On Ethnicity

[Kirrig]

How to decide on Ethnicity?

Nationality and Ethnicity are to quite separate things. An Englishman can quite easily be French, either he is a French citizen of English stock or vice versa. In this case, his nationality is French and his ethnicity is English. Nationality is very easy to determine, but an individual's ethnicity is somewhat trickier.

Broad ethinic categories such as NZ European, European, Maori, Polynesian, Asian or Indian are also fairly easy to decide upon. An NZ European is born in New Zealand with ancestors from Europe, normally Britain. If the individual also has, say, Maori ancestry the individual just picks which (s)he identifies with the most, or both. This system works quite well but is arbitary. For example, the individual has one Maori great-grandparent and all the others were born in, say, London. However, this person sees themself as Maori, although they are only one eighth so (12.5%.) Obviously, this is quite innacurate.

Now, the individual can describe himself as NZ European. This is more accurate, but the ethnic label is the opposite. To be entirely accurate (s)he should describe their ethnicity as being partially Maori-English New Zealander. The New Zealander part coming from their and their parents having been born in New Zealand. In truth, this is not altogether that accurate, either. This is because the individuals ethnicity has partly been determined from their great-grandparents nationality (English.)

Some would argue that the individual should describe himself as a New Zealander, but by doing so nothing is said at all about their ethnic origin. There will proabaly never be any new ethnicities. People are now far to mobile and children of multiple ethnicities are very common. We should probably accept that we will have to make do with the ethnicities that we have today. Having people going around describing themselves as Dutch-Spanish-German-Frisian-Cook Island Maori does not really work and neither is it appropiate for that individual to describe themself as being Spanish ethnically.

How inaccurate can one afford to be without being ridiculous? How accurate can one be withouit being ridiculous?

I think that a person with 4 Dutch great-grandparents, 2 English ones and 2 New Zealand born ones should describe their ethinicity as European. They should then describe it more fully by incorporating their nationality, resulting in NZ European.

I believe some similar topics have been posted recently, but, I feel, this one is different.

[The Blaatschapen]

I would go further. Why would ethnicity matter at all?

Is culture(as in the set of values and customs that you adhere to) or nationality(as in terms of being a member of a sovereign state, thus giving you certain rights within said state and others) not far more important than ethnicity?

[Terra Superia]

Based on your description of an NZ European, how would you describe me? I have one Ukrainian-Jewish great-grandfather, three Russian-Jewish great-grandparents, two German-Jewish great-grandparents, and two Polish-Jewish great-grandparents. Three of my four grandparents were born in Israel, as have both my parents, but I was born in the USA, though I currently live in Israel, and hold dual citizenship (Israel and USA). Am I European by ethnicity? Am I Jewish by ethnicity? Would you describe my as European, American , Israeli, or something else? This goes to show that ethnicity and nationality are issues too complicated for this kind of simple classification, and should be dependent on how people defines themselves.

[Kirrig]

Ethnicity is generally used as a means of breaking down statistics. In other respects, culture and nationality are more important. In some places culture and ethnicity seem to be treated as one in the same.

[Kirrig]

Based on your description of an NZ European, how would you describe me? I have one Ukrainian-Jewish great-grandfather, three Russian-Jewish great-grandparents, two German-Jewish great-grandparents, and two Polish-Jewish great-grandparents. Three of my four grandparents were born in Israel, as have both my parents, but I was born in the USA, though I currently live in Israel, and hold dual citizenship (Israel and USA). Am I European by ethnicity? Am I Jewish by ethnicity? Would you describe my as European, American , Israeli, or something else? This goes to show that ethnicity and nationality are issues too complicated for this kind of simple classification, and should be dependent on how people defines themselves.

Religion complicates things somewhat. My understanding is that Jews tend to consider themselves Jews wherever, like how many Chinese people here in NZ see themselves as Chinese before NZers. However, I would describe you as Slavic or Eastern European given that so many of your ancestors are from that area. I hold that where you live and have lived for most of your life, presumably Israel, takes precedence over nationality if the nationality is more complicated. Therefore, I would put you down as a Eastern European Israeli.

Your situation, I point out, is difficult for me as I see a distinction between European as in the French and European as in Italians and European as in the Poles.

How do you personally see your ethnicity? For the system I used at the end perhaps one gerneration further back is needed.

