U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-24-2014, 05:55 AM
 
334 posts, read 337,692 times
Reputation: 61

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioR View Post
If they are conspicuously mixed then they are not real whites.
There are many conspicuously mixed whites. Whiteness is not about racial purity. White racial purity is a myth.

AD Powell has a good book called "Passing For Who You Really Are" which is a must read. It helps promote and spread information and essays on multiracial WHITENESS, multiracial white(ness) advocacy and challenging the odious ridiculous racist one drop rule myth:

Passing for who You Really are: Essays in Support of Multiracial Whiteness - A. D. Powell - Google Books
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-24-2014, 05:57 AM
 
334 posts, read 337,692 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioR View Post
If they are conspicuously mixed then they are not real whites.
Passing for who You Really are: Essays in Support of Multiracial Whiteness - A. D. Powell - Google Books
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2014, 06:01 AM
 
334 posts, read 337,692 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioR View Post
If they are conspicuously mixed then they are not real whites.
Again, varies by region, time period, etc. For example, only 100 years ago, in Ohio, Obama would have been seen as WHITE man. They even put it in their code of law. That is what happened in Puerto Rico as well, where more than half the population identifies as White even though the African ancestry in many is obvious. Again, experiences vary by region and blanket statements tend to be innacurate as they hold up in some cases and not in others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2014, 09:06 AM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,476 posts, read 26,078,274 times
Reputation: 26426
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorderoAries View Post
Also with 23AndMe DNA genetic testing on females, she doesn't get all of her full results but only her X chromosomes from both her parents X and/or female contributions and ancestors. So some genetic material is left out.
Males and females who test with 23AndMe get the same autosomal information. Both get maternal haplotypes; only males get their paternal haplotype. If a female has a male sibling or her father is tested, she can get the male haplotype by inference.

Females do not get just X chromosome results.

By the way, the OP is male, since his results show only one X chromosome.

Last edited by suzy_q2010; 03-24-2014 at 09:14 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2014, 09:48 AM
 
4,771 posts, read 7,490,512 times
Reputation: 3959
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorderoAries View Post
There are many conspicuously mixed whites. Whiteness is not about racial purity. White racial purity is a myth.

AD Powell has a good book called "Passing For Who You Really Are" which is a must read. It helps promote and spread information and essays on multiracial WHITENESS, multiracial white(ness) advocacy and challenging the odious ridiculous racist one drop rule myth:

Passing for who You Really are: Essays in Support of Multiracial Whiteness - A. D. Powell - Google Books
People that look mostly white usually have 70 to 80% European genes as is evident in DNA tests. I don't consider that to be conspicuously mixed. As I said in other post, conspicuously mixed people usually fall in the 40-70% DNA range and, for the most part, conspicuously mixed people look very mixed.

I'm getting the feeling that some people in this forum want to deny or are uncomfortable with a mixed identity, and are using generalizations to show that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2014, 09:53 AM
 
4,771 posts, read 7,490,512 times
Reputation: 3959
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorderoAries View Post
Again, varies by region, time period, etc. For example, only 100 years ago, in Ohio, Obama would have been seen as WHITE man. They even put it in their code of law. That is what happened in Puerto Rico as well, where more than half the population identifies as White even though the African ancestry in many is obvious. Again, experiences vary by region and blanket statements tend to be innacurate as they hold up in some cases and not in others.
And in much of the 20th Century Obama types were categorized as blacks. They are both nonsense and I don't see what's the point of mentioning the screwed up ways of the past, as if that's suppose to change anyone's opinion as to who should adopt a mixed identity.

Time changes things and now that we have access to DNA tests, we can actually use reality in people's identity. Conspicuously mixed people are mixed people, its simply the way it is and everything points that that's how identity will be shaped in the coming decades, at least in the USA.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2014, 01:57 PM
 
334 posts, read 337,692 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioR View Post
People that look mostly white usually have 70 to 80% European genes as is evident in DNA tests. I don't consider that to be conspicuously mixed. As I said in other post, conspicuously mixed people usually fall in the 40-70% DNA range and, for the most part, conspicuously mixed people look very mixed.

