Talk:Afrophobia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please help improve this article or section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (January 2007)

1 Brainstorming the potential for this page
2 Possible page move
- 2.1 A silly misunderstanding
3 Afrophobia as a psychological condition
4 Original research
5 Contribution to "Afrophobia among blacks" deleted
6 Votes for deletion
7 Role of blackface and darky iconography in Afrophobia
8 Blacks and The Holocaust
9 South Africa Coloured (mixed race) and Asians
10 Origin of Term
11 originalresearch tag

[edit] Brainstorming the potential for this page

Earliest reactions of Europeans (and others) to black Africans -- notions of savagery and supremacy.
Refinement of the notion of white superiority with the advent of the trans-Atlantic slave trade -- and of its corollary, the inherent inferiority of blacks.
The role of segregation in this regard - the notion that blacks were/are somehow unclean, degenerate ("dirty, smelly, stupid, depraved")
Notions that blacks have "contaminated" and "degraded" white culture.
White flight: the enduring phenomenon of segregation in the U.S., despite legislated attempts to integrate public schools, to strike down discrimination in housing
"Color-consciouness" worldwide (black-on-black discrimination)
The phenomenon of internalized notions of white racism/white supremacy and how that is manifested by blacks in various cultures: e.g., Michael Jackson has been described as "a poster child for black self-loathing." Hair straightening, skin lightening, cosmetic surgery, etc.
The section on Arab or Muslim nations/societies - what's going on in Egypt, the Sudan, the phenomenon described by Henry Louis Gates of blacks identifying themselves as "Arabs" and denying their black Africanness, Tuareg color bias
In Asia, the notorious anti-black animus, citing racist stereotypes in Japanese culture (esp. comic books), the riots in China in the 1970s ('80s?) against African college students, resulting in several deaths, etc.
Role of white supremacy Afrophobia and other similar ideologies/values indigenous to non-European cultures
Examine change of indigenous East Indian culture from one that valued blackness to one that despises/rejects it.
An examination of Afrophobia and violence: the French extinction of the Tazmanians, lynching, etc.
Colorphobia as an antecedent to Afrophobia.

This piece is beginning to sound broader and broader as I think about possible ideas for inclusion. I think this has tremendous potential as an article, with the various subheads containing a list of referrals to other, related articles on Wikipedia which certain related phenomenaa in greather depth. I think Afrophobia could be a valuable resource for examining anti-black inclinations and institutions in their most significant manifestations/permutations, allowing the reader to see the scope of this phenomenon, its history and its importance in shaping the world as we know it.

It will require disciplined editing and strong editorial guidance to prevent it from becoming a hulking, catch-all, meandering bohemoth of an article; but it has definite possibilities. I think we should keep it and see what develops. deeceevoice 06:47, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

More "Historical" Perspective

It would be good to push the boundaries of your inquiry and brainstorming to earlier times (that is, before "Europeans", before the slave trade). Many of the causes of "Afrophobia" may find their genesis in how Man relates to such fundamental elements as 'day' and 'night'. Early humans could be expected to find great relief, even safety, during daylight hours; and find deep set fear and worry at night's onset. Such reactions could easily be transferred to beings who proportedly shared attributes with 'day' (good, worthy) or 'night' (suspect, troublesome). (contributed by User:Karhu

You're absolutely correct, Karhu -- something I overlooked. But if you don't weigh in on the VfD page to keep this article, there won't be anything to insert your idea into. So, please do so. Thanks. deeceevoice 19:51, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

DeeCee, please advise, what is the VfD page? Karhu 12:50, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi, Karhu. It means "Votes for Deletion." This article has been nominated for deletion; they wanna murder it! :( Forgive me for assuming your arrival at this page was a result of that discussion and not providing a link. [1] I hope you'll weigh in on the side of saving and improving this one. Thanks for your interest and your suggestions. :-) deeceevoice 13:25, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Possible page move

