Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Celebrating Memorial Day!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > World
 [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 11-02-2014, 07:31 PM
 
2,661 posts, read 5,472,415 times
Reputation: 2608

Advertisements

Indians are very diverse. It is a huge country and you get people like the picture above who are Andamanese and people who look like Aishwarya Rai. The Andamanese are most closely related to Asian populations.

Ancestral North Indians (ANI), who are genetically close to Middle Eastern, Central Asian, and European populations, and Ancestral South Indians (ASI), who are genetically distinct from both ANI and East Asians. The Onge Andamanese were observed to be related to the Ancestral South Indians, and were unique in that they were the only South Asian population in the study that lacked any Ancestral North Indian admixture. The authors thus suggest that the Onge populated the Andamanese Islands prior to the intermixture that took place between the Ancestral South Indians and Ancestral North Indians on the Indian mainland.

Andamanese people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You can't really categorise Indians other than saying they are South Asians. They have a great variety of skintones.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-02-2014, 08:16 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
14,317 posts, read 22,388,935 times
Reputation: 18436
Default Many reasons

Because:
1) Their ancestors weren't from Africa, brought over here against their will, and forced into Slavery.
2) Their freedom from Slavery wasn't an issue in the Civil War.
3) They weren't the target of Jim Crow laws.
4) They weren't who the Civil Rights struggle was waged by or for.
5) They aren't the group hated and despised by Dixie and Conservatives everywhere.
6) They aren't the group most hated in this country since its founding by whites who are racist.
7) They aren't the group that is still treated like second-class citizens in this society, especially by the Right-wing.

The term "black" refers to the shared struggle by the magnificent, talented race of people in this country who are the focus on items 1-7.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2014, 09:35 PM
 
Location: Canada
4,865 posts, read 10,528,229 times
Reputation: 5504
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusNexus View Post
Because:
1) Their ancestors weren't from Africa, brought over here against their will, and forced into Slavery.
2) Their freedom from Slavery wasn't an issue in the Civil War.
3) They weren't the target of Jim Crow laws.
4) They weren't who the Civil Rights struggle was waged by or for.
5) They aren't the group hated and despised by Dixie and Conservatives everywhere.
6) They aren't the group most hated in this country since its founding by whites who are racist.
7) They aren't the group that is still treated like second-class citizens in this society, especially by the Right-wing.

The term "black" refers to the shared struggle by the magnificent, talented race of people in this country who are the focus on items 1-7.
I'm sorry but this is too US-centric a view. I appreciate the struggles of blacks in the United States, but at the same time you're not the centre of the universe and the term "black" predates your country and has international meaning and relevance in many other countries and other struggles. To overly focus on the African-American experience is to ignore the experiences and cultures of millions of other people in other areas of the world. What you have described is the definition of African-American, not black, and they are not the same thing.

But of course, you are correct that Indians are not black.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-02-2014, 09:38 PM
 
Location: Gatineau, QC, Canada
3,379 posts, read 5,537,247 times
Reputation: 4438
Quote:
Originally Posted by DahomeyAhosi View Post
I am Ghanaian and can't tell the difference between some Eritreans, Ethiopians, Somalis, and south Indians physically. However Africans are far more diverse than Indians, both genetically and physically. There are real black people who live in what is now known as India. They are the inhabitants of the Andaman islands.

I was going to bring up the Andaman Islands. I was never sure what the origins of their people was. They are related to Africa? They almost seem to have a tinge of silverish/grey to their skin tone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2014, 01:02 AM
 
674 posts, read 698,612 times
Reputation: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse44 View Post
I was going to bring up the Andaman Islands. I was never sure what the origins of their people was. They are related to Africa? They almost seem to have a tinge of silverish/grey to their skin tone.
Everyone on the planet is related to Africa. There are plenty of different skintones in Africa as well. However the two girls in that picture would(physically) fit right in south Sudan and most parts of West Africa. The two young men below are from Sudan.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3060/...7a08cfe5_m.jpg

Last edited by Rozenn; 11-03-2014 at 12:06 PM.. Reason: Copyright
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2014, 01:30 AM
 
2,661 posts, read 5,472,415 times
Reputation: 2608
Skin tone is not a good factor to see how related populations are. The Adamanese are most closely related to Asian populations not to Africans.

With genetics it is usually geographically related. There might be some rare exceptions but the closest populations are geographically the more likely they are to be closer genetically. Neighbours usually have more genes in common. The more distant geographically the less likely there will be genes shared. Just commonsense really.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2014, 03:46 AM
 
674 posts, read 698,612 times
Reputation: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernie20 View Post
Skin tone is not a good factor to see how related populations are. The Adamanese are most closely related to Asian populations not to Africans.

With genetics it is usually geographically related. There might be some rare exceptions but the closest populations are geographically the more likely they are to be closer genetically. Neighbours usually have more genes in common. The more distant geographically the less likely there will be genes shared. Just commonsense really.
The problem with your argument is that continental Africans are the most genetically diverse people on the planet. There is more genetic diversity between two random ethnic groups from West Africa than there is between all non-Africans. That stems from the fact that the number of paternal lines to have survived the trip from Africa is less than 40. So yes if I'm black and a fellow African is also black then I feel comfortable saying those girls are black.

Also I don't judge folks by skin color alone so don't put words in my mouth. The girls that I posted possess something far more important for Africans. That's the hair or, as some call it, the proof. Many people from Papua New Guinea self-identify as black because of the obvious physical connection as well as cultural similarities. And at the end of the day you will not be the one to decide for us.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2014, 07:25 AM
 
15,063 posts, read 6,177,347 times
Reputation: 5124
It would be much better if people would stop the inadequate, usually inaccurate color classifications period.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Davy-040 View Post
Sub-Saharan Africans = Black
South Asians = Dark Brown
Latinos, Arabs and Southeast Asians = Light Brown
The above is an example of why color classifications are so foolish.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2014, 07:32 AM
 
Location: London, UK
9,962 posts, read 12,384,276 times
Reputation: 3473
Quote:
Originally Posted by DahomeyAhosi View Post
No, it's the other way around. After all Africans have been on this planet far longer than Indians. We are your ancestors. You are not ours.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-03-2014, 08:10 AM
 
2,661 posts, read 5,472,415 times
Reputation: 2608
Quote:
Originally Posted by DahomeyAhosi View Post
The problem with your argument is that continental Africans are the most genetically diverse people on the planet. There is more genetic diversity between two random ethnic groups from West Africa than there is between all non-Africans. That stems from the fact that the number of paternal lines to have survived the trip from Africa is less than 40. So yes if I'm black and a fellow African is also black then I feel comfortable saying those girls are black.

Also I don't judge folks by skin color alone so don't put words in my mouth. The girls that I posted possess something far more important for Africans. That's the hair or, as some call it, the proof. Many people from Papua New Guinea self-identify as black because of the obvious physical connection as well as cultural similarities. And at the end of the day you will not be the one to decide for us.
No problems with what you have said and I'm not arguing. It's just that genetically they are Asian and cluster with Asian populations. I'm not saying they aren't black because they are but they are an Asian population. Getting back to the point of the thread Indians are a very diverse population and have a lot of different looks.

Not sure what you're second paragraph is about actually very baffled by it. You appear to be arguing with me. Whether someone is black it doesn't mean they are close to each other genetically. The Andamese would be far closer to a person from Thailand than they would be to any African population.
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 > World Forums > World

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top