If someone of mixed race identifies as mixed, biracial, multiracial, etc. please respect that.
Don’t label them as a certain race based on the way they speak, dress or look.
Don’t promote stereotyping.
You can’t tell someone who or what they are supposed to be.
Their identity isn’t for you decide.
- The character from the Zelda game whose name just so happens to be “Romani”
- that’s it
I really don’t understand why there needs to be a “consensus” for people to realize that a word is a slur. There is really not much at all the majority group needs to consider about the word.
Does the word have a historical or contemporary context that is pejorative in nature?
Are people from the ethnic, racial or cultural group telling you it’s offensive?
If both of these are yes, then congratulations, you’ve got yourself a slur.
A particular from of pre-modern racism, the “limpieza de sangre” (“purity of blood”) was introduced in early modern following the expulsion of the Moors. This doctrine, the mediaeval origins of which are controversial, was aimed at converted Jews and their descendants, who were accused of possessing corrupted blood as a result of their ancestry. This cult of blood had popular roots and was only slowly adopted by the state and church; however, following the , it won acceptance over the Catholic Church’s claim to universal validity, above all among the nobles. Despite their conversion to Christianity, former Jews and their descendants were not recognised as full members of society; instead, they were subjected to the surveillance of an increasingly closely meshed network of spying and inquisitorial fanaticism.
-Boris Barth (EGO.EU)
The identification of the Jews with the devil and witchcraft in the popular mind of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries was perhaps the first sign of a racist view of the world. Official sanction for such attitudes came in sixteenth century Spain when Jews who had converted to Christianity and their descendents became the victims of a pattern of discrimination and exclusion.
-George M. Fredrickson (PBS)
No one can understand racism in today’s Europe without a critical analysis of Europe’s past. Any recollection needs to go far beyond World War II and the constitutional or international commitments taken by the European states since then. Taking a long look back at the construction of Europe’s nation-states, Maleiha Malik, professor of law at King College London, explains how national identities in Europe became defined by excluding “outsiders” since their very beginning in the middle ages. In fact, a traditional feature of Europe’s history is to use exclusion and the dehumanization of certain groups based on geographical origin, racial, or religious identity, to consolidate own, local and ethnic identities.
-Open Society Foundations
As we shall see, the idea that the soil has a direct impact on the people born on it plays a part in the concept of autochthony. The principle of the heredity of acquired characters id only stated explicitly in relatively few sources, but once it is clear that the idea existed, it is obvious that it was, in fact, commonly assumed to operate in practice. This is clear, for instance, from the expression cited and discussed elsewhere in this book, where Cicero calls Jews and Syrians, “people born to be slaves”. Slavery is not a physical condition, even though Aristotle considered the possibility that it might be one. The underlying assumption is that people who have been subjected to become servile in spirit through their condition, and they then pass on this quality to their children. This notion is common in several authors, such as Josephus and Tacitus […]
-Benjamin H. Isaac
All Roma groups, however, fell victim to a ruling system that did not only limit their human rights, but withdrew them completely. “The dark skinned strangers” were denied their humanness: Roma were seen as “debased creatures” that “wanted to become slaves because it lifted them, although not to the level of human beings, to the same level of good, working, domestic animals”.
On the one hand, this kind of racism legitimised the total enslavement of hundreds of thousands of people. On the other hand, civic rights were bound to landownership in the Romanian principalities; farmers without land as well as Roma were affected by this.
The terms “Ţigani” and “Robi” were interchangable, they described a certain social class. Roma were slaves from their birth on. They were not allowed to enter relationships with “free” persons, and marriages between slaves could only take place, if the respective owner granted permission. The spectrum of bodily violence ranged from flogging to torture and the death penalty.
However, in spite of his good intentions, Kogalniceanu’s approach to the Gypsies is that of one writing from a superior and paternalistic position and is imbued with the ordinary stereotypes about the so-called “inferior” groups. For instance, his description of the Gypsy women alone shows that he is influenced by well-known stereotypes about the representation of marginalized groups. Women belonging to these groups are usually associated with nature and considered more potent or more sexually accessible than the “civilized” groups. The same stereotype has held true for African-American women throughout history. The Gypsy woman is an icon of attractive and subversive sexuality and fertility, often represented as an insinuating flower girl. Kogalniceanu claims that Gypsy women are very accessible sexually and even hyper-sexual.
