This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
There is a mulatto flag. This ethnic flag is a symmetric cross flag, rendered in the colors black, white, and [[gray]There were two tpies of flags mad by warbird and mluattoworld]. [1]
This flag has somewhat of a history behind it, but not that much.� As you can tell by the colors, and the way they are arranged, this flag represents who we are.
It really did not take much time or effort to come up with this flag.� I actually thought of this design after having a heated discussion with two friends of mine who happen to be Dominican.
Our discussion was mostly about my guest editorial that was posted on a website called Interracial Voice.� The name of the editorial was called Mulatto: A "Race" of People".� In the editorial, I spoke of how it was diffucult to "play both sides of the fence", in other words, to feel a "racial bond" with both blacks and whites.� Not just difficult, but impossible.� My belief is that because of this, we cannot consider ourselves to be of "both" races, but of neither - since we are not not "racially bonded" with both.� As mulattoes, we are a people, and the only people that we can really feel a "racial bond" with is eachother.
I explained this to my friends, and they are against mulattoes having a culture of their own.� However, they are Dominican, and they have a culture, which I thought they took for granted.� Afterall, they can have a culture, and mulattoes can't?� Just who the hell do they think they are?� Well, although they are Dominican, they were both black, and born in the United States.� With that being said, I could only guess that they developed some African-American perspectives on things.
I was so angry at them for thinking that we weren't good enough to have our own culture, while at the same time, they were; that is why I came up with this flag.� This flag was actually a mockery of the Dominican flag, after the two friends of mine that upset me that day.
To this day, I am still friends with the two women, but we have both agreed not to discuss issues concerning race & culture anymore.
To clear things up, this flag is no longer a mockery of the Dominican flag.� I designed it the day after the heated discussion.� After that, I didn't even touch it until a few weeks later.� When I was�over my anger, I looked back at the flag which I have designed, and I realized how much the colors and their positions represent who we are.
To those mulattoes who read read this website, and have websites themselves, I would encourage you to copy this flag and display it on your website, even if it is a personal homepage that is not dedicated to the issues discussed here on this website.� I would ask that you do not link this flag back to my website (but, please do mention why the flag is there, and what it represents).��It is not my flag; it is our flag. File:Mulatto3214.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mulattoking ( talk • contribs)
http://web.archive.org/web/20010216050151/internettrash.com/users/mulatto/index3.htm
The flag was mad by warbird miller he was the frist mulatto to think up of a flag for us.Many mulatto support this flag if you do internet search you can see that.And to and many flags are made up by someone at frist and the people support there country flag how do you think these flags come from threw someone makeing it up. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
216.27.165.11 (
talk)
02:02, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I reordered the countries from highest to lowest percent of mulatto population in Latin America and noticed some discrepancies in the numbers and some sources. Puerto Rico sticks out the most at 76%?? It looks like this used to be a different number and someone changed it. When I look at the CIA Factbook, it gives 81% as white and 10.9% as mixed, so I find it hard to believe that 76% is correct. Many of the other countries don't add up either. Does anyone know where the percentages came from originally or did someone just guess or did someone vandalize the numbers? Cuba shows 51% and the Dominican Republic shows 73% in the CIA Factbook. Kman543210 ( talk) 15:11, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
There are Mulatto in Europa Africa and Canada they just go by diffrent names but they are still mulattos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.27.165.11 ( talk) 02:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
In Europe, Africa, and Canada, there may be inhabitants who by simple definition of the word might be considered "mulattoes", but they don't automatically belong to a "mulatto" ethnic group. KumarFilo ( talk) 23:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Edit: Yes there are mulattoes in Africa. Mulattoes (half black and half white) would be a subset in the set coloreds because coloreds usually include anyone with partial African ancestry in South Africa. Even an indian could be considered a colored in South Africa. I agree with you that egyptians, tunisians, libyans, algerians and moroccons are majority mulattoes because they have substantial African ancestry in their populations. KumarFilo ( talk) 01:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
This article on mulattos were bad , but I have read worst. First of all, I feel that you have to be a Mulatto to know. However , their are people who call themselves Mulatto and do not know what it means or where it comes from. I never seen such a debate on the term Mulatto before. The term means a mixture of races. I am from Southwest Louisiana and we use (especially the old folks) this word all the time. Sometimes in Creole Zydeco and area rap songs. Some with different view and from other parts of the USA or other countries may refer to the term Mulatto as having one black / one white parent. The usage depends on locality and the ever changing English language. Words do change meaning by locality and cultures. I feel that an Black Asian can call themselves Mulatto. Yes, the word Mulatto did derive from Latin word Mule , which was first used to describe mixed Moorish/Spanish/North African Canary Islanders. Like I said word meanings change. For the North African - Sub-Saharan debate. I feel that , it is just a distinction for North Africans to consider themselves Arabs because of their Muslim religion. I never understood why they class themselves from other Africans on the continent. I cannot tell them what to call themselves but as far as I am concerned they reside on the continent of Africa so they are Africans. Just as my national identity is American since I reside on the continent of North America. To clear things up , they are light skinned African blacks, they are tribes who live in remote Africa who had no contact with the outside world until recently and they are light skinned. So they were probabaly light skinned black tribes members who ended up in the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. I have read and heard about light skinned blacks completing admixture tests and coming with 90-100% sub-Saharan African ancestry. I also heard of a very dark skinned man who lived his life as a black man with a black family who also did a admixture test to find that he was abt. 95% European and the rest was Native American. Well as for race I am a multi-ethnic Louisiana Creole. creolegenealogyqueen@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by CreolegenealogyqueenLA337 ( talk • contribs) 00:46, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
First of all, mulatto is not in current, everyday use in English speaking countries though you wouldn't know that if this article were your only source of info on the term. Colin Powell and Barack Obama are not commonly called "mulattos".
Secondly, the passage in the intro on the etymology of ethnic terms is original research and that's not allowed. This article isn't here to convince people of your personal preference to use the term mulatto. Plus, it's a bad, weak argument. Negro and nigger are derived from the Latin for black, but no one would seriously argue that they aren't widely seen as archaic and racist on the basis of the etymological argument that anon keeps reinserting. The origins of words and the meanings that they acquire over time through usage often have little to do with one another. -- Media anthro 12:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
mulatto is an offensive word to mixed people because its origins come from the word Mule. Its a word used to show mixed kids that their just like thier black parent, an animal for work and is not a human being. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
71.178.124.221 (
talk)
22:21, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
What is a Mule? It is the result of breeding a horse with a donkey ie: crossbreeding. I think that it is logical to think that at the time of the origin of the word that "mulado" or "mulato" was meant to denote the "crossbred" aspect of the term. The world was a homogenious place at that time and there was not the mixing of the races that there is today. The politically correct (?) term "biracial" is confusing because without seeing the person one cannot denote what races have been mixed. If one cannot use "Mulatto" as it has been coloquialized into what some consider offensive what is going to be the new word for someone with a mix of Caucasian and Negriod genes? BTW there is no "black" race. The correct word in the English language is "Negriod". Are we so politically correct that we cannot even still speak the Queen's English? MarshallB. BTW my partner considers herself "Mulatto" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.242.230.166 ( talk) 15:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Angsax ( talk)Negroid was the correct reference and is/was specifically used to define a person with particular physiological characteristices. I'm not sure where/when/if Negriod was a word or who used it. A couple of points here. What does a person's personal viewpoint have to do with a so-called encyclopedia?
Language is used so badly nowadays that few people understand the correct, as opposed to politically correct terms.
For instance, just 15 years ago I asked a fellow student if she thought that Blacks tended to associate with other Blacks, referencing an article I had been reading. She, a Black woman corrected me and told me that I should say colored, not Black. My response was that I wasn't referring to colored people as that would include any non-white group and I meant Blacks. How things change! Now I rarely hear someone say "colored". The North East USA, upstate NY is very parochial and the colleges closed minded (opinion of course - mine.
Mulatto has always meant a person born of a Black (African descent) and a White.