I think it would help tremendously if we moved this article to a new title and made Afrophobia a redirect there. This should trump the neologism arguements; after all Wikipedia encourages redirects and it would ensure that some one searching for Afrophobia would find the subject matter, albeit at a new title like Racism against people of Black African orgin, that is specific and meets with naming conventions. -JCarriker/Always remember, we are not Britannica— we're better. 11:00, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. If anything, your proposed (and IMO, clunky) Racism against blacks should be a redirect to Afrophobia, which is an accepted term for the phenomenon and far simpler/more elegant. deeceevoice 11:20, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I am simply proposing a compromise, clunky as it may be it does meet with our naming conventions and avoids the neologism arguement. It also avoids the problems that might arise out of an article entitled Racism against Blacks which can be considered dehumanizing or Racism against Africans, which is misleading. I have no objection to the article remaing at Afrophobia, but important thing is that regardless of what happens to the Afrophobia article the topic survives and has an article. -JCarriker 13:11, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

I understand your intent -- but an argument definitely can be made that Afrophobia is not a neologism. Further, I have to comment that referring to people as "blacks" is no more "dehumanizing" than referring to people as "whites." If we are, indeed equal, then our naming conventions should be, as well. And, frankly, I think it's time people got over the racist negatives which historically have been associated with the term and stop tiptoeing around it.. Certainly a good many of us "blacks" have. Peace. deeceevoice 13:58, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] A silly misunderstanding

If your interest and focus is the preservation (or deletion) of Afrophobia, then please continue to post your comments above and completely ignore this section.'

Afrophobia is not a neologism; I know better. A significant plurality of people apparently do and renmaing is a way of taking away there arguement. There is also the possibilty that the article will be deleted-- Where does the information go then? In response to your comment: Frankly, I do consider the term whites dehumanizing; I'm more than a color and I refuse to have my character judged on that basis alone. Further more many "blacks" where I live, including many of my friends do find the term dehumanizing and opt instead for African-American or Black American; and I was simply refering concerns I have heard them express and that I agree with. Also, we are indeed equal and I would appreciate it if you would extend the same degree of respect to me that I have extended to you. -JCarriker 14:45, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

Dang. You got your jaws all tight for nothin'. I doubt seriously if your black friends find the term "whites" objectionable; they probably use it all the time. Personally, the vast majority of African Americans I know -- myself included -- use that term and "black" interchangeably without much thought. I think both terms reclaim/embrace things of beauty and importance that far too long have had stigmas attached to them. And that business about being uncomfortable with "black" as a tag, frankly, applies equally to black folks as it does to whites, IMO. Further, no reasonable person expects a tag to embody or signify all that a person is. I'm a woman, but I'm far more than my gender. Does that mean I should object to the use of the term to describe me? Lastly, recognizing that you might take my comments the wrong way -- as some kind of criticism of you (which they were not; I was referring to the fact that the tendency of some toward a strained political correctness can be really a drag/totally impractical sometimes) -- I added "Peace" to my post. But I guess that was completely lost on you. Touchy, touchy, touchy.... I would appreciate it if you would lighten up and not read things into people's comments that simply aren't there. deeceevoice 19:25, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Maybe I have read things into your comments that weren't there, and if I have I am sorry, but you have too. I have never said that Afrophobia is a neologism, yet in your first and second posts you contend that I did. I was talking about a politcal strategy for saving the article; many of the delete votes contend, wrongly, that Afrophobia is a neologism and if you rename the article you take that arguement away from them. Secondly, if the article fails-- how can we save the information? In response to my first post (which does not include my 2nd point) you responded that you disagreed; I felt that you had misunderstood what I wrote and sought to clarify it in my second post. In your response to my clarification you contened that Afrophobia is not a neologism, when I never said it was; then we digressed into this comedy of misundertanding which has nothing to do with what should be are primary concern-- saving the article. Since then, I have tried to clarify my postion to no avail; my opinions and that of friends still remains the brunt of your response, even when my concerns regarding the article are placed at the front of my posts denoting priority. Also, placing Peace at the end of your post was not lost on me and likewise my tone throughout our discussion has been nothing less than diplomatic. Further more in your post preceding this one; you insult my intelligence by saying that But I guess that was completely lost on you, but I digress. These are the facts- this article is on vfd and is in serious jepordy of beign deleted. I have but forth ideas of how we can form strategy to save the artcile; and a contingency plan to save the topic if the article fails. I am, ready, willing, and able to help you. However if you don't want my help or don't want to discuss my ideas, just say so. I'll bow out of the situation entirely get of this talk page strike my vote and direct my energy toward areas where they might be mor useful. -JCarriker 22:24, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

