|
Post by asdf on Oct 3, 2005 18:41:03 GMT -5
Yes, to varying degrees. The average is around 20%.
|
|
|
Post by Batrus on Oct 3, 2005 19:04:18 GMT -5
Then the study should use samples from west africans and europeans, as you would expect the samples of the american blacks to have a considerable degree of caucasoid blood.
I don' like the way that genetic studies focus so much on west africans and northern europeans. It seem as genetics is only used as a field to discuss racism.
|
|
|
Post by galton on Oct 4, 2005 9:38:25 GMT -5
According to sampled comparison study of nucleotide polymorphisms, European-americans it would seem, are a genetic subset of their African-american counterparts. What is interesting about the study is that african-americans are primarily of west african descent, not east-african, which is traditionally registered as the hot bed of human genetic diversity. www.chip.org/board/read.cgi?bid=1&aid=43&p=2 ![:o](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/shocked.png) Interesting. Discuss. Ofcourse I expect it will be in the predictable dodona fashion and repsonse, but thats why I like this board. ;D I found this sort of thing interesting. A couple of notions come to mind while reading your post. 1) The definition of white in the USA isn't consistent amongst different circles of our society. Also, the category of the white racial label is arbitrary at times. Meaning that someone with about 1/8 negroid and 7/8 caucasian can claim to be white on census related materials and documents without question. Other nonwhites, whether by choice or not, are declared white by some government entities in some countries. 2) I don't profess to be an expert at genetic studies or something of the kind, but it seems such studies regardless of motivation or intent can be parsed in any manner suitable to a particular point or occasion, such as blurring the lines of established racial lines of categories. Chimps are probably closest related to humans outside the human species currently and nobody would mistake a human for a chimp or vice versa. I would imagine that a truely european descended american wouldn't be mistaken for a negro american, a mulatto american, or even a quadroon american. I realize that someone like Mariah Carey {a supposed quadroon, I believe her to be more octoroon} can be mistaken as just simply european descended by some circles of individuals. I can imagine someone like her simply passing as white in america and I'm sure it has happened in the past in the USA. Wentworth Miller of HUMAN STAIN fame is an octoroon by my estimation. He has very pronounced caucasoid features and very very subtle negroid features if any. Someone like him could pass for white without question. Imagine his results from a genetic studies. If the races of man continue to reside in the same region and society, nature will take its course and more and more mixing will occur. Then years from now, the mariah carey and Wentworth miller types' genetic makeup will further converge with the genetic makeup of the Wesley Snipe types. I think that there are races of man and they are real, but the definitions of white and black keep changing at different times and with different circles of people.
|
|
|
Post by Power Cosmic on Oct 4, 2005 12:44:54 GMT -5
"African-Americans" are mulatos. African-Americans are not mulattoes, thats a gross exaggeration.
|
|
|
Post by galton on Oct 4, 2005 13:02:15 GMT -5
"African-Americans" are mulatos. African-Americans are not mulattoes, thats a gross exaggeration. Would it be more reasonable to say some "african-americans" are mulattoes?
|
|
|
Post by Power Cosmic on Oct 4, 2005 13:17:07 GMT -5
African-Americans are not mulattoes, thats a gross exaggeration. Would it be more reasonable to say some "african-americans" are mulattoes? Avery small number of black Americans are mulattoes by parentage but are socially black.
|
|
|
Post by Mike the Jedi on Oct 4, 2005 13:35:20 GMT -5
What does that mean, exactly? Black is all of a sudden now more of a cultural label than a racial one?
Does that mean that whiteys like me can be socially black, too?
|
|
|
Post by Power Cosmic on Oct 4, 2005 13:43:13 GMT -5
What does that mean, exactly? Black is all of a sudden now more of a cultural label than a racial one? Does that mean that whiteys like me can be socially black, too? No, whitey can never be socially black. Most mulattoes identify as black and are accepted as black. They show visible black mixture also.
|
|
|
Post by Mike the Jedi on Oct 4, 2005 13:46:26 GMT -5
But being half-white, mulattos could also identify as socially white, could they not? But for one reason or another, Halle Berry and Alicia Keys chose to identify as black rather than as white. Why do you think that is? Or even more realistically, why don't they accept a mixed identity (which is the reality)? And Theodore Shaw: what's up with this guy? ![](http://www.naacpldf.org/images/content/tmShaw_color_288.jpg) ![](http://cjonline.com/images/082304/22428_512.jpg) Heck, I'd venture to say this man looks whiter than I do. Yet he heads a key sector of the NAACP. I guess black really is more of a social construct than a racial label.
|
|
|
Post by Batrus on Oct 4, 2005 13:49:29 GMT -5
I think white people usually show less disposition to accept mulattos as equals. Maybe a mullato could consider himself white, but i don't think most utterly white people would consider him so.
It's different with black americans who consider fairer skin a good looking trait. Or so i've heard. I'm not american.
I think they should just consider theselves mulatos.
|
|
|
Post by Mike the Jedi on Oct 4, 2005 13:52:24 GMT -5
I think white people usually show less disposition to accept mulattos as equals. This is what I thought. But why would blacks who look West African not show the same disposition?
|
|
|
Post by Batrus on Oct 4, 2005 13:59:05 GMT -5
I have a theory that most european based societies consider races only in terms of a white non-white division. They take it as a social status or as elite club. Such a division is beyond genetics, so it doesn't really matter if two persons belong to different races, they are equal as long as they are not white. Maybe east asians would be the exception.
I feel i haven't expressed myself well. Sorry, english is not my first language. I'll try to correct it.
|
|
|
Post by Igu on Oct 4, 2005 14:00:04 GMT -5
I think white people usually show less disposition to accept mulattos as equals. This is what I thought. But why would blacks who look West African not show the same disposition? -Blacks want to assimilate more caucasoid features, Whites do not want to acquire negroid features, mulattoes go to the group that will accept them. -Mulattoes often look like native Black Africans, on average they less negroid but people like them are found among native black africans.
|
|
|
Post by Power Cosmic on Oct 4, 2005 14:00:42 GMT -5
I think white people usually show less disposition to accept mulattos as equals. Maybe a mullato could consider himself white, but i don't think most utterly white people would consider him so. It's different with black americans who consider fairer skin a good looking trait. Or so i've heard. I'm not american. I think they should just consider theselves mulatos. We don't consider a fairer skin a good looking trait. Most American blacks are not mulattoes it would be foolish to define ourselves as something we are not.
|
|
|
Post by Batrus on Oct 4, 2005 14:06:17 GMT -5
I think white people usually show less disposition to accept mulattos as equals. Maybe a mullato could consider himself white, but i don't think most utterly white people would consider him so. It's different with black americans who consider fairer skin a good looking trait. Or so i've heard. I'm not american. I think they should just consider theselves mulatos. We don't consider a fairer skin a good looking trait. Most American blacks are not mulattoes it would be foolish to define ourselves as something we are not. I don't mean to be offensive, but that's what i've heard. The archetype of beauty is very nordicist in most countries. I live in argentina and we're mostly spanish and italians (i'm both). Blondism is not very common among us as it's mostly a north europeans trait. Still here we see it as a good looking trait. I don't consider that to acknowledge northern europeans as superior, but that we follow a precept of beauty stablished by those countries and that has expanded towards us.
|
|