The black/mixed race writer Matthew Ryder writes:
"The term "black" has always included mixed-race and lighter skinned people of African heritage.
Some argue that a less racist society would have recognised black and mixed race as different. But that well-meaning approach is both inaccurate and reactionary. It was the most racist societies that highlighted such distinctions and, to our credit, we moved on. The American South proudly divided slaves into "negroes", "mulattos", "quadroons" and "octoroons". Apartheid South Africa, also differentiated between "black" and "coloured".
In deliberate contrast, "black" did not make distinctions based on racial purity. First, it was unifying. African-Americans, like Caribbeans, are a physically diverse, but culturally connected people. Second, it was liberating. The phenomenon of everyone from "negroes" to "quadroons" choosing to redefine themselves as "black", regardless of skin tone or hair texture, consciously subverted a discredited history of oppression. The closeness to white ancestry was no longer the defining source of our identity.
Once the genesis of the term is understood, the fallacy that "mixed race" can or should be separated from "black" is exposed. By definition, "black" includes mixed-race; to assert otherwise would mean changing what "black" means. And, if so, are we supposed to invent a new term for a group of "black" people who are racially "pure"?
If we embrace our own multiple identities and enjoy who we are, instead of arguing over what we are not, we can face the future with more confidence. That is why I, and many others like me, remain unapologetically and happily African, Caribbean, British, European, mixed-race and, of course, black."