Why is Kamala referred to as a Black Woman?

[Vior]

Watched a doc on iplayer and it struck me that many commentators referred to Kamala as a black woman. It’s not just sloppiness as some of the black, democrat women participating did similar.

It intrigues me. Especially as a woman with a half Indian daughter. I think I would be pretty surprised if DD referred to herself as purely English or purely Indian. She can pass for both depending on tan.

I know the US has a much different view on race and assume it is based on that. Genuinely interested. Not rage baiting. Have googled the question and no answer has really emerged.

I hope you feel better having got that off your chest. None of that is relevant to this conversation, so I’m just going to copy/paste:

Most of that has nothing whatsoever to do with what I asked.

You said But I see no Asian attributes in K. Harris (by Asian I mean from the subcontinent of India btw) in either her behaviour or her attitudes.

That is why we’re having this conversation. You cannot provide any ‘attributes’ that are applicable to all Asians or that are onlyapplicable to Asians. And you have no knowledge of her attitudes and very limited knowledge of her behaviour. So, that statement was nonsensical.

Yes, I’d just woken up and I’m used to writing SE Asian about myself. My mistake!

She doesn't strike me as Asian. She also does not strike me as black, either, in the sense USians use. Identi-politics do not help anyone.

She doesn't strike me as Asian. She also does not strike me as black, either, in the sense USians use.

Again, nonsensical statements for which you’d be unable to provide a rational basis if questioned.

Identi-politics do not help anyone.

I agree.

But your judgment isn't really relevant. The USA is a nation of immigrants and people's identities matter to them. She doesn't strike you as Black, but I am here to tell you Americans see her that way, and more importantly, in the USA, identity is heavily subjective from the point of view of the person experiencing it. If she didn't look at all Black but identified that way, she'd get questions. As much as the one-drop rule is historically offensive (and as I say not really held to that anymore), there's some excellent historical reasons why, particularly for Black and Native people, Americans don't insist on strict percentages.

(incidentally, there's plenty of debate on whether or not to capitalise Black. At the moment, thinking has leaned more towards yes. White is more contentious for several reasons, one of which is that capitalising white was an issue taken up by white nationalists and can be a marker of one. So newspapers capitalise Black but not white.)

She is black isn't she? I guess it's up to the person how they call themselves ethnically within parameters of truth. But my mixed race family all refer to themselves as black. As do my mixed race friends. A few prefer just prefer saying they are mixed. They certainly wouldn't call themselves white.
What do you want her to be known as, racially?

You don't have to break your ancestry down into fractions in the US. There was a time when that was done; a terrible thing, and a terrible time.

Frankly, if someone has been perceived as black her whole life, she has had the experience of being black.

The only person to loudly and publicly question her identity is Donald Trump, so I'm not really sure why anyone here on MN would do the same.

Yes to this.

AP style is the most prevalent guidance in the US for written material. Here they explain why Black is capitalized, but white is not.

https://apnews.com/article/archive-race-and-ethnicity-9105661462

She doesn’t need to strike you as Asian. She is LITERALLY ASIAN. She has an Asian parent. She has a black parent.
If she’s not black or Asian then what is she??

Because she’s black. Obviously.

All we've gotten on that is some word salad on what she thinks "Asian attitudes" are. Never mind that India (forget the rest of South Asia) is a country of 1Bn people with dozens of languages, multiple religions, and different cultures. And even within that, there's always changes in the diaspora, from country to country. I can tell you that from my own family which is not originally British!

Mixed race, like my children, one of whom identifies as English (last time it came up). DS in question gets fed-up with people at work assuming he is typically Asian (by which I mean origins in the subcontinent, S.E Asia) and therefore is into all the rituals and beliefs that entails (lately RSS, which has a big constituency where we live and was involved in riots two years ago) and bothered about caste. This thread was about why Kamala Harris is considered black. Presumably, this is because she does not look black - and the Asian background came up. It merely occurred to me (of a woman I know nothing much about except her ideas on TWAW) that she exhibits no Asian traits e.g. in dress, mannerism, etc. Being Asian is not just about genetics but also about culture - which is why my DS gets so cross because he is not culturally an Indian.
I am now done with this.

And even within that, there's always changes in the diaspora, from country to country.

