
OT - Hamilton is (not) black?
#1
Posted 10 April 2006 - 11:01
Now, popular press wants us to beleive that Lewis Hamilton is black. I find it sad and hard to beleive that in the 21st century soceity is either uneducated and/or misinformed about origins, genetics and human race. Call it ignorance.
Lewis Hamilton's mother is white and his dad is black, right?. Therefore to say he is 'black' is technically wrong!. Lewis Hamilton is of mixed race.
I hate to predict the international media gettig it all wrong here, when he steps into Formula One...
EDIT: The 'raison d'etre' of this post is to try and find out how YOU F1 fans and racing enthusiasts regard Lewis Hamilton vis-a-vis his ethnic background. It is mainstream to have 'whites' in racing so as soon as a racer represents otherness(the definition is subjective) the press tells us he/she's black -even if strictly spoken he/she's not. This is to pick on the press as well who usually misinform us. I treasure quality information -like most of you I'm sure- and I think that in journalism it should be taken as a tenet to never pass judgement before knowledge. It may be that (you)we let (y)ourselves brainwashed everyday without knowing. So I just want to have an idea of this as well.
#3
Posted 10 April 2006 - 11:15
He's a racing driver. A pretty good one too. End of story.
Thirty years ago you could count the non-"Anglo-Saxon" footballers and cricketers at the top of the English game on the fingers of very few hands. Somewhat different now....
If Hamilton's success inspires more youngsters (of whatever colour, creed or religion) to race, then that can only be good for the sport.
#4
Posted 10 April 2006 - 11:24
#5
Posted 10 April 2006 - 11:28
Me personally, I don't care. If he's that good and is working hard, he deserves a shot. I just fear that the title of "the first {whatever} in F1" might actually prove more of a burden than anything else. But maybe he'll get lucky and pull a Tiger Woods, who knows.
Still, discussing such a topic can prove problematic, since it often does not take long for all the preachers to join in and start lambasting everyone who uses a potentionally offensive word in the wrong context.
I think that more than "race" itself, the actually important aspect these days is the social status, since that's what makes a real difference.
#6
Posted 10 April 2006 - 11:44
#7
Posted 10 April 2006 - 11:50
Black refers to non-white people. i.e. the Chinese, Arabs and Aboriginals are all black, too.
Black does NOT mean Afro-Caribean.
And you'll find that to say black will refer most specifcally to the most common non-white ethnicity in the region. i.e. in Melbourne, "Black" will typically be used to refer to Aboriginals.
The phrase "people of colour" was a PC Paraphrasing of Black.
This is the single most stupid thread that's ever been on here.
Hamiltion is Black. Cope. If he were white, we wouldn't be having this conversation, and he'd be just as quick. Go Away.
#8
Posted 10 April 2006 - 11:58
Originally posted by xype
I think that more than "race" itself, the actually important aspect these days is the social status, since that's what makes a real difference.
Do not want to make this an academic debate but arguably this is what Marx said a hundred years ago, so I don't think it's something that is an exclusively modern conception. OTOH conceptions of race and social status are arguably still inherrently intertwined.
Lewis Hamilton's success is of course relatively detached from both his social and racial background, although it is more imaginable that the commercial interests in the sport find his racial background more prospectous than his social background. E.g. we seldom see references or PR-narratives constructed around the perceived poor background of e.g. Raikkonen's family. You cannot target Raikkonen to appeal to a certain social class, but as I have understood there is a certain interest in using Hamilton as a bait for certain racially defined segments to get interested in the sport (insert reference to Tiger Woods, at will).
I have no idea what the first post tries to convey though...
#9
Posted 10 April 2006 - 11:59
Originally posted by Calorus
Black refers to non-white people. i.e. the Chinese, Arabs and Aboriginals are all black, too.
That's the single most stupid thing I've read here that does not directly involve F1.
#10
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:00
#11
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:00
Originally posted by xype
That's the single most stupid thing I've read here that does not directly involve F1.
We can soon change that; just get FSS on to politics.
#12
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:03
Originally posted by GT Racing Online Magazine
Do not want to make this an academic debate but arguably this is what Marx said a hundred years ago, so I don't think it's something that is an exclusively modern conception. OTOH conceptions of race and social status are arguably still inherrently intertwined.
I agreee completely with your post - maybe I should have worded it differently. To me the social status a sportsman starts with is more important than race in the context that the race is used. The message often used in advertising and marketing is that "everyone can do it", yet the examples used are mostly of darker skin (be that sportsmen or hip hop musicians or whatnot). I guess the stereotype will take quite some time to wear off.
#13
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:13
Originally posted by Pinguin
Lewis Hamilton's mother is white and his dad is black, right?. Therefore to say he is 'black' is technically wrong!. Lewis Hamilton is of mixed race.
This kind of thinking originates from the false premise that there exists two races, white race and black race of which you are able to generate "sub races" such as 3/4 whites, 5/28 blacks or "mixed".
The color of skin is just one property of a human being that doesn't tell practically anything about his race (which is a fictive concept) or his genetics. Hamilton's genes are a mix of his mother's and father's genes like everyone elses, but that's about it.
I recommend reading an article about human origins in quite recent National Geographic.
#14
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:13
Originally posted by xype
That's the single most stupid thing I've read here that does not directly involve F1.
It's the origin of the word. The English laguage, coined by a white nation unaffected by non-european encountered African, then Arabs and considered them all black, then in the 15th Century, 500 years before Political Correctness, China was met. They were referred to as blacks at the time, too. Equally segregation referring to Blacks in America was applied, to any non-white up until the pencil test was invented.
#15
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:17
Originally posted by Calorus
It's the origin of the word. The English laguage, coined by a white nation unaffected by non-european encountered African, then Arabs and considered them all black, then in the 15th Century, 500 years before Political Correctness, China was met. They were referred to as blacks at the time, too. Equally segregation referring to Blacks in America was applied, to any non-white up until the pencil test was invented.
Some people here originate from countries where English is not their native language and thus a statement like yours it over-generalisation at best. I never heared any germans or slovenians or croatians refer to other ethnicies as "black" and I'd be very grateful for a link explaining the English useage of black. I really find it hard to believe the example you give with China - but I've never seen it used before in other cases either (which might simply be due to the fact that I rarely engage in such topics).
#16
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:21
Originally posted by Calorus
Technically speaking - he's Black.
Black refers to non-white people. i.e. the Chinese, Arabs and Aboriginals are all black, too.
Originally posted by xype
That's the single most stupid thing I've read here that does not directly involve F1.