No. lol Read what I wrote again. I didn't say you said it was a neologism. In fact, I didn't get the impression you thought it was. I understood perfectly that you were discussing, as you clearly stated, a "compromise." My point was that, even though some opposed the article on that basis, it was really groundless -- so why bend over backwards to accommodate a misapprehension, particularly when there are those who have already argued persuasively that it is not? "However, if you don't want my help, or don't want to discuss my ideas...." What? Why on earth would you assume that? Get off the personal tip. We're all here for the same purpose -- aren't we? Damn. So much wasted energy. Let's just stick to the subject at hand. Last I checked, the votes were pretty close, so I think saving Afrophobia may have a chance. (I haven't checked they probably use it all the time. Personally, the vast majority of African Americans I know -- myself included -- use that term and "black" interchangeably without much thought. I think both terms reclaim/embrace things of beauty and importance that far too long have had stigmas attached to them. And that business about being uncomfortable with "black" as a tag, frankly, applies equally to black folks as it does to whites, IMO. Further, no reasonable person expects a tag to embody or signify all that a person is. I'm a woman, but I'm far more than my gender. Does that mean I should object to the use of the term to describe me? Lastly, recognizing that you might take my comments the wrong way -- as some kind of criticism of you (which they were not; I was referring to the fact that the tendency of some toward a strained political correctness can be really a drag/totally impractical sometimes) -- I added "Peace" to my post. But I guess that was completely lost on you. Touchy, touchy, touchy.... I would appreciate it if you would lighten up and not read things into people's comments that simply aren't there. deeceevoice 19:25, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

One last thing: I just read your second response in its entirety. Sorry, but I gotta say "bull." Let's examine this misunderstanding. You accepted that your objection to what I wrote was the result of a misunderstanding. But then you go on to try to charge me with the same thing ("Maybe I have read things into your comments that weren't there, and if I have I am sorry, but you have too." Essentially, you're saying, "You're another one." (What?!!!) And, again, you are simply incorrect. I clearly did not say you thought Afrophobia was a neologism. And not content to leave it at that, you further charge me with "still" focusing on your friends. Please note I did not mention your friends until you did; I "focused" on them no more than you did. I mentioned them only to explain my original statements. If your black friends object to the use of "blacks" to refer to African-Americans, then they should object to the use of "whites" to describe whites. And, frankly, I don't know a single African-American who does. And, to my way of thinking, "if we are, indeed, equal," then that makes absolutely no sense.

Further, I don't spend a lot of time on Wikipedia walking on eggshells. I simply state my opinions. My nod to hoping you would understand that my original post was offered in good faith -- which it was -- was the attachment of "peace" at the end. After all, why would I purposely insult you and then say "peace"? That defies logic. IMO, that single word at the end should at least have been sufficient to make you doubt your obviously ill-considered, defensive and then offensive response. But, no. You took that your misunderstanding and then ran with it -- in your responses herein and then over to the to the Wareware RfC page. I think your comments about my misplaced focus is the pot calling the kettle black. The mere fact that we're even having this exchange tells me you were far too focused on some perceived personal slight -- when there was none. And taking that misplaced focuse even further, once you reached the RfC page, saw fit to specifically refer to this absolutely ridiculous misunderstanding between us and how you were "frustrated" with me -- and before even bothering to address the real subject at hand: Wareware's unrepentant, virtulant and repeatedly vicious racist verbal attacks. Absolutely uncalled for. Oh, indeed. IMO, "peace" was completely lost on you. deeceevoice 11:38, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This probably would have been better posted on a user talk page, but sense it is here I will respond. This is pointless, it is a mutual misunderstsanding and the more either of us tries to get out of it we only get deeper in. I'm going to stop posting here so that you can dedicate your full energies toward saving the article. I will not withdraw my vote.

What I think of you now is that you are an intellegent, dedicated, proud, and energetic user. Second, Rfc is a request for comment that are open to every one who will take the time to review the situatuion. Third, I endorsed your postion and the Outsdide view. My point in stating that I was frustrated with you is that; frustration is not justification for the way he responded to you; you deserve better than that, we all do. I think it's unfortunate that you have chosen to continue to assume the worst about me. Perhaps we can work together better in the furture. Peace -JCarriker 12:09, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, but this reads like more excuse making. There has been no misunderstanding on my part -- so, no. It is not "mutual." Secondly, IMO, given the fact that you now realize that your response was clearly the result of a misunderstanding on your part, the honorable and appropriate thing to do would be to remove the irrelevant, wholly inappropriate reference to it from your remarks in the RfC. "Continue to assume the worst"? No, I don't "continue to assume the worst" about you; never did. However, so far, quite frankly, you've not given me much reason to think of you in any other way than your unfortunate conduct has prompted me to. All I read are excuses -- even a defense for your indefensible post in the RfC. deeceevoice 12:16, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Afrophobia as a psychological condition

In the interest of maintaining the original intent of this article, consider reviewing the article on phobia. From a scientific perspective Afrophobia is a valid phoenomenon. When contributions to this article focus on the science regarding phobias and how that relates to Africa, Africans, African history, African culture and the African diaspora that will maintain a clear understanding of fact. Everything else is an unfortunate diversion.

Originally, it was intended to focus the article on research that would justify Afrophobia's inclusion in the DSM-IV. The evidence to support that objective is astounding to say the least. Critical attention to the facts demonstrates the need for such work. The history of the APA and its inability or desire to address Afrophobia and its effect on society show how important that this issue be addressed. It stands to reason that a wide variety of social ills result directly from Afrophobia. Their resolution is therefore quite simple to implement once an enlightened approach is taken.

[edit] Original research

The term is neologism. The content is unsupported with academic references. The article for a valid topic (hostility towards africans and/or afro-americans) was started with two blatant violations of wikipedia basic policies. Please think about moving to a proper title.(Is there really nothing in wikipedia on the subject yet?) and provide scholarly references that discuss the issue. Mikkalai 21:26, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Quite the contrary, ample evidence has been given on the VfD page that "Afrophobia" clearly is not a neologism. With regard to the expectation that references will be provided -- that's a given. deeceevoice 14:06, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Contribution to "Afrophobia among blacks" deleted

"Afrophobia among Blacks. It's a state of mind, a combination of fear, envy and ignorance."

Though there is some truth to the second statement, it is entirely too pat and, presented in the current vacuum of information, could be construed as racist. When dealing with issues of this sort, to do the subject justice and prevent misapprehension, it is helpful to be as unambiguous as possible. Further, the language needs attention (but that's a minor concern). If the nameless contributor would care to expand upon this thought, perhaps the information he/she wishes to present can be added to the article. deeceevoice 14:13, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Votes for deletion

This page was recently nominated for deletion, and the consensus decision was to keep it. The deletion debate is archived here. ugen 64 02:28, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Role of blackface and darky iconography in Afrophobia

There's information that could be included in this article in blackface. Aside from the general phenomenon of blackface minstrelsy and its role, among the most obvious matters is the portion that refers to the way some Dutch children burst into tears when approached by a Zwarte Piet, how some also point to blacks they may encounter on the street, saying, "Look! There's a Zwarte Piet!" -- and also in references regarding the ongoing debate about this racist custom. Critics claim it engenders a fear of blacks in young, white children. Additionally, someone recently contributed a quote to Golliwogg, which may have some value:

