Point Blank- Los Angeles Safe For African/Black/Hiatian/Jamaican American people? (Vista: neighborhood, moving to)

[Sakana]

I'm not to sure about the antelope valley. I suppose it's not that bad out there, atleast not what people make it out to be. In more suburban areas, It really depends on the type of people you hang around and how you dress and act.
As a cat who grew up mixed(japanese/italian)...i've always surrounded myself with different cultures...the chameleon effect you could say. All of my friends talk **** on each other's cultures, but it's in love.
But sometimes when I look at the bigger picture of Race in Los Angeles..i see alot of segregation. Yet we're all in the same boat..just trying to make a living and survive. Funny how the only time we all seem to be as one..is when we end up in clubs together...chasing all these fine ass ladies..haha

[johntheman]

I am not speaking out of prejudice or racism but how did Hispanic or Spanish speaking and to a lesser extent Portugese speaking peoples especially of the Western Hemisphere end up having taken over the term and designation Latin within the past few decades with the added term Latino? As an Italian-American of Roman ancestry it was from my ancestors in ancient Rome, Italy and by Julius Ceaser, Pompeii and the Vatican that the Latin language, culture, and tribes came from and the only true Latins are the Italians over any other people since it is the cultural legacy of Italy. What makes it even more incorrect for Western Hemisphere Hispanics to be using that title is the fact that the overwhelming majority of the are a mixture of several races - white(Iberian), Indian, and black.

[Sakana]

Good point John.

I'm very cautious of using the word Latino or Hispanic, even though at times I end up using the term. It's a term that just seemed to spread, and you'll even find Mexican-Americans regarding themselves by those terms.

I'm probably not entirely correct on this subject. But as far as I've come to read on it. Hispanic refers to people of Hispania(which is Spain, Portugal, Andorra). So if you meet someone in the U.S. who's fully Spaniard. You can refer to him as Hispanic. Now their are some Mexicans who have primarily Spanish blood, but most are Mestizos(mixed). So it would be wrong to call them Hispanic, since some may actually only have a 1/4 Spanish blood.

Now the term Latino or Latin American makes no sense. It is for the most part a term created in the last 30 years. Like you said....Latino refers to the original Latin Speaking peoples in Rome and Italy. At it's furthest extent, it could be used to refer to other Latin-derivative languages(Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian, and even French).
But if you ask someone who is French or Portuguese(in europe or the U.S.), they would just tell you they are French or Portuguese(not latinos).

If you ask someone from Chile or Colombia, they never refer themselves as Latin American, but as American or just Chilean/Colombian.
Bolivians(who have higher American blood), have no relation to the term Latin(since many don't even have any Latin/Hispanic blood).

In the United States(because of different racial backgrounds)...Latino was created to refer to anyone who has a Spanish speaking background, regardless if they are Mestizo's, Mulattoes, Mayan or Spaniards. Which is why you can mark off Latino/Hispanic on the Census, but be of white, mestizo, african race.

So it's a complicated matter, created through the racial/caste system of Spaniards and the U.S. Our obsession with Race causes us to complicate a simple term that should be used. AMERICAN
Which is why I call anybody from Canada to Patagonia as Americans.


I probably have some holes in this. So anybody, feel free to correct me, where I'm wrong.

[Raggy dee Ann]

Originally Posted by mommabear2

Why do people ask these type of questions? OMG. Look, you (and anyone of any race) are going to encounter a$$holes where ever you go. L.A. is no exception. Our city is filled with them. Frankly, I've had more racist jerks judge me in BFE midwest America than I ever have here. We are mixed city - if it exist, we have it - Armenian, Vietnamese, Creole, French, Mexican, German, African American... you name it. Personally, in general, I love people, I don't care what color your skin is... so I'M certainly not going to jump you. I'm an L.A. native btw.

I thought the same thing when I read first post in thread.

[Raggy dee Ann]

Is all this just alarmist stuff or are things really deteriorating. I lived in the valley (Sherman Oaks/Studio City) for over 10 years - mid 80's to mid 90's then moved to another state. When I did come back to California it was to live in Ventura county and I left there 4 years ago, but looking at moving back next year.

A lot of Burbank was pretty much ok back then now I'm hearing all this?????????
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]

[ArizonaBear]

Originally Posted by Sakana

Good point John.