Etymology is very difficult as the English language was not standardised until the middle 1800s, so the arguments will continue. Common knowledge, or personal knowledge is not always correct (even if I'm always right - haha) - that is a joke. Angsax ( talk) Where do the tildes go? angsax—Preceding unsigned comment added by Angsax ( talk • contribs) 15:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
This section needs a serious cleanup. Also, it's transparently biased in favour of the least likely etymology (according to experts on the Spanish and the Portuguese language), from muladí/muwallad, for some reason. FilipeS 12:43, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
I see no significant changes in the etymology section. FilipeS 14:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I am guessing here... but probably the word for mule and mullato and muwallad/muladi all share a common history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.131.118 ( talk) 02:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Website sited for etymology seems inaccurate and biased. Other origination of words on site are inaccurate and incomplete. Site should not be used as a proper source. Please site other sources (merriam-webster may be efficient enough for sourcing), thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.215.67 ( talk) 12:55, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
When was this last updated? "enough to be considered black under South African law". Whaaaah? The apartheid is over by the way. I am going to delete that part.-- HandGrenadePins ( talk) 20:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
"(cur) (last) 00:47, 21 August 2008 Kman543210 (Talk | contribs) (19,277 bytes) (removed etymology; there is a difference between a definition and etymology; see mestizo, castizo, zambo; none have etymologies at beginning. See etymology section) (undo)"
Either way an encyclopedia must have accuracy if general knowledge is out there, not frivolous speculation. Of course words meaning change over time, but general knowledge is that mulatto means a mule. No matter how desperately you want to talk around that, the fact will always remain. I'm not saying that you can't describe yourself as a mulatto, but to remain intellectually honest as to its etymology. At this point, you may remove the etymology, or derivation of the word mulatto, but I will state the meaning of the word itself in the opening paragraph. Same difference, surely, but there really is no running from 'mule'. Sorry.
It is not a generally accepted fact that mulatto comes from mule. Accepted by whom? If you cannot show any development from the original Latin and Arabic through mule and then mulatto, you are making impossible intellectual leaps. You comment, therefore, regarding the relationship between mule and mulatto is erroneous. At best it is speculative; at worst tremendously specious. If the latter is true, your argument borders on de facto racism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.32.0.40 ( talk) 20:54, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Note:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mestizo
Opening section:
"The word mestizo originated from the Romance language / Latin word 'Mixticius', meaning 'mixed'."
So mestizo means mixed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castizo
Opening section:
"Castizo or castiza is a Spanish word with a general meaning of 'genuine'."
So castizo means genuine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zambo
No etymology of any sort is provided.
Nevertheless, it will state that mulatto means a mule in the opening section.
KumarFilo (
talk)
01:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Whether or not this word, mulatto, receives a "negative connotation" by me stating the truth is not my concern. This is an encyclopedia after all, so facts outweigh any feel-goodisms. Like I said, the meanings of words change over time, sure, but the base meaning will always stay the same no matter how much you want to hide the history of a word from public view. I shortened it to include only the meaning and not etymology since for some odd reason you feel upset that mulatto means a mule. So I didn't include the etymology, I included the meaning of the word mulatto itself by stating "..Spanish word for mule..". Which is, to your chagrin, exactly how the other entries (castizo, mestizo) you provided, presented their terms in the opening sections. I'm sure the word 'mulatto' has taken on new meanings, by different people, in different regions today, but the fact of the matter is that the word itself 'mulatto' means 'a mule'. You can't really run from that. Sorry. KumarFilo ( talk) 02:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Says who? All the other multiracial labels have the meaning of the word itself in the opening section. How is 'mulatto' exempt? KumarFilo ( talk) 02:30, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Here are the examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mestizo
Opening section:
"The word mestizo originated from the Romance language / Latin word 'Mixticius', meaning 'mixed'."
So mestizo means mixed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castizo
Opening section:
"Castizo or castiza is a Spanish word with a general meaning of 'genuine'."
So castizo means genuine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zambo
No etymology of any sort is provided.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesti%C3%A7os_(Sri_Lanka)
Opening section:
"In Sri Lanka, the names Mestiços (Portuguese for "Mixed People") or Casados ("Married") were applied to people of mixed Portuguese and Sri Lankan (Sinhalese people and Tamil) descent, starting in the 16th century."
So mestico means mixed people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hapa
Right at the top:
"In the Hawaiian language, hapa is defined as: portion, fragment, part, fraction, installment; to be partial, less. It is a loan from the English word half."
So hapa means a part.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baster
Right at the top:
"The name Baster is derived from the Dutch word for ‘bastard’ (or ‘crossbreed'). "
So baster means a bastard.
And so on. The bottom line is mulatto means a mule. So I will state that and include it.
KumarFilo (
talk)
02:48, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi all, not realizing the debate of the etymology of mulatto I always assumed the that the term "melado" was of similar origin. However, this does not seem to be the case. Does anyone have information on it's origin? Is it an actual dictionary word or is it slang? Would this term be considered derogatory by most people? I've heard it used in a non-derogatory way which is perhaps out ignorance and would like information so as to use or not use this word in future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.77.71 ( talk) 17:29, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Removed all but the one as no process evident here and the one remaining the only one likely to be the basis of one. 72.228.150.44 ( talk) 19:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
.Cananda .US .Latin america .Asia .Europea .Arabe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.176.126.128 ( talk) 19:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
"the latter definition of which makes the term highly subjective in nature"
I've removed phrase this from the article lead. It seems to be trying to make an important point, imo; I would guess about the fact that we are all the same species whatever our melanin level, or even the further point that especially in America, many so-called blacks have white ancestors, and likewise, there are plenty of American people who pass for "lily" white who have black ancestor, etc. (Please note, for the record, that I don't even agree with this whole framework of racial bias, but the one drop rule has historical currency, and the mulatto designation is at least somewhat inherently related to that). Per WP:PRESERVE I bring this here for discussion. -- 209.6.238.201 ( talk) 05:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
OK this is kind of ridiculous, I mean it would be nice to hear about the actual Mulatto people and their significance in history instead of hearing people go back and forth on whether the word means "mule" or not. Words change meanings all the time but we still use them. I mean by this logic we shouldn't use the word "kid" or "kids" when referring to children because the word "kid" is used to describe a baby goat. How many people have used the word "kid" or "kids" when referring to children in the general sense or when even referring to their own children? When a mother says "I'm going to go put the kids to bed" I'm sure the first thing you picture is not a human mother putting her baby goats to bed now is it?
I mean come on,instead of bickering you could be listing more facts about the lives of mulatto/Biracial slaves during and after slavery, or the many civil rights leaders that were of mulatto ancestry how about listing Mulatto achievements because there were many.
furthermore, there are many Mulattoes I've met that were not offended by the word Mulatto although not all knew the origins of the word the ones that did were still not offended by the term because they also knew that the meanings of words can change with the times.
From what I've noticed the people that were offended by the term have been Blacks that were from two black parents to some it's taken as anyone who identifies as mulatto is trying to distance themselves from their black side.
Note: I'm also not implying that all Black people feel a certain way. nor am i implying that all mulatto, biracial, mixed race, multiracial feel a certain way I'm just stating what I've seen and heard.
I don't know where did you get these sources from, but - no matter how well reputed they may be - the word "mulatto" most certainly comes from the Portuguese term "mulato", first spread in Northeastern Brazil. Popotão ( talk) 23:04, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
In response to User talk:Tarc
The gallery does not illustrate any racist terms. I used no racist terms in my submissions. Unless you're indicating the entire article is racist. Please explain. You're accusing me without explanation. Please cite the terms of which I am violating. The gallery illustrates, not only the various physical results of mulatto offspring, but the various types of mulatto ancestry, from ambiguous to specific, to recent (or first generation). Unless there is a unanimous consensus, I see this objection as coming from you only, as in your opinion. It's subjective. Please view the bios of each person. With the exception of Cornell West and Vanessa Williams, who are African-American descendants of slaves, all bios indicate specific European and sub-Saharan African recent ancestry or parentage. I'm putting the gallery back up until I'm notified of an official Wikipedia violation, not one based on personal opinion. Please explain to me how that is racist.
