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.
You can't trust 23andme with those tiny ancestral attributions.
It's one very rough direction to consider.
Even hobbyists in the field know you must go much further for fact....take other DNA tests then actually trace the family tree, etc.....but you will eventually get there.
We have went from almost no information....due to the Holocaust and other such events...to knowing a LOT, including having books which mention our ancestors and their reputation. It is amazing how it all unfolds.
Even if that appearance is more phenotypically European. at one time in the south the greatest insult you could give a white person was to say or imply that he/she had "a touch of the tar brush" which basically meant the person looked white but had one or two features that were more common in another race,
Like his or her tan takes longer to go away after summers over, or hair is curlier than average but otherwise looks white.
The reason I started was because, in many parts of the world, it's assumed that the U.S. is one of the few countries that practices the one drop rule.
It's not uncommon for people from Britain, France, Brazil, Colombia, etc. to claim that they don't have the one drop rule in their countries and that the U.S. is the "black sheep."(No pun intended).
However, I disagree with this sentiment.
The one drop rule is not an actual legal rule. And "drop" does not refer to a particular percentage. It simply means that what you look like and can be identified as will determine how people react to you and how you are treated. Which is significant in a society with an explicit legal, race based caste system, as the US had through most of its history.
The difference between countries in the western hemisphere is due to political strategy. The US decided that due to the relatively small black population, it was best to make a clean racial demarcation with no blurry lines. In parts of the Caribbean and latin America, the non white population comprised a much larger percentage, so the strategy was to break them up into several distinct castes, each set with its own anxieties and jealousies vs the others, so that they could not as easily cooperate against the ruling white caste.
You can make a case for single drop rules to still exist in America. Only now instead of assigning the race of the lowest social rank we now assign multi or biracial somewhat like apartiad era South Africa assigned "colored". And not with the multiple degrees of African features like much of Latin America does
You can make a case for single drop rules to still exist in America. Only now instead of assigning the race of the lowest social rank we now assign multi or biracial somewhat like apartiad era South Africa assigned "colored". And not with the multiple degrees of African features like much of Latin America does
Well, in the absence of laws to the contrary or reversed decisions, judges can still apply it in some cases such as the one from 1981 that I cited earlier, where a Louisiana judge refused to compel a state licensing office to changer her race to "white" because the state had a record of a distant black ancestor.
You can make a case for single drop rules to still exist in America. Only now instead of assigning the race of the lowest social rank we now assign multi or biracial somewhat like apartiad era South Africa assigned "colored". And not with the multiple degrees of African features like much of Latin America does
Yes, and that is no solution. What's happening now is that because "biracial" counts as "diversity" for all necessary purposes it's become the selection of choice instead of ever choosing someone who either identifies or is visibly "black," particularly with regard to women.
And dark-skinned women have definitely taken note of that.
The one-drop rule was used in court at least as recently as 1980, when a Louisiana woman was denied her request to be classified as white on her birth certificate because of a black ancestor four generations back. A Louisiana law, repealed only in1983, assigned residents as “colored” if one thirty-second of their ancestry included African descent.
Interesting. Thanks. I wonder how it stands in Mississippi.
It really shows how absurd "race" is. My mom was as black as this woman's mom visually.
My mom was an Italian, I have no idea why she was not labeled black when she was born too. It really is surreal. The year my mom was born she was not considered white but not considered black either.
Toward the end of the video the woman says her grandpa was born black but died white and yes that makes sense because by the time he died "he looked white and so he was designated different. once again absurd. We just make up these designations that have much value.
Last edited by creepy; 07-26-2018 at 03:40 PM..
Reason: add info
All it said was 2 percent western African - that encompasses a lot of nations - LOL.
DNA is not limited to man-made political boundaries.
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.