So perhaps Springsteen should have sung this then?
Got in a little hometown jam
So they put a rifle in my hand
Sent me off to a foreign land
To go and kill the black black man
[Black repeated only to make it scan]
That I agree with.Originally posted by Calorus
This is the single most stupid thread that's ever been on here.
Hamiltion is Black. Cope. If he were white, we wouldn't be having this conversation, and he'd be just as quick. Go Away.
Originally posted by BRG
Is Halle Berry 'black'?
PreciselyOriginally posted by mach4
who cares... :yawn:
#17
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:24
Originally posted by Calorus
Black refers to non-white people. i.e. the Chinese, Arabs and Aboriginals are all black, too.
Arabs are more generally considered white. (But then the use of the term changes. At one time western Europeans didn't consider some eastern Europeans to be 'white').
#18
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:26
Originally posted by xype
Then you'll be surprised that some people here originate from countries where English is not their native language and thus a statement like yours it over-generalisation at best. I never heared any germans or slovenians or croatians refer to other ethnicies as "black" and I'd be very grateful for a link explaining the English useage of black. I really find it hard to believe the example you give with China.
I'm not talking about French or German as translations, because typically words have a huge amount of colloquialisation, and even more significantly - there are very few direct abstract translations, even down to colours (as in the frequencies for instance where gree, becomes turquoise, become blue). And I can find nothing on the internet. I only know as result of studing History and doing most of my essays on race relations. Really you have to look at laws and statutes along with diaries journals and newspapers - and some rather disturbing "ethnic" experiments.
#19
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:28
Originally posted by Calorus
I'm not talking about French or German as translations, because typically words have a huge amount of colloquialisation, and even more significantly - there are very few direct abstract translations, even down to colours (as in the frequencies for instance where gree, becomes turquoise, become blue). And I can find nothing on the internet. I only know as result of studing History and doing most of my essays on race relations. Really you have to look at laws and statutes along with diaries journals and newspapers - and some rather disturbing "ethnic" experiments.
Gnarf - I just edited the original post to not sound too flametastic. But thanks for the explanation, something new I learned today, then.
Advertisement
#20
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:29
Originally posted by TT6
This kind of thinking originates from the false premise that there exists two races, white race and black race of which you are able to generate "sub races" such as 3/4 whites, 5/28 blacks or "mixed".
The color of skin is just one property of a human being that doesn't tell practically anything about his race (which is a fictive concept) or his genetics. Hamilton's genes are a mix of his mother's and father's genes like everyone elses, but that's about it.
I recommend reading an article about human origins in quite recent National Geographic.

#21
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:31
Originally posted by xype
Gnarf - I just edited the original post to not sound too flametastic. But thanks for the explanation, something new I learned today, then.
Relaxo chill. You sounded a touch flamey, but you converse, so no harm no foul!
#22
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:33
Originally posted by xype
That's the single most stupid thing I've read here that does not directly involve F1.
I was gonna say that. Thanks.
#23
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:44

#24
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:48
Originally posted by Vitesse2
What difference does it make whether he's "black", "white" or green?
He's a racing driver. A pretty good one too. End of story.