I'm very cautious of using the word Latino or Hispanic, even though at times I end up using the term. It's a term that just seemed to spread, and you'll even find Mexican-Americans regarding themselves by those terms.

I'm probably not entirely correct on this subject. But as far as I've come to read on it. Hispanic refers to people of Hispania(which is Spain, Portugal, Andorra). So if you meet someone in the U.S. who's fully Spaniard. You can refer to him as Hispanic. Now their are some Mexicans who have primarily Spanish blood, but most are Mestizos(mixed). So it would be wrong to call them Hispanic, since some may actually only have a 1/4 Spanish blood.

Now the term Latino or Latin American makes no sense. It is for the most part a term created in the last 30 years. Like you said....Latino refers to the original Latin Speaking peoples in Rome and Italy. At it's furthest extent, it could be used to refer to other Latin-derivative languages(Spanish, Portuguese, Romanian, and even French).
But if you ask someone who is French or Portuguese(in europe or the U.S.), they would just tell you they are French or Portuguese(not latinos).

If you ask someone from Chile or Colombia, they never refer themselves as Latin American, but as American or just Chilean/Colombian.
Bolivians(who have higher American blood), have no relation to the term Latin(since many don't even have any Latin/Hispanic blood).

In the United States(because of different racial backgrounds)...Latino was created to refer to anyone who has a Spanish speaking background, regardless if they are Mestizo's, Mulattoes, Mayan or Spaniards. Which is why you can mark off Latino/Hispanic on the Census, but be of white, mestizo, african race.

So it's a complicated matter, created through the racial/caste system of Spaniards and the U.S. Our obsession with Race causes us to complicate a simple term that should be used. AMERICAN
Which is why I call anybody from Canada to Patagonia as Americans.


I probably have some holes in this. So anybody, feel free to correct me, where I'm wrong.

My only major nit I have with your post is the use of the word 'Americans'......strictly speaking, an American is a citizen of the USA only.

Canada=Canadian
Mexico=Mexican
Chile=Chilean
USA=American (sans hyphens)

[Lovehound]

"America" has become the de facto name of the United States of America. Canada, Central and South American countries have no interest in this appellation as far as I can see, and are more than happy to have "America" mean the US.

I used to argue the same point as Sakana for geographical reasons but I've retired my argument, discarded and dismissed. America means the US only. Nobody else claims it and nobody else wants it.

[Miami305Kid]

No its not. I saw a documentry on TV about how Latino gangs and Black gangs have terrirory. If a black walks into a Latin oneighborhood they could get killed but sometimes the Latino gangs go into black neighborhoods and just shoot the first black person they see. L.A is 50% Hispanic and around 10% black and arond 17% white. Even in Compton Latinos outnumber blacks. Obviously blacks, whites, asians, latinos, etc. will be safe in Hollywood, Beverly Hills, and places like that. Most low-income blacks live in South Central or South L.A but slowly the Latinos are taking over that to. Most blacks are moving back to the south, socal isn't safe in many places. The Latinos are literally killing off the blacks and taking over tradionally black neighborhoods. Some people will suggest that you live in Crenshaw or other South Central locations, DONT! They are just as gang infested as Latino neighborhoods. I feel bad for Socal blacks they're literally being killed off until theres none left.

[Lovehound]

Originally Posted by Miami305Kid

L.A is 50% Hispanic and around 10% black and arond 17% white.

Your statistic for LA being 17% White can't be right.

I agree with you about Blacks getting screwed. Just about the time it looked like Blacks could live in LA without prejudice the Latinos started gaining, and these days the Blacks take hind udder to the Latinos. I don't see any good future for Blacks in LA, and not much better for Whites.

By 2050 California will be 50% Hispanic. Los Angeles is closer to the influx point (Mexico) so for that reason LA is ahead of its time. I don't think LA is 50% Latino yet but it's getting close. It's really impossible to tell because of the large numbers of undocumented alien residents.

I expect to leave CA in the next few years and this is part of the reason why. (I'm White.) I have no desire to be in the minority. It can't have been fun for the Blacks to be in the minority, it probably wasn't fun for the Latinos either, and I don't see any reason to believe that the Whites will fare any better.

Please note that I have no problem getting along with Blacks or Latinos. I just don't want to be in a minority.

[Fontucky]

I'm in the minority here in Fontana, and I get along just peachy. Or is that pinche?