The 'Who' behind "Who Dat"

In a previous post, I lamented the use of the word "Negro" on the United States census. There are countless examples of words like this--words that can be traced back to racial stereotyping and discrimination. But after reading Hollis Robbins' essay on the origins of the New Orleans Saints' slogan, I know "Who Dat" isn't like the rest.

"Who Dat" has its beginnings in black poetry and entertainment. African American poet Paul Laurence Dunbar used the phrase in his 1895 poem "When Malindy Sings." At the time, Robbins writes, "the idea behind writing dialect was that the language evoked the real speech of the folk population."

Dunbar would later team up with African-American composer Will Marion Cook to write lyrics for a Broadway show. The all-black cast, a feat in itself in 1898, was a big hit. Not only did it draw in audiences, but it proved black musicians and writers to be savvy business people.

Opponents to "Who Dat" cite its use in minstrel shows. Others say the use of dialect in song and poetry portrayed African Americans as dumb or inferior. I urge these people to look not at the use of the phrase in its most harmful context but its overall use throughout history.

With its origins in African American poetry and song, "Who Dat" is no more harmful than "Hijo" or "Ese," commonly used in Hispanic households as a term of endearment. To be sure, mass media could manipulate these terms to belittle the groups to which they refer, but these words are not intended for that purpose. Unlike "Negro," which began as a socially constructed marker designed to promote racial hierarchy, "Who Dat" has roots in black empowerment and success.

Sports slogans and mascots are often attacked for their racial undertones, and many teams and groups alter or change their slogans to placate the public. I am not arguing that these changes are a bad idea by any means. The Washington Redskins? Awful. The Cleveland Indians, with their smiley, red-faced mascot? Deplorable. But "Who Dat?" Historically, and even today as the downtrodden city of New Orleans celebrates its Super Bowl win, these words evoke camaraderie and celebration of success.

Click here for more "Who Dat" history.

Photo Credit: TVByTheNumbers.com

What it means to be a 'Negro' in 2010

The United States Census Bureau announced earlier this month that it would not remove "Negro" as a race qualification in the 2010 census. Amidst public outcry, the Bay Area News Group reports, the bureau said it would consider removing the term from subsequent surveys.

Why keep the term? The census bureau says many older African Americans identify as "Negro," and removing the term would risk incorrectly counting this group.

Why lose the term? The word "Negro" conjures a time in American history when African Americans were considered subordinate. From Jim Crow and anti-miscegenation laws to the civil rights movement, "Negro" connoted "otherness" at its best and inferiority or inhumanity at its worst. Of course, all racial categories are socially constructed, with no biological basis, but this particular label evokes inequality and oppression.

Many groups within the United States that previously used the term have abandoned it, citing it, in the words of CNN analyst Roland Martin, as "best left where it is" and in the history it stirs up. Among these, reports Slate.com, Negro History Week was changed to Black History Month in 1976. The United Negro College Fund now refers to itself as U.N.C.F, and the Supreme Court has not used the word "Negro" without quotations or citations to outside sources for 25 years.

Time.com reports over 56,000 Americans specifically write-in "Negro" on the U.S. Census. Even so, the census is meant to reflect the changing demographics of the country. In many other ways, the census bureau aims to track these changes. The 2010 U.S. Census will implement 15 changes dealing with race and Hispanic origin. For each of these changes, 30,000 people will be given a slightly different questionnaire. These changes include allowing more than one classification under Hispanic origin and allowing people who identify as "white" or "black" to clarify their ethnic identity more specifically.

Judging by these alterations and the 13 others like them, it seems the census bureau is attuned to the changes taking place in America. The bureau recognizes we do not fall into set boxes. Furthermore, the terminology used to describe different groups, although seemingly innocuous to some, must be examined through a historical lens. Whether subconsciously or not, we internalize these labels and perpetuate the stereotypes and societal roles they propagate. Just because some people are not bothered by a term, or even if some Americans use the term to self-identify, does not mean the use of the word "Negro" in an official government survey carries no weight in the broader scheme.

Think of it this way: How does "Negro" compare to other, perhaps more offensive labels? All these terms evoke history, be it European immigration to the United States, anti-Semitic sentiment or slavery. All of these words are still in use today, some of them by the groups to whom they refer. Does that make them any less hurtful to others? No. The word "Negro" is no different, and the census bureau should see it as such.

Photo Credit: TheGrio.com