Mixed People Ain't Black!

[Gravity]

Because that's nonsense. Look 'race' can be defined and manifest itself in many ways, but let's not sit here and pretend that the only thing that separates Manute Bol and Brittany Spears is their social class standing.

It's not nonsense, it's fact. There are plenty of things that separate Manute Bol from Britney Spears the same way that there are plenty of things that separate Manute Bol from Beyonce. This was a stupidass post. Race is a social construct, not a scientific construct. "Mixed" people with African heritage are considered "black" because our society says so. You idiots on that "mixed people aint black" shyt don't have a clue. If mixed people aren't black then there aren't very many black people outside of Africa. A great majority of black people in this country have people in their family tree who aren't black. I would bet cats like Wesley Snipes and Morris Chestnut have people in their family tree who aren't black. Some of you are just downright stupid.

 

[nawshus]

If you're mixed but would get looked at like for drinking at a "Whites-Only" water fountain during the Jim Crow era then you're BLACK. Point blank.

People kill me with all this "I'm not Black I'm mixed" shyt. Well yo ass would be sitting right next to me at the BACK of the bus. This includes our President.

Do you let racist Whites define everything for you? Serious question for you & those that follow white supremacist ideas like the one drop rule

 

[nawshus]

Like I thought she said that recently, she was probably told to do this by her PR team after the criticism of her getting casted as nina simone

In most of her older interviews she said she was latina

Latina and black aren't mutually exclusive, and that quote of hers posted here was years before the nina shyt

 

[hayesc0]

Mixed folks ain't black they're mixed

Look at Zoe Saldana for example she never identifies as being black but she gets black roles

The society needs to make a distinction btw blacks and mixed before mixed folks are the new face of black people

PS. I have nothing against mixed ppl just hate it that some are only black when its convenient

there seems to be a huge disconnect with people when it comes to race ethnicity and nationality you can be black and latina zoe saldana identifies as both

 

[filial_piety]

It's not nonsense, it's fact. There are plenty of things that separate Manute Bol from Britney Spears the same way that there are plenty of things that separate Manute Bol from Beyonce. This was a stupidass post. Race is a social construct, not a scientific construct. "Mixed" people with African heritage are considered "black" because our society says so. You idiots on that "mixed people aint black" shyt don't have a clue. If mixed people aren't black then there aren't very many black people outside of Africa. A great majority of black people in this country have people in their family tree who aren't black. I would bet cats like Wesley Snipes and Morris Chestnut have people in their family tree who aren't black. Some of you are just downright stupid.

Nah n1gga, you're just dumb and continue to synthesize some "race war" that you've conceived in your head to justify you're lack of common sense and knowledge to the subject because you have a social agenda. Your entire post is just dumb and is overly emotional.

Anything categorized by man is a "social construct" if you really want to make that your argument. There is a genetic component to haplo groups that can be categorized by their similarities and differences from one group to the next. That is scientifically embedded. Manute Bol looks like Manute Bol and other Dinka tribesmen because there is a distinct genetic difference between someone like himself and Brittany Spears. You don't even have to know shyt about genetics to see that. Are they both human? Absolutely. Are there identifiable genetic markers that distinguish one from the next in contrast to other groups? Absolutely.

And "mixed" and "biracial" aren't mutually inclusive, so try not to "mix" the terms up. Someone such as Barack Obama has two distinct genetic ancestries from two distinct haplo groups that have little if any common variance genetically outside of the typical genome. That is not a "social construct", that is a genetic fact. Manute Bol, has more in common genetically with Charles Barkely, who has more in common with Brittany Spears than Manute Bol does. Most black people in the US have some white ancestry is various degrees, but statistically speaking they are NOT genetically 50% from European haplo groups that like most biracials with one FULLY genetic white person of European ancestry would have.

Simply opening up a junior high school science book would have you schooled you to common sense about that.

 

[Tommy Knocks]

It's not nonsense, it's fact. There are plenty of things that separate Manute Bol from Britney Spears the same way that there are plenty of things that separate Manute Bol from Beyonce. This was a stupidass post. Race is a social construct, not a scientific construct. "Mixed" people with African heritage are considered "black" because our society says so. You idiots on that "mixed people aint black" shyt don't have a clue. If mixed people aren't black then there aren't very many black people outside of Africa. A great majority of black people in this country have people in their family tree who aren't black. I would bet cats like Wesley Snipes and Morris Chestnut have people in their family tree who aren't black. Some of you are just downright stupid.

wat.

 

[Gravity]

Nah n1gga, you're just dumb and continue to synthesize some "race war" that you've conceived in your head to justify you're lack of common sense and knowledge to the subject because you have a social agenda. Your entire post is just dumb and is overly emotional.

Anything categorized by man is a "social construct" if you really want to make that your argument. There is a genetic component to haplo groups that can be categorized by their similarities and differences from one group to the next. That is scientifically embedded. Manute Bol looks like Manute Bol and other Dinka tribesmen because there is a distinct genetic difference between someone like himself and Brittany Spears. You don't even have to know shyt about genetics to see that. Are they both human? Absolutely. Are there identifiable genetic markers that distinguish one from the next in contrast to other groups? Absolutely.

And "mixed" and "biracial" aren't mutually inclusive, so try not to "mix" the terms up. Someone such as Barack Obama has two distinct genetic ancestries from two distinct haplo groups that have little if any common variance genetically outside of the typical genome. That is not a "social construct", that is a genetic fact. Manute Bol, has more in common genetically with Charles Barkely, who has more in common with Brittany Spears than Manute Bol does. Most black people in the US have some white ancestry is various degrees, but statistically speaking they are NOT genetically 50% from European haplo groups that like most biracials with one FULLY genetic white person of European ancestry would have.

Simply opening up a junior high school science book would have you schooled you to common sense about that.

I don't have an agenda you dumb b*stard, I'm simply speaking the truth. Race doesn't=genetic makeup. There are plenty of "white" people on this planet who have African genes. You bring up Obama and the fact that he's technically bi-racial, but that doesn't stop him from being "black". You see how that works? I say that race is a social construct to make the point that it has nothing to do with genetics. Race isn't based on haplo groups, it's based on phenotypical characteristics. If a person looks like they are of African descnet then that person is considered "black". I didn't create the concept of race, I'm just explaining the rules. The current concept of race was invented in the 1600s by Europeans as a way to classify people socially, it has never been based on genetics or science. That was obvious when they said that anybody with a drop of African blood is "black". Does that sound like something that's based on science or genetics you inbred mouth-breather? Seriously, what part of "races isn't based on genetics" don't you understand?

 

[filial_piety]

I don't have an agenda you dumb b*stard, I'm simply speaking the truth. Race doesn't=genetic makeup. There are plenty of "white" people on this planet who have African genes. You bring up Obama and the fact that he's technically bi-racial, but that doesn't stop him from being "black". You see how that works? I say that race is a social construct to make the point that it has nothing to do with genetics. Race isn't based on haplo groups, it's based on phenotypical characteristics. If a person looks like they are of African descnet then that person is considered "black". I didn't create the concept of race, I'm just explaining the rules. The current concept of race was invented in the 1600s by Europeans as a way to classify people socially, it has never been based on genetics or science. That was obvious when they said that anybody with a drop of African blood is "black". Does that sound like something that's based on science or genetics you inbred mouth-breather? Seriously, what part of "races isn't based on genetics" don't you understand?

You aren't speaking any "truth", you're just parroting what other politically correct nonsense that was fed to you. Phenotypes are based on genetics are they not??? People look different based on their genes, correct? Groups of people can share commonalities based on those very genes that cause them to be different by contrast of another group, are they not?

When you look at a 6'5 Swiss with blonde hair and blue eyes from the Swiss Alps, are you telling me that you don't see ANY physically different characteristics from a Khalahari Bushman from South Africa?

I'm am NOT saying that "race" is based only on genetics, what I am saying is that there IS a genetic agent involved there, thereby debunking that it is nothing more than a "social construct." If it were ONLY a "social construct" (word of mouth, institutionally classified economic groups, that may or may not share linguistic relationships) then you would not be able VISUALLY tell the difference between a Swede and a Bushman right? Some of you fling around "social construct" as if a social construct is completely devoid of scientific merit, when technically the damn periodic table is a man made institutional "contruct" that is grounded on science.

