No need to be sad, Carol.

It is understandable that talking about these topics related to race 
can be considered tabu.  But we all are mature persons, tolerant of 
each other, and I haven't read any personal insult or something that 
reflects ill will in any message.  

On the contrary, it can be a learning experience to bring historical 
facts into the open so we learn the painful mistakes of our ancestors 
and avoid stumbling with the same blocks in our time.

Well, this is just my opinion.  If Joseph thinks we should not 
mention any of this I will respect his wish.

Victor

--- In ranchos@yahoogroups.com, Carol Lester  wrote:
> I think it is so very sad that people can spend so much 
time "talking" about something they cannot change...and perhaps if we 
would read the Word of God and apply His principle of "seeing each 
other as HE sees us, there would never be an on-going conversation 
such as is taking place with the Ranchos group.   As one very 
wise "human"

Rock on, Carol!!!:) Marge:)





On Jun 23, 2005, at 8:26 PM, Carol Lester wrote:

I think it is so very sad that people can spend so much time "talking" about something they cannot change...and perhaps if we would read the Word of God and apply His principle of "seeing each other as HE sees us, there would never be an on-going conversation such as is taking place with the Ranchos group.   As one very wise "human" was paraphrased once long ago.."me thinks you all protest too much..."   Come on, really, what does it matter anyway?  My final thought...love yourself; because you were created in the IMAGE of a living GOD...and I garantee all of you, He knew exactly what HE was doing when He made us.  He doesn't make junk...we do.  As for the DNA?....HE MADE THAT TOO!!!   



-----Original Message-----

From: Emilia

Sent: Jun 23, 2005 7:48 AM

To: ranchos@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [ranchos] Racial Classifications



I just found an answer as to why, when my husband and I

I think it is so very sad that people can spend so much time "talking" about something they cannot change...and perhaps if we would read the Word of God and apply His principle of "seeing each other as HE sees us, there would never be an on-going conversation such as is taking place with the Ranchos group.   As one very wise "human" was paraphrased once long ago.."me thinks you all protest too much..."   Come on, really, what does it matter anyway?  My final thought...love yourself; because you were created in the IMAGE of a living GOD...and I garantee all of you, He knew exactly what HE was doing when He made us.  He doesn't make junk...we do.  As for the DNA?....HE MADE THAT TOO!!!    

-----Original Message-----
From: Emilia 
Sent: Jun 23, 2005 7:48 AM
To: ranchos@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [ranchos] Racial Classifications

I just found an answer as to why, when my husband and I have roots in 
Mexico going back to the early 1700's, he and I look so different.  
In

Jose Luis,

About "hija natural" or "hijo natural" I've always known that it 
meant a child born out of wedlock not that the child has no father.
I've seen baptisms records of "hijos naturales" where both parents 
are listed.

Identifying the gender that corresponds to a particular name can be 
tricky and there's not a single answer that applies to every case.  
We would have to take a look at the actual manuscript film to 
decide.  A rule of thumb is that the father's name is always listed 
first.

Regarding the use of "Y" versus "I" in names such as Ysabel or 
Ysidro, you have to realize that back in the old days there were no 
standard grammar rules and whatever rules there were I think the 
priests applied them at their own discretion.  The older the 
documents you look at the wider variability you will find in their 
caligraphy/script.

Victor

--- In ranchos@yahoogroups.com, zendean  wrote:
>  
> Fellow searchers;
>   I have encountered some thing strange in my

 
Fellow searchers;
  I have encountered some thing strange in my extraction film. I know that "hija natural" means that the child has no father. But at times there is an man's name written in below the child's name in the bapised child list, but not in body of the narrative where the names of the parents is listed. In your experience, does this mean that the father was named , but does not acknowledge that child ? Additionally, I sometimes find names for the father listed as "Dolores" or "Maria Isvaldo" or "Yldlesterialde Isabel". Is that a name for a man ? I have never met a man named Dolores but at times a woman is named Juan Jesus. Is there a better formula than if the name ends in "o"= boy or "a"=girl ? The child is either "Hija" or Hijo". the times that I have trouble is when the name is not clear and the parish father puts "hn" or "hl", in those cases I can't tell the gender.  
Also, at times the parent is listed as "Jesus Montenegro or Juan Eliso Montenegro". Do you know if

Armando, I had no idea that the peoples of Los Altos were considered 
elitist... you see the first Gutierrez record I've found for my 
Gutierrez family says they are from Los Haciendas de los Altos, 
Jalisco and registered the birth in Atoyac.  Guess they came by the 
attitudes from way back... Many people think of racism as one sided 
but like you, I know first hand that discrimination comes from both 
sides of the street..

Linda

I find it interesting that after 500 years we Mexicans are still 
trying to explain our skin color.
My maternal grandmother was poor as a church mouse but was very 
proud of her white skin and my mothers blond hair and blue eyes, 
they were from Jalisco.  My fathers family was from Zacatecas, 
darker skinned with Mestizo blood lines.  When my father married my 
mother my maternal grandmother was very upset because he was dark 
skinned.  Her first question when babies were born was always "what 
color are they."  It's no wonder with this background as a child 
raised in a color concious California when people told me I 
didn't "look" like a Mexican I was proud, not something I am proud 
of now... As I grew up and learned the history of my genealogy I 
learned to take pride in all that I am and not the color of my skin, 
and now when someone askes me what nationality I am and they say the 
usual "you don't look like a Mexican" I always respond, "What does a 
Mexican look like?"  I also

Don't forget the "tara" in Taraumara (sp?) Indians in Chihuahua.
Memarge:)

Here is another link:

http://www.familysearch.org/Eng/Search/RG/guide/WLSpanis19.asp#racial_te
rminology

So......according to the link above:
Coyote = Spanish (1/2), Indian (3/8), and Negro (1/8)

I doubt the science was ever that accurate.  As someone mentioned 
earlier, I imagine, it had more to do with your complexion and your 
parents complexion.  Besides someone who is a farmer is going to get 
more sun then someone who owns a hacienda.  They might have the same 
amount of Spanish and Indian blood but one is going to be classified as 
Espanol and the other will be classified as Mestizo.  Plus who could 
keep up when someone who was Coyote married someone who was mestizo or 
lobo, etc...

Just my two cents...
Angie