The gallery is placed between the 'Colonial Era' and 'Contemporary Era' sub-sections to illustrated the type of mulatto posterity produced by both, regardless of social race labels/classifications applied during these eras. It doesn't matter, they're all American, whether they look white, black, or in between, who are born of mulatto ancestry, or of sub-Saharan/European (Caucasian) parentage. I wanted to included more, because I know there are more, but didn't want to make the gallery to long. I think it's pertinent that people read the article and understand that mulatto isn't just pertinent to a specific range of looks, but it's very broad. I wanted to add more range, using someone like Boris Kodjoe but that individual has no American ancestry. Will likely use him for Germany.
There should be a subsection somewhere discussing the trend of European and continental African dating, offspring and unions that started in the mid-1900s. It's significant, and a huge sub-topic to explore. I came across a thesis about the resulting population in Germany written by a graduate student a couple years ago. The article also doesn't discuss the initiatives taken by the British government to induce mixed race communities in Britian during the mid-1900s, and that the same sort of initiatives to taken by other European governments. People such as Poly Styrene were born from such initiatives.
There is information about 'mulatto' populations in parts of Europe born to these types of unions that should be included. There is a huge population in Switzerland, for example. There is also mulatto 'legacy' ancestry in places like Tanzania where there is a population cognizant and accepting of it. I just hope that you don't work to 'narrow' the perimeters of this topic, because it's not narrow in the least bit.
There needs to be expansion about the mulatto colonial populations of Africa as well as these people were very influential in those societies and contributed immensely in modernizing those regions (Sherbro clans).
I am working on a gallery for Brazil, and will be putting images and information together for other sections of this article.
Bab-a-lot ( talk) 13:54, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
I reverted an edit changing white to European and black to African because that's not what the citation says. If that change is appropriate, perhaps a different citation should be used. Victor Engel ( talk) 20:18, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
The links i posted were from peer reviewed journals.
Can you please explain how they are unreliable? -- Nicki44445 ( talk) 12:55, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
I agree that sounds about right. Perhaps the OP or someone else would put a couple sentences or paragraph here, or in the article. I am not familiar with the social aspects of race in Brazil. As well as my obvious reading comprehension problem noted above. heh-heh Dave Dial ( talk) 19:16, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
How is this addition controversial? [3] Dave Dial should take a look at WP:VERIFY and WP:NPOV (particularly WP:DUE in WP:NPOV). [4] [5] [6] Tobby72 ( talk) 20:18, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Here, Toby72 asked me to take a look at this. Here is what I saw in a not-so quick look at recent edits.
I think I've got that straignt. Some of the edits mentioned above were separated from one another by unrelated edits made by other users.
Guys, please re-read WP:BRD. I know that it is an essay and not a policy, but it does describe a workable method for reaching consensus by identifying objections to edits and keeping discussion moving forward and help towards breaking deadlocks. That Bold-Revert-Discuss method is much superior to the Bold-Revert-Unrevert- Edit war method which has been tried here. Regardless of how the section at issue got to be in its current state, can we please have some discussion aimed at establishing a consensus about what it ought to contain?
It looks to me as if the main area of disagreement is how much weight should be given to information about master-slave rapes in colonial America in an article on the topic of Mulatto, which the lead sentence describes as, "a term commonly used in the United States to refer to a person who is born from one white parent and one black parent, or more broadly, a person of any 'mixed' ancestry." Input from editors not involved in the edit-warish exchanges above would probably be useful. I'll mention that this source might be useful. It speaks somewhat to the subtopic at issue here, though not from an American Colonial Era viewpoint. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:33, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
::::All slave women ... were vulnerable to being raped, but the mulatto afforded the slave owner the opportunity to rape, with impunity, a woman who was physically white (or near-white) but legally black
::::mulattoes were symbols of rape and concubinage. Gary B. Nash (1974) summarized the slavery-era relationship between the rape of black women, the handling of mulattoes, and white dominance...It was resolved by insuring that the mulatto would not occupy a position midway between white and black. Any black blood classified a person as black; and to be black was to be a slave.... By prohibiting racial intermarriage, winking at interracial sex, and defining all mixed offspring as black, white society found the ideal answer to its labor needs, its extracurricular and inadmissible sexual desires, its compulsion to maintain its culture purebred, and the problem of maintaining, at least in theory, absolute social control. (pp. 289-290)
::::Rapes occurred, and many slave women were forced to submit regularly to white males or suffer harsh consequences. However, slave girls often courted a sexual relationship with the master, or another male in the family, as a way of gaining distinction among the slaves, avoiding field work, and obtaining special jobs and other favored treatment for their mixed children (Reuter, 1970:129). Many of the sexual contacts between the races at this time took still other forms, such as prostitution, adventure, concubinage, and sometimes love. In rare instances, where free Blacks were concerned, there was even marriage (Bennett, 1962:243-68). (pp. 38-39)
re: References for the claim, "Contemporary usage of the designation is generally confined to situations in which the term is considered relevant in an historical context, as now most people of mixed white and black ancestry rarely choose to self-identify as mulatto.[2]"
While I am without comparative figures compiled to confirm or dispute the claim, "...most people of mixed white and black ancestry rarely choose to self-identify as mulatto", there are evidences from the internet that it is a term used to self-describe:
Shouldn't this article mention the 'Moorish Empire' as this coincides perfectly with the etymology of the term? Also, what about the historical Iberian Peninsula populations, as well as places like Italy, Iraq, Oman and Yemen where the populations still display genetic evidence of the once dominant 'mulatto' populations. Bab-a-lot ( talk) 14:08, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Moors were/are not a black population. They are Berbers [who again, are not black]. If anything, North Africans are darker today than they were in the past since so many Sub-saharan Africans [black people] were brought to North Africa as slaves after the advent of Islam. The middle East is a different story however, since black slaves were brought there from the horn of Africa in massive numbers shortly after Islam came about.. So Mulatto phenotypes are common in the middle east, in Saudi/Yemen they may infact make up the majority. 107.222.205.242 ( talk)
Apologies if my edit is bad; I don't know how to do this, but want to at least contribute my point of view. Please fix up my edit as appropriate.
Isn't the whole premise underlying the statement
> In the broadest sense, it is applied to persons of Black and White ancestry.
seriously flawed? AFAIK, homo sapiens first appeared on the scene somewhere in East Africa about 200,000 years ago, whereas the first Homo Sapiens setting foot in Europe is perhaps just 40,000 years ago. In other words, *most* of the ancestry of every white person on Earth is African and Black, and so every white person is a "mulatto" by the definition given above. Richard Dawkins famously refuses to tick the "Caucasian" box on US Visa forms because there is no biological reality behind the US government's conception of race.
IMO, the summary ought to mention quite early both the lack of any biological significance of this term AND the fact that it is an offensive slander derived from "mule" - the sterile (genetic dead-end) offspring of a horse and a donkey. Or is this in fact not the origin of the term? 80.203.21.218 ( talk) 17:22, 25 April 2014 (UTC)TheDag, April 25th 2014
I have deleted the statement, "Rape was not held to be a crime under Colonial Law." As written, the statement was demonstrably false: In the British-American colonies rape was a felony punishable by death, just as it was in England. The appalling fact is that forcing a slave to suffer unwanted sexual intercourse did not constitute rape, because the person of the slave was deemed property of the master, which, within grievously broad limits, the master could use or abuse as he saw fit. (Paradoxically, consensual sexual relations between blacks and whites were generally held to constitute a crime during the same period and long afterwards.) The article did cite a book in support of its dubious statement, but didn't specify a page, so the reference couldn't be conveniently checked. I dare say that if the relevant passage could be found, it would say more or less what I have said here, or at least that rape of slaves was not held to be a crime. With proper citation, I would support the introduction of a statement to that effect in place of the one I have deleted. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 19:34, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I could say "forget that everyone already knows that the moon landing is a hoax", it doesn't really mean anything. Seems more like a logical fallacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepyinfant ( talk • contribs) 21:44, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Mulatto. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 04:42, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
@ Fifi stahlman:'s additions regarding South Africa appear to be valuable, but they need more specific citation. For example, any attribution of purpose or intention behind an action (such as ". . . the aim of subdivisions was to enhance the meaning of the larger category of Coloured by making it all encompassing;") ought to have its own reference to a particular statement in the source.