People are genetically different, and people can be grouped according to those very differences. Bio geneticists have been mapping that shyt out for years. It ONLY becomes dangerous and offensive to some people when you begin attributing behavior and/or capabilities to those very genetic differences.

But in regards to black people in the US...first and foremost, the "one drop" rule was NEVER a federal law. Those were state based laws. In some states on your birth certificate you could have been catagorized as "black" despite having heavily mixed ancestry, while in other states such as Hawaii, there was NO such law, if you were mixed you were identified as such. But that is besides the point, because in 2013 there is NO such law. Being historically mixed and being biracial are influenced by two very different types of thinking. Someone with a great great great white grandaddy will look and perceive themselves differently than someone who was born and raised with two parents with completely different genetic ancestral lines. You cats are just locked into some mentality that there is some ongoing race war and feel the need to swallow up every group connected to you to further your own agenda. The shyt is more political with some of you more than anything else.

 

[Gravity]

You aren't speaking any "truth", you're just parroting what other politically correct nonsense that was fed to you. Phenotypes are based on genetics are they not???

No, genotype is based on genetics. Phenotype is nothing but what a person looks and acts like. A person's phenotype is heavily influenced by said person's environment and such. A lot of people with the same genotype look and act nothing alike.

I'm not even going to address the rest of that bullshyt because it's a waste of my time. It's funny that you accuse me of having an agenda, when the whole purpose for the current concept of race is to oppress non Europeans to the benefit of Europeans. Racism is the agenda of race. The difference between you and I is that you're trying to give the bullshyt credence while I'm just calling it out for what it is, a hustle. The current concept of race and racism is nothing but game that the Europeans are using to keep themselves at the top of the totem pole. I understand perfectly well that people with ancestry from different parts of the world have some differences(however minute) in their genetic makeup. You aren't saying anything by pointing that out. I'm simply saying that race isn't based on those genetic differences, it's based on social and phenotypical didfferences. I don't have to parrot anyone to debate a clown like you, you're an idiot.

 

[Tommy Knocks]

No, genotype is based on genetics. Phenotype is nothing but what a person looks and acts like. A person's phenotype is heavily influenced by said person's environment and such. A lot of people with the same genotype look and act nothing alike.

I'm not even going to address the rest of that bullshyt because it's a waste of my time. It's funny that you accuse me of having an agenda, when the whole purpose for the current concept of race is to oppress non Europeans to the benefit of Europeans. Racism is the agenda of race. The difference between you and I is that you're trying to give the bullshyt credence while I'm just calling it out for what it is, a hustle. The current concept of race and racism is nothing but game that the Europeans are using to keep themselves at the top of the totem pole. I understand perfectly well that people with ancestry from different parts of the world have some differences(however minute) in their genetic makeup. You aren't saying anything by pointing that out. I'm simply saying that race isn't based on those genetic differences, it's based on social and phenotypical didfferences. I don't have to parrot anyone to debate a clown like you, you're an idiot.

so you know it was created for a european agenda and yet you still choose to follow it?

no dumb ass, when someone tells you a biracial person is black, you CORRECT them. You tell one cac that Obama is biracial not black, he then tells 5 of his friends what "some black guy told him" sure enough it spreads and becomes correct. Why in the world would you continue to follow something you know is wrong?

Negro was a politically incorrect term, blacks post-civil rights continued to remind folks until the entire nation eventually adopted african american, which in itself is also wrong, as it should be 'black american'. we're currently working on fixing that too.

progression is key. and what some cacs still going by the one drop rule isn't going to stop my progressive thinking, on the contrary it should be my duty to correct it.


btw phenotype has nothing to do with behavior, behavior is individually inherited, sometimes by environment sometimes just individual characteristic. (ei some people are just born shy, despite having 2 outgoing parents)

you have clown ass points that no one is agreeing with yet you want to sit here and call people idiots, it doesnt help your argument nor does it make you appear any smarter. LOL.