#25
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:50
‘So, Lewis, how does it feel to be the first black driver in F1?’
‘So, Lewis, how does it feel to be the first black driver finish a F1 race?’
‘So, Lewis, how does it feel to be the first black driver to score points in F1?’
‘So, Lewis, how does it feel to be the first black driver on the F1 podium?’
‘So, Lewis, how does it feel to be the first black driver to get a pit-lane speed limit penalty in F1?’
‘So, Lewis, how does it feel to be the first black driver to get a puncture in F1?’
‘So, Lewis, how does it feel to be the first black driver to retire from a F1 race?’
‘So, Lewis, how does it feel to be the first black driver to collide with Ralf Schumacher?’
‘So, Lewis, how does it feel to be the first black driver to be fined by the F1 stewards?’
‘So, Lewis, how does it feel to be the first black driver to drive for Ferrari?’
‘So, Lewis, how does it feel to be the first black driver to punch James Allen on the nose?’
And the two questions that Lewis probably won’t mind so much:-
‘So, Lewis, how does it feel to be the first black driver to win a GP?’
‘So, Lewis, how does it feel to be the first black F1 World Champion Driver?’
The second black driver will mercifully not be asked these questions. It’s a pity Lewis isn’t a woman (Louise Hamilton?), then we could get rid of two prejudices in one go!
#26
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:52

Btw: the poll could use a few more options, for example:
4) If he looks black, then he is black (it's really a marketing issue).
5) If he feels he is a black man, then he is (it's about personal identity).
6) If he is belongs to a black (sub)culture, then he is black (it's about cultural identity).
I could go on, and on ;)
#27
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:52



Perhaps, we could get him to have a sex change: thereby dealing with the transgender issue as well...
#28
Posted 10 April 2006 - 12:53
Originally posted by Foxbat
Since he is neither black, nor white does that make him the first mongrel in F1?
![]()
Doubt that's true - Humanity is rarely as selective when it comes to breeding as it likes to pretend.
#29
Posted 10 April 2006 - 13:06
#30
Posted 10 April 2006 - 13:06
Originally posted by Calorus
Doubt that's true - Humanity is rarely as selective when it comes to breeding as it likes to pretend.
And besides it hasn't been that long ago that the first of our ancestors left Africa to colonize the globe, I think we're all mongrels by most standards.
Re: Ali G, why not give him a ride? He'd be the first jewish rapper in F1

Btw: Bernie is probably the biggest mongrel in F1.
#31
Posted 10 April 2006 - 13:09
Already done...Bob/Roberta Cowell...Originally posted by Calorus
Perhaps, we could get him to have a sex change: thereby dealing with the transgender issue as well...
#32
Posted 10 April 2006 - 13:28
I think that some comments that black white or asian races genetically don't differ at all, are quite wrong, and indeed National Geographic like, being politically correct...
But lets make a somewhat racing thread of it, instead of a political race-discussion... are the chances of Hamilton to reach F1 not much better than ten or twenty years ago? And yeah, because of the color of his skin?
#33
Posted 10 April 2006 - 13:41
I guess it comes from the lack of education when it comes to anthropology.
There are three races and three races only.
Caucasian, Negroid and Mongoloid.
At this point in our own evolotion, there has been racial mixing for hundreds, mabye thousands of years, but none of it creates a new race.
The bi-product of a child born of parents of two different races is a bi-racial child, who has the characteristics of both races.
Is he of the Negroid race ? Yes, but he is also of the Caucasian race !!
#34
Posted 10 April 2006 - 13:56
#35
Posted 10 April 2006 - 14:05
There is more DNA diversity in the continent of Africa than in the entire rest of the world combined. I am closer in anthropological terms to a Native American than a Ghanaian is to a Zimbabwean. The whole "race" question is a vexed one but the above statement is, on the basis of mitochondrial study, just not true.Originally posted by Keir
I guess it comes from the lack of education when it comes to anthropology.
There are three races and three races only.
Caucasian, Negroid and Mongoloid.
#36
Posted 10 April 2006 - 14:14
Originally posted by Pinguin
Lewis Hamilton's mother is white and his dad is black, right?. Therefore to say he is 'black' is technically wrong!. Lewis Hamilton is of mixed race.
This just brought to mind the fact that Bob Marley had similarly a white dad and a black mother. Being white myself I've always seen Marley as being black. As long time fan of Marley's I've read that as a half-white child in Jamaica, Bob was not easily accepted in the local community. He was often considered to be white. He was rejected by both his white family and some members of the black community. Still knowing this to me Marley appears to be a black man rather than white, not that it matters to me what his or anybody else's colour of skin actually is. That's just the way I've always seen it, looking at it from my perspective. What I'm trying to say is that the way you see things really comes down to your own skin colour, where you come from and - equally importantly - how you understand different terms. For instance I woud presume that white people are a lot more likely to see Hamilton as being "black" than black people.
#37
Posted 10 April 2006 - 14:18
Originally posted by Keir
We have this thing in the USA where Hispanics consider themselves to be a race of their own.
I guess it comes from the lack of education when it comes to anthropology.
There are three races and three races only.
Caucasian, Negroid and Mongoloid.
At this point in our own evolotion, there has been racial mixing for hundreds, mabye thousands of years, but none of it creates a new race.
The bi-product of a child born of parents of two different races is a bi-racial child, who has the characteristics of both races.
Is he of the Negroid race ? Yes, but he is also of the Caucasian race !!
I have read that the entire planent is related within 7 generations, therefore we are all bi-racial.
#38
Posted 10 April 2006 - 14:44
Originally posted by Keir
We have this thing in the USA where Hispanics consider themselves to be a race of their own.
I
huh?
More like the way the USA wants to classify people, than the way Hispanics classify themselves.
A white European couple having children born in Latin America makes the kids Hispanic.
Give me a break.
#39
Posted 10 April 2006 - 14:44