[Terra Superia]

Based on your description of an NZ European, how would you describe me? I have one Ukrainian-Jewish great-grandfather, three Russian-Jewish great-grandparents, two German-Jewish great-grandparents, and two Polish-Jewish great-grandparents. Three of my four grandparents were born in Israel, as have both my parents, but I was born in the USA, though I currently live in Israel, and hold dual citizenship (Israel and USA). Am I European by ethnicity? Am I Jewish by ethnicity? Would you describe my as European, American , Israeli, or something else? This goes to show that ethnicity and nationality are issues too complicated for this kind of simple classification, and should be dependent on how people defines themselves.

Religion complicates things somewhat. My understanding is that Jews tend to consider themselves Jews wherever, like how many Chinese people here in NZ see themselves as Chinese before NZers. However, I would describe you as Slavic or Eastern European given that so many of your ancestors are from that area. I hold that where you live and have lived for most of your life, presumably Israel, takes precedence over nationality if the nationality is more complicated. Therefore, I would put you down as a Eastern European Israeli.

Your situation, I point out, is difficult for me as I see a distinction between European as in the French and European as in Italians and European as in the Poles.

How do you personally see your ethnicity? For the system I used at the end perhaps one gerneration further back is needed.

I see myself as an Ashkenazi Jew (an Eastern/Central European Jew). However I also recognize that people in similar situations would chose to define themselves in a different manner. I think people should be able to define themselves, as these things are anything but straightforward.

[Kirrig]

Religion complicates things somewhat. My understanding is that Jews tend to consider themselves Jews wherever, like how many Chinese people here in NZ see themselves as Chinese before NZers. However, I would describe you as Slavic or Eastern European given that so many of your ancestors are from that area. I hold that where you live and have lived for most of your life, presumably Israel, takes precedence over nationality if the nationality is more complicated. Therefore, I would put you down as a Eastern European Israeli.

Your situation, I point out, is difficult for me as I see a distinction between European as in the French and European as in Italians and European as in the Poles.

How do you personally see your ethnicity? For the system I used at the end perhaps one gerneration further back is needed.

I see myself as an Ashkenazi Jew (an Eastern/Central European Jew). However I also recognize that people in similar situations would chose to define themselves in a different manner. I think people should be able to define themselves, as these things are anything but straightforward.

Yes, being able to define yourself is important. Howver, I have issues with it if someone decides they are something when they have only the slightest of claims to it. The examples I gave in the opening post are all valid in my eyes, but if a person is only one sixty-fourth something and sees themself as that based only on that 1.56% (3sf) heritage than I see it as wrong. There is room to choose, but not insanely much.

[Furious Grandmothers]

How to decide on Ethnicity?

Nationality and Ethnicity are to quite separate things. An Englishman can quite easily be French, either he is a French citizen of English stock or vice versa. In this case, his nationality is French and his ethnicity is English. Nationality is very easy to determine, but an individual's ethnicity is somewhat trickier.

Broad ethinic categories such as NZ European, European, Maori, Polynesian, Asian or Indian are also fairly easy to decide upon. An NZ European is born in New Zealand with ancestors from Europe, normally Britain. If the individual also has, say, Maori ancestry the individual just picks which (s)he identifies with the most, or both. This system works quite well but is arbitary. For example, the individual has one Maori great-grandparent and all the others were born in, say, London. However, this person sees themself as Maori, although they are only one eighth so (12.5%.) Obviously, this is quite innacurate.

Now, the individual can describe himself as NZ European. This is more accurate, but the ethnic label is the opposite. To be entirely accurate (s)he should describe their ethnicity as being partially Maori-English New Zealander. The New Zealander part coming from their and their parents having been born in New Zealand. In truth, this is not altogether that accurate, either. This is because the individuals ethnicity has partly been determined from their great-grandparents nationality (English.)

Some would argue that the individual should describe himself as a New Zealander, but by doing so nothing is said at all about their ethnic origin. There will proabaly never be any new ethnicities. People are now far to mobile and children of multiple ethnicities are very common. We should probably accept that we will have to make do with the ethnicities that we have today. Having people going around describing themselves as Dutch-Spanish-German-Frisian-Cook Island Maori does not really work and neither is it appropiate for that individual to describe themself as being Spanish ethnically.

How inaccurate can one afford to be without being ridiculous? How accurate can one be withouit being ridiculous?

