A west African on west African phenotype

[topdog]

anunnaki said:

Only because how they treated black South Africans or also because they are white?

Which leads me to another question, do you guys consider white South Africans to be Africans or do you view them as Europeans who are in a place where they don't belong? I'm thinking a bit about how long a people have to live in one particular spot on the planet to be considered "natives" of that spot. Must the group have evolved on said spot? Can Aussies (who are not Australian Aboriginals) truly call themselves Australians or are they just a bunch of Euros? Same with every other colonized piece of land on the planet.

What do you people think? When, if ever, do we quit saying "white South African" and "black South African" and simply call them South Africans?

White South Africans are interlopers, not Africans. I don't consider former colonists of an oppressive regime to be Africans, especially when their justication of having a 'homeland' in south Africa was based upon a lie that stated no 'Bantus' were there, therefore the land belongs to them. The white population are in the postion they are in after years of enriching themselves of Africa's natural resources and systematically depressing the native black population

[amksa]

Charlie said:

I'm sorry, but white South Africans have no right to call themselves African-anything after the way how black South Africans were treated all those years. Thats just my personal feeling. African American is more appropiate because eventhough we are not 100% culturally 'African' we still have retained some elements of African culture, I made a thread on African coooking on RAS relating to this. People are off their rocker if they believe African-Americans are totally devoid of any African-ness, its just a matter of doing some reading and research to find out the truth. We have our own culture which has incorporated those lingering African elements along with some European and Native American , but its our own way of doing it that makes us special.



Man, thats just arguing over semantics, I would say it includes both 1 and 2 and not just one or the other. Say what you want, I still don't consider recent remnants of colonists as 'African', they're to me still a bunch of Euros and Arabs inhabiting African land, but in the broadest sense they are Africans.



Negro is the worst term to ever call a black person, but you're question the validity of the term 'African-American'?

if we play to semantics game like you brilliantly said, Charles, we should only call african the few Tunisians who are of attested Romans descent, if we still can isolate such population among present-day population, because as far as i know and understand it, Africans were formerly the Romans who settled in north African cities, the "Afariq" like Arabs called them when they entered : For me, from the beginning, the word "African" was a colonial term ! but i can understand that those days African just means black, "not quite white" or "those poor people we had to classify or enslave (but colonies ans slavery are abolished... technically.)"

i reject the label "African" for a general designation, we should say melano-african and leuco-african... and for the numerous north african, who are in fact mixed : the mixito-african.
i think that people feel too involved with Africa : let Africa rename itself !

[topdog]

Wadaad said:

Well Charlie lets be honest here are Afrikaners the worst experience the African continet has seen? We all know that Black on Black crimes have been just as bad if not worse than anything commited by White South Africans. So are you saying that Hutus cannot call themselves Africans becuase of their Tutsi genocide?
All in all, Whites in South Africa have been more good than harm, thats a FACT

More good than harm :rolleyes: their 'Hamitic Hypothesis nonsense is why Tutsis and Hutus are fighting in the first place. The modern borders created by the former colonial powers are the reason why there is so much inter-ethnic fighting today. There's no way more good than harm was when we look at the overall picture. It isn't a matter of black on black.

[Agrippa]

Mike said:

I've never heard of African Americans being descended of Sahelids like the Wolof and Fulani. Agrippa said Sudanid and Paleonegrid types are the most represented in African Americans. Unless he lied to me.

AGRRRRRRRIPPPPPPPPPPPAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!

There are enough books written about where the Afro-American slaves came from, they didnt came out of the Sahara YOU KNOW.
If they catched one his brother sold or something like that, ok, can happen, even white skinned people were sold as slaves, namely Guanches and some Muslims they catched in the early slave trade.

But the mass of slaves came from West African regions which are still pred. Sudanid/North Palaenegrid, everything else is just the exception from the rule and is not of statistical importance.
You should never forget that many Africans, especially Muslim ones, made tours to catch slaves, mainly of "wild tribes" and enemies to make money and getting goods (like guns).

[magneto]

This is a good thread but I disagree with alot of it.Im not saying that African woman is wrong but this is my take.That RAS website has alot of Black Africans so I'll use some of those pictures.

1.AA's are a combination of diferent WA's in that includes people from Nigeria,Ghana,Sierra Leone,Senegal,Mali, and Liberia.This guy Ponto keeps denying it but it's documented.