More important, fifi stahlman's only source is Palmer (2015), which she or he cites three times, without ever citing a specific page in the book. That makes it unreasonably burdensome for readers who want to verify the article's assertions. All articles have to be verifiable, so references should specify the page or other exact location in which the material relied on is to be found. I respectfully ask that fifi stahlman kindly improve the references in the material he or she has added. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 16:06, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
An editor has twice recently placed a photo of Pres. Barack Obama on this page, and another editor has twice removed it. There should be debate.
Clearly, Pres. Obama fits the definition of mulatto, in that he is the child of an African father and a Euro-American mother. The question, however, is whether mulatto is an appropriate term to use of any modern person, or whether it should be consigned to history? I am of the latter opinion, except in the case of the rare modern person who voluntarily describes him- or herself by that term. Persons of mixed race who describe themselves as mulattoes are of course entitled to do so; but I don't think they're entitled publicly to call anybody else by that term. Pres. Obama is not known to refer to himself publicly as a mulatto. To identify him as such here would reflect an unencyclopedic POV, which many readers would assume to be racist. I therefore oppose putting Pres. Obama's picture on this page. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 15:36, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
@ Dom Kaos: made some deletions today of matter that, while unsourced, was apparently credible and should not have been deleted, in my opinion, but simply tagged with "citation needed". I started to revert the deletions, but, honestly! The whole article is such a mess that I can't really say whether or not the deleted matter ought to be in there or not. As the previous thread ("South Africa") suggests, this article contains a good deal of information that belongs rather in the article, Multiracial. Most of the material in the section, "Africa", seems to belong in an article on racial classification and identification in South Africa, not here. Moreover, nearly half of the section, "Latin America and the Caribbean", is about the United States, which is not usually regarded as belonging to either of those regions, and which has its own section, further down.
Clearly, the article needs a complete overhaul.
To that end, the first thing that needs to be done, in my view, is for us (or whoever is going to revise the article) to decide on what the article is about. Although I am not very learned on this subject, I'll make so bold as to offer a few thoughts on that, in hopes that others, better informed, will take up the discussion:
This should be enough to start a discussion, and I'm out of time for today. Please add your thoughts. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 22:24, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
South Slavic nations use the term all the time to describe so that should be mentioned. I also clearly remember one elementary school textbook that taught us about different races, tolerance, mixed marriages etc. That's where I read the word "mulattio" for the first time, along with other terms for children of mixed couples. It is used in everyday life by some of the most liberal people I know. "Children of mixed marriage" is a broad expression and it can mean anything-from mixed race to couples of different nationalities or even religion. So it's not used for "multiracials" when you want to be more clear. Reading this article came as a surprise to me.... does the rest of the english-speaking world avoid that term or only USA? I believe this only applies to North America, so that should be made more clear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.138.57.97 ( talk) 16:19, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Although mulatto in the English language technically has two versions of plurality, "mulattoes" and "mulattos;" mulatto(es) is used not only in books etc. but in official U.S. documents of the English language. Although derived from the Spanish "mulato(s)," where foreign words usually receive an "s" only such as in radio(s) etc. I suppose the same plurality reflects how negro(es) or tomato(es) is pluralized; also from Spanish. Savvyjack23 ( talk) 07:04, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
In Brazil, many people of African descent consider the term "mulato", when used to describe race or skin color, to be an offensive racial slur, due to its commonly attributed etymology "mule-like", implying the bestiality of people thus described. —Daniel Ávila, 14:54 (UTC), 03 March 2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 191.17.153.167 ( talk)
Since mulato/a is a Spanish term, we need here some clarification. Mulato/a is a perfectly ok term to describe a mixed black and white color of skin, regardless of the race or origin of the person. It means neither black nor white; it means something in the middle. Mulato/a s the model of skin desired by people, specially in Spain, that’s why they have sunbaths and go to uva rays baths compulsively. It is not pejorative at all. All the opposite; a mulato/a person is beautiful always. That includes the song. He’s showing his rhythm to a beautiful ‘mulata’ woman. Así que de peyorativo nada majete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.163.26.99 ( talk) 14:05, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
"Its use is considered outdated and offensive", there are two sources listed with this, neither say anything about the term being outdated or offensive, so not sure why that was added or those sources were cited. As such, I'm removing that sentence and sources, which are not even sources for that statement to begin with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C2:4F00:3D00:DDC7:4963:78A7:8FBA ( talk) 03:03, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
The image titled Pinckney Benton Stewart on the mulatto entry is incorrectly labeled. The image is Homer Plessy of the famous Supreme Court decision. Ampittis ( talk) 01:45, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Should there be something in the "Contemporary Era" that says that the term is now considered offensive, and is no longer used as a standard term? Because that's certainly the case, the dictionary lists it as such, and I was surprised that that wasn't mentioned anywhere in the article. Carlo ( talk) 21:31, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
Greetings. I will contact the dictionary editors to find out where they got the notion that 'Mulatto' is derogatory. I my-self claim Afro-Metis and Mulatto heritage and do not find this term derogatory. Riverlisp ( talk) 05:51, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
It is controversial as to whether or not this term is offensive. Many do not find it derogatory in the least, but use it to represent our heritage. 2601:182:4381:E60:BD7A:135:CE5E:1C5B ( talk) 13:51, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
Have to admit I was expecting to see Nirvana's usage in Smells Like Teen Spirit mentioned here. Are there other references in films and songs? JohnCastle ( talk) 23:18, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
This article claims that the term is offensive, without clarifying any details. But in reality, in Spanish and Portuguese, as well as even in English if you're in a Spanish speaking country, this term has no negative connotation. Someone said to me that this shouldn't be added to this page because it's on English Wikipedia, but as per WP:Global , Wikipedia is an universal encyclopedia, not just an encyclopedia for countries with the English as its primary language. This is just the English version of Wikipedia, but read by people all around the world with English as a second language. Therefore, people should know that mixed people of European and African ancestry are called Mulattoes in countries like Brazil. This person them said that this article is just about the English term. But as far as I know, there's no articles about the word in other languages. So why isn't this article about this word in general? The page Negro clearly states that it depends on the language if it's offensive or not, and I think this page should too, especially since it already talks about its usage in Spanish speaking countries.
93.15.241.95 ( talk) 18:47, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
@ Knoterification: Words have different meanings in different languages. I'm convinced that our readers know that. Everybody who has ever learned a second language knows that words sounding similar and having the same root can be very treacherous. So, we don't have to mention that the word "mulatto" is an English word or that it is outdated and offensive only in English. Also, adding a link to English language is certainly overlinking. Do modern historians really use the term "mulatto" when referring to Haitians or Angolans ? In that case, my Oxford dictionary would be wrong. Rsk6400 ( talk) 08:53, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Marlene L. Daut
Luiz Felipe De Alencastro In Racism and Ethnic Relations in the Portuguese-Speaking World Knoterification ( talk) 17:38, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
@
Vlaemink: Would you please respect
WP:BRD and take part in the discussion before making changes that didn't achieve consensus in an ongoing discussion ?
Rsk6400 (
talk)
19:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
This discussion has got out of hand. @ Acroterion:, before preceding to more formal steps, might I ask your opinion on whether the second sentence ("Its use is considered outdated and offensive in English.") should contain the words "in English" or not ? Thanks in advance, Rsk6400 ( talk) 19:12, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Should the words "in English" be added to the second sentence of the lead section ? The resulting sentence would be "Its use is considered outdated and offensive in English." Rsk6400 ( talk) 09:14, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
Comment This has been discussed extensively in the section above #Anglocentric_bias. Rsk6400 ( talk) 09:22, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
There isn't enough information on this page. Say if someone were to really extensively look into the term and the people who are identified as mulatto, you would not be able to get much. Each country in Latin America, for example, should have their own section like the "mestizo" article. It would also be nice to bring the population table back, that was rediculous to delete that in the first place. The word may be offensive to English speakers, but censoring the article is not helpful for those who truly just want to use it for research purposes. Lifeinvegas ( talk) 02:34, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
There is a mulatto flag. This ethnic flag is a symmetric cross flag, rendered in the colors black, white, and [[gray]There were two tpies of flags mad by warbird and mluattoworld]. [1]
This flag has somewhat of a history behind it, but not that much.� As you can tell by the colors, and the way they are arranged, this flag represents who we are.