I think that a person with 4 Dutch great-grandparents, 2 English ones and 2 New Zealand born ones should describe their ethinicity as European. They should then describe it more fully by incorporating their nationality, resulting in NZ European.

I believe some similar topics have been posted recently, but, I feel, this one is different.

Well, then, how Dutch/English/NZ were the great grandparents themselves? Cuz if you go back far enough, would you end up concluding that everyone is African? I don't see how ethnicity is relevant in any way. Even for police identification, I think skin color would do a much better job than identification by ethnicity.

[Free Soviets]

How to decide on Ethnicity?

Nationality and Ethnicity are to quite separate things. An Englishman can quite easily be French, either he is a French citizen of English stock or vice versa. In this case, his nationality is French and his ethnicity is English. Nationality is very easy to determine, but an individual's ethnicity is somewhat trickier.

Broad ethinic categories such as NZ European, European, Maori, Polynesian, Asian or Indian are also fairly easy to decide upon. An NZ European is born in New Zealand with ancestors from Europe, normally Britain. If the individual also has, say, Maori ancestry the individual just picks which (s)he identifies with the most, or both. This system works quite well but is arbitary. For example, the individual has one Maori great-grandparent and all the others were born in, say, London. However, this person sees themself as Maori, although they are only one eighth so (12.5%.) Obviously, this is quite innacurate.

only if ethnicity is genetic. since ethnicity is about culture, it poses no problem at all. my great-great-great-grandparents showed up here from sweden. doesn't make me swedish. i'm a chicagoan.

There will proabaly never be any new ethnicities. People are now far to mobile and children of multiple ethnicities are very common.

actually, what really happens is that new ethnicities are constructed as the cultural mixing and regional divergence churns out new clusters of language/clothing/diet/religion/favorite drugs/etc. you can't long have multiple intermingling groups maintaining separate ethnic identities. people living together will always generate a new common ethnicity, unless they specifically exclude some people from it. but that just is about preventing intermingling in the first place, which is the precise opposite of your worry.

the only way to stop this is to have a sort of cultural panmixtic situation, where population movement is random and basically nobody winds up where they started. but this would actually be the most radical change in ethnicity ever seen - the whole of humanity sharing one utterly new global ethnicity.

[Conserative Morality]

Ethnicity as genetic has always seemed ridiculous to me. Genetically, I'm 1/2 Western/Northern European and possibly some Native American, 1/4 Italian, and 1/4 Japanese. Yet I wouldn't identify as any of those.

[Free Soviets]

Ethnicity as genetic has always seemed ridiculous to me. Genetically, I'm 1/2 Western/Northern European and possibly some Native American, 1/4 Italian, and 1/4 Japanese. Yet I wouldn't identify as any of those.

what amuses me most about it is when people in some of the most stereotypical ethnic outfits imaginable start talking about how they are 'irish' or 'polish' or whatever.

[Tagmatium]

An Englishman can be French?

Then, sir, he is no Englishman!

[Wazkyraque]

The concept of Ethnicity, Race, and Nationality, IMO, is stupid

[Free Soviets]

The concept of Ethnicity, Race, and Nationality, IMO, is stupid

the 'is' confuses me. do you think they are the same thing?

[The Irish Marchlands]

Regardless of whether it is stupid or not, ethnicity and nationality are concepts active in real life and affect people's lives. The question is not on the veracity of the concept but how do you deal with it when the question applies to you.

[The Shrailleeni Empire]

Ethnicity is a part of individual identity. That's all. My family doesn't really keep track of our ethnicity, we are white Americans. We do know that on one side we are mostly Welsh and Scots-Irish with a little English thrown in, and English and Irish on the other. The only reason I know this is because I like to self-identify as "British Isles Decent," because I think it's cool that I have ancestors immigrated from every major Isles state.

But the key is that I don't expect people to know that, and I expect some understanding if I don't instantly know your ethnicity by looking at you. Its a personal choice. I have a friend who is technically half Polish and half German, but refuses to recognize the German half.

[Free Soviets]

My family doesn't really keep track of our ethnicity, we are white Americans.

white americans come in a variety of ethnicities, and we can all basically pick out the ones we belong to and which ones other people do. or, in other words, tell me what you know about southerners.

[The Shrailleeni Empire]

My family doesn't really keep track of our ethnicity, we are white Americans.

white americans come in a variety of ethnicities, and we can all basically pick out the ones we belong to and which ones other people do. or, in other words, tell me what you know about southerners.