I'm getting the feeling that some people in this forum want to deny or are uncomfortable with a mixed identity, and are using generalizations to show that.
I agree with you and I'm actually a big supporter of mixed identity especially since I'm anti one droppist. The multiracial whiteness concept just help broadens out mixed race identity and mixed modes of identity, because if there can be a multiracial black, or multiracial Asian etc, then rightfully there can be a multiracial WHITE, which thus is an antithesis to the racist hypodescent extreme one drop rule.

I agree with you though on what you say. Just adding other layers and nuances to this.

There is nothing wrong with this and I don't know why being mixed or mixed identity makes people uncomfortable. People should be proud of and embrace all that they are.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2014, 02:05 PM
 
334 posts, read 337,692 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioR View Post
And in much of the 20th Century Obama types were categorized as blacks. They are both nonsense and I don't see what's the point of mentioning the screwed up ways of the past, as if that's suppose to change anyone's opinion as to who should adopt a mixed identity.

Time changes things and now that we have access to DNA tests, we can actually use reality in people's identity. Conspicuously mixed people are mixed people, its simply the way it is and everything points that that's how identity will be shaped in the coming decades, at least in the USA.
I think you're missing the point. I was pointing out the flaw in your statement in regards to legal history of color line and how race perception had changed. Continuously up until the 1930 census, mulatto and other MIXED race categories were legally employed as seperate stand alone race categories. From 1931 to 1967, mixed race identity categories were eliminated, as one drop rule was put in place in some southern states and luckily mixed race identity consciousness was restored thanks to the Loving Vs. Virginia case in 1967.

Had the USA been like South Africa and had a separate mixed race category remaining in tact and existing during apartheid segregation like South Africa, mixed race identity in the USA and interracial dynamics would not be so contentious.

The only thing the racists in South Africa got right was not imposing a one drop rule or hypodescent.

Mixed race identity category should make a strong comeback in society and on the census and restored like how it was pre 1931.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2014, 02:07 PM
 
334 posts, read 337,692 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioR View Post
And in much of the 20th Century Obama types were categorized as blacks. They are both nonsense and I don't see what's the point of mentioning the screwed up ways of the past, as if that's suppose to change anyone's opinion as to who should adopt a mixed identity.

Time changes things and now that we have access to DNA tests, we can actually use reality in people's identity. Conspicuously mixed people are mixed people, its simply the way it is and everything points that that's how identity will be shaped in the coming decades, at least in the USA.
I agree with you that "mixed is mixed" and that it's its' own thing. And people should respect mixed race identity, especially those that identify as such.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2014, 02:12 PM
 
334 posts, read 337,692 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntonioR View Post
And in much of the 20th Century Obama types were categorized as blacks. They are both nonsense and I don't see what's the point of mentioning the screwed up ways of the past, as if that's suppose to change anyone's opinion as to who should adopt a mixed identity.

Time changes things and now that we have access to DNA tests, we can actually use reality in people's identity. Conspicuously mixed people are mixed people, its simply the way it is and everything points that that's how identity will be shaped in the coming decades, at least in the USA.
Btw having close to 1/2 European ancestry in Ohio made one WHITE up until recently, and that existed in much of the 20th century. Each state had it's own set of laws and things varied by jurisdiction and discretion of the courts.

During the 1931 to 1967 Jim Crow one drop rule years, there were still people that identified as mixed race. After 1931 imposition of one drop rule, many people classified as mixed had trouble adjusting to being lumped and one dropped with and as blacks, because it was a devastating blow to mixed race consciousness and identity. Luckily 1967 restored this mixed race consciousness.

The multiracial movement is restoring and maintaing this consciousness. I just wish people would reject supporting one drop rule and racist one droppist modes of identity. Mixed is mixed

It was actually some minor portion of African Americans that originated and created the one drop rule, and later on it was transferred as a white supremacist tool and a symbol of racism. Sadly today, it seems as if blacks and some African Americans even, think that they are the arbitrators of race and they go around one dropping people and enforcing the racist one drop rule and keeping it alive. Smh. I don't know why people support the racist one drop rule which divides and keeps people apart and is racist to all races of people. *sigh*
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top