|
Post by Limesucker on Mar 13, 2004 9:14:10 GMT -5
I don't believe that Meds are big on racemixing. [...] the mestizos are very fertile and rapidly replicated themselves to be the major type in many Central/South American countries and Mexico. So the initial race mixing was not large scale Yes, I'm sure that is very true. In fact, I think there was only one "Med" in the history of Latin America who ever indulged in the unwholesome practice of miscegenation. Even that one episode wasn't really "race mixing" as we know it -- what actually happened is that one unlucky Med male was shot through the scrotum with an arrow, which continued to fly until it pierced the womb of a native Brazilian woman, thereby fertilizing her egg. That woman eventually bore twins -- one male and one female -- who married each other and begat 70 children of their own. The 70 children intermarried with each other and produced more children, and the process continued until most of the continent was full of mixed-race inhabitants. And that, my friends, is the official MEDONA position on how there came to be a couple hundred million mestizos and mulattos in Latin America, without anyone actually mixing race in the traditional sense. I think something similar must have happened in places like Arabia, Yemen, and the North African countries.
|
|
|
Post by Melnorme on Mar 13, 2004 9:34:03 GMT -5
And that, my friends, is the official MEDONA position on how there came to be a couple hundred million mestizos and mulattos in Latin America, without anyone actually mixing race in the traditional sense. I think something similar must have happened in places like Arabia, Yemen, and the North African countries. LOL. I'm trying to make sure this place never turns into MEDONA, believe me.
|
|
|
Post by nordicyouth on Mar 20, 2004 16:26:14 GMT -5
I think it is WHITE MALES that are the biggest race-mixers. They race-mixed in South America, Africa, North America, and wherever they went, causing the creation of mixed groups e.g. mulattos, mestizos. I think this is a little more important than a few successful Blacks (programmed that the fairest White women are their ideal), marrying a White woman because they are ashamed to some degree of their heritage - and yes, Black males are incredibly successful, so we're all doomed Contrary to popular opinion, I read a recent newspaper article about this in my city and for North America, black/white couples are few and far between, and there is a negligible difference between BM/WW and WM/BW. The highest amt. of racemixing is WM/AW. This single group is larger than all of the other mixings combined. And since Asians (East Asians) are on par with Whites in terms of success, the barrier of poverty is not involved. *As far as Europe is concerned, many North Africans are Muslims, or at least patriarchal - that's right folks, the whiter a woman is, the more she wants to screw/marry/breed with a man who on average is among the poorest in her society, who is chauvinist, and who will give her kids that don't resemble her at all. I think when one deals with race-mixing, one has to look at it objectively, instead of from a male/female point of view, because then it is the Black men who are doing all this, or one's fellow White women! And the next thing is to not look at it from a Med or Nordic perspective because then the other is seen as more worse than in reality.
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Mar 20, 2004 16:51:53 GMT -5
I think it is WHITE MALES that are the biggest race-mixers. They race-mixed in South America, Africa, North America, and wherever they went, causing the creation of mixed groups e.g. mulattos, mestizos. Yeah, but they didn't race-mix with thin air, they copulated with females of these races. This brings us to another point in the tale of racemixing, and that's: provided with superiority, any group will racemix with the females of the subdued.
|
|
|
Post by nordicyouth on Mar 20, 2004 20:02:30 GMT -5
True, but I don't see how that affects things today. The majority of interracial couples are White Male/Asian Female, and I know many of these White males and they do not think of the Asians as a 'conquered' people or anything of the sort.
Neither is the White male subdued by the Black. The American Black men who achieve success want to be with a White woman to demonstrate their ascendancy; however, they don't eagerly relish the idea of a mulatto that will fit into neither community.
Many American Blacks are supporting segregation to protect their own identity, and Black women are the most fervent about our women 'taking' their men.
European Blacks have ties to Africa, and while a White girlfriend is a trophy prize perhaps, they generally either marry an African or adopt an African child (the few successful ones exempted).
