has mobilized native and foreign blacks to join forces and fight against it. Institutions such as volunteer organizations, churches, schools, etc. have served as mobilization grounds.

It is interesting to see how West Indians embrace both their ethnicity and their race. However, most of the population seems to use their homeland as their primary identity. Although most acknowledge that they are related to African Americans, they do not portray racial group awareness and consciousness to the rest. I guess that it is because (like is said in the article) slavery in the West Indies ended much earlier than it did in the United States. West Indians initially come to the United States with a I am going to work and then leave this wretched place kind of mindset. Thus to them, at least initially, race problems are the least of their concerns. The first generation to migrate particularly believes that hard work, demonstration of values and good etiquette will make people overcome racism. The later generations are the ones who begin to truly experience racism at school and other public places. Adult immigrants who work in menial jobs are already in one way or another accepting their position in society. However, the later generations that receive education and become part of American society are the ones who are always shocked by where they end up on the social mobility ladder. Many expect to be treated a certain way because of their pre-supposed intellect and when they get treated like trash, they become angry and is experiences like this one that make later generations associate themselves more and more with native blacks, who have experienced this for a much longer stretch of time.

An interesting idea brought up by Rogers is that African Americans tend to compare their situation with that of whites while Caribbean immigrants compare their situation with the situation that they were in back in their homeland. African Americans will never be satisfied by they will always believe that they are not being treated correctly; whereas, West Indians see a positive change, generally speaking of course. Also, West Indians have the exit option, meaning if the situation gets worse they can always go back home. This option is just a way for Caribbean immigrants to cope with their issues. I am pretty sure no one would go back.

I personally think that there is truly a shared identity amongst African Americans and Afro-Caribbeans. Before this class, I had ignorantly believed that they even shared the same cultures. This idea sounds so idiotic to me now. It is like saying that Ecuador has the same culture as Spain just because at one point Spaniards colonized Ecuador and resided in it. Although we may have a shard language, and certain cultural aspects like religion, dance and cuisine, there are many differences between both groups of people. The stigmatization of native blacks in this country is what makes it difficult for Caribbean immigrants to fully identify with the native black population.

In “Growing Up West Indian and African American,” Waters talks about the development of an identity, amongst West Indians, be it ethnic or racial and the effects of leaning towards one over the other. On a side note, I never knew the difference between race and ethnicity before this class. Through an intensive study, Waters discovered that most first generation West Indian immigrants identified themselves with their country of birth and some tried to maintain a huge distance from African Americans. However, the second generation had a more variety of responses. Waters believe this is because of race, class, gender, and the experience that these people have in the U.S. It was seen that people who identified themselves ethnically were mostly from a middle/working class while people who identified racially were of a lower class. What is implied is that those who identified themselves ethnically wanted a distinction between them and African Americans because they have no reason to be associated with them, whereas, those in the lower class are often victims of racism and maltreatment, causing them to form an alliance with African Americans as a way of fighting back the system.

I found it interesting and understandable that many believed being a black American to be the worst possible label. These people are often the victims of racial prejudices and stereotypes. In terms of gender, Waters described it as boys identified being black in terms of racial solidarity while girls discussed it as freedom from parental control. Also, the reason why West Indian immigrants had more access to jobs and opportunities when compared to the native blacks was because of the networks that many established. The establishment of networks was necessary for West Indian immigrants because they needed to be sure they would have opportunities waiting for them once they arrived to the U.S.

Waters’ article focuses more on individual identification. The inclusion of the study responses were very interesting and made the article more appealing to me. I admire Waters for being so direct, to the point and sure of what she was saying. The way she analyzes her interviews and comes up with many generalizations was very interesting and must have require a lot of work and effort on her part. She raises some very good ideas like the fact that decent jobs, good schools and low crime rates are universal ideas that would benefit everyone.

I look forward to discussing this more in depth in class.

“Caribbean Transnationalism as a Gendered Process”

This work, by Christine G. T. Ho, talked mainly about global capitalism and its relationship with the role women had in supporting their families financially, as well as their role in actually migrating. Since many Caribbean families were quite poor, they had to move using what is known as circular migration, in contrast to elite families who were all able to move together. This system provided the means for subsequent families to move in to the areas as well. Unfortunately though, this system causes families to be split up as not all members are able to move at once.

One thing that the article stressed in great detail was the idea of a matrifocal, but not matriarchal, household. I found this really interesting to think about, because usually when you think of the person who is breadwinner, makes the most money, and is responsible for organizing family activities etc., you would also think that person would hold the most power. This is not the case, however, according to the article. The men of the family were still considered more powerful. I would be interested in finding out why this is. This fact also puts a heavy burden on females in the Caribbean, because this means they are responsible for both family activities and income. Compared with the gender roles in the United States, I am amazed how women are able to keep up with such a huge burden. Usually, if a woman in the United States works, she won’t necessarily have to have the entire financial burden placed on herself.

“‘Black Like Who?’ Afro-Caribbean Immigrants, African Americans, and the Politics of Group Identity”

This article discusses the differences between Afro-Caribbean blacks and African Americans, who are often confused and misrepresented by others, as they are collectively placed in the same group and labeled “black.” This is not accurate, as each group, Caribbeans and African Americans, have vast differences culturally. Caribbeans are generally considered to place more emphasis on education. Because of this, they considered themselves to be of a higher social status and therefore felt very strange being thrown into the same group as the native African Americans.

Politically, African Americans are unified by a strong sense of ethnic togetherness. African Americans tend to identify ethnically with a more generic African ethnicity. This is a result of their collective experience with discrimination, and their disadvantages in terms of how they are treated on a social and economic level. Caribbeans, on the other hand, identify more strongly with the specific country where they came from or where their family originated. They are less inclined to identify as black as a result of being so transnationally motivated.

