Redundant?

[Redlass]

Is it redundant to say "white Anglo-Americans"?

[erik_kosberg]

It would have been a hundred years ago, but as England’s demographics have changed (especially post-WW2), the American children of more recent immigrants from England might well not have the skin tone usually associated with “Anglo-Americans.”

[CurtisEdmonds]

Depends on how you mean "Anglo". If it refers to the Angles and the Saxons, probably redundant. If it refers to the Brits in general, probably not. If it's used the way the Mexicans use it (as a substitute for "generic white guy") then redundant.

[Redlass]

It's used in a test question about diversity in the U.S. work force. It's discussing the eye contact that white Anglo Saxons make and contrasting it with other ethnic groups. I wondered whether I should take out "white" or "Anglo Saxon." (Especially given that many white people are not Anglo Saxon.)

[mjfrombuffalo[$]]

Well if you're talking ethnic groups, stay with Anglo Saxon since white is a race. Or if it's eye contact that white people make (even Catholics ), then take out Anglo Saxon.

mj
whose kids will be beige-brown and Presbyterian - Anglo Blaxons?

[Prepoia[$]]

The phrase was probably picked because of the WASP title when talking about the group, White Anglo Saxon Protestants...which has long been used to discuss the founding fathers. However, it does not sound as though it is a good phrase to be applying to this test question. White or Caucasion (sp) would be more accurate I think.

[magenta321]

Personally, I stick to a simple "Caucasian".

I think Anglo is too narrow, and white is too... I don't know... derrogatory, somehow. Don't get me wrong, I consider myself "white", but I'm not used to seeing it in print or anything "professional".

[Redlass]

OK. I agree that it is a strange term. Technically it is used in the chapter so it is legitimate to use that phrase in the test questions, but I don't like it.

I think we were worried that some of our readers wouldn't know the term "caucasian." But then, if they don't know that term, why would we expect them to know Anglo-American?

[mjfrombuffalo[$]]

I still have a problem with mixing categorical terms. If a writing or survey or whatever uses a term for a race, all the terms should be racial categories. If a writing or survey or whatever uses a term for an ethnicity, all the terms should be ethnic categories.

Wrong:

White
Asian
African-American

White and Asian are racial categories, African-American is ethnic.


Right:
White
Asian
Black

Some African-Americans bristle at the term "Black." My Haitian Hubby is not African-American but is Black. I rarely, if ever, see surveys or writings that don't mix the racial and the ethnic terms. And let's not even get into cultural identification, a whole other can of worms...

[murasaki]

Would "Euro-American" work better?

According to David Hollinger in Postethnic America, ethno-racial cultures/identities (in the US) fall into a "pentagon":

African American
Asian American
Euro-American
Indigenous American
Latino/Hispanic American

(Hollinger also argues the limitations of this pentagon.)

Would that work better? To me, "Euro-American" seems more specific than "Caucasian," which encompasses Hispanic.

--naomi

[lyagushka]

Originally posted by magenta321
Personally, I stick to a simple "Caucasian".

Uh, sorry, but I have to respond to this one. "Caucasian" is only simple to those with absolutely no knowledge of the Caucasus. I've been there and can tell you that the people in this region have skin tones ranging from the darkest Arab-type skin with black hair and eyes, to true blondes with blue eyes and milky white skin. There is no 'average' Caucasian coloring. Russians, in fact, use the term Caucasian to indicate someone of extremely dark coloring. Since visiting this place, I use the term "Caucasian" to refer to Armenians, Georgians, Chechens, Azeris and Daghestanis only. It's far more useful as a description of culture than appearance. I really wish this term would be dropped from the English vernacular. I'm white, but I'm definitely NOT Caucasian. When pressed, I describe myself as an American of western European descent.

[pisces]

I think of "White" as a general term for anyone with Western European ancestry. "Anglo-Saxon" is the specific tribe or area of Europe the ancestors inhabited.

I don't think its redundant because in the animal kingdom, biologists use a similar type of classification system. An animal is labeled by BOTH its genus (general) and species (specific) name type.

Not everyone with Western European ancestry is Anglo-Saxon (English).

Someone who is 100% Celtic (Irish/Welsh), or Old Germanic, might be offended to be simply lumped in with and labeled "Anglo."

[Prepoia[$]]

Would "Euro-American" work better?

Gee, I really like this term. It's much more specific culturally....but, even then, it it color specific? I think it is even though there are many African-Americans that live in England and other countries there I suppose they would not be native Europeans so this term might be color specific too.

Sandy

I often call African-Americans "blacks" without any disrespect meant. They have (in my lifetime) been reassigned a color name often but this was the preferred race referencial name during my formative years. They moved (over my lifetime) from Negroid to blacks to people of color, to African Americans. My daughter corrects me every time I slip....but what that nomenclature doesn't include is the people of color that are not African. Hmm....got to think about this one. That seems very wrong to me...except, those not directly from African origins must surely have been immigrated to the Caribbean region from Africa right? So....they too may be considered African-Caribbeans.

Sandy
Who needs to stop thinking so much