 

[Gravity]

so you know it was created for a european agenda and yet you still choose to follow it?

no dumb ass, when someone tells you a biracial person is black, you CORRECT them. You tell one cac that Obama is biracial not black, he then tells 5 of his friends what "some black guy told him" sure enough it spreads and becomes correct. Why in the world would you continue to follow something you know is wrong? Pb


Negro was a politically incorrect term, blacks post-civil rights continued to remind folks until the entire nation eventually adopted african american, which in itself is also wrong, as it should be 'black american'. we're currently working on fixing that too.

progression is key. and what some cacs still going by the one drop rule isn't going to stop my progressive thinking, on the contrary it should be my duty to correct it.


btw phenotype has nothing to do with behavior, behavior is individually inherited, sometimes by environment sometimes just individual characteristic. (ei some people are just born shy, despite having 2 outgoing parents)

you have clown ass points that no one is agreeing with yet you want to sit here and call people idiots, it doesnt help your argument nor does it make you appear any smarter. LOL.

I don't say anything here to appear smarter. Everything that I say here is from the heart. I honestly believe that people such as yourself are stupid. You being stupid doesn't make me smart. What you've just posted above is dumb as fukk and I don't feel the need to sugarcoat that.

There's no getting around the concept of race. Race is the backbone of our societal construct. It wouldn't do me or any other black person any good to dismiss or reject the concept of race. I don't have a problem with race or how people are classified, I have a problem with the racist ideology that Europeans have attached to race. The lie that is white supremacy is what we need to fight to fight against, not the idea that anyone who is visibly of African descent is "black". There's nothing wrong with being classified as black despite what the institution of white supremacy says. Mixed or biracial people who like to distinguish themselves from being black only do so in an effort to cash in on whatever privilege that they can get from their non African heritage. That only perpetuates white supremacy. Mixed or biracial people who embrace being black are directly rejecting the concept of white supremacy. The only way to defeat white supremacy is to get people to stop buying into it.

Just to be clear, you are an idiot. Phenotype is the sum total of a person's observable traits. Behavior is most certainly an observable trait. There's really no excuse For you to be this stupid.

 

[Tommy Knocks]

I don't say anything here to appear smarter. Everything that I say here is from the heart. I honestly believe that people such as yourself are stupid. You being stupid doesn't make me smart. What you've just posted above is dumb as fukk and I don't feel the need to sugarcoat that.

There's no getting around the concept of race. Race is the backbone of our societal construct. It wouldn't do me or any other black person any good to dismiss or reject the concept of race. I don't have a problem with race or how people are classified, I have a problem with the racist ideology that Europeans have attached to race. The lie that is white supremacy is what we need to fight to fight against, not the idea that anyone who is visibly of African descent is "black". There's nothing wrong with being classified as black despite what the institution of white supremacy says. Mixed or biracial people who like to distinguish themselves from being black only do so in an effort to cash in on whatever privilege that they can get from their non African heritage. That only perpetuates white supremacy. Mixed or biracial people who embrace being black are directly rejecting the concept of white supremacy. The only way to defeat white supremacy is to get people to stop buying into it.

Just to be clear, you are an idiot. Phenotype is the sum total of a person's observable traits. Behavior is most certainly an observable trait. There's really no excuse For you to be this stupid.

I cant debate with someone this ignorant. first time in coli history Im just going to leave this discussion.

what I will say however, is that youll see a shift from mixed race people being called black to mixed in our life time 100%. it's already began, and all other nations that have 100s of years over us, have already done just that. the patterns are there.

as for behavior being linked to phenotype, are you talking about richard dawkins theory of extend phenotype, because if you are, that is nothing more than theory and has yet to be proven, nor mapped.

http://web.missouri.edu/~segerti/1000H/BouchardRev.pdf

put wiki down, and actually read about a few articles and studies.