The whole ****ing thread reads like the bad days in South Africa.
Neil
Advertisement
#40
Posted 10 April 2006 - 14:57
The fact is that this is going to be an issue, at least for the world's media, whether we like it or not. Just as the media have had a wetdream-fest over Danica Patrick, so they will do a 'Tiger Woods' on Hamilton. Hopefully, he will react as calmly and professionally as Tiger has and the fuss will die down so that he is judged on his driving only.Originally posted by Option1
Stupidest, and close to being the most revolting thread ever posted
#41
Posted 10 April 2006 - 14:59
A European couple having a child in Latin America makes the child whatever race the parents are.
The child's nationality is the duality of his/her birth parents and his/her birth country.
The whole term Hispanic is a crock. Someone from Brazil, who is not considered Hispanic, moves to Puerto Rico, suddenly becoming Hispanic !!
All Hispanic means is, "from Spain" !!! There is no race link ! Hispanics, for all intent and purpose, are Caucasian.
..... and it's not the USA trying to class people, it's the Hispanic comunity trying to distance themselves from everyone else.
It's a crock. ..... and all things will be better when everyone in answering the race question puts down "HUMAN" as their race.
#42
Posted 10 April 2006 - 15:24
As The Fast Show pointed out about Tiger Woods, he was the perfect combination of race for a golfer:Originally posted by BRG
Hopefully, he will react as calmly and professionally as Tiger has and the fuss will die down so that he is judged on his driving only.
-African, for the calmness and rhythm in the swing;
-Vietnamese, for ability in the rough;
-Caucasian, to let him on the course in the first place.
#43
Posted 10 April 2006 - 15:55
Is he fast? Thats what counts.
Oh, and I have to say, some of the "views" expressed in this thread were backward in medieval times.
#44
Posted 10 April 2006 - 15:57
Originally posted by Option1
Stupidest, and close to being the most revolting thread ever posted here.![]()
![]()
![]()
The whole ****ing thread reads like the bad days in South Africa.
Neil
I think I'd find a thread about my race to be constricting but I don't think the intention was to place anyone in a racial box. Rather, suggested by the general media categorizing of Lewis Hamilton, it's against placing people in such a category, especially when it's one which is based on such strange assumptions. Perhaps it would be better as 'Who is black' or something along those lines (which wouldn't place Lewis Hamilton in the centre of it) and put in the Paddock Club?
#45
Posted 10 April 2006 - 16:01
Originally posted by BorderReiver
Who gives a toss?
Is he fast? Thats what counts.
I hope that is what obtains, but unfortunately it won't. Marketing will exploit his colour/race.
Here in Jamaica, if you look black you are labelled as black. If you look white you are labelled white. We have more of a social bias here. As OSX pointed out in relation to Bob Marley, he looked black so was black to the world. Lewis Hamilton will be labelled black.
#46
Posted 10 April 2006 - 16:32
(singing)
Never be rude to an Arab,
An Israeli or Saudi or Jew.
Never be rude to an Irishman
No matter what you do.
Never pull fun at a ******,
A spic or a wop or a kraut,
And never poke fun at a [KA-BOOM]
Irrelevant? Perhaps but probably less than most posts in this thread...

#47
Posted 10 April 2006 - 16:46
#48
Posted 10 April 2006 - 16:56
If you want to debate the themes, try the bar in the Paddock Club.