2.AA's can look like any WA group IMO.The real reason AA's don't look like Nigerians is because of all the WA's it's the Nigerian with the most distinct ethnic traits but guess what happens when you mix all types of different WA's together?You dilute strong ethnic traits!!I believe this is similar to how white americans are mixed of Irish,German and other whites so they tend to not look like those ethnic groups in their pure form.

Stereotypical Nigerian


but they don't all have that look,I believe it's the Yoruba that looks like that.Im going to post a picture of an AA male and a Nigerian woman and another Nigerian woman and yall tell if you think they can pass for AA's or if the AA could pass for Nigerian.




Moving on to GHana..

Ghanian people look different from NIgerians in that they don't have as strong ethnic features.These are Ghanians



Haha @ the guy said your average Senegalese are mixed.Senegalese people don't have those strong ethnic features either but they have a recognizable look IMO.here are some Senegalese..




Finally I've noticed alot of Malians appear AA(Infact a girl on here named "Freehuey" had yall fooled into thinking she was malian but she was AA) so here are some Malians..




^^the lighter dude is African American the other is Malian

Basically IMO by the Nigerians(mostly Yoruba) having these distinct ethnic features around the eyes and nose area makes it hard for AA's to like them because AA's are a combination of different WAs and the features became diluted.The rest of the WA's(Ghanians,Malians,Senegalese,Liberians etc..) can easily look AA because they dont have those strong features

[magneto]

holyjesus said:

That is unsupportablem and your opinion. American blacks look like no African negrids. Wolofs and Hausa! The chosen African negrids that American blacks want in their family tree - the equivalent of the Nordid for caucasoids. Nilo-Saharans of the Sahel region! Man what are you on? You are just doing the typical BS that some American blacks do. Hand picking people who you think look like American blacks because their noses are higher bridged, they have narrow faces or in the case of the Fulani because they are more caucasoid looking and lighter skinned. There are no Nilo-Saharans from the Sahel in the genetic background of American blacks. There are no Ethiopians or Somalis in the genetic background of American blacks. Senegalese negrids are partly mixed with caucasoids from Mauretania and Morocco. They are not pure African negrids and their caucasoid mixture is derived from African sources whereas with American blacks it is derived from caucasoids of NW European origins. Face up to it. You are not African. You are American. You have ties to Europe, Africa and the American civilisations through your mixed racial heritage. Forget the Hausa, Wolof, Fulani, Amhara, Somali, Badarians, Egyptians and move on.

LOL..Is it just me or is this guy always jumping to conclusions?

First of all who said anything about the slaves being Ethios,Somalis etc..?Also you should stop trying to whitewash the Senegalse and Fulani people.I told you before that I didn't know the numbers but it's a fact that there were Wolof slaves in America and also Fulani.

[Agrippa]

topdog said:

Wadaad said:

Well Charlie lets be honest here are Afrikaners the worst experience the African continet has seen? We all know that Black on Black crimes have been just as bad if not worse than anything commited by White South Africans. So are you saying that Hutus cannot call themselves Africans becuase of their Tutsi genocide?
All in all, Whites in South Africa have been more good than harm, thats a FACT

More good than harm :rolleyes: their 'Hamitic Hypothesis nonsense is why Tutsis and Hutus are fighting in the first place. The modern borders created by the former colonial powers are the reason why there is so much inter-ethnic fighting today. There's no way more good than harm was when we look at the overall picture. It isn't a matter of black on black.

The border in Rwanda is similar to those of the Hima area, so its rather the exception from the rule, but I agree that Europeans, mainly Belgians and Christian organisations are responsible for forming an aggressive and easier to manipulate Hutu "elite".

Anyway, wars are nothing exceptional, there were some before the Europeans and there will be one if all Europeans would disappear. Now there are just the media reports and journalists and politicians all around and can look at it and bring it to a wider public. Furthermore its the scale and the weapons they use. Why do you think were there so many slaves? Because Africans wanted power, goods and weapons and attacked other tribes and areas for getting a "ressource" they could sell, African slaves...
Nothing exceptional, similar things happened at some time almost everywhere on this planet, but to blame the white man for everything is just stupidity. Its like blaming Jews FOR EVERYTHING which went wrong in Europe after WW2...

Furthermore Bantus had no more rights for South Africa than Europeans, since they were colonists either. If you wanna be "fair" give the land back to the Khoisans who are left...

