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.
Some time ago, I created a thread titled "The best and worst cities for interracial dating and relationships in Texas," however, I did not get the answers that I desired. Nevertheless, I hate to "beat a dead horse" and bring up the interracial thing again, but I have another question concerning this issue.
In short, how common or uncommon do you see/observe black/non-black hispanic relationships (black male/non-black hispanic females or non-black hispanic males/black females throughout Texas?
**As a side note**I already know that there are many anglo (white)/hispanic relationships in Texas. So please, do not state the obvious.* Thanks.
Some time ago, I created a thread titled "The best and worst cities for interracial dating and relationships in Texas," however, I did not get the answers that I desired. Nevertheless, I hate to "beat a dead horse" and bring up the interracial thing again, but I have another question concerning this issue.
In short, how common or uncommon do you see/observe black/non-black hispanic relationships (black male/non-black hispanic females or non-black hispanic males/black females throughout Texas?**As a side note**I already know that there are many anglo (white)/hispanic relationships in Texas. So please, do not state the obvious.* Thanks.
Sorry, I'm going to state what should be the obvious... the time for questions like this is in the past. You ARE beating a dead horse. Give it up!
Genetic scientists have now proven that we are all related, all descended from the same small group of maybe 2,000 individual in Africa. And the whole concept of race has been overthrown. There is no scientific basis for it. We're 99% alike. We really only differ materially in terms of visual appearance, like skin color and eye color and hair texture.
Common/uncommon, who really cares? It's not important. The only thing that ultimately matters is what two hearts find together.
Thanks for that, OpenD. I said much the same thing on the Maryland Forum and got ridiculed by several people who couldn't understand that "race" isn't a scientific concept but a social construct, and that the concept of gene pools and genetic spread is more useful in understanding the distribution of phenotypic characteristics.
Having said that, I would point out that the Hispanic population of Texas is far more derived from the mestizo genetic and cultural blend of Mexico than is the case in some other parts of the USA that have larger populations from the Spanish Carribean with their larger blends of African, European, and Native American genetic and cultural inputs. Culturally you are going to see a lot more African-American/Hispanic coupling in the Northeast than in Texas because of the differing origins of the Hispanic populations in the two regions, at least as one salient factor. At this point, Latino/Anglo-American coupling is far more common in Texas in my own experience than are African-American/Latino couples. It is important to emphasise that all of the foregoing has to do with complex social attitudes amongst people, as well as the continued remnants of de facto social segregation. One would expect all this to continually diminish over time, as has indeed been happening over the past half century.
My spouse and I met at the University of Texas in 1974; I'm Anglo, he's Latino. But our ethnic origins aren't of any real significance in our relationship.
Thanks for that, OpenD. I said much the same thing on the Maryland Forum and got ridiculed by several people who couldn't understand that "race" isn't a scientific concept but a social construct, and that the concept of gene pools and genetic spread is more useful in understanding the distribution of phenotypic characteristics.
Having said that, I would point out that the Hispanic population of Texas is far more derived from the mestizo genetic and cultural blend of Mexico than is the case in some other parts of the USA that have larger populations from the Spanish Carribean with their larger blends of African, European, and Native American genetic and cultural inputs. Culturally you are going to see a lot more African-American/Hispanic coupling in the Northeast than in Texas because of the differing origins of the Hispanic populations in the two regions, at least as one salient factor. At this point, Latino/Anglo-American coupling is far more common in Texas in my own experience than are African-American/Latino couples. It is important to emphasise that all of the foregoing has to do with complex social attitudes amongst people, as well as the continued remnants of de facto social segregation. One would expect all this to continually diminish over time, as has indeed been happening over the past half century.
My spouse and I met at the University of Texas in 1974; I'm Anglo, he's Latino. But our ethnic origins aren't of any real significance in our relationship.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OpenD
The rest was interesting, but this is the only thing that's important.
Sorry, I'm going to state what should be the obvious... the time for questions like this is in the past. You ARE beating a dead horse. Give it up!
Genetic scientists have now proven that we are all related, all descended from the same small group of maybe 2,000 individual in Africa. And the whole concept of race has been overthrown. There is no scientific basis for it. We're 99% alike. We really only differ materially in terms of visual appearance, like skin color and eye color and hair texture.
Common/uncommon, who really cares? It's not important. The only thing that ultimately matters is what two hearts find together.
Seriously, give it up and move on.
That's like saying George Zimmerman couldn't have been motivated by race, because scientists have proven there is no such thing as race.
What genetic scientists have "proven" has not yet trickled down to personal social relationships. So the question is perfectly valid in every sphere except the halls of academia. Not even counting the fact that there is genuine science that points to the opposite, and your scientists have not yet proven anything at all except that the question is in dispute.
By the way, 99% alike is not very impressive, considering that Humans and Chimpanzees are 96% alike. Which means that for every four ways a chimp is different from me, a black human is different in only one of those ways. Your argument, not mine -- I'm just interpreting it mathematically. Different "races" of humans differ in many more ways than you wish to believe, like susceptibility to diseases and physiological weaknesses. For example, high blood pressure is much more prevalent among blacks. And only black are susceptible to sickle-cell anemia.