It really did not take much time or effort to come up with this flag.� I actually thought of this design after having a heated discussion with two friends of mine who happen to be Dominican.
Our discussion was mostly about my guest editorial that was posted on a website called Interracial Voice.� The name of the editorial was called Mulatto: A "Race" of People".� In the editorial, I spoke of how it was diffucult to "play both sides of the fence", in other words, to feel a "racial bond" with both blacks and whites.� Not just difficult, but impossible.� My belief is that because of this, we cannot consider ourselves to be of "both" races, but of neither - since we are not not "racially bonded" with both.� As mulattoes, we are a people, and the only people that we can really feel a "racial bond" with is eachother.
I explained this to my friends, and they are against mulattoes having a culture of their own.� However, they are Dominican, and they have a culture, which I thought they took for granted.� Afterall, they can have a culture, and mulattoes can't?� Just who the hell do they think they are?� Well, although they are Dominican, they were both black, and born in the United States.� With that being said, I could only guess that they developed some African-American perspectives on things.
I was so angry at them for thinking that we weren't good enough to have our own culture, while at the same time, they were; that is why I came up with this flag.� This flag was actually a mockery of the Dominican flag, after the two friends of mine that upset me that day.
To this day, I am still friends with the two women, but we have both agreed not to discuss issues concerning race & culture anymore.
To clear things up, this flag is no longer a mockery of the Dominican flag.� I designed it the day after the heated discussion.� After that, I didn't even touch it until a few weeks later.� When I was�over my anger, I looked back at the flag which I have designed, and I realized how much the colors and their positions represent who we are.
To those mulattoes who read read this website, and have websites themselves, I would encourage you to copy this flag and display it on your website, even if it is a personal homepage that is not dedicated to the issues discussed here on this website.� I would ask that you do not link this flag back to my website (but, please do mention why the flag is there, and what it represents).��It is not my flag; it is our flag. File:Mulatto3214.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mulattoking ( talk • contribs)
http://web.archive.org/web/20010216050151/internettrash.com/users/mulatto/index3.htm
The flag was mad by warbird miller he was the frist mulatto to think up of a flag for us.Many mulatto support this flag if you do internet search you can see that.And to and many flags are made up by someone at frist and the people support there country flag how do you think these flags come from threw someone makeing it up. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
216.27.165.11 (
talk)
02:02, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I reordered the countries from highest to lowest percent of mulatto population in Latin America and noticed some discrepancies in the numbers and some sources. Puerto Rico sticks out the most at 76%?? It looks like this used to be a different number and someone changed it. When I look at the CIA Factbook, it gives 81% as white and 10.9% as mixed, so I find it hard to believe that 76% is correct. Many of the other countries don't add up either. Does anyone know where the percentages came from originally or did someone just guess or did someone vandalize the numbers? Cuba shows 51% and the Dominican Republic shows 73% in the CIA Factbook. Kman543210 ( talk) 15:11, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
There are Mulatto in Europa Africa and Canada they just go by diffrent names but they are still mulattos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.27.165.11 ( talk) 02:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
In Europe, Africa, and Canada, there may be inhabitants who by simple definition of the word might be considered "mulattoes", but they don't automatically belong to a "mulatto" ethnic group. KumarFilo ( talk) 23:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Edit: Yes there are mulattoes in Africa. Mulattoes (half black and half white) would be a subset in the set coloreds because coloreds usually include anyone with partial African ancestry in South Africa. Even an indian could be considered a colored in South Africa. I agree with you that egyptians, tunisians, libyans, algerians and moroccons are majority mulattoes because they have substantial African ancestry in their populations. KumarFilo ( talk) 01:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
This article on mulattos were bad , but I have read worst. First of all, I feel that you have to be a Mulatto to know. However , their are people who call themselves Mulatto and do not know what it means or where it comes from. I never seen such a debate on the term Mulatto before. The term means a mixture of races. I am from Southwest Louisiana and we use (especially the old folks) this word all the time. Sometimes in Creole Zydeco and area rap songs. Some with different view and from other parts of the USA or other countries may refer to the term Mulatto as having one black / one white parent. The usage depends on locality and the ever changing English language. Words do change meaning by locality and cultures. I feel that an Black Asian can call themselves Mulatto. Yes, the word Mulatto did derive from Latin word Mule , which was first used to describe mixed Moorish/Spanish/North African Canary Islanders. Like I said word meanings change. For the North African - Sub-Saharan debate. I feel that , it is just a distinction for North Africans to consider themselves Arabs because of their Muslim religion. I never understood why they class themselves from other Africans on the continent. I cannot tell them what to call themselves but as far as I am concerned they reside on the continent of Africa so they are Africans. Just as my national identity is American since I reside on the continent of North America. To clear things up , they are light skinned African blacks, they are tribes who live in remote Africa who had no contact with the outside world until recently and they are light skinned. So they were probabaly light skinned black tribes members who ended up in the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. I have read and heard about light skinned blacks completing admixture tests and coming with 90-100% sub-Saharan African ancestry. I also heard of a very dark skinned man who lived his life as a black man with a black family who also did a admixture test to find that he was abt. 95% European and the rest was Native American. Well as for race I am a multi-ethnic Louisiana Creole. creolegenealogyqueen@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by CreolegenealogyqueenLA337 ( talk • contribs) 00:46, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
First of all, mulatto is not in current, everyday use in English speaking countries though you wouldn't know that if this article were your only source of info on the term. Colin Powell and Barack Obama are not commonly called "mulattos".
Secondly, the passage in the intro on the etymology of ethnic terms is original research and that's not allowed. This article isn't here to convince people of your personal preference to use the term mulatto. Plus, it's a bad, weak argument. Negro and nigger are derived from the Latin for black, but no one would seriously argue that they aren't widely seen as archaic and racist on the basis of the etymological argument that anon keeps reinserting. The origins of words and the meanings that they acquire over time through usage often have little to do with one another. -- Media anthro 12:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
mulatto is an offensive word to mixed people because its origins come from the word Mule. Its a word used to show mixed kids that their just like thier black parent, an animal for work and is not a human being. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
71.178.124.221 (
talk)
22:21, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
What is a Mule? It is the result of breeding a horse with a donkey ie: crossbreeding. I think that it is logical to think that at the time of the origin of the word that "mulado" or "mulato" was meant to denote the "crossbred" aspect of the term. The world was a homogenious place at that time and there was not the mixing of the races that there is today. The politically correct (?) term "biracial" is confusing because without seeing the person one cannot denote what races have been mixed. If one cannot use "Mulatto" as it has been coloquialized into what some consider offensive what is going to be the new word for someone with a mix of Caucasian and Negriod genes? BTW there is no "black" race. The correct word in the English language is "Negriod". Are we so politically correct that we cannot even still speak the Queen's English? MarshallB. BTW my partner considers herself "Mulatto" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.242.230.166 ( talk) 15:22, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Angsax ( talk)Negroid was the correct reference and is/was specifically used to define a person with particular physiological characteristices. I'm not sure where/when/if Negriod was a word or who used it. A couple of points here. What does a person's personal viewpoint have to do with a so-called encyclopedia?
Language is used so badly nowadays that few people understand the correct, as opposed to politically correct terms.
For instance, just 15 years ago I asked a fellow student if she thought that Blacks tended to associate with other Blacks, referencing an article I had been reading. She, a Black woman corrected me and told me that I should say colored, not Black. My response was that I wasn't referring to colored people as that would include any non-white group and I meant Blacks. How things change! Now I rarely hear someone say "colored". The North East USA, upstate NY is very parochial and the colleges closed minded (opinion of course - mine.
Mulatto has always meant a person born of a Black (African descent) and a White.