[magneto]

hey,does anyone no what happened to the first post(thread starter)by Human2 with the link to the Nigerian poster on another board? ???I don't see it anymore.

[Agrippa]

Its quite probable that he deleted it because he posted it for his agenda to deconstruct classification systems.

[magneto]

agrippa said:

Its quite probable that he deleted it because he posted it for his agenda to deconstruct classification systems.

OK.thanks for letting me know

holyjesus said:

That is unsupportablem and your opinion. American blacks look like no African negrids. Wolofs and Hausa!

blacks because their noses are higher bridged, they have narrow faces or in the case of the Fulani because they are more caucasoid looking and lighter skinned.

There are no Nilo-Saharans from the Sahel in the genetic background of American blacks.Senegalese negrids are partly mixed with caucasoids from Mauretania and Morocco. They are not pure African negrids and their caucasoid mixture is derived from African sources whereas

Ponto do you actually even know what these people look like or do you only draw conclusions from those old colonial type pictures where the photographers had an agenda and would try to depict the different peoples in certain ways?? I think you should stop with this sick whitewashing.Im going to post some Fulanis and Wolof from Senegal.

Fulani/Peul





Wolof




Now Im going to post some Hausas.

Hausa




As you know the Fulani people live all over West Africa but themost famous type is the Woodabe.Im going post some without alot of makeup so you can seem them better before Ponto starts claiming they aren't "real" blacks.

[shango]

I have more genetic info on Africans and African-Americans than anybody. First of all, a study done in South Carolina of African American men's Y chromosomes found that 77% of the men who had a West African Y were descendants of one man who was as Mende/Mandingo from the western tip of Africa.

Many have take DNA tests and we are finding that 60% of African Americans are from West Africa (Wolof, Manding, Temne,Fula, Yoruba), 30% are from West Central Africa (Fulbe, Kanuri, Tuareg, etc) , 10% is Southern African (Kwazulu, Xhosa, Pygmy).

The Brazilians are more West Central and Southern African. Jamaicans are like Americans except they have less West Central African.

We know from linguistics that this is true. Also, the analysis of the types of music African Americans created harkens back to these areas.

[shango]

African words in English language
www.slaveryinamerica.org/history/hs_es_languages.htm


Similarity of Blues with West African music
www.csmonitor.com/2004/0312/p13s02-almp.htm

[magneto]

From what I've read Jamaicans mostly come from Ghanians but then they started importing other slave types.They even have the story about one of their fiercest Maroon leaders that was Asante...

www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43/130.html

More than 1 million slaves are estimated to have been transported directly from Africa to Jamaica during the period of slavery; of these, 200,000 were reexported to other places in the Americas. During the 17th and 18th centuries, the Akan, Ga, and Adangbe from the northwestern coastal region known as the Gold Coast (around modern Ghana) dominated the slave trade to the island. Not until 1776 did slaves imported from other parts of Africa-Igbos from the Bight of Biafra (southern modern Nigeria) and Kongos from Central Africa-outnumber slaves from the Gold Coast. But slaves from these regions represented 46 percent of the total number of slaves. The demand for slaves required about 10,000 to be imported annually. Thus slaves born in Africa far outnumbered those who were born in Jamaica; on average they constituted more than 80 percent of the slave population until Britain abolished the slave trade in 1807. When Britain abolished the institution of slavery in 1834, Jamaica had a population of more than 311,000 slaves and only about 16,700 whites.


Maroon leader "Nanny"

www.edunetconnect.com/cat/soccult/grnan.html

[shango]

If you ever listen to Regggae music, you'll know that the Jamaicns are mostly Ashanti because they say so. in their speech they say things like "I cyan't do this or that".


The African Americans are mostly Mandingoes, Wolof, Fulani, and some Bantu. All together many tribes are in the African American stock.

pages.prodigy.net/jkess3/AMISTAD.htm

[Igu]

shango said:

African words in English language
www.slaveryinamerica.org/history/hs_es_languages.htm


Similarity of Blues with West African music
www.csmonitor.com/2004/0312/p13s02-almp.htm

There is no similarity between Blues and west African music, Blues is just an offshoot of western music.

I had some courses of music (History+genres+solfege), and play some guitar, I can assure you that Blues has nothing to do with West Africa.

Because you AA are so sensitive, and because there many communists on this board, I have to give an example on Berber music, to prove that I am not Racist:

Berber music has its own specificity but it is an offshout of oriental music.