This is an excellent point. I think it is fairly obvious that Indian and African diaspora culture in the US is quite different than it is in the UK and other European countries. Many posters are looking at Kamala Harris through a lens that really doesn't apply so much in the US. She doesn't look Black? What does that even mean? In the US, we are used to a myriad of "looks" that multi-racial people have. I also think that there may be faster assimilation in the US for many people, for a variety of reasons, so that some cultural practices from countries of origin become less prevalent in as much as a generation or two. That is something that Americans are very used to, but it does not erase their ethnic identity.

I am myself Asian and white. Mixed people are not from neither culture, but both. I am Asian, I am white. I belong to both.
you seem very hung up on peoples religion or dress, being Asian is not the way you dress or act or look. It’s who you are.

That's because she's mixed race. It's difficult being mixed race because I'm both but not seen as either.

Which is why I don't accept that men in frocks are women. But Asian culture includes ritual and belief and social attitudes. Most Hindus I have known have been highly family-orientated, encouraged academic achievement in their children and promoted advancement in professions and economic security. These are part of Asian culture (and not only Asian culture, naturally).
From Harris' history it seems she embraces those endeavours, to which I give way: she does exhibit Asian values (much more so than Black American values, perhaps).
I am not hung up on clothes, but religion is important - it is the cultural and psychological water we swim in, so that, for the most part, we are unaware of it.
I was brought up by a Catholic father and a mother who was not interested in religion. I know well that many of my ideas, beliefs and feelings are built on Catholicism and also a rejection of it - for example, I love music in church but I also distrust the spiritual feelings it arouses as being 'unreal' and 'sentimental', rather than true religious feeling. My late DH pointed out I carry around what he (a Methodist) called 'Catholic guilt'. That's part of my culture, just as Hinduism is part of the culture of many Asians.
How you dress, act and look is a product of the cultural water you swim in - that's how you are and have your being.

Would you not see it as being composed of both? I (Irish) have relatives who are half English. Others who are half Swedish. I regard them as half Irish and half the other origin.

Nationality can be different, of course. However, as all the countries involved recognise dual nationality, they have both nationalities as well.

I probably meant to say, I see them as Irish and Swedish, Irish and English. It isn’t that I don’t see them as either. Maybe that is precisely what you meant though.

there is no such thing as ‘Asian culture’ there is a wide variety of people of all religions and backgrounds in Asia. Many of us are not religious at all even if they are culturally Hindu or Sikh or whatever.

Yes, I know there is a wide variety of what may be called 'Asian' cultures. And I am at fault, for being British is the cultural water I swim in. By 'Asian' I mean - as most in the UK would mean - cultures based in the Indian subcontinent, and also the majority culture of India: Hinduism.
I don't include Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, Malay etc in the concept 'Asian' (because it is part of my cultural heritage not to do so - I am aware that USians designate differently). They are all different cultures and different societies. I am talking about the majority Hindu culture of Indian - South-East Asians if you like. And I know the Hindus of North India are different in many ways from those of e.g. Kerala, for example, and that Sikh culture has many differences (it's a schism of Hinduism so there are connections).
If pushed, I would say I was thinking of the Hinduism of North India, I suppose.

So would you consider the millions of Christians living in India (to pick just one example), Asian?

I find this all very odd.

South-east and East Asian people are also Asian! Even in the U.K. we are still Asian.

highly family-orientated, encouraged academic achievement in their children and promoted advancement in professions and economic security

I know a fair few middle class black American families (former work colleagues), and this definitely applies to them too. Probably not families growing up in the projects of south central LA or whatever the cliche is, but black professional families like Michelle Obama’s would absolutely fit that mould.

FWIW in the USA, Southeast Asia doesn't include India, it's the area with Thailand, Cambodia etc.

The Indian subcontinent is South Asia. If you just say "Asian" in the US people are more likely to think East Asian (Chinese/Japanese/Korean).

At any rate, even within South Asia, there's so many cultures and languages, that I don't think these generalisations are helpful.

My family is Ashkenazi Jewish. Both sides are from adjacent areas in Eastern Europe, so many things are the same. But my father's side emigrated to England while my mother's emigrated to America, and bits of the family ended up in Canada and Israel. So even though we all started with the same cultural base, you can absolutely see how we've changed. Each branch has acquired things from the surrounding culture. I can see this with neighbours (many are Asian) too: the differences between the generation that emigrated, the children, then the grandchildren.

Also "family and education oriented" describes Jamaicans in the USA as well (it is very interesting to me how West Indians are stereotyped differently in the UK vs America). And Jews, for that matter!