Etymology is very difficult as the English language was not standardised until the middle 1800s, so the arguments will continue. Common knowledge, or personal knowledge is not always correct (even if I'm always right - haha) - that is a joke. Angsax ( talk) Where do the tildes go? angsax—Preceding unsigned comment added by Angsax ( talk • contribs) 15:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
This section needs a serious cleanup. Also, it's transparently biased in favour of the least likely etymology (according to experts on the Spanish and the Portuguese language), from muladí/muwallad, for some reason. FilipeS 12:43, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
I see no significant changes in the etymology section. FilipeS 14:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I am guessing here... but probably the word for mule and mullato and muwallad/muladi all share a common history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.131.118 ( talk) 02:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Website sited for etymology seems inaccurate and biased. Other origination of words on site are inaccurate and incomplete. Site should not be used as a proper source. Please site other sources (merriam-webster may be efficient enough for sourcing), thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.215.67 ( talk) 12:55, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
When was this last updated? "enough to be considered black under South African law". Whaaaah? The apartheid is over by the way. I am going to delete that part.-- HandGrenadePins ( talk) 20:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
"(cur) (last) 00:47, 21 August 2008 Kman543210 (Talk | contribs) (19,277 bytes) (removed etymology; there is a difference between a definition and etymology; see mestizo, castizo, zambo; none have etymologies at beginning. See etymology section) (undo)"
Either way an encyclopedia must have accuracy if general knowledge is out there, not frivolous speculation. Of course words meaning change over time, but general knowledge is that mulatto means a mule. No matter how desperately you want to talk around that, the fact will always remain. I'm not saying that you can't describe yourself as a mulatto, but to remain intellectually honest as to its etymology. At this point, you may remove the etymology, or derivation of the word mulatto, but I will state the meaning of the word itself in the opening paragraph. Same difference, surely, but there really is no running from 'mule'. Sorry.
It is not a generally accepted fact that mulatto comes from mule. Accepted by whom? If you cannot show any development from the original Latin and Arabic through mule and then mulatto, you are making impossible intellectual leaps. You comment, therefore, regarding the relationship between mule and mulatto is erroneous. At best it is speculative; at worst tremendously specious. If the latter is true, your argument borders on de facto racism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.32.0.40 ( talk) 20:54, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Note:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mestizo
Opening section:
"The word mestizo originated from the Romance language / Latin word 'Mixticius', meaning 'mixed'."
So mestizo means mixed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castizo
Opening section:
"Castizo or castiza is a Spanish word with a general meaning of 'genuine'."
So castizo means genuine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zambo
No etymology of any sort is provided.
Nevertheless, it will state that mulatto means a mule in the opening section.
KumarFilo (
talk)
01:35, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Whether or not this word, mulatto, receives a "negative connotation" by me stating the truth is not my concern. This is an encyclopedia after all, so facts outweigh any feel-goodisms. Like I said, the meanings of words change over time, sure, but the base meaning will always stay the same no matter how much you want to hide the history of a word from public view. I shortened it to include only the meaning and not etymology since for some odd reason you feel upset that mulatto means a mule. So I didn't include the etymology, I included the meaning of the word mulatto itself by stating "..Spanish word for mule..". Which is, to your chagrin, exactly how the other entries (castizo, mestizo) you provided, presented their terms in the opening sections. I'm sure the word 'mulatto' has taken on new meanings, by different people, in different regions today, but the fact of the matter is that the word itself 'mulatto' means 'a mule'. You can't really run from that. Sorry. KumarFilo ( talk) 02:17, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Says who? All the other multiracial labels have the meaning of the word itself in the opening section. How is 'mulatto' exempt? KumarFilo ( talk) 02:30, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Here are the examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mestizo
Opening section:
"The word mestizo originated from the Romance language / Latin word 'Mixticius', meaning 'mixed'."
So mestizo means mixed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castizo
Opening section:
"Castizo or castiza is a Spanish word with a general meaning of 'genuine'."
So castizo means genuine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zambo
No etymology of any sort is provided.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesti%C3%A7os_(Sri_Lanka)
Opening section:
"In Sri Lanka, the names Mestiços (Portuguese for "Mixed People") or Casados ("Married") were applied to people of mixed Portuguese and Sri Lankan (Sinhalese people and Tamil) descent, starting in the 16th century."
So mestico means mixed people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hapa
Right at the top:
"In the Hawaiian language, hapa is defined as: portion, fragment, part, fraction, installment; to be partial, less. It is a loan from the English word half."
So hapa means a part.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baster
Right at the top:
"The name Baster is derived from the Dutch word for ‘bastard’ (or ‘crossbreed'). "
So baster means a bastard.
And so on. The bottom line is mulatto means a mule. So I will state that and include it.
KumarFilo (
talk)
02:48, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi all, not realizing the debate of the etymology of mulatto I always assumed the that the term "melado" was of similar origin. However, this does not seem to be the case. Does anyone have information on it's origin? Is it an actual dictionary word or is it slang? Would this term be considered derogatory by most people? I've heard it used in a non-derogatory way which is perhaps out ignorance and would like information so as to use or not use this word in future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.77.71 ( talk) 17:29, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Removed all but the one as no process evident here and the one remaining the only one likely to be the basis of one. 72.228.150.44 ( talk) 19:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
.Cananda .US .Latin america .Asia .Europea .Arabe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.176.126.128 ( talk) 19:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
"the latter definition of which makes the term highly subjective in nature"
I've removed phrase this from the article lead. It seems to be trying to make an important point, imo; I would guess about the fact that we are all the same species whatever our melanin level, or even the further point that especially in America, many so-called blacks have white ancestors, and likewise, there are plenty of American people who pass for "lily" white who have black ancestor, etc. (Please note, for the record, that I don't even agree with this whole framework of racial bias, but the one drop rule has historical currency, and the mulatto designation is at least somewhat inherently related to that). Per WP:PRESERVE I bring this here for discussion. -- 209.6.238.201 ( talk) 05:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
OK this is kind of ridiculous, I mean it would be nice to hear about the actual Mulatto people and their significance in history instead of hearing people go back and forth on whether the word means "mule" or not. Words change meanings all the time but we still use them. I mean by this logic we shouldn't use the word "kid" or "kids" when referring to children because the word "kid" is used to describe a baby goat. How many people have used the word "kid" or "kids" when referring to children in the general sense or when even referring to their own children? When a mother says "I'm going to go put the kids to bed" I'm sure the first thing you picture is not a human mother putting her baby goats to bed now is it?
I mean come on,instead of bickering you could be listing more facts about the lives of mulatto/Biracial slaves during and after slavery, or the many civil rights leaders that were of mulatto ancestry how about listing Mulatto achievements because there were many.
furthermore, there are many Mulattoes I've met that were not offended by the word Mulatto although not all knew the origins of the word the ones that did were still not offended by the term because they also knew that the meanings of words can change with the times.
From what I've noticed the people that were offended by the term have been Blacks that were from two black parents to some it's taken as anyone who identifies as mulatto is trying to distance themselves from their black side.
Note: I'm also not implying that all Black people feel a certain way. nor am i implying that all mulatto, biracial, mixed race, multiracial feel a certain way I'm just stating what I've seen and heard.
I don't know where did you get these sources from, but - no matter how well reputed they may be - the word "mulatto" most certainly comes from the Portuguese term "mulato", first spread in Northeastern Brazil. Popotão ( talk) 23:04, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
In response to User talk:Tarc
The gallery does not illustrate any racist terms. I used no racist terms in my submissions. Unless you're indicating the entire article is racist. Please explain. You're accusing me without explanation. Please cite the terms of which I am violating. The gallery illustrates, not only the various physical results of mulatto offspring, but the various types of mulatto ancestry, from ambiguous to specific, to recent (or first generation). Unless there is a unanimous consensus, I see this objection as coming from you only, as in your opinion. It's subjective. Please view the bios of each person. With the exception of Cornell West and Vanessa Williams, who are African-American descendants of slaves, all bios indicate specific European and sub-Saharan African recent ancestry or parentage. I'm putting the gallery back up until I'm notified of an official Wikipedia violation, not one based on personal opinion. Please explain to me how that is racist.
The gallery is placed between the 'Colonial Era' and 'Contemporary Era' sub-sections to illustrated the type of mulatto posterity produced by both, regardless of social race labels/classifications applied during these eras. It doesn't matter, they're all American, whether they look white, black, or in between, who are born of mulatto ancestry, or of sub-Saharan/European (Caucasian) parentage. I wanted to included more, because I know there are more, but didn't want to make the gallery to long. I think it's pertinent that people read the article and understand that mulatto isn't just pertinent to a specific range of looks, but it's very broad. I wanted to add more range, using someone like Boris Kodjoe but that individual has no American ancestry. Will likely use him for Germany.
There should be a subsection somewhere discussing the trend of European and continental African dating, offspring and unions that started in the mid-1900s. It's significant, and a huge sub-topic to explore. I came across a thesis about the resulting population in Germany written by a graduate student a couple years ago. The article also doesn't discuss the initiatives taken by the British government to induce mixed race communities in Britian during the mid-1900s, and that the same sort of initiatives to taken by other European governments. People such as Poly Styrene were born from such initiatives.
There is information about 'mulatto' populations in parts of Europe born to these types of unions that should be included. There is a huge population in Switzerland, for example. There is also mulatto 'legacy' ancestry in places like Tanzania where there is a population cognizant and accepting of it. I just hope that you don't work to 'narrow' the perimeters of this topic, because it's not narrow in the least bit.
There needs to be expansion about the mulatto colonial populations of Africa as well as these people were very influential in those societies and contributed immensely in modernizing those regions (Sherbro clans).
I am working on a gallery for Brazil, and will be putting images and information together for other sections of this article.
Bab-a-lot ( talk) 13:54, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
I reverted an edit changing white to European and black to African because that's not what the citation says. If that change is appropriate, perhaps a different citation should be used. Victor Engel ( talk) 20:18, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
The links i posted were from peer reviewed journals.
Can you please explain how they are unreliable? -- Nicki44445 ( talk) 12:55, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
I agree that sounds about right. Perhaps the OP or someone else would put a couple sentences or paragraph here, or in the article. I am not familiar with the social aspects of race in Brazil. As well as my obvious reading comprehension problem noted above. heh-heh Dave Dial ( talk) 19:16, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
How is this addition controversial? [3] Dave Dial should take a look at WP:VERIFY and WP:NPOV (particularly WP:DUE in WP:NPOV). [4] [5] [6] Tobby72 ( talk) 20:18, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Here, Toby72 asked me to take a look at this. Here is what I saw in a not-so quick look at recent edits.
I think I've got that straignt. Some of the edits mentioned above were separated from one another by unrelated edits made by other users.
Guys, please re-read WP:BRD. I know that it is an essay and not a policy, but it does describe a workable method for reaching consensus by identifying objections to edits and keeping discussion moving forward and help towards breaking deadlocks. That Bold-Revert-Discuss method is much superior to the Bold-Revert-Unrevert- Edit war method which has been tried here. Regardless of how the section at issue got to be in its current state, can we please have some discussion aimed at establishing a consensus about what it ought to contain?
It looks to me as if the main area of disagreement is how much weight should be given to information about master-slave rapes in colonial America in an article on the topic of Mulatto, which the lead sentence describes as, "a term commonly used in the United States to refer to a person who is born from one white parent and one black parent, or more broadly, a person of any 'mixed' ancestry." Input from editors not involved in the edit-warish exchanges above would probably be useful. I'll mention that this source might be useful. It speaks somewhat to the subtopic at issue here, though not from an American Colonial Era viewpoint. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:33, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
::::All slave women ... were vulnerable to being raped, but the mulatto afforded the slave owner the opportunity to rape, with impunity, a woman who was physically white (or near-white) but legally black
::::mulattoes were symbols of rape and concubinage. Gary B. Nash (1974) summarized the slavery-era relationship between the rape of black women, the handling of mulattoes, and white dominance...It was resolved by insuring that the mulatto would not occupy a position midway between white and black. Any black blood classified a person as black; and to be black was to be a slave.... By prohibiting racial intermarriage, winking at interracial sex, and defining all mixed offspring as black, white society found the ideal answer to its labor needs, its extracurricular and inadmissible sexual desires, its compulsion to maintain its culture purebred, and the problem of maintaining, at least in theory, absolute social control. (pp. 289-290)
::::Rapes occurred, and many slave women were forced to submit regularly to white males or suffer harsh consequences. However, slave girls often courted a sexual relationship with the master, or another male in the family, as a way of gaining distinction among the slaves, avoiding field work, and obtaining special jobs and other favored treatment for their mixed children (Reuter, 1970:129). Many of the sexual contacts between the races at this time took still other forms, such as prostitution, adventure, concubinage, and sometimes love. In rare instances, where free Blacks were concerned, there was even marriage (Bennett, 1962:243-68). (pp. 38-39)
re: References for the claim, "Contemporary usage of the designation is generally confined to situations in which the term is considered relevant in an historical context, as now most people of mixed white and black ancestry rarely choose to self-identify as mulatto.[2]"
While I am without comparative figures compiled to confirm or dispute the claim, "...most people of mixed white and black ancestry rarely choose to self-identify as mulatto", there are evidences from the internet that it is a term used to self-describe:
Shouldn't this article mention the 'Moorish Empire' as this coincides perfectly with the etymology of the term? Also, what about the historical Iberian Peninsula populations, as well as places like Italy, Iraq, Oman and Yemen where the populations still display genetic evidence of the once dominant 'mulatto' populations. Bab-a-lot ( talk) 14:08, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Moors were/are not a black population. They are Berbers [who again, are not black]. If anything, North Africans are darker today than they were in the past since so many Sub-saharan Africans [black people] were brought to North Africa as slaves after the advent of Islam. The middle East is a different story however, since black slaves were brought there from the horn of Africa in massive numbers shortly after Islam came about.. So Mulatto phenotypes are common in the middle east, in Saudi/Yemen they may infact make up the majority. 107.222.205.242 ( talk)
Apologies if my edit is bad; I don't know how to do this, but want to at least contribute my point of view. Please fix up my edit as appropriate.
Isn't the whole premise underlying the statement
> In the broadest sense, it is applied to persons of Black and White ancestry.
seriously flawed? AFAIK, homo sapiens first appeared on the scene somewhere in East Africa about 200,000 years ago, whereas the first Homo Sapiens setting foot in Europe is perhaps just 40,000 years ago. In other words, *most* of the ancestry of every white person on Earth is African and Black, and so every white person is a "mulatto" by the definition given above. Richard Dawkins famously refuses to tick the "Caucasian" box on US Visa forms because there is no biological reality behind the US government's conception of race.
IMO, the summary ought to mention quite early both the lack of any biological significance of this term AND the fact that it is an offensive slander derived from "mule" - the sterile (genetic dead-end) offspring of a horse and a donkey. Or is this in fact not the origin of the term? 80.203.21.218 ( talk) 17:22, 25 April 2014 (UTC)TheDag, April 25th 2014
I have deleted the statement, "Rape was not held to be a crime under Colonial Law." As written, the statement was demonstrably false: In the British-American colonies rape was a felony punishable by death, just as it was in England. The appalling fact is that forcing a slave to suffer unwanted sexual intercourse did not constitute rape, because the person of the slave was deemed property of the master, which, within grievously broad limits, the master could use or abuse as he saw fit. (Paradoxically, consensual sexual relations between blacks and whites were generally held to constitute a crime during the same period and long afterwards.) The article did cite a book in support of its dubious statement, but didn't specify a page, so the reference couldn't be conveniently checked. I dare say that if the relevant passage could be found, it would say more or less what I have said here, or at least that rape of slaves was not held to be a crime. With proper citation, I would support the introduction of a statement to that effect in place of the one I have deleted. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 19:34, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I could say "forget that everyone already knows that the moon landing is a hoax", it doesn't really mean anything. Seems more like a logical fallacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creepyinfant ( talk • contribs) 21:44, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Mulatto. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 04:42, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
@ Fifi stahlman:'s additions regarding South Africa appear to be valuable, but they need more specific citation. For example, any attribution of purpose or intention behind an action (such as ". . . the aim of subdivisions was to enhance the meaning of the larger category of Coloured by making it all encompassing;") ought to have its own reference to a particular statement in the source.