“Growing Up West Indian and African American”

This work discusses the differences in the ways that West Indians and African Americans describe themselves ethnically, and also how this decision impacts their lives. It describes also how second generation Caribbeans view their situation, and how they navigate it. One significant portion of the research that was done had to do with the effect of gender on how second generation Caribbeans perceived being an American. It was interesting to see that both genders expressed concerns about being American because they faced discrimination as a result, but boys felt American because they were able to come together and resist “societal exclusion and disapproval.” This is not unusual to hear, as it often seems to be the case in the news, especially as of more recently, that black boys seem to be pursued by police etc. more than other ethnic groups. Black girls, notably, don’t feel this same level of persecution from either the police or whites.

The first article that we had to read this week was Transnationalism as a Gendered Process by Christine Ho. In this paper, Ho discusses the role of women in the transmigration phenomenon. Caribbean women, though they are often portrayed as strong, independent and the heads of their households, they are often times still dominated by men. The women are merely forced into these positions by men. Caribbean men tend not to integrate into the family unit, leaving the women to take care of the children and the household. This creates a matrifocal but not matriarchal societal structure. That is to say that the women are central to the family and hold a lot of influence but they are not the dominant individuals in the family structure.

The connection that women have with other women is very important. Often times it is with other female kin or daughters. It is also explained how much these Caribbean women depend on men, despite their perceived independence. Most of the jobs in which they are employed are low-wage jobs where they serve men. In this sense, women’s movement into the workforce locks women in the lower class and into the servitude of men. They are also expected to depend on several men in their lives. They must depend on lovers, sons, and husbands for primary income and resources since women have been delegated to the role of supplementary wage earners within the family.

The second article we read this week was “Black like Who?” Afro-Caribbean Immigrants, African Americans, and the Politics of Group Identity by Reuel Rogers. Rogers looks at the differences and the relationship between native-born African Americans and foreign-born Caribbean’s within the black community of the United States. Something that I found very interesting is the idea that class comes before race. As the black population grows, parts of it move up into the middle class and other parts stay in the lower class. As blacks enter a more comfortable life in the middle class, they tend to associate less with their “blackness” and black political movements. This shows how important class is and how it can overpower the influence of race.

Both the native-born and foreign-born blacks held strong views on their race, culture and identity. Many of the Afro-Caribbean’s hold strong ties to their home country. Most identify as black in a similar way to the native-born African Americans. The difference is that the Afro-Caribbean’s accept their home country as their primary identity and hold that identity with pride. This is because of the transnational networks that are created during transnational migration, since they strengthen and solidify the connections to their home country. They also interact with other Caribbean islanders and African Americans so they develop a far more pluralist and diverse identity.

The last article we read this week was Growing Up West Indian and African American, Gender and Class Differences in the Second Generation by Mary C. Waters. In this article, Waters studies the way in which immigrants to the United States adapt to their new environment and follow the changes based on generation. The study included West Indian immigrants to New York City and their teenage children to learn more about this topic.

First generation immigrants from the Caribbean, as discussed in “Black like Who?” Afro-Caribbean Immigrants, African Americans, and the Politics of Group Identity by Reuel Rogers, identify more with their Caribbean country of origin. For their children it is not so simple. Often times they are more Americanized and have lost certain traits like an accent that make them recognizable as Afro-Caribbean’s so they are often misidentified as native-born African Americans. This is a huge difference in the experience and perception of the first and second generation. Again another large factor is class and growing up in such a diverse city like New York, I have witnessed this. Children growing up in poorer neighborhoods are more likely to reject their ethnic identity while children in middle class neighborhoods are more likely to embrace their ethnic identity.

It is interesting to me how the three paths of identity development were laid out. The three types include those who identify as American, ethnic American, or as an immigrant. It is strange to think that people with similar familiar background of transnational migration could arrive at such a wide spectrum of identities for themselves. I think that this shows that class is a huge factor in deciding one’s identity, more than ethic or racial factors. Class even has the power to influence the perception of the other two, ethnicity and race. This makes the study of political-economic factors exceedingly important in understanding identity of immigrants and their children.

This week’s readings Black Like Who?, Growing Up West Indian and African American, and Caribbean Transnationalism As a Gendered Process dove into the topic of gender and race playing a role in immigration. They looked into women leading households, nationality and identity in different generation immigrants, and the common ideas of African Americans vs. West Indians.

Ho’s article did a great job of showing how strong Caribbean women are and how they shape their families. Caribbean families are very matrifocal and the bond between a mother and her child is extremely valued. I found this to be so different from patriarchal European societies and the standard male-dominant societies we see today in many countries. Earlier in the semester, we discussed how women are usually the first to initiate the immigration process. This was brought up again and led into the idea of childcare and how it is a collective responsibility. Ho’s work also discussed women’s constant “participation in the public workplace” which isn’t common for many other societies. Caribbean women are expected to work difficult jobs, take care of the home and take care of the children. I believe Ho really captured the strength of the women and showed them in a positive light. My family, unlike many Russian households, is also more matrifocal, so I was able to connect to the women Ho wrote about. My mother was the one who made a higher salary, took care of the house, the children and so much more. She was also the one to initiate the immigration process and was at times the head of the household, much like Dominican women. I was also a part of a collective childcare, where both sets of my grandparents would take turns helping to raise my brother and me.

Rogers’ Black Like Who?, discussed the divisions of African Americans and West Indies immigrants. He brought up first-generation immigrants national identification compared to native-born. Rogers explores the experience of the immigrants with race. He states that race has been a more present issue and much more conscious with African Americans than Afro-Caribbeans. In general, Rogers’ agrees that there will always be a separation between African Americans and Afro-Caribbeans all around in politics and socially.