The greatest mixing is White and East Asian, and both societies highly value their ethnic groups and are proud of their histories; both generally look down on Blacks.
|
|
|
Post by AWAR on Mar 20, 2004 20:48:22 GMT -5
True, but I don't see how that affects things today. The majority of interracial couples are White Male/Asian Female, and I know many of these White males and they do not think of the Asians as a 'conquered' people or anything of the sort. Neither is the White male subdued by the Black. The American Black men who achieve success want to be with a White woman to demonstrate their ascendancy; however, they don't eagerly relish the idea of a mulatto that will fit into neither community. Many American Blacks are supporting segregation to protect their own identity, and Black women are the most fervent about our women 'taking' their men. European Blacks have ties to Africa, and while a White girlfriend is a trophy prize perhaps, they generally either marry an African or adopt an African child (the few successful ones exempted). The greatest mixing is White and East Asian, and both societies highly value their ethnic groups and are proud of their histories; both generally look down on Blacks. The reasons are a bit different now. The American white male has lost his heritage, his supremacy regarding other races, women etc. Of course, I'm not talking about those American citizens who still have a live ethnic heritage, but mostly of those who have become the victims of the melting pot, who have become just 'white americans' with nothing deeper than that. Only the mentally strongest have survived becoming assimilated, so they re-invented their identity for the future. The vast majority hasn't been very successful at that, so they've become victims to consumerist/multi-culti ideology, while others have become victims of 'white nationalism', racism and other extremes which lead nowhere. So, this de-masculinized white guy is no match to a black guy who retained/invented his machism. The white women adjust to any new fad, and forget it in a matter of months, while men can't. So, the women already got fed-up with white guys who are in touch with their feminine side women will always want men, the ones that are rated as 'real men' will always eventually get the girl. Asian women have different things in mind when they're looking for men. They don't idolize gangstas, they want more safety, stability, white men can provide this, plus white men probably have a best-of-both-worlds image among asian women. White men see asian women as more 'female' than what the average white woman has become. Black females aren't especially well liked by whites or asians, because of their more masculine features. The race-mixing is only a result of the cultural stereotypes that go on in America ( and other highly developed economies ).
|
|
|
Post by supergirl on Mar 27, 2004 16:11:30 GMT -5
maybe now more then ever I do unerstand why love wasnt enogh for my parents to stay together (my father is an arab and my mom is slavic) I juts feel sorry and understand them more now...good for me I dont give a shit about what people say and think ( in most cases) WHEN IT COMES TO COLUR OF THE SKIN IM BLIND COLOURED !!!!AND HAPPY ...humman is humman after all..no mater what enyone says ..
|
|
|
Post by buddyrydell on Apr 14, 2004 23:38:37 GMT -5
I just stumbled upon this forum and I must ask why people are being so disrespectful of other groups. This isn't Skadi or some other racist forum in which you can rant and rave and hack on other people. Interracial marriage is really no big deal to me and I personally have nothing against it, even though I'll admit that it's not really my thing as I revealed in the thread I created. But I will say this to all of you Nordicists out there, almost all of the whites I've seen here in the U.S. engaging in interracial dating have been decidedly northern European-looking and definitely not Mediterranean. In fact, coming from an Italian-American family myself, I can tell you that interracial relationships aren't really the preferred kind among Italian-Americans and other Mediterranean ethnic groups here in the U.S. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by Weevil on Apr 18, 2004 0:04:55 GMT -5
I just stumbled upon this forum and I must ask why people are being so disrespectful of other groups. This isn't Skadi or some other racist forum in which you can rant and rave and hack on other people. Interracial marriage is really no big deal to me and I personally have nothing against it, even though I'll admit that it's not really my thing as I revealed in the thread I created. But I will say this to all of you Nordicists out there, almost all of the whites I've seen here in the U.S. engaging in interracial dating have been decidedly northern European-looking and definitely not Mediterranean. In fact, coming from an Italian-American family myself, I can tell you that interracial relationships aren't really the preferred kind among Italian-Americans and other Mediterranean ethnic groups here in the U.S. Thanks ALL white groups in the US have members who marry outside of their race, it's a practise that has been going on for centuries and will likely never die out. Please remember that Anglo-Americans outnumber Italian-Americans by like 10-1, that's the only reason you see more Nordics dating non-whites.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Apr 21, 2004 10:26:21 GMT -5
North Americans are obsessed by negroid people. Most American blacks are coloured, part white with some Amerindian. I have read that the average American black is 30% caucasian and about 5% Amerindian. The fact that these blacks still have negroid features is because they choose each other as mates and thus maintain a certain level of negroid inheritance. Black Americans look as out of place in Africa as a german shepherd among wolves. From what I have observed in the USA black/white matings are common probably not as common as asian/white, but common enough. I don't agree with the assessment that the white Americans are overwhelmingly Anglo-Saxon. They are definitely of mixed pan European stock.
