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.
It's about time we take color and shades of skin to be of any relevance. Take pride in being American and be thankful for the fact that we live in the best country in the entire world.
Except when the best country in the entire world won't let you be just an American.
So, here's the real deal, you can go around being white, damn near white, or biracial, but when the wheel hits the pavement and you are confronted with those folks who don't view you as a "Real American" don't all of a sudden try to play your god given black card because if you do, those black folks that you didn't want to identify with will tell you to go look for your Real American friends to have your back.
Membership has its privileges but you have to be a dues paying member first.
Last edited by TheWiseWino; 10-23-2015 at 04:16 PM..
I'm taking a racial studies class and want to gather some data but on top of that I'm extremely curious, I'm American but I'm half Afro Brazilian and half German American. When in both countries(meaning brazil and germany) and I say i'm half black half white it's usually accepted. It's a pretty common thing for people from other countries to think that Americans follow the one drop rule/don't accept people being multiracial(my dominican friends especially say this). Any who, just wanted to know if that was true or not, what race do you guys consider a "mulatto" to be.
Thanks.
This is nonsense plenty of southern Europeans have !% sub-Saharan African admixture. My mother has 2% sub-Saharan African admixture it would be absolutely stupid for her to identify as black lol she likely inherited that DNA from several ancestors in the 16th or 17th century which was unknown to any of us until she had her autosomal DNA tested. I don't believe that African phenotypes are even present until one has close to about 10% sub-Saharan African admixture.
I consider them to be whatever they think they are. I've noticed most half black/half white people in the U.S. tend to identify as black, but some identify as white, and some just say "mixed".
This. How we self identify and that should not be second guessed.
My husband has straight blonde hair, blue eyes, fair skin, and growing up he would have been a great poster child for Hitler's Lebensborn program. I sometimes call him my Viking or my Nordic god as a joke.
We recently had our DNA tested and SURPRISE SURPRISE - he is about 3 percent western African! Of course, his family is from Louisiana so there's no telling who or what is in that mix!
No one would ever even KNOW he had some African in him, let alone be weird enough to try to label him as "black." Not that that makes any difference in his worth as a human being but it would certainly seem weird to be calling this man who looks whiter that Prince William "black."
The whole "one drop rule" is racist to the core. People are people. Why should anyone of mixed racial ancestry feel compelled to choose one label over another or allow others to force them to do so?
Of course, I have no problem with someone like Obama voluntarily choosing to self identify as one race or the other, if that's what he or she identifies more closely with. Though I would think it was sort of strange if my Nordic husband suddenly decided to start calling himself black.
Come to think of it, he's always really liked Motown music...Hmmmm....
I thought there was a one drop rule where if they had one drop of black blood that made them black.
Jim Crow laws reached their greatest influence during the decades from 1910 to 1930. Among them were hypodescent laws, defining as black anyone with any black ancestry, or with a very small portion of black ancestry.[3] Tennessee adopted such a "one-drop" statute in 1910, and Louisiana soon followed. Then Texas and Arkansas in 1911, Mississippi in 1917, North Carolina in 1923, Virginia in 1924, Alabama and Georgia in 1927, and Oklahoma in 1931. During this same period, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Utah retained their old "blood fraction" statutes de jure, but amended these fractions (one-sixteenth, one-thirty-second) to be equivalent to one-drop de facto.[12]
5. It shall hereafter be unlawful for any white person in this State to marry any save a white person, or a person with no other admixture of blood than white and American Indian. For the purpose of this act, the term "white person" shall apply only to the person who has no trace whatsoever of any blood other than Caucasian; but persons who have one-sixteenth or less of the blood of the American Indian and have no other non-Caucasic blood shall be deemed to be white persons. All laws heretofore passed and now in effect regarding the intermarriage of white and colored persons shall apply to marriages prohibited by this act.
Louisiana statute repealed in 1970
In signifying race, a person having one-thirty second or less of Negro blood shall
not be deemed, described, or designated by any public official in the State of
Louisiana as “colored,” a “mulatto,” a “black,” a “negro,” a “griffe,” an “AfroAmerican,”
a “quadroon,” a “mestizo,” a “colored person,” or a “person of color.”2
From the Supreme Court Case Plessy v. Ferguson (No. 210)
Argued: April 18, 1896
Decided: May 18, 1896
That petitioner was a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of Louisiana, of mixed descent, in the proportion of seven eighths Caucasian and one eighth African blood; that the mixture of colored blood was not discernible in him, and that he was entitled to every recognition, right, privilege and immunity secured to the citizens of the United States of the white race by its Constitution and laws; that, on June 7, 1892, he engaged and paid for a first class passage on the East Louisiana Railway from New Orleans to Covington, in the same State, and thereupon entered a passenger train, and took possession of a vacant seat in a coach where passengers of the white race were accommodated; that such railroad company was incorporated by the laws of Louisiana as a common carrier, and was not authorized to distinguish between citizens according to their race. But, notwithstanding this, petitioner was required by the conductor, under penalty of ejection from said train and imprisonment, to vacate said coach and occupy another seat in a coach assigned by said company for persons not of the white race, and for no other reason than that petitioner was of the colored race;
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.
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.