Growing Up West Indian and African American was a great study. It consisted of 212 interviews with 2^nd generation immigrants, native-born blacks, native-born whites, and adolescents who were the children of black immigrants from the Caribbean. The interviews suggested that first-generation immigrants identified themselves according to their national origins. I found this relatable because I moved to the US when I was four, and I still identify myself with the country I am from. I was also able to connect to the middle-class students in magnet schools who identified themselves as immigrants. In my opinion, it was difficult to see the different viewpoints students had of their future. They discussed the pessimistic views of their future opportunities. The author did a good job of showing how different background as well different nationality and identity changed the kids views on racism and opportunities. For example, American-identified teens in all-black schools thought that “the fight against segregation had been lost” while students in middle-class situations attending magnet schools saw more possibilities and a brighter future.

Women play a major role in Caribbean families. This is due to the fact that Caribbean families are structured as matrifocal. Matrifocal is “mother-centered,” where the mother has close ties to her children, whether or not there is a father. The Caribbean people value the mother-child bond above all. This type of bond is the longest lasting and eventually the child would become the “old-age insurance” for the mother. The bond between the mother and child is like an investment that will pay off in the long run. The mother takes care of the child and eventually the child takes care of the mother. Child care is also a collective responsibility rather than being targeted to the parents. This is interesting because the child doesn’t only have one mother. Sometimes he/she is moved around to different households. Caribbean children are basically raised by the community rather than just the parents.

Caribbean kinship revolves around “reserving legal marriage for status equals and non legal unions for partners of lower status.” This means that the upper and middle class men can marry women of the same status while at the same time have an affair with other women of a lower status. The men can also father the children of the lower status women. This concept allows a Caribbean man to have multiple families. This system results in the women supporting a family without male support. Caribbean women rely on other female kin such as friends and neighbors to compensate for the lack of support from the men.

Caribbean women are usually workers and mothers. “The capitalist relations of production historically denied adequate earning power to a large segment of men, making it unrealistic to expect them to be sole breadwinners.” This is the reason that Caribbean women are brought into the workforce. Women strive for economic independent and responsibility, however, many Caribbean women are often unskilled laborers so they do not make enough to support their own families. Eventually they will have to rely on men for help.

Almost all of Caribbean women work in domestic labor. This includes working in private homes or in hotels. This is the one of the limited type of work available for them because “88 percent of Caribbean women have no more than primary school education.” Other Caribbean women who do not want to work in domestic labor works in assembly plants. These plants offer low wages and inflexible hours because the pool of Caribbeans in need of jobs is vast. They aren’t even hired full time and in most cases only used for the fringe benefits. As more and more Caribbean women stay in the same field, they will always be always be dependent on men because they will be unable to achieve economic independence.

How did this dependency on men even start? Well, long ago the families were run by both men and women. The labor of a woman was just the same or greater than the labor of a man. Therefore, women were of high status. Eventually industrial capitalism changed everything by “shifting the locus of economic production away from the household into the public workplace.” The labor of men were valued more than the labor of women because they just stayed at home while the men went out to work. The work of a women was regarded as unproductive and the status of women started to decline. Actually, in the early stages of industrial capitalism, even children worked in the public labor force. If men, women, and children all worked then who would stay at home and reproduce? This was the concern so a deal was made that the men would be paid a “family wage,” to cover the cost of the women and children not working.

This industrial capitalism does not apply to Caribbean women because they are forced to work rather than stay at home. There are several factors that contributed to a unique experience of industrial capitalism on Caribbean women. The first factor is that Caribbean men were never paid a family wage. Instead, they work in low paying and risky jobs. The second factor is that most Caribbean women were influenced to work in the public labor force, which were usually low paying and low skill, and not avoid it.  Lastly, Caribbean women have always been working and taking care of family at the same time. Therefore, abandoning the work force doesn’t even make sense.

Caribbean women have a much different experience than other women around the world. They are forced to be dependent on men but at the same time strive for economic independence. They also have two jobs, one as a mother and one as a laborer. Industrial capitalism changed the role of women globally but Caribbean women are unaffected. Caribbean women maintain the symbol of independence and strength due to their life struggles.

This weeks articles focused on a separation of racial and ethnic identity. In “Black Like Who?” Rogers argues that all blacks in New York are too often classified into one group. However, in reality, Rogers says that there are several sub groups such as immigrant Afro-Caribbeans and native born African Americans. The race as a whole is dominated by African Americans, but the population of Afro-Caribbeans is quickly rising and will soon outnumber African Americans. Furthermore, there are different social and economic backgrounds that separate blacks. Some choose to identify with their ethnic backgrounds while others chose to identify with their racial backgrounds. However, Rogers elaborates that under certain circumstances blacks will chose to identify with one over  the other. For instance, from a political standpoint, many blacks identify racially as a whole rather than ethnically leading to “a high degree of political unity within the group.”

I have to agree with Rogers that blacks are too often and unfairly identified in a singular group. This only further fuels an animosities between native and immigrant blacks. Furthermore, I think its an important point to note that people don’t seem to be as frightened of Caribbean immigration as they are of Hispanic and Latino immigration. The numbers appear to be similar with the immigrant Caribbean population growing exponentially to the point when it will out number native blacks. The latino population is also growing at a similar rate where experts predict that they might one day outnumber native whites. There is a much more negative connotation with this immigration relationship and that seems very unfair to me. Also I think its interesting that middle class blacks are more likely to identify with the racial whole than are lower class blacks. I would’ve thought that it would’ve been the opposite. However, Rogers explains that this most likely because middle class blacks are more likely to encounter whites on a regular basis where they are the subject of racial discrimination and find it important to hold on to their racial identity.

In the other article, “Growing Up West Indian and African American” by Mary Waters, the author analyzes the way in which first and second generation immigrants are likely to identify themselves, either racially or ethnically. Children of immigrants often lack their parents’ accents and other distinguishable characteristics. Waters goes on to explain that at an early age these child learn from their parents that immigrant blacks are more often favored by white than are native blacks. However, since these same children lack the distinguishing characteristics of their parents, they develop a fear that they will be discriminated against in the future. A big part of this fear often stems from peers at school, Waters elaborates. Waters continues that as  result of these influences, lower class black children tend to develop an “oppositional identity” while middle class children tend to develop an “ethnic identity.”

I feel that all of these negative connotations associating a particular ethnic group or race are very wrong and must be stopped at the source. Its terrible to think that children grow in fear of discrimination at school just because they lack particular characteristics of a foreign race. Its so much worse to see this kind of behavior within children than it is within adults mostly because of how easily children can become influenced. Its easy for everyday adults to shrug off racial discrimination when they’ve already developed a strong, positive ethnic and racial identity. However, children are still developing their identities and can become ashamed of things that they have no control over such as their race. This a terrible trend that must be put to an end before we can fully develop as a multicultural society.

Growing Up West Indian and African American – Gender and Class Differences in the Second Generation by Mary C. Waters

In her article, Waters discusses how second-generation West Indians choose to identify themselves within the American society. Throughout her writing she continuously proves that racism and discrimination still define the lives of those considered “black.” These two factors are what mainly affect a second-generation Caribbean decision to identify as American, ethnically, or as an immigrant. The child or adolescent’s experiences in class, race and gender cause him or her to define him or herself along one of those lines.

One interesting note that Waters makes is this manner in which the second generation views life after the civil rights movement. Many viewed discrimination still having a great affect on society. Some identified the separation from de facto and de jure, noting how explicit racism is illegal, yet implicit racism still runs rampant. As a 15-year-old Trinidadian girl noted, the law would not prevent you from going to a certain neighborhood, yet you know problems will arise if you do go.

Another important note that Waters discusses is the effect of racism drawn along gender lines. She notes how girls, due to the sheltering by their parents, “experience less overt hostility and exclusion by mainstream society,” while adolescent males “experienced a greater number of attacks on their rights to be full-fledged members of society.”

The portrayal of West Indians as the model minorities shows how the color line both progresses and limits them. It may provide them with tiny advantages within the workplace, stemming from their “lack of expectation of interpersonal racism.” Bosses and employers tend to feel more “comfortable” around West Indians as opposed to native blacks. Nonetheless, it is this type of “structural racism” that causes both African Americans and West Indians to be truly limited by the color line. They can never “forget about race” if they want to achieve something.

Waters ends off on an interesting point. She discusses that if the color line is not erased or if it is redrawn incorrectly, it can be detrimental for both African Americans and West Indians. The African Americans cannot help but feel stagnant, as they watch immigrants achieve a higher social and economic status than they. Yet if the color is drawn strictly between black and nonblacks, the effects on West Indians will be split. Those considered white or nonwhite would prosper much more than those considered black.

“Black Like Who?” – Afro-Caribbean Immigrants, African Americans, and the Politics of Group Identity by Reuel Rogers

In the article, Rogers discusses the manners in which Afro-Caribbean immigrants identify either ethnically or racially with their African American counterparts. With Afro-Caribbean immigrants making up a large percentage of the black population within New York, it is important to note how they designate themselves socially and politically. While he displays that the immigrants may align themselves ethnically or racially due to various factors (i.e. wanting to distance themselves from African Americans or identifying racially due to segmented racism and discrimination), he makes note that choosing one does not necessarily “negate” the other. For a Caribbean immigrant, in certain cases he or she may identify themselves ethnically, and in other cases they may do so racially. Rogers importantly notes that African Americans and Caribbean immigrants may identify differently because their “frames of reference” are different. Also, the experiences of socialization of African Americans have little connection with the Afro-Caribbean peoples.

Rogers dives into the importance of politics, and how it stems from African Americans’ self-identification. He shows how American blacks tend to be more informally, politically active than whites, who were more inclined to participate in systematic voting, campaigns, and political movements. He states that political alliance is “heightened” by the African Americans’ group consciousness.

His interviews show that there are differences in how Afro-Caribbean immigrants identify with African Americans.  As noted before, they embrace both racial and ethnic lines as desired. Although many initially identify ethnically, to identify a form of origin, not many refused to identify racially with African Americans. The interesting point of connecting with a home country came up here. They did identify racially with African Americans, some interviewees noted their heritage with Africa, yet they all identified with their home country first. My favorite response depicting this was “… I am naturally Jamaican but naturalized American.” Here, the immigrants have a trio of lines to identify along (African, Caribbean, American).

Unlike the African Americans, the Caribbean immigrants lack the political and social meanings that accompany racial identity. Rogers argues that this stems from their lack of group consciousness. Tying into racism, Afro-Caribbean peoples tend to not focus on racism as much as African Americans, recognizing that they (African Americans) have linked their “grievance to their highly cultivated feeling of racial group consciousness.”

Transnationalism also sets the Afro-Caribbean peoples apart from African Americans. While Afro-Caribbean immigrants do experience racial frustration, transnationalist ties provide a way to alleviate them. Rogers deems it an “exit option.” Many immigrants believe that if tensions within America become too great, they can always return to their home country, thanks to improvements in technology and communication.

The readings for this week covered new factors influencing Caribbean transnationalism. In “Caribbean Transnationalism as a Gendered Process” by Christine G. T. Ho, she explains the many transforming roles that Caribbean women have to take for their personal success, as well as the success of their children and their transnational networks. In Chapter 7 of Mary C. Waters’ Growing Up West Indian and African American and Chapter 8 of Reuel Rogers’ Black Like Who?, results of their studies are shown and analyzed and come to the consensus that the American culture towards black skinned people have to change to improve the chances of upward mobility for second generation Caribbean children. For the poor and working-class black Americans, racism and discrimination make up their childhood and cannot afford to get out of that life.

Many Caribbean women are the definition of single mothers. In coming to New York City, they strive to get a job to help their family. While they work, they also have to keep order in the household. They do this to move up social class. However, as the job opportunities for Caribbean women rise in America, the opportunities for men decline. Despite that, women still need the extra income to support their children. In an attempt to not fall behind, they spread their family network across many borders, as well as keeping strong ties to their home nations. Discrimination against their race has prevented full integration into society therefore requiring them to have a back up plan in case of the racial tension getting too hostile.

Future generations of Caribbean Americans are greatly affected by the level of success that the first generation has. In the best-case scenario, the parents have been successful both socially and economically, which gives the children a chance for good education and to visit the parents’ home nation. This gives the child an opportunity to interact more with his ethnic background and learn to appreciate it. He will have his own transnational network built from the ones his parents introduced him to. This was the case of the interviewees that identified themselves as West Indian in the interviews conducted by Waters and Rogers. In the opposite end of the spectrum were the poor families. The children in poor families only have their parents as a connection to their ethnic background. They are more exposed to racial slurs because they look like native blacks. As they grow older, they identify themselves as a black American rather than their ethnic background. They were born in America, just like other black Americans and don’t have access to ethnic trust networks. There is nothing to differentiate themselves from other black Americans, not even a foreign accent.

From these readings, it seems that the worst possible thing is to be recognized as a native black American. This is unfortunate for them and for the new immigrants that are put together with them by the white majority. The worst part is that instead of improving the race relations by spreading knowledge to end prejudice, the immigrants separate themselves from the native blacks. There is no clear manner to end instinctive discrimination, but hopefully there will be efforts made to break this terrible cycle.

Reading Christine Ho’s article on transnationalism as a gendered process was both surprising and not very surprising at the same time. I feel like we have touched on the importance of women in migration and transnational networks many times before in this course. Women tend to have an easier time finding work, often as a maid or caretaker, immediately after migrating and can secure financial stability much quicker than men. Women also used their “natural role” as a caretaker to take the burden of children off of other migrating families until they are able to get on their feet. What was surprising about the article was how matrifocal many Caribbean cultures are. Strong ties between mothers, other women and kin play a large role in creating the large kin networks we have previously talked about.

In the article “Black Like Who?” we finally go deeper into the relationship between native African Americans and Caribbean immigrants. So far in the course, we’ve only briefly touched upon these relationships and problems between native blacks and foreign blacks. Most of what we talked about was how they each group of people perceive the other. Many Caribbean immigrants felt they were better than native blacks since they often migrated with a substantial education and artisanal skills, while native blacks held their own prejudices against as well. What this article did was show how each group views each other in respect to how the country views them. Through interviews with over 50 different Caribbean immigrants, Reuel Rogers helps paint a better, more defined picture of the relationship between Native and Foreign blacks. Something in particular that stood out to me was how each group felt about their chances in succeeding in life or elevating their social standings. Native African Americans interviewed felt that it is incredibly hard to increase one’s social standing in America specifically due to the color of their skin. Caribbean immigrants interviewed felt different about the subject. Though some did say race plays a role, most felt that as long as one was hard working, they could improve their conditions. I don’t think anyone would not understand why these groups do not agree on this issue. The idea of a class system based entirely on racism is fairly new to many Caribbean immigrants; they did come face to face with racism in their home country, but class systems weren’t necessarily entrenched in the idea. Also, with many Caribbean immigrants holding strong transnational ties to their home country, there isn’t such a deep concern with issues in their new country. As Rogers explained, for many immigrants from the Caribbean, there exists an “escape route.” Many immigrants feel that if times get too tough, they could always migrate back to their original home. With such strong transnational networks in place, returning home and getting back into society would not be that hard at all.

The following chapter, by Mary C. Waters, ties in nicely with the aforementioned ideas. Many first generation immigrants cannot fully sympathize with native blacks. Yet, the emerging second generation, which mostly aligns itself with African Americans, definitely can. This second generation has grown up with the inequality and the ingrained racism of America. They do not have an escape route to a distant country since America is the only place many of them consider home. Most of the second generation is also too far removed from their ethnic identities to connect with a Caribbean culture. Many even want to rebel and often adopt the styles and attitudes of their native peers. Now, this isn’t a bad thing by any means. The only problem is that many of this second generation lose the hope in life that originally drove their parents to immigrate. Many actually start to feel that there is no use in trying to succeed, whether in school or in society in general, since their skin color will always relegate them to an inferior social distinction. On the other hand, members of the second generation who do on to any ethnic ties they have often stay optimistic about the future. They empathize with their parents and also want to achieved the heralded American Dream. As the article stated, to tell if hanging on to ethnic ties really does end up making one’s life better further research and studying will need to be done, but so far, those that do seem to have taken larger strides in bettering themselves.

First off just a few reflections about the walking tour of the Caribbean community in Flatbush Brooklyn. A large distinction of the community was the amount of money transfer processes available. In particular, the one that I am most familiar with is the Western Union, which we noticed in almost every block. In my community here in the Bronx there is also a large community of West Indies (of course not as large as Flatbush). When I used to work at a community retail store that provided Western Union, I encountered many West Indian immigrants. Most of our Western Unions customers were mainly West Indian immigrants. For example, there was a Jamaican customer that walked in every Sunday (as he received his weekly check) and send about $200. Of course at the time I did not understand why he does this, however now I am aware of remittances and their importance to the West Indians. It was really interesting to find that connection in our tour. As I reflect back to my Western Union customers the pieces fall together perfectly.

Another interesting observation from the walking tour was the fact that the community was in New York City a city that I lived most of my life in but yet at Flatbush it seemed anything but. I felt as if I left New York City and traveled for a quick vacation. The fact that I was coming from the Bronx (2 hour transportation) further emphasized this experience. The people also played in important role in manifesting this experience. New Yorkers are known to be rude and obnoxious folks that wont smile in your face. However, the total opposite was noticed at Flatbush. The Caribbean folks were very welcoming and friendly. They seemed to admire our interest in learning about the Caribbean immigrants.

As mentioned before many times, women played a key role in the Caribbean society in both New York and the Caribbean islands. Going back to the migration of Caribbean individuals around the time of the construction of the Panama Canal, women played a vital role in influencing migration of families, and taking care of them in group homes in “developing regions” such as Harlem. During this time, women predominantly worked domestic jobs along with mediocre factory jobs in order to earn money, which they could send back home to pay for the migration of the rest of her family. When we learned this, we overlooked the greater idea of transnationalism. However, these early days of the diaspora was the foundation for these strong transnationalistic ties that still exist today, along with the idea of trust networks.

In the article, ” Transnationalism as a Gendered Process” by Ho, the importance of women was again emphasized, but in a different scheme. Women most of the times led the household, either domestically or financially. As Ho mentioned, due to the lack of jobs along with other economical hardships, the role of men was lacking because they could not provide for their families sufficiently. Women, however, worked mediocre jobs and simultaneously took care of all the domestic jobs, which really proves their significance during this time. In addition, transnationalistic ties involving women was really crucial during this time, especially around the central idea of child bearing. As we learned much earlier, women were a huge factor in promoting migration, and they continued to be. As more individuals migrated to America, some felt as if though their children will not truly learn in the cultural setting they desired. Thus, this led to another revolutionary transnationalistic practice of sending children back home to keep their cultural roots intact. This was another way of keeping in touch with their home country, other than through the trust networks involving the movement of money and items. In addition, this practice of sending children back home especially during their youthful years in still continued today. On a personal note, when I was younger and had recently migrated to America, my mother would mention sending me back to Afghanistan because I was forgetting the culture gradually, and making mistakes in syntax and semantics when speaking Farsi.

In addition the complex idea of identity was also mentioned in the two other articles by Rogers and Waters. As we had learned before, individuals that were actually foreigners were ironically treated better. During this time, having an accent was actually embraced, because you were treated better. But, what being foreign set you apart from was being identified as black. Taking note of this historical time period, racism and discrimination was extremely prominent, and it played a pivotal role in people identifying themselves in a certain group. Many individuals actually who were middle class identified themselves using their country of origin (ethnically), to avoid being grouped in with the other degenerate African Americans. In contrast, individuals that were treated very poorly actually identified themselves racially as African American because they shared the struggle with other blacks facing racism and discrimination, and sought to improve their status by fighting together with the other African Americans. Another interesting aspect was that as the generations of immigrants progressed, the individuals actually started to identify themselves differently. The first generation migrants, as expected, identified themselves according to their home country, especially taking note of their nationalistic pride, and strong transnationalistic ties. But, as generations progressed, individuals started to identify themselves according to their economical, financial, social, and gender status. This really goes to prove the extreme struggles these individuals had when trying to identify themselves, especially with the stressing factors of racism, discrimination, and social class.

In Christine G. T. Ho’s article, “Caribbean Transnationalism As a Gendered Process”, Ho explains the economical and financial stability that women had to create for themselves as they resided in the cities of New York. Commonly, elite immigrant families tended to move to another country as a whole unit. All the nuclear family members had the resources and money to move in such a large entity. However, many poor Caribbean families immigrated independently from each other. It would take them many trips over many years to successfully bring the whole family into the same city. With this thought in mind, many of the Caribbean women migrants participated in what is known as “circular migration”, a method in which they would pave the path for other people to follow behind them, such as family members or friends.

Ho clarifies that many Caribbean families tended to be matrifocal and placed great emphasis and respect to the mother-child bond. Contrary to the notion that women in matrifocal families would be dominant, husbands were still considered to have the dominant hand in the family.

There are many causes as to why Caribbean women played such essential roles in maintaining the family and serving as the connecting bridges between the native country and the immigrant nation. Caribbean transnationalism rests on the foundations of family and kinship ties, which women managed to preserve. Many Caribbean men tended to maintain illegal relationships with other women. This forced the Caribbean wives to work hard without receiving a lot of financial and emotional support from the husbands. Many of these women worked as farm vendors and other jobs in the informal sector of the economy. After post WWII, the shift in the jobs forced women from agricultural work into domestic labor. At that time period, 88% of Caribbean women had only a primary school education and this made them the perfect candidates to be marginalized as the reserve labor pool, mainly due to high unemployment and their lack of an education. With women barely making enough money to support their families, they had to rely on relationships with numerous men to support their family.

All of these scenarios helped pave the path for women to form many networks and to keep their connections with their native country. Women kept in touch with their families back home so that they could receive help when times were tough. These same women had many networks within the community so that they could make money to help support their families.

In Reuel Rogers’ article, “’Black Like Who?’ Afro-Caribbean Immigrants, African Americans, and the Politics of Group Identity”, Rogers clarifies the major differences that diversifies the Caribbean community from the African-American community. There are many reasons why these two major groups are separated. With the increase in the Caribbean population and the decline of the native African-American population, the many conflicts between the two groups continued to clash at an exponential level.

Native African-Americans and the Caribbean immigrants both have a strong sense of nationality and racial identity. These two groups have always viewed themselves as unique with their own culture and heritage, individual from other groups. With the arrival of the Caribbean immigrants into New York City, social structures grouped the native African-Americans and the Caribbean immigrants into one black social group. This brought up intragroup tensions because these groups were offended that they were viewed as basically similar to each other.

The Caribbean immigrants also tended to have a higher education than their native African-American counterparts and this also fueled the rising conflicts. The Caribbean immigrants viewed themselves as upper class people and wanted to be treated better than the native blacks. They also believed that their migration was voluntarily made to New York City whereas the native blacks were forced to migrate to the states. These differences made each group view themselves as different from the other group, thus creating stresses between each other.

Many political groups started to form as ways to identify and aid the people specifically part of the same group. The Caribbean political organizations would exclusively aid the Caribbean immigrants by providing them ways to attain jobs, buy houses, and receive an education. In the same manner, native African-Americans formed their own political organizations where they had the capability to attain social mobility in their own communities and to identify with their racial identity and heritage. This influenced how both groups viewed politics because it was in the terms of achieving political representation for the whole racial group. This strong group identification influenced their political views on laws and issues that would benefit all their members. It is interesting to note that the more current immigrants from the Caribbean tend not to join these political organizations. Native African-Americans were more likely to relate strongly to their racial identity and roots, unlike the newest wave of Caribbean immigrants.

In Mary C. Waters’ article, “Growing Up West Indian and African American”, Waters explains her study on the development of racial identity of second-generation Caribbean teenagers and African-American teenagers. According to Waters research, first-generation immigrants from the Caribbean tended to identify themselves as from the West Indies. The second-generation teenagers, however, grew up hearing about the negative things about white culture and the African Americans. These second-generation Caribbean teenagers were also treated differently than their parents. They didn’t have their parents’ unique West Indian accent that distinguished them from their African-American counterparts. This hindered them from attaining higher wage jobs since the majority of the society couldn’t distinguish if these Caribbean teenagers were of West Indian or African-American descent.

Waters’ explains that parents who were involved with ethnic groups and organizations were more likely to instill a sense of racial identity in their children. Differing views between the parents and the children also influenced how they grew up to view their society and ethnicity. The immigrant parents were more likely to view their low social class standing due to a lack of education. They convinced their children that with hard work, they could make it up the social mobility ladder. However, these teenagers faced racism and discrimination from the society, thus altering their views of America, which vastly varied from their parents. Notably, the ethnic-identified teenagers who had middle-class parents and were placed in magnet schools had more hopes for the future. They believed that they would receive equal opportunities with the acquiring of an education.

“Caribbean Transnationalism As a Gendered Process” – Ho

In this article, the author discusses the role that women play in transnational ties as well as the disadvantages and problems they face in such a system. The author begins by claiming that the effects of globalization and capitalism affect both men and women differently. These effects (on both genders) have been negative and include rising unemployment, decreasing wages, and the “casualization” of labor. However, in this essay, the author looks into its effects on women. Families in the Caribbean have a matrifocal structure. That is, the family structure focuses on the relationship between mother and child, and the responsibility for raising children lies on female kin. However, this also leads to a less involved family structure for men, as these men have outside relations with other women. This, according to the author, leads to a greater burden on the mother, both financially and emotionally, thus leading to greater dependence on men for financial support.

Economic conditions deny Caribbean men a higher wage as well. However, since most women do not have the proper schooling, they are forced to work in mainly informal and low-paying jobs. Although an explanation exists (that cites industrialization) on women’s financial dependence, this explanation seems rooted in European experience. The Caribbean experience has been different because (1) men have been paid very low wages themselves, (2) women have not been excluded from the public workspace, and (3) women have always been burdened with a double workload and have never been exempt from household responsibilities.

Women have also been limited in terms of the types of jobs they can access, as they have been limited to low-paying, wage work. However, men have had similar experiences in Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic. Despite this, recent years have seen an increase in the number of jobs available for women because, according to the author, they are cheaper and more docile. Yet, the lack of jobs for men undermines their role in the household and forces some to leave home, making this increase in jobs for women a double-edged sword. Thus, some Caribbean women have resorted to migration.

In migration, women play an important role in maintaining transnational and kinship ties. These ties involve the sharing of responsibilities and the pooling of resources among members. This is especially true of child rearing because parents may send children to the Caribbean for a better education, and family members watch these children (until they reach higher education when they return). However, migration may cast a toll on relationships including marriage breakdown (because men have a difficult time finding work, thus undermining their role in the family) and strained parent-child relationships (because of long-term separation or conflicts between parent-child values).

I was intrigued by one sentence that the author wrote. It said:

“Put differently, (material) changes in the mode of production may alter the family as an economic unit but do little to change it as an ideological (nonmaterial) one” (38).

Now, to change the economic status of women, there must be a change in terms of material possessions (e.g. higher wages). This would allow Caribbean women to better their economic position as they would have to work less and some of the double workload would be lifted off their shoulders. I agree with this part of the statement.

However, I must partially disagree with the last part of the statement, which states that a material change would do little to alter ideology. To me, material changes have the ability to set in motion a set of ideological changes as well. Given the state of the economy today, I do not find it difficult for higher wages to undermine the system of patriarchy that the author mentions. Although it would be somewhat difficult, it can be done. However, given that such an event (e.g. an increase in wages) is rather unlikely in this day and age, I will admit that a more psychosocial-oriented change is necessary.

On page 40, the author provides a proposed explanation for the decreased status of women. However, she mentions in the next paragraph that this explanation is “obviously based on the European and Euro-American experience” (41). As was seen in the other two readings, it seems that many long-standing explanations were based on European experience. Was this the effect of Anglo hegemony in such studies? Despite this, it is nice to see that more and more people are now beginning to question these long-standing notions.

In addition, we are reminded of the importance of trust networks to Caribbean migrants. This is especially relevant when the author mentions that Caribbean migrants tend to put children in the care of relatives back home. It was also interesting to see how the author called children “human currency” (48). I never thought of children with such an analogy; however, it is very appropriate. Children act as the gateway to stronger transnational ties between family members. Parents place enormous amounts of trust in these family members, who are expected to take care of the child and provide him/her a proper education and discipline. Thus, it is only appropriate that children be considered a form of currency that assists in strengthening these transnational ties.

“Black Like Who?” – Rogers

This chapter discusses the differences in group identity and consciousness between African Americans and Afro-Caribbeans. As the number of foreign-born Caribbean blacks in New York City increases, the notion of a homogenous group of “black people” becomes increasingly irrelevant. Considering a simple grouping of one black people ignores ethnic and class differences as well as the diversity among this group. Many researchers have recently begun asking whether or not blacks share a racial group identity. Another, more important question asks about the identity that foreign-born blacks take. Do they take identify ethnically (as from their home countries) or racially (as African-American)?

Some have suggested that foreign-born blacks tend to identify ethnically in order to distance themselves from native blacks and avoid stigmatization. Others have suggested that racial inequalities force Afro-Caribbeans to identify racially and unite with African-Americans in the fight against these inequalities. However, the author argues that the choice is not dichotomous. That is, many foreign-born blacks primarily identify ethnically; however, they may also identify as blacks (with varying levels of intensity). The author argues that differences in racial identity between foreign-born and native blacks are due to differences in their “cognitive frames of reference” and their socialization in specific institutions.

To African-Americans, a shared racial identity serves as a point for group mobilization against racial discrimination. However, even more than this, African Americans believe in a linked racial fate outlook. They believe that their own individual fates are linked to that of African Americans as a whole. In addition, there exists a strong group consciousness, which results from dissatisfaction with the group’s social, economic, and political resources. African American political behavior seems to be driven by this consciousness and creates, according to the author, a “distinctive ideological lens.” In addition, institutional networks have acted as a sort-of group mobilization ground. However, this heightened group consciousness seems to be more prominent in middle-class blacks because they are more likely to encounter whites in everyday life and are more likely to participate in these institutions.

Afro-Caribbeans tend to embrace both their ethnic and racial identity; however, their ethnic, home country identity is usually their primary identity. Yet, despite shared racial group identification, they do not express a high level of racial group consciousness and express some ambivalence about any ideological meanings to their racial identity. This is because these people are not as preoccupied with racism as are African Americans. In addition, they are not connected to institutional networks as much as African Americans. Those who are connected express a higher level of group consciousness. Furthermore, transnational attachments tend to continue these patterns.

The concept of an alternate frame of reference stems from the fact that African Americans tend to compare themselves with whites; whereas, Afro-Caribbeans tend to compare themselves with their previous situations back home. In addition, Afro-Caribbeans speak of an exit option. That is, if racial conditions become particularly rough, they have the (often times, imaginary) option to return to their home countries.

The author wrote that African American group consciousness leads to a political worldview “at odds with the American ethos.” However, it is also mentioned that African Americans tend to lean toward a liberal or radical conception of this ethos, which they consider to be aligned with the nation’s ideals. To me, it is all a matter of perspective. To a white person, it may appear to be radicalism. Government intervention to address certain grievances does sound somewhat radical given the issue being considered.

However, to an African American, this may be seen as aligning to the American ideal: “That all men are created equal.” Thus, from their point of view, intervention makes sense because it was one of the ideals of the Founding Fathers.

As a result, the question of whether or not African American group consciousness leads to a political worldview “at odds with the American ethos” is a purely subjective one.

I also believe that a shared racial identity (among Afro-Caribbeans and African Americans) makes sense. One of the respondents in the study stated of African-Americans and Afro-Caribbeans that “our histories are similar.” Both African Americans and Afro-Caribbeans have similar roots. Both groups were brought over from Africa to the Western Hemisphere a couple of hundred years ago in order to provide labor. What is the difference? One group was sent to what is today the United States. Another group was sent to the Caribbean. Thus, it is understandable that Afro Caribbeans may have a sense of shared racial identity. However, what is stopping them from fully identifying with African Americans is the stigma and racism associated with being “black.” Thus, the notion of full-blown, shared racial identity cannot become a reality until racism and discrimination are (to put it lightly) eradicated (something that might not happen for a long time).

“Growing Up West Indian and African American” – Waters

Here, the author discusses the development of an identity (ethnic or racial) among West Indians as well as the implications of choosing a certain identity. The author found that first-generation Caribbean immigrants identified according to nation of origin and distanced themselves from African Americans. However, this was mixed in the second generation as race, class, and gender all play a role in determining identity. People who identified ethnically were more likely to come from a middle-class background, and those who identified racially (and had an “oppositional identity”) were more likely to come from a lower-class background. Middle-class children may have had access to better schools as well as participation in voluntary associations; they may also be shielded in a way from black culture by their parents. In addition, African-American identified teens had more negative things to say about being American (no equality) than ethnic-identified teens (with hard work, success is possible). In terms of gender, boys were more direct and discussed being black in terms of racial solidarity; whereas, girls were less direct and discussed it in terms of freedom from parental control.

The author recommends looking at West Indian identity and understanding it in context. This is because identity is usually chosen in relation to others based on kin ties. In addition, identification with American blacks carries with it the stigmatization and racism associated with being African American.

There is also the notion of West Indians being a “model minority.” It seems that the less American an immigrant is, the more likely they are to have access to jobs and information from social networks. The author attributes this to hiring preferences and social networks as well as cultural expectations (such as a relatively more “comfortable” attitude towards racism). The author ends by remarking that the plight of West Indians and African Americans is a sad one and questions the future of race relations in America.

This article differs from the last one by Rogers in that this talks about the implications of individual identification. The Rogers article discussed group consciousness and identity. However, I liked how the articles tied into and related to each other.

I liked the detail that the author gave in describing her study. She went into close detail about who her study subjects were, where they came from, and where they worked/went to school as well as hints at their social class backgrounds. I believe that it really helped the reader (me) to understand the structure of her study and helped to clear up any misconceptions about her study.

Now, the author mentions:

“If anyone has an incentive to maintain either loyalty to another country or a transnational identity, West Indians in the United States do” (203).

I would have liked it if the author elaborated a bit more on this statement. Is it because they have the option to distance themselves from African Americans? Is it because these transnational ties confer some type of other benefit? A little more elaboration would have been useful here to clear up these questions.

Later, the author writes:

“If the West Indian experience teaches us anything about American race relations, it should refocus our attention on the destructive, everyday prejudice and discrimination for which whites are still responsible” (207).

and

“Decent jobs, effective schools, and safe streets are not immigrant-oriented or race-based policies. They are universal policies that would benefit all urban residents” (209).

I do not have much to say on these lines, other than the fact that I was impressed by the forcefulness of the author’s words. She calls the prejudice and discrimination present “destructive” and actively blames it on “whites.” She later says that the right to a decent job, good schools, and low crime are universal (a point with which I fully agree).