posted
I'm curious to know the answer to this question since we use it to seperate a part of Africa.
Sundjata Member # 13096
posted
^I doubt most even use the term "African" to begin with.. Good question though.
The Explorer Member # 14778
posted
Only Africans exposed to "western" curricular material, mass media, or else living overseas parrot the term "sub-Saharan". Otherwise, it has had no meaning historically or now to the rest of Africans. "Africa" on the other hand, is a more widespread and more well-known term to many Africans, cosmopolitan or otherwise.
Narmer Menes Member # 16122
posted
Cosign, since africans never saw defined their existence in relation to a dry desert region, and even if they did, they would not classify themselves as being 'below' it, but above it in consistence with the African worldview.
But, as Explorer, expressed, in the major cities and 'developing' regions where its fashionable to parrot western academicians and media, they quite willfully adopted the term, unaware of its implications.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Only Africans exposed to "western" curricular material, mass media, or else living overseas parrot the term "sub-Saharan". Otherwise, it has had no meaning historically or now to the rest of Africans. "Africa" on the other hand, is a more widespread and more well-known term to many Africans, cosmopolitan or otherwise.
Mike111 Member # 9361
posted
The Sahara seems an excellent point of demarcation in modern times. What is wrong with the term "sub-Saharan"??
argyle104 Member # 14634
posted
Mike111 isn't it about time that you got out of the house and stopped playing with your dick?
Mike111 Member # 9361
posted
argyle104 - Isn't it time for you to grow-up and learn to give explanations instead of insults?
The Sahara is an excellent point of demarcation between the Muslim north and the MOSTLY "Other" South. There are likely many other differences. What is your problem with it?
Egmond Codfried Member # 15683
posted
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: The Sahara is an excellent point of demarcation between the Muslim north and the MOSTLY "Other" South. There are likely many other differences. What is your problem with it?
Yes how innocent does it sound. But we should immediately ask for what use. I have found that they divide blacks into 'True Negroes' and 'Caucasian Africans.' The True Negroes are the kind they don't want and god forbid, have them as ancestors. The Caucasian African though, often pitch black, are to them actually Caucasians. They belong to the white master race, and THEY built the pyramids, because the beastly Negroes are not able to find a civilisation or built anything. So there you have it, in the Sahara hangs an invisible barrier which incinerates any True Negro DNA, so North Africa is pure white, pure Caucasian. And all is well with the goddam world.
Africans in Europe almost always answer with 'Africa' and express surprise if you ask for the name of their country, or indicate that you have heard of their country or city or province or nation.
NeferKemet Member # 17109
posted
I do agree with these explanations.
quote:Originally posted by Narmer Menes: Cosign, since africans never saw defined their existence in relation to a dry desert region, and even if they did, they would not classify themselves as being 'below' it, but above it in consistence with the African worldview.
But, as Explorer, expressed, in the major cities and 'developing' regions where its fashionable to parrot western academicians and media, they quite willfully adopted the term, unaware of its implications.
quote:Originally posted by The Explorer: Only Africans exposed to "western" curricular material, mass media, or else living overseas parrot the term "sub-Saharan". Otherwise, it has had no meaning historically or now to the rest of Africans. "Africa" on the other hand, is a more widespread and more well-known term to many Africans, cosmopolitan or otherwise.
posted