Burrowing by Way of Genes: Mice provide clues to genetics of behavior
they see clues (see article), but after MU did studies on twins which came out inconclusive, it was back to zero. their were clinical trials just 3 years ago in yet another attempt to map them out. I like how you magically are calling someone dumb as if phenotype and behavior have been proven fact. the only place I saw written as if it were, was wiki, most other places make sure to highlight its in theory. lol

dumb smart nikkas via google I see. always the loudest ones. always. :uhhuh:

 

[Gravity]

I cant debate with someone this ignorant. first time in coli history Im just going to leave this discussion.

what I will say however, is that youll see a shift from mixed race people being called black to mixed in our life time 100%. it's already began, and all other nations that have 100s of years over us, have already done just that. the patterns are there.

as for behavior being linked to phenotype, are you talking about richard dawkins theory of extend phenotype, because if you are, that is nothing more than theory and has yet to be proven, nor mapped.

http://web.missouri.edu/~segerti/1000H/BouchardRev.pdf

put wiki down, and actually read about a few articles and studies.

Burrowing by Way of Genes: Mice provide clues to genetics of behavior
they see clues (see article), but after MU did studies on twins which came out inconclusive, it was back to zero. their were clinical trials just 3 years ago in yet another attempt to map them out. I like how you magically are calling someone dumb as if phenotype and behavior have been proven fact. the only place I saw written as if it were, was wiki, most other places make sure to highlight its in theory. lol

dumb smart nikkas via google I see. always the loudest ones. always. :uhhuh:

Miss me with your bytchmade copouts. You can't debate becasuse you're a fukking idiot. I couldn't care less about your opinion of what will happen in the future, you're a fukking idiot.

First you say that behavior has nothing to do with phenotype(an unbelievably stupid statement), then after doing some quick googling you try and fall back on this "it's just a theory" nonsense. You're so dumb that it's sad. You clearly don't understand the information in the links that you posted I haven't googled anything, I'm speaking straight off of the head. I'm not talking about theories you dumb son of a bytch. Richard Dawkins and his theory have nothing to do with my point here. I'm speaking facts. I'm telling you that behavior is part of a person's phenotype. I'll say this again since you obviously didn't get it the 1st time. Phenotype is the composite of a person's observable traits. Behavior is an observable trait therefore it is part of a person's phenotype. There are all kinds of behavioral phenotypes you mouth-breathing fukk. People with mental disabilities such as down syndrome have specific behavioral phenotypes. It's funny that you accuse me of using google when that's clearly what you've done
The nerve of you stupid motherfukkers

 

[Tommy Knocks]

Miss me with your bytchmade copouts. You can't debate becasuse you're a fukking idiot. I couldn't care less about your opinion of what will happen in the future, you're a fukking idiot.

First you say that behavior has nothing to do with phenotype(an unbelievably stupid statement), then after doing some quick googling you try and fall back on this "it's just a theory" nonsense. You're so dumb that it's sad. You clearly don't understand the information in the links that you posted I haven't googled anything, I'm speaking straight onff of the head. I'm not talking about theories you dumb son of a bytch. Richard Dawkins and his theory have nothing to do with my point here. I'm speaking facts. I'm telling you that behavior is part of a person's phenotype. I'll say this again since you obviously didn't get it the 1st time. Phenotype is the composite of a person's observable traits. Behavior is an observable trait therefore it is part of a person's phenotype. There are all kinds of behavioral phenotypes you mouth-breathing fukk. People with mental disabilities such as down syndrome have specific behavioral phenotypes. It's funny that you accuse me of using google when that's clearly what you've done
The nerve of you stupid motherfukkers

you havent said shyt. :uhhuh:

basically I stopped reading after "Richard Dawkins has nothing to do with this".

yep nothing at all. show me scientific proof behavior itself is phenotypic without highlighting a disorder ........i'll wait.

 

[Gravity]

you havent said shyt. :uhhuh:

basically I stopped reading after "Richard Dawkins has nothing to do with this".

yep nothing at all. show me scientific proof behavior itself is phenotypic without highlighting a disorder ........i'll wait.

Gotdamn you're stupid. I'm not showing you anything, I'll just let you wallow in your own stupidity. It's obvious that you aren't capable of understanding what's even being debated here. You don't even understand the shyt that you googled and posted
The Richard Dawkins theory is completely irrelevant to the point that I'm making here. His theory isn't even about phenotypes despite the name of it, his theory is all about genes. Dawkins argues that genes are the most important factor in how organisms evolve. I disagree with his theory by the way.

The definition of phenotype is the proof that behavior is part of it. It's really that simple.