Sorry, that was made as a specific statement, not speaking for "white Americans" as a whole. As in "my family sees itself as white Americans, and not really a specific Euro ethnicity." Again, its an individual thing, other people see themselves as whatever ethnicity they choose. Heck "white" to me doesn't mean the same thing that it does to a white supremacist.

[Free Soviets]

white americans come in a variety of ethnicities, and we can all basically pick out the ones we belong to and which ones other people do. or, in other words, tell me what you know about southerners.

Sorry, that was made as a specific statement, not speaking for "white Americans" as a whole. As in "my family sees itself as white Americans, and not really a specific Euro ethnicity." Again, its an individual thing, other people see themselves as whatever ethnicity they choose. Heck "white" to me doesn't mean the same thing that it does to a white supremacist.

and i mean that you have an ethnicity - one of many that fall under the category of 'white american'. i, for example, am a chicagoan. which is really just the urban subtype of the broader great lakes peoples. northwest territorians, if you will. there are lots more ethnic groups around, too. you can identify them yourself - just remember, ethnicity is about culture, not about ancestry. especially not percentages of ancestry.

southern californians, new englanders, southerners, hawaiians, texans, mormons... any cohesive, self-identifying cultural group is probably an ethnic group. or in the process of becoming one.

[The Shrailleeni Empire]

Sorry, that was made as a specific statement, not speaking for "white Americans" as a whole. As in "my family sees itself as white Americans, and not really a specific Euro ethnicity." Again, its an individual thing, other people see themselves as whatever ethnicity they choose. Heck "white" to me doesn't mean the same thing that it does to a white supremacist.

and i mean that you have an ethnicity - one of many that fall under the category of 'white american'. i, for example, am a chicagoan. which is really just the urban subtype of the broader great lakes peoples. northwest territorians, if you will. there are lots more ethnic groups around, too. you can identify them yourself - just remember, ethnicity is about culture, not about ancestry. especially not percentages of ancestry.

southern californians, new englanders, southerners, hawaiians, texans, mormons... any cohesive, self-identifying cultural group is probably an ethnic group. or in the process of becoming one.

I see what you mean. Using that definition I would be a Pennsyltuckian.

[Kirrig]

Perhaps my original usage of ethnicity is in error, but I will persevere. I see a distinction between ethnic groups of a cultural origin and those of a national origin. However, I seem to have treated ethnicity as a concept interlinked with genetics and will continue to do so.

I stand by my original comment regarding new ethnicities, continual interbreeding will never cause a new ethnicity unless only the same ethnicities interbreed. That is, no more new ones enter the mix. New cultures are all too easy to produce; a fact I doubt will ever change.

With regards to those amongst you who treat ethnicity as relating only to culture, you are also wrong. This can be seen by the second 'or' in the following definition: "the fact or state of belonging to a social group that has a common national or cultural tradition." This is the Oxford Dictionaries Online's definition. However, your answer to the original question is not.

The person who stated that by going back far enough we would conclude that everyone is African is also wrong. African is not an ethnicity. There are many different ethnicities that come under the category African ethnicities, Sub-saharan or Eastern as examples. However, my calling this wrong seems hypocritical as I have linked Dutch, German and French people into the category 'European,' but I see a distinction between these two situations. What I have done is failed to put Western European, whereas this person has given no indication of a similar case.

Having addressed the above, it appears that what the individual identifies with is what they are. This is the conclusion I have reached from the comments.

[JuNii]

for race, I usually put 'Human'.

for Ethnic Background... I put Hawaiian... that gets some weird looks from the officals. they ask me how? I simply turn to look behind me and wave to the wide background and say... "Hawaii... so Hawaiian."

the usual response is for them to press their lips together and hand me a new form to fill out.

[Bitchkitten]

Like many Americans I'm a total mutt. German, Dutch, English, Irish, Scots, Cherokee, Commanche and French.

[JuNii]

Like many Americans I'm a total mutt. German, Dutch, English, Irish, Scots, Cherokee, Commanche and French.

and Mutts are the most lovable and fun to have.

that's what we here call a Poi Dog.

[Kirrig]

Like many Americans I'm a total mutt. German, Dutch, English, Irish, Scots, Cherokee, Commanche and French.

Very well, but what is your ethnicity? Do you consider yourself to be the sum of all those parts?