By Stacey Patton

The use of an old name on the 2010 Census form, scheduled for mailing in March, has sparked some controversy over the past few days. As the U.S. Census Bureau begins the herculean task of counting more than 300 million Americans, it says it wants to heighten awareness and be more inclusive.

But some blacks have complained that one of the form’s questions is outdated, offensive, and a throwback to the Jim Crow era.

Question No. 9 on the form asks: “What is Person 1’s race?”

The first selection, no surprise, is White. The second box includes choices in the following order – Black, African-Am., or Negro.

Some younger blacks, particularly those under age 40 interviewed by various media outlets, say that the use of “Negro” has no place in today’s social lexicon and it sets the race back in time.

“Why not put colored in there?” asked one blogger on the Grio site.

“I don’t think my ancestors would appreciate it in 2010,” one opponent told the New York Daily News. “I don’t want my grandchildren being called Negroes.”

The Census Bureau found some older blacks still identifying as Negro. The Bureau said: “Results from the Census in 2000 showed that a number of respondents provided a write-in response of “Negro” when answering the question of race.”

And surprisingly, a few respondents wrote, “Colored.”

The use of “Negro” was intended as a term of inclusion, said Jack Martin, another Census Bureau spokesperson.

“I compliment the Census Bureau for giving us so much space to identify ourselves,” said NYU professor and Pulitzer Prize-winning historian David Levering-Lewis. The famous DuBois biographer told TheDefendersOnline in a phone interview that he was not offended by the use of the term.

“Historically we proudly called ourselves Negroes,” said Lewis. “It is a legitimate anthropological term. It has utility and historical validity, which validates its justification for being used. We have to get beyond the Velcro aspect of race.”

In 1890, the Census used racial categories including white, mulatto, quadroon and octoroon. The use and disappearance of such terms reflects the historical trajectory of racial categorization and shifting social relationships in this country.

As an Eighties kid, “Colored” and “Negro” are jarring terms to many of my peers. We’ve only used “Black” or “African-American” to describe ourselves. Many of my West Indian friends say they that the Census choices exclude them, as they don’t want to identify as Black, African-American or Negro. They usually check the “Other” box for personal or political reasons. Now that’s a discussion for another blog post.

As a student of history, I don’t find the term “Negro” offensive or demeaning. Many of our oldest organizations and cultural institutions include the term—The United Negro College Fund, The National Council of Negro Women, The Negro Ensemble Company, The Negro Baseball League and so on.

I’m a bit baffled by the hullabaloo. We used to be Negroes. What’s wrong with that? My mother, who was born in Yonkers, New York in 1957, was identified as “Negro” on her birth certificate. So too were her sisters who were born in Montclair, a historically integrated suburb of northern New Jersey.

“Negro” is part of our collective and familial history and it has never had the vile implications of that ugly n-word that far too many people of the younger generations embrace and even defend as a term of endearment.

I hope the 2020 Census form won’t look like this – Black, African Am., Negro, or N—a.

One also has to wonder that as we keep splitting and atomizing ourselves with different names, will we be able to recognize who we are? I guess this is part of the legacy of a nation founded on racial categories and discriminatory practices.

Stacey Patton is Senior Editor and Writer for TheDefendersOnline.