What two hearts find together, if it is not an enduring fit, have very significant ramifications in the social issues that pervade the entire society, which is a cost borne by all of us. And that is the issue that the OP addresses. Scioence is daily proving things that society blissfully ignores, to its own peril, as people continue to behave in ignorance, and the OP is exploring that behavior. You can't just blow off things like domestic violence because some prof says there is no such thing as race, when a social and psychological perception of race often precipitates that domestic violence, as well as many other antisocial phenomena.
In San Antonio, black male/Hispanic female couples are very common. Black females with any non-black male is a rare sight. I probably only see this coupling a few times a year.
What genetic scientists have "proven" has not yet trickled down to personal social relationships.
For many it has, and there are more and more all the time. The way to end racism is to stop being racists. Kids aren't born racists, and if they aren't taught racism they grow up accepting each other as being fundamentally like each other, just coming in different packages.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88
By the way, 99% alike is not very impressive, considering that Humans and Chimpanzees are 96% alike.
Well, we're actually more like 99.8% alike, but more importantly, it's where those remaining differences are concentrated that matters. Some of our differences with chimps are very substantial differences, like their opposable big toes, and their much smaller brains, whereas our differences from each other are much less significant, like the texture of our ear wax, and whether or not cilantro tastes soapy to us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88
Different "races" of humans differ in many more ways than you wish to believe, like susceptibility to diseases and physiological weaknesses.
Absolutely, yes, there are characteristics that follow certain genetic pools, but they're all naturally occurring variations within one race. The long ago invention of the concept of different races based on appearance was unscientific, fictional, and totally agenda driven, by a group of pale-skinned European dudes who wanted to justify the business of slavery and colonialization. It's a totally bankrupt notion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88
You can't just blow off things like domestic violence because some prof says there is no such thing as race, when a social and psychological perception of race has precipitated the domestic violence.
That's like saying George Zimmerman couldn't have been motivated by race, because scientists have proven there is no such thing as race.
What genetic scientists have "proven" has not yet trickled down to personal social relationships. So the question is perfectly valid in every sphere except the halls of academia. Not even counting the fact that there is genuine science that points to the opposite, and your scientists have not yet proven anything at all except that the question is in dispute.
By the way, 99% alike is not very impressive, considering that Humans and Chimpanzees are 96% alike. Which means that for every four ways a chimp is different from me, a black human is different in only one of those ways. Your argument, not mine -- I'm just interpreting it mathematically. Different "races" of humans differ in many more ways than you wish to believe, like susceptibility to diseases and physiological weaknesses. For example, high blood pressure is much more prevalent among blacks. And only black are susceptible to sickle-cell anemia.
What two hearts find together, if it is not an enduring fit, have very significant ramifications in the social issues that pervade the entire society, which is a cost borne by all of us. And that is the issue that the OP addresses. Scioence is daily proving things that society blissfully ignores, to its own peril, as people continue to behave in ignorance, and the OP is exploring that behavior. You can't just blow off things like domestic violence because some prof says there is no such thing as race, when a social and psychological perception of race often precipitates that domestic violence, as well as many other antisocial phenomena.
Some factual errors here. The sickle cell trait is found in the indigenous population of the Mediterranean world and not just in Africa or persons of African origin. The trait is adaptive when the person has only a single DNA strand - or gene - for this trait, because having that bit of DNA protects against contracting malaria. Natural selection has preserved the trait in Old World populations in areas where there is a longstanding history of mosquito-borne, malarial infection. Sickle cell anemia, however, occurs when one inherits genes for the trait from both parents. At any rate, the distribution of this genotype (which usually produces an adaptive phenotype) is an example of why we speak of gene pools, and this distribution isn't limited to African or African-American populations only.
What your post mostly underscores is the correct idea that "race" is a social construct and of course a social construct is both a product of, and an influence upon, the groupthink of the populations in which such constructs exist. However, just as the earth isn't flat and there are no sea monsters at its edges, there is no objective reality to "race" -- only a combination of perception (the world seems more or less flat to our visual sense, just as it seems the sun goes around the earth rather than vice versa) and mythology (we construct all sorts of ideas such as "Here there be monsters" to go along with our misperceptions).
This is analogous to the different roles of science and religion. Science asks questions about the functional mechanisms operating in the world; religion attempts to address questions of ultimate meaning and moral valence.
Getting back to the ideas of race and of gene pools, it is important to point out that while humans and chimpanzees (or other non-human primates) share most of the same DNA (even humans and sub-primates have a large share of the same DNA in common), the DNA that they do NOT share in common is, in the natural order, defining of their respective species. Humans cannot inter-breed with other existing primates or other non-human species. By contrast, fertile human individuals all over the globe can breed with one another and produce viable young. In isolated groups, a high degree of human genetic uniformity is preserved amongst the limited number of breeding individuals (endogamy), whilst in geographically mobile persons and societies, a higher degree of genetic variation becomes the norm by virtue of exogamy. In an isolated group, phenotypic characteristics such as skin colour can be very uniform, whilst in mobile societies, there will be a wide range and spread seen in the phenotypic expression of the genes controlling these outward traits -- but they are all specifically human genes.
Compare the phenotypic range of Texans to the distribution of observable phenotypic characteristics amongst native Icelanders: definitely not the same, since the Icelandic genotype has been relatively static since the island was first settled by Vikings. By contrast, both the overall population of Texas and individual Texans will display a much greater range of genetic input due to the overlap of inter-breeding gene pools.
TX is one of the most diverse and accepting states. There are many couples who date out side their heritage.
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.
