Halle Berry won the Oscar for Best Actress, Denzel Washington won Best Actor and Sidney Poitier received a lifetime achievement award. Then, of course, all is well with race relations in the film industry – or so some would like to think. Monday's Washington Post boasted about the "golden night for black actors," and many people are talking about the Oscar year that made history by breaking down the race barrier. However, the way some quickly have jumped on the "black actor wave," is actually a perpetuation of that barrier.

There is no doubt that the success of this trio of film stars does represent a unique moment in Oscar history, but more than another moment to tack onto the month of February for a black history fact. The 2002 Oscars, the "golden night for black actors," show that Berry, Washington, and Poitier – all of whom have completely different ethnic backgrounds – are still scene as just black actors (emphasis on "black") in the eyes of too many.

The three actors represent various branches on this racial tree that has taken root through history: Berry is actually biracial, Washington is an African-American, and Poitier, a Caribbean-American whose parents are from the Bahamas.

Granted, Berry, who was raised by her mother, has primarily identified herself as African-American or black rather than biracial. Berry's self-identification as an African-American is not surprising considering she grew up in an era when mixed identity meant the "other" box on the census and the standardized test form. This would make one want to choose something. Even in her acceptance speech, Berry paid homage to former African-American actresses who came before her. Yet this notion that the former African-American actresses like Dorothy Dandridge and Lena Horne have paved the way, acknowledges the idea that there is a separate path for black actors in the film industry.

On the contrary, there is no separate path. So-called "black actors" win awards for great performances just as so-called "white actors" do. Unfortunately, there are few highlights in the Academy's history that demonstrate this fact, but it is getting better. This is not to minimize the historical significance of this year's Oscar's, but it is to refute the fixed ideas that many of us have about the differences between whites and blacks in all fields.

Ideally, Berry should never have had to choose between identifying herself as "white" or "black." She should be able to be an actress, a talented Oscar recipient who won – not for the "black race," but for her individual talent. There should not have been 74 years of history that she must represent when she stood at the podium to accept her award.

I'd like to see people recognize the varying ethnicity among blacks and whites while recognizing the beauty in those differences rather than broadly grouping people in the vague categories of "white" and "black," which leave many people out and perpetuate the historical racial divisions.

The Academy has honored Berry, Washington and Poitier with awards that hold great value in the performing arts. These awards honor their talent to interpret the words of a script and give life to those words through the portrayal of a new person. The way characters, especially minority characters, are represented on the big screen, makes an impact on how people see these groups on a smaller scale. Berry has spoken out against the limited roles for women of color. Now that she is "legitimately" one of the best actresses in Hollywood, I wonder if this will change. After playing a widow, a crack addict, and several other demeaning and pathetic characters, (which I realize she did decide to portray) maybe Berry will get more offers for the roles that, say, Julia Roberts, gets? After all, Roberts won Best Actress last year for playing the girl-next-door role that makes her so agreeable to the American audience. If Julia can just be Julia, cannot Halle just be Halle?

• Breaking barriers