Just Striaght AADOS Men Flashin Out On a Racist CAC to Protect BW Again
- Thread starter Supper
- Start date
Mindfield333
Superstar
That’s the behavior that gets called the “weakest link” on twitterthat breh living with them
seabreeze80
All Star
How are you not in the red
Posters are agreeing with me. I received about 50 daps alone from my posts in this thread.
Mindfield333
Superstar
Eh. Black people come in all shades. I know a light skin BW with light eyes but both her parents are black
seabreeze80
All Star
Of course black people come in all shades but what about her features? Some features are undeniably unique to us.
Post op mtf trans are women correct?she's see herself as "black"
I looked at some of the pages of of her fam (aunt/uncle) and they're clearly ADOS. I didn't see anyhting that would indicate that they were foreign
her words
she clearly see's herself as black
Compare ethnicity, which is largely not biologically determined, to binary gender, which is purely biologically determined, brehs.
And yes black is an *ethnic* marker for us AADOS.
Last edited:
lol Her swirler "friends" catchin strays from ol' girl now.
But, that ain't nuna my bidness tho.
Them brehs handled their's. That's all that matters in the end.
lol dawg, she still getting at her swirler "friend".
I was more so talking about how stupid you are.
And getting 50 daps from the same 10 people subscribing to your hogwash and dapping Your post every time you reply. Is not saying much
There are some literally mentally Disturbed retarded ass people on this site
Counter Racist Male
Retired poster and occasional lurker
+1
You're pivoting hard right now. You said she sees herself as black. Race IS purely biologically determined. Is she black or is she not? And it's not *an* ethnic marker its the key one ,unless you can be white and AADOS? Try not to break your ankles this time. Oh and then explain to me how a group of people who relate to each through ANCESTRY isnt largely biologically determimed.
IcemanCometh
Pro
AA men holdin it down as usualNo, it's not.
APA PsycNet
The original definition of race was purely phenotypical. It had nothing to due with genetics or any biology. It was just a way for colonizers to construct a caste system of people who they conquered based on how they looked. In which case two full siblings could be of two different races if one ended up being dark skin with coarser hair and one ended up being light skin with straighter hair despite them coming from the same gene pool. And that's still how race functions in most latin american countries today.
But I wasn't even talking about race to begin with. I'm talking about ethnicity. Because in the US "racial groups" began to demarcate much more than just phenotype, due to the history of strictly enforced racial segregation, anti-miscegenation and tge one drop rule. "Racial groups" in the US, ESPECIALLY that of black americans, became their own communities with their own clearly defined culture and heritage. Whereas it's not so the case in Latin America where didn't form separate communities based on race, especially after slavery. The US and AADOS are entirely unique in this regard.
"Black" in the US has simply been the accepted nomenclature to identify aados as an ethnicity for centuries, hence why you can have a "black community", "black culture, "black art", "black dance". "black venacular", "black music", "black food" and so on. None of that has anything to do with phenotype let alone genetics, yet we all still know what it's referring to.
And yeah, you can be what most people deem to be phenotypically white and be AADOS, as long as you have chattel slave heritage in what's today the contiguous US, and are part of the culture and community.
But, you being non-ados wouldn't understand any of this, because you're not from this culture, and aren't in any position to tell *ME* about how my culture functions, and only make yourself look more foolish in even trying.
Last edited:
You're contradicting your own argument. It doesn't matter what the original definition of "race" was used for this is non sequitur to the argument. ALL classifications were originally rudimentary before more rigorous taxonomy was developed to describe it and this is what we're using in the discussion and now and in general as well as in the U.S. You mentioning latin america like they're the only place on Earth is irrelevant. We can nearly perfectly identify someone's race using their DNA it's distinctly biological. "Black" in the us today is used to describe race AND also nomenclature to identify of aados. But no one sees a white man and claims he is AADOS like you're doing in your nebulous identification to arbitrarily group together people who aren't connected. When someone says they see a BLACK man he could be Haitian, Nigerian, Jamaican or whatever. When someone is speaking specifically about the particular subcultures in America sure people substitute "black", but in generalities when speaking about IDENTITY it's used today almost exclusively to reference race. You're just being obtuse to push a narrative. Ilhan Omhar is called black by most of the public. They aren't calling her ADOS. And finally my family has more than likely been here longer than yours and we ALL call blacks blacks white white and biracial biracials :yeshurg:
Last edited: