One of Butterfield’s main points in her article is that a racial identity and an ethnic one are not mutually exclusive traits, and that a person can have both, rather than choose between the two. For example, a person can be both black and West Indian–the black would be the racial component, and the person is ethnically West Indian.
A girl in my politics class spoke about this in class last week. She immigrated from Jamaica, and considers herself “black.” However, she feels that she has been lumped together with other people of black skin color, even though she considers herself to be different from other “blacks,” such as African-Americans (those who are actually from Africa). She told of how cultures and ideologies are very different between the two groups; therefore, just because her skin color is that of African Americans, she can not be lump summed with them.
I think this teaches us a very striking lesson in understanding and tolerance. Just because someone appears to be a certain way–by eye at least–does not mean that we can generalize and/or group this person. People are just much more complicated than that. How much more so in a city like New York where there are so many different shades of skin, coming from countries all around the world.
Can we even use the terms “black” and “white” anymore? “Black” nowadays can refer to so many things: African-American? Afro-Carribean? More specifically, Jamaican or Dominican? And “white”: European, Irish, English? And let’s be honest, there are a lot more colors in between “black” and “white.” Use your imagination. We have to gain a greater social acceptance and understanding for people, for fear of disrespect and outright rudeness.