-Mihaela MudureThe European abolitionist movement fighting for the abolition of slavery in the colonies, andthe abolitionists in the U.S.A. also exerted their influence over public attitudes. It was not by chancethat the first American book translated into Romanian was “Uncle Tom’s Cabin” (with a foreword by Mihail Kogălniceanu), which aroused a great public interest. Numerous speeches and writtenmaterial by Europeans on slavery of Gypsies caused a strong social reaction as well, e.g. the SwissEmil Coli de Guggsberg in his book published in Iasi in 1841 directly posed the question: “Willanyone ever dare think of belonging to civilized nations, until one can read the an advertisement insome of your papers: “For sale, Young Gypsy”?”
-Marushiokova & PopovPedeapsa robilor (“The Punishment of Slaves”). Drawing of a Western slave master punishing his African slave, originally published in the Romanian-language Transylvanian magazine Foaia Duminecii.House slaves were forbidden to speak Romani, and their descendants, the Beyash (also Boyash or Bayash), today have a variety of Romanian, a Latin-based language, rather than Romani, as their mother tongue. Female house slaves were also provided to visitors for sexual entertainment (Colson, 1839); the half-white children of such unions automatically became slaves.In the 16th Century, a Romani child sold for the equivalent of 48¢. By the 19th Century, slaves were sold by weight, at the rate of one gold piece per pound. Treatment of the slaves included flogging, the falague or shredding the soles of the feet with a whip, cutting off of the lips, burning with lye, and wearing a three-cornered spiked iron collar called a cangue. Slaves were able to escape periodically and take refuge in maroon communities in the Carpathian mountains; these are called netoti in the literature.-Patrin
[Black] Slaves were punished by whipping, shackling, hanging, beating, burning, mutilation, branding and imprisonment. Punishment was often meted out in response to disobedience or perceived infractions, but sometimes abuse was performed to re-assert the dominance of the master (or overseer) over the slave.[…] A metal collar was put on a slave to remind him of his wrongdoing.
-Wikipedia (not proud of the source, but this is accurate)
§2 “Gypsies are born slaves,” §3 “Anyone born of a mother who is a slave, is also a slave,” §5 “Any owner has the right to sell or give away his slaves,” and §6 “Any Gypsy without an owner is the property of the Prince.” But Ottoman rule was thwarted by a takeover by the Russians in 1826, and Paul Kisseleff was appointed governor in 1829. He was firmly opposed to slavery, but because of pressure from the boyars, among other things, he did not abolish it. Instead in 1833 he incorporated stringent, conservative revisions in the Moldavian civil code, including the following: §II(154) “Legal unions cannot take place between free persons and slaves,” §II(162) “Marriage between slaves cannot take place without their owner’s consent,” §II(174) “The price of a slave must be fixed by the Tribunal, according to his age, condition and profession,” and §II(176) “If anyone has taken a female slave as a concubine, she will become free after his death. If he has had any children by her, they will also become free.”-Patrin(Romanian “Slave laws” resemble “Slave Codes” used in the American South & vice versa. This is a more humane, post 1818 version of Wallachian/Moldavian “Slave Laws”.)
Again, merely scratching the surface, but that’s kind of how the proto-racism of the Roman Empire became chattel slavery in Europe & the Americas. There is more & more research being done, which shows the flow of ideas & consequently the similarities between Romani slavery in Europe & the “pure blood” rules of Spain [which affected persons of Jewish, Romani, African & Arab descent], and African-American slavery & modern ideologies of racism & “racial purity”. It all has a long, interconnected history that has largely been ignored until rather recently.
I feel like the Romani Hederlezi song should not be covered by non-Romani bands & artists. It’s a traditional song for a holiday that we’ve adapted to fit our own culture & the way we celebrate reflects our pre-Christian & pre-Islamic beliefs. We have effectively kept ancient Hindu beliefs and celebrations in Europe by using Christian saints. The Romani celebration is unique to us. The festival & our traditional songs about it reflect our spirituality & even though we don’t have an organized religion of our own, that’s no reason to completely disregard that there are aspects of our culture with religious & spiritual significance.
I just heard a version of the song that went “sa gazhe, amaro dive” and was sung by someone who was not Romani. And, bands like Beirut have been making money from “covering” a few traditional Romani songs, this being one of them. [That’s not even delving into the whole issue of non-Romani bands making a profit off traditional Romani music.. cough Gogol Bordello cough..]
We don’t do that to your music, spiritual or otherwise, so please don’t do it to ours.
Let’s face it, if it wasn’t in a Soviet era film, none of you would even know the song existed.
fucking thank you. gadje stoppit.