More important, fifi stahlman's only source is Palmer (2015), which she or he cites three times, without ever citing a specific page in the book. That makes it unreasonably burdensome for readers who want to verify the article's assertions. All articles have to be verifiable, so references should specify the page or other exact location in which the material relied on is to be found. I respectfully ask that fifi stahlman kindly improve the references in the material he or she has added. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 16:06, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
An editor has twice recently placed a photo of Pres. Barack Obama on this page, and another editor has twice removed it. There should be debate.
Clearly, Pres. Obama fits the definition of mulatto, in that he is the child of an African father and a Euro-American mother. The question, however, is whether mulatto is an appropriate term to use of any modern person, or whether it should be consigned to history? I am of the latter opinion, except in the case of the rare modern person who voluntarily describes him- or herself by that term. Persons of mixed race who describe themselves as mulattoes are of course entitled to do so; but I don't think they're entitled publicly to call anybody else by that term. Pres. Obama is not known to refer to himself publicly as a mulatto. To identify him as such here would reflect an unencyclopedic POV, which many readers would assume to be racist. I therefore oppose putting Pres. Obama's picture on this page. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 15:36, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
@ Dom Kaos: made some deletions today of matter that, while unsourced, was apparently credible and should not have been deleted, in my opinion, but simply tagged with "citation needed". I started to revert the deletions, but, honestly! The whole article is such a mess that I can't really say whether or not the deleted matter ought to be in there or not. As the previous thread ("South Africa") suggests, this article contains a good deal of information that belongs rather in the article, Multiracial. Most of the material in the section, "Africa", seems to belong in an article on racial classification and identification in South Africa, not here. Moreover, nearly half of the section, "Latin America and the Caribbean", is about the United States, which is not usually regarded as belonging to either of those regions, and which has its own section, further down.
Clearly, the article needs a complete overhaul.
To that end, the first thing that needs to be done, in my view, is for us (or whoever is going to revise the article) to decide on what the article is about. Although I am not very learned on this subject, I'll make so bold as to offer a few thoughts on that, in hopes that others, better informed, will take up the discussion:
This should be enough to start a discussion, and I'm out of time for today. Please add your thoughts. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 22:24, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
South Slavic nations use the term all the time to describe so that should be mentioned. I also clearly remember one elementary school textbook that taught us about different races, tolerance, mixed marriages etc. That's where I read the word "mulattio" for the first time, along with other terms for children of mixed couples. It is used in everyday life by some of the most liberal people I know. "Children of mixed marriage" is a broad expression and it can mean anything-from mixed race to couples of different nationalities or even religion. So it's not used for "multiracials" when you want to be more clear. Reading this article came as a surprise to me.... does the rest of the english-speaking world avoid that term or only USA? I believe this only applies to North America, so that should be made more clear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.138.57.97 ( talk) 16:19, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Although mulatto in the English language technically has two versions of plurality, "mulattoes" and "mulattos;" mulatto(es) is used not only in books etc. but in official U.S. documents of the English language. Although derived from the Spanish "mulato(s)," where foreign words usually receive an "s" only such as in radio(s) etc. I suppose the same plurality reflects how negro(es) or tomato(es) is pluralized; also from Spanish. Savvyjack23 ( talk) 07:04, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
In Brazil, many people of African descent consider the term "mulato", when used to describe race or skin color, to be an offensive racial slur, due to its commonly attributed etymology "mule-like", implying the bestiality of people thus described. —Daniel Ávila, 14:54 (UTC), 03 March 2017 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 191.17.153.167 ( talk)
Since mulato/a is a Spanish term, we need here some clarification. Mulato/a is a perfectly ok term to describe a mixed black and white color of skin, regardless of the race or origin of the person. It means neither black nor white; it means something in the middle. Mulato/a s the model of skin desired by people, specially in Spain, that’s why they have sunbaths and go to uva rays baths compulsively. It is not pejorative at all. All the opposite; a mulato/a person is beautiful always. That includes the song. He’s showing his rhythm to a beautiful ‘mulata’ woman. Así que de peyorativo nada majete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.163.26.99 ( talk) 14:05, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
"Its use is considered outdated and offensive", there are two sources listed with this, neither say anything about the term being outdated or offensive, so not sure why that was added or those sources were cited. As such, I'm removing that sentence and sources, which are not even sources for that statement to begin with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C2:4F00:3D00:DDC7:4963:78A7:8FBA ( talk) 03:03, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
The image titled Pinckney Benton Stewart on the mulatto entry is incorrectly labeled. The image is Homer Plessy of the famous Supreme Court decision. Ampittis ( talk) 01:45, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Should there be something in the "Contemporary Era" that says that the term is now considered offensive, and is no longer used as a standard term? Because that's certainly the case, the dictionary lists it as such, and I was surprised that that wasn't mentioned anywhere in the article. Carlo ( talk) 21:31, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
Greetings. I will contact the dictionary editors to find out where they got the notion that 'Mulatto' is derogatory. I my-self claim Afro-Metis and Mulatto heritage and do not find this term derogatory. Riverlisp ( talk) 05:51, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
It is controversial as to whether or not this term is offensive. Many do not find it derogatory in the least, but use it to represent our heritage. 2601:182:4381:E60:BD7A:135:CE5E:1C5B ( talk) 13:51, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
Have to admit I was expecting to see Nirvana's usage in Smells Like Teen Spirit mentioned here. Are there other references in films and songs? JohnCastle ( talk) 23:18, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
This article claims that the term is offensive, without clarifying any details. But in reality, in Spanish and Portuguese, as well as even in English if you're in a Spanish speaking country, this term has no negative connotation. Someone said to me that this shouldn't be added to this page because it's on English Wikipedia, but as per WP:Global , Wikipedia is an universal encyclopedia, not just an encyclopedia for countries with the English as its primary language. This is just the English version of Wikipedia, but read by people all around the world with English as a second language. Therefore, people should know that mixed people of European and African ancestry are called Mulattoes in countries like Brazil. This person them said that this article is just about the English term. But as far as I know, there's no articles about the word in other languages. So why isn't this article about this word in general? The page Negro clearly states that it depends on the language if it's offensive or not, and I think this page should too, especially since it already talks about its usage in Spanish speaking countries.
93.15.241.95 ( talk) 18:47, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
@ Knoterification: Words have different meanings in different languages. I'm convinced that our readers know that. Everybody who has ever learned a second language knows that words sounding similar and having the same root can be very treacherous. So, we don't have to mention that the word "mulatto" is an English word or that it is outdated and offensive only in English. Also, adding a link to English language is certainly overlinking. Do modern historians really use the term "mulatto" when referring to Haitians or Angolans ? In that case, my Oxford dictionary would be wrong. Rsk6400 ( talk) 08:53, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
Marlene L. Daut
Luiz Felipe De Alencastro In Racism and Ethnic Relations in the Portuguese-Speaking World Knoterification ( talk) 17:38, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
@
Vlaemink: Would you please respect
WP:BRD and take part in the discussion before making changes that didn't achieve consensus in an ongoing discussion ?
Rsk6400 (
talk)
19:01, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
This discussion has got out of hand. @ Acroterion:, before preceding to more formal steps, might I ask your opinion on whether the second sentence ("Its use is considered outdated and offensive in English.") should contain the words "in English" or not ? Thanks in advance, Rsk6400 ( talk) 19:12, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Should the words "in English" be added to the second sentence of the lead section ? The resulting sentence would be "Its use is considered outdated and offensive in English." Rsk6400 ( talk) 09:14, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
Comment This has been discussed extensively in the section above #Anglocentric_bias. Rsk6400 ( talk) 09:22, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
There isn't enough information on this page. Say if someone were to really extensively look into the term and the people who are identified as mulatto, you would not be able to get much. Each country in Latin America, for example, should have their own section like the "mestizo" article. It would also be nice to bring the population table back, that was rediculous to delete that in the first place. The word may be offensive to English speakers, but censoring the article is not helpful for those who truly just want to use it for research purposes. Lifeinvegas ( talk) 02:34, 15 February 2023 (UTC)