In his 1947 novel, The Chequer Board, British novelist Nevil Shute depicts the children's doll as an influence on adult behavior:

Because he was uncertain what to do, he put his arms round her and kissed her... For a moment she yielded... then fear came to her, irrational, stark fear. When she was a little child, somebody had given her a golliwog, a black doll with staring white eyes and black curly hair, dressed in a blue coat with red trousers. It had terrified her; whenever she saw it she had screamed with fright so that it had been given to a less sensitive child. Now at the age of seventeen the same stark fear came back to her. What she had been subconsciously afraid of all her life had happened. The golliwog had got her.

deeceevoice 06:58, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Blacks and The Holocaust

I added blacks to the list of groups who were targeted during the Holocaust and then received a note of inquiry from another Wikipedian. I've reproduced my response below. I believe it relevant to the "Afrophobia in Europe" section.

Just as Jews were throughout Europe, so, too, were blacks -- but in far smaller numbers. Most were "mixed-race." They were discriminated against and marginalized and segregated from mainstream German society. Most were forcibly sterilized, but it is estimated that at least 400 German blacks were sent to concentration camps. African-American woman jazz musician Valaida Snow was arrested in Denmark while living in and touring Europe and survived 18 months in Wester-Faengler, a Nazi concentration camp. She was released, along with some Allied troops, as part of a prisoner swap. And there were others. A relatively quick search on the Internet should yeild at least spotty information. Here's one: http://www.thechronicle.demon.co.uk/archive/lovehate.htm . Just as other non-Jewish victims of The Holocaust are continually overlooked, its black victims are almost never mentioned.

Peace. deeceevoice 21:13, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] South Africa Coloured (mixed race) and Asians

I've rewritten this paragraph about South Africa, which is inaccurate and patronising, if not insulting.

Apartheid also involved a caste system of sorts, which divided black South Africans dividing them into "blacks" and "coloureds" on the basis of skin color,

Coloured South Africans are distinct culturally and ethnically from black South Africans. Most don't have much black South African ancestry, being descended from Khoisan ('Bushmen'), Malays, and slaves from other parts of Africa, and more of them speak Afrikaans than whites. In Zimbabwe, the situation is different as they did have black African as well as European ancestry.

and which created a separate class for East Indians, as well.

WHAT???? The term 'East Indian' is used in the Western Hemisphere, particularly the West Indies - nobody in South Africa would use this term, least of all Asians of Indian origin themselves.

The apartheid regime did indeed try to buy Coloureds and Asians off with limited political rights, but that was only because they couldn't create homelands for them - previously, it happily stripped Cape Coloureds of voting rights and denied citizenship to Asians.

User:Quiensabe 23:15 UTC 2005-10-30

[edit] Origin of Term

Section on "Origin of Word" was deleted - it contained nothing about the WORD "Afrophobia". Indeed, it is not clear that this word is an accepted term. Talking about related CONCEPTS does nothing to elucidate the origin of the (supposed?) WORD.

If someone can come up with a history of the WORD (e.g. when was it first used? by whom? Did the meaning shift over time?), a new section would be useful.

That the PHENOMENON of phobias directed at Africans exists or existed (and was mentioned by prominent writers) does not mean that the WORD "Afrophobia" is appropriate, or that this (or any other) WORD was ASSOCIATED with the phenomenon.

Best regards.

[edit] originalresearch tag

I have tagged this article as original research. Afrophobia is not a phobia. There is no such thing as black self-loathing or self-hatred, and even if there were, it wouldnt be termed "Afrophobia", but self criticism. Why are articles of interest to diasporan Africans always so annoyingly awful? I wouldn't mind seeing this article deleted for being about an insignificant and silly elucidation. --Ezeu 20:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Hidden categories: Articles to be expanded since January 2007 | All articles to be expanded