|
|
|
Post by berschneider on Apr 21, 2004 11:17:33 GMT -5
North Americans are obsessed by negroid people. Most American blacks are coloured, part white with some Amerindian. I have read that the average American black is 30% caucasian and about 5% Amerindian. The fact that these blacks still have negroid features is because they choose each other as mates and thus maintain a certain level of negroid inheritance. Black Americans look as out of place in Africa as a german shepherd among wolves. From what I have observed in the USA black/white matings are common probably not as common as asian/white, but common enough. I don't agree with the assessment that the white Americans are overwhelmingly Anglo-Saxon. They are definitely of mixed pan European stock. White Americans are not Anglo-Saxon, for the most part they are scum. Here is an interesting UPI piece on the blackness of the blacks and whiteness of the whites in the U.S. of A. 30% (!) of American "whites" have African ancestry 10% of American "blacks" are over 50% white. www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=15042002-084051-5356r
|
|
|
Post by executiona9 on Apr 21, 2004 15:17:15 GMT -5
Stop trolling. Ive read the article you posted and it sais :
``It appears that 70 percent of whites have no African ancestors. Among the 30 percent who do, the black admixture is around 2.3 percent, which would be like having about three black ancestors out of those 128.``
So 70 % of white-americans have no black blood, and the 30 % that do have black blood its only 2.3 % on average. Thats almost nothing. Such small amounts are not even worth mentioning.
Recent dna studies found that the average Portuguese person has 2,5 % black blood and the average British person has 1,8 % black blood. All Europeans have some small amounts of black blood mixed in.
Nobody in the world is 100 % pure white, that does not exist.
|
|
|
Post by berschneider on Apr 21, 2004 15:24:40 GMT -5
Stop trolling. Ive read the article you posted and it sais : ``It appears that 70 percent of whites have no African ancestors. Among the 30 percent who do, the black admixture is around 2.3 percent, which would be like having about three black ancestors out of those 128.`` So 70 % of white-americans have no black blood, and the 30 % that do have black blood its only 2.3 % on average. Thats almost nothing. Such small amounts are not even worth mentioning. Recent dna studies found that the average Portuguese person has 2,5 % black blood and the average British person has 1,8 % black blood. All Europeans have some small amounts of black blood mixed in. Nobody in the world is 100 % pure white, that does not exist. I guess you are right, cheeshead! I just posted an a link without any racist intentions of course. Americans are garbage not because they are pink or yellow or black or white but because they are.
|
|
|
Post by Graeme on Apr 22, 2004 10:12:59 GMT -5
Limesucker seems to not have understood what I wrote. South and Central America contained a large indigenous population when the Europeans got there. Their efforts on the sexual front would have been limited compared with the native's efforts. So any half-breeds would have been absorbed into the unmixed indigenous population. So most mestizos are probably 10-20% caucasian. There are more negroid contribution to the non caucasian population than white contribution. The level of race mixing is overexaggerated. That is not the case in the USA where the caucasian population is the largest and the indigenous very small. The negroid population is about 10% of the population. It would naturally follow that it is more likely that white Americans have mixed more with the Indians and the blacks.
|
|
|
Post by buddyrydell on Apr 23, 2004 1:28:44 GMT -5
I agree with Geirr. Give us Americans a break huh? Let it rest and save your breath, I don't go around badmouthing your people berschneider, so I expect the same courtesy of you. As for most white Americans being of Anglo-Saxon origin, well this isn't entirely accurate but I'd say most white Americans are of Germanic or Celtic origin. I know it sounds broad and vague, but what I mean is that the greatest number of white Americans are of northwestern European origin (Britain/Ireland, Germany, Low Countries, etc.). Of course most of these nationalities have intermarried with one another, along with later arrivals from southern and eastern Europe added to the mix. But it's largely a mix of various northwestern European ethnicities. In other words, a greater number of white Americans are mix of say, Irish and German, than say, German or Irish mixed with Italian or Greek. But nevertheless, ALL European ethnic groups have intermarried at very high rates in America. Even Jewish-Americans, who tend to be a bit more traditional, have intermarriage rates as high as 50%. Hope this helped set the facts straight
|
|