Talk:Black Irish (folklore)

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Irish American media

[edit]

I am new to this discussion, but I want to point out that this page excludes any history of the term being used within Irish American media. This would qualify the earlier question about Black Irish being used in the 21st century, which among Irish Americans, it still very much is. No study (that I can find) has been done to determine the modern usage of the term and its frequency, but from media alone such as The Black Donnellys (2007), Black Irish by Stephan Talty (2013), and by extension Black Mass (2015) it is clear the term is still used amongst Irish Americans.

There seems to be an edge to this article that seeks to bury the terms modern usage within Irish America, or makes claims about "performance" to suggest that it is not a legitimate ethnonym. Anxieties about the use of the term for nefarious purposes are understandable, as in the example of Rosanne Barr's classic tweets about the subject. That does not, however, disqualify the term out of existence. 162.83.150.150 (talk) 23:43, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@162.83.150.150 Black Irish is not a legitimate ethnonym, as the article states, due to a complete lack of evidence to support the most often cited Spanish Armada myth. Given its continued usage in American media, it may be more accurate to say it dates to the 19th/20th century rather than it's a 19/20th century term. Shana3980 (talk) 22:27, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the article is a mess. The original creator of this article has claimed ownership and sits like a troll under the bridge, editing out anything that gives the term any legitimacy. We are lucky the article is the way it is. That editor is convinced the term is illegitimate and is very dedicated to ensuring the article gives that impression. Dantai Amakiir (talk) 09:14, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Despite a warning for personal attacks, you're persisting? Knock it off. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Facts aren't attacks. All of my citations have magically disappeared. That's not responsible editing, that's sabotage. Dantai Amakiir (talk) 10:14, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dantai Amakiir The term is illegitimate when it refers to a connection with the Spanish Armada, as genetics studies have proven. It's been debunked thoroughly. Shana3980 (talk) 19:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Um, genetics can't prove that words are illegitimate. There's nothing in the "rules" for ethnonyms that says that the names can't be associated with a false folk etymology, especially for endonyms. The indigenous people of the Americas can still legitimately call themselves "Indians" or "American Indians" if they want to, even though they're not from India, and there are any number of indigenous groups whose names mean something like "people from the north" or "people eternally of this place" when genetics shows the opposite. Names are chosen by people, not by genetics tests. If some Irish Americans want to call themselves "Black Irish", then they're allowed to do so, and that's true even if you think they have the wrong motivation for it and you thoroughly disapprove of their choice. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:26, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we know that. The rest of us have been trying to stop this article focusing on the Spanish Armada myth and instead focus on black Irish identity. You can't blame me that a couple of persistent editors keep changing the article to focus on the Spanish Armada myth despite consensus being against this. The article is needlessly confusing and uninformative for this very reason. Dantai Amakiir (talk) 10:13, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This just another example of how biased Wikipedia has become over the years. I myself can attest to the fact that they do indeed "exist". One particular family we grew up around referred to themselves as "Black-Irish". They were very active in the Roman-Catholic church (at a mostly Spanish-speaking parish I might add) which also served as a Boy Scout troop hall. Moreover, their features were indeed rather "Mediterranean" and their ways somewhat different from what I would call "traditional Irish". Of course these are all just anecdotal observations of my own, but surely the editors of this article would be aware of such things as to address them properly? Instead we get gas-lit by those who seem to be more committed to "woke" identity politics than reality. Earl of Arundel (talk) 03:39, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's a "woke identity politics" thing. I think the main problem is that exactly the same words are used to identify a different group of people in Ireland. They might equally say "I myself can attest to the fact that people of African descent are Irish citizens. My own family calls themselves 'Black Irish', and my grandparents immigrated from West Africa more than half a century ago. I've never heard anyone in Ireland call a white person 'Black Irish', and surely the editors of this article would be aware of such things. Instead we get gas-lit by people who have never even visited Ireland and who seem to be more committed to a stereotypical Irish American personal identity than to reality..." WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are you even taking about? AFAICT black people in Ireland simply call themselves "Irish", whereas the term "Black Irish" has been used for many centuries now to refer to something completely different. Again, this entire project is rife with identity politics. That much is clear. (Redacted) But of course woke rags such as this one continue to offer up such nonsense because they obviously have an agenda to do so. Wikipedia's status as a go-to for accurate information has long since been lost. Is it any wonder? Earl of Arundel (talk) 20:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the official Irish census by the Central Statistics Office, one finds tables saying things like:
Ethnicity    Both sexes    Male    Female
White Irish    3,893,056    1,921,947    1,971,109
White Irish Traveller    32,949    16,172    16,777
White Roma    16,059    8,548    7,511
Any other White background    502,081    245,378    256,703
Black or Black Irish - African    67,546    32,811    34,735
Black or Black Irish - any other Black background    8,699    4,382    4,317
So if "black people in Ireland simply call themselves "Irish"", then who are the 76,245 Irish people who called themselves "Black Irish" in the last census? WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:51, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you may need to go outside and touch some grass, Earl. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:58, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good question. Maybe you should ask that of the next "White Irish Traveller" that you meet? Barring that, I assume that "Any other White background"-er would be able to clear that up for you. Earl of Arundel (talk) 05:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We have an article on Irish Travellers that might interest you. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:53, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dantai Amakiir, would you mind looking through the article history to find the most important (sourced) contribution you've made that's been removed, and post it in a new section so we can talk about it? I find that talking about one single bit in isolation is best. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again I keep seeing articles about “race” which assume the term has any validity

[edit]

The problem here and elsewhere on Wikipedia is that the article says a lot about race, but without mentioning the fact that race is a social construct and that it has no scientific validity:

To quote the article on race: “Modern science regards race as a social construct, an identity which is assigned based on rules made by society. While partly based on physical similarities within groups, race does not have an inherent physical or biological meaning. The concept of race is foundational to racism, the belief that humans can be divided based on the superiority of one race over another.

The quote includes the sources (from the article on race) so I haven’t included any further sources.

If you want to use terms such as “white” and “black” to refer to people you are talking about race. There is no scientific validity to the concept of race. There are plenty of examples of people who have completely different backgrounds and languages who look like they could be from the same family let alone the same ethnicity! Kanchan M Mahon (talk) 00:24, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kanchan M Mahon, if you want to talk about Race (human categorization), please do so at Talk:Race (human categorization). If you want to mention it here, then just add a simple link. Don't copy/paste the whole thing here.
I think you need to read a bit more about this idea that "There is no scientific validity to the concept of race". It is true that there is no consistent genetic basis for declaring people to belong to different racial groups. However, there are multiple valid social science concepts of race. Social constructs and identity are real things. Race is just as real as other social constructs, like blondes, short people, gamers, stoners, and married people are. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This term is indeed used in Ireland

[edit]

The introductory section states this is not the case and references the Irish central statistics office website. However, there is a great difference between the phrase being used in an official capacity (which is not the case anywhere, including in the US) and it being used in common parlance. Anecdotally, I am Irish and this phrase is used to refer to people with swarthy skin and dark hair and no African descent. Off the top of my head, I saw the phrase being used in a similar way in the 2020 Scottish Novel "Shuggie Bain", showing that it is present in Great Britain also. HyadesHoliday (talk) 15:11, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry? The lead states In 21st-century Ireland Black Irish is used primarily to refer to Irish nationals of African descent, and the alternative meaning is not commonly used. That is correct. It isn't commonly used. That does not mean it's never used in Ireland, and the article doesn't claim that. I've heard it used, too - but not in a good few years. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 16:20, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bastun Actually the lead states "This meaning is not used in Ireland", which means that it is not used in Ireland, i.e. the term does not exist in Ireland at all. It is used in Ireland, albeit uncommonly amongst younger generations and in cities with African-Irish citizens. HyadesHoliday (talk) 12:04, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I always find it amusing and kind of pathetic when people response to comments online with "sorry?" or the like, which can only ever betray a sort of smug pedantry utterly incompatible with polite and intelligent discussion, or a sort of overwhelming scandalised shock at a fairly mild claim which surely should disqualify the user from any sort of internet access for the benefit of their own health. HyadesHoliday (talk) 12:11, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then I guess I better not ask if you're triggered, or a snowflake? There are two contradictory sentences in the lede. Both referring to the "swarthy skin" meaning, one of these says "not used in Ireland"; the other "not commonly used." Clearly the first needs to be amended. Whatever about your anecdotes or assertions, as you can read in prior talk page sections, "Black Irish" meaning "Irish of African descent" is indeed used in an official capacity in Ireland. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 14:30, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bastun I don't know you'd bring up being "triggered" or "snowflakes". You can keep your culture war away from me, thank you. Anyway, I'm glad that you do agree that it is used, however uncommonly.
Also, if you had actually looked at my revision, you see that I never removed anything regarding the official capacity of the term - in fact, I emphasised it. You're attributing opinions to me that you've just completely made up. HyadesHoliday (talk) 08:51, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Likewise? there is a great difference between the phrase being used in an official capacity (which is not the case anywhere, including in the US) is literally what you wrote. Anyway - article has been amended; I think we're done? BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 09:33, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bastun "there is a great difference between the phrase {i.e. Black Irish meaning African Irish} being used in an official capacity and it being common parlance" - my point being that the citation showing usage of the term in census data to mean African Irish doesn't mean that's the most common meaning within normal speech. And conversely, just because the 'folk' meaning it isn't used in census data doesn't mean it *isn't* common parlance.
As someone pointed out in another thread, one cannot say that "White - other" is a common Irish identity just because it is present in census data. And nor would one claim that "Ulster Unionist" isn't an extant denonym just because it isn't in Northern data either. HyadesHoliday (talk) 11:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]