This chic is %20 African?!?

[FluffyCorleone]

That's why interracial relationships shouldn't happen. It brings nothing but confusion to everybody.

** goes back to fukking white girlfriend after logging off thecoli **

 

[QuavoFlow]

i can see the black in her

looks like she could use some more tho

 

[-----]

I've known about this chick for about 4 years, ever since she first started college since we the same age.

You go to school with her?

 

[Red Shield]

who the fuk are you again fakkit?

That's no way to talk to me beloved :demonbey:

 

[videogamestashbox.com]

​

 

[SheWantTheD]

You go to school with her?

no

 

[FLYINHAWAIIAN]

That's why interracial relationships shouldn't happen. It brings nothing but confusion to everybody.

 

[Gab]

That's no way to talk to me beloved :demonbey:

 

[IllmaticDelta]

She's as cac as they come..I don't care if she's 90%, she's white..
Thecoli confused and full of contradictions. you claim mixed people are Black because they look Black yet this one looks completely white but now you want to move the goalposts..she's white let it go.

it's not really goal post moving...."black" in the usa is a combination of physical traits and/or descent which is why these were both "black" in America

 

[3rdWorld]

it's not really goal post moving...."black" in the usa is a combination of physical traits and/or descent which is why these were both "black" in America

It's goal post moving.

When Black people have respect and admiration for a mixed person notice how they automatically give them an honorary 'Black' title..

If said mixed person is hated and reviled they remain mixed or evening become white.

the shyt is all based on emotion and not science. excusing bad thinking as being 'American' still doesnt make it right.

 

[El Bombi]

 

[IllmaticDelta]

It's goal post moving.

how is it goal post moving if it's the norm in USA society historically?

When Black people have respect and admiration for a mixed person notice how they automatically give them an honorary 'Black' title..

no such thing as an "honorary black" title for someone of african descent in the USA context. That's both the definition and only needed qualification for "black" in the USA

"
Whites’ Skin Tone as Function of Admixture

The combination of narrow phenotype variation (skin tone) along with a wide range of inter-population (Afro-European) admixture variation among White Americans shows that a selection process has taken place. Few human populations display such a clear mark of selection. Narrow phenotype variation alone does not necessarily indicate selection. Northern Europeans display little skin tone variation, but they lack a wide range of African admixture. Broad genotype variation alone does not necessarily indicate selection. Puerto Ricans average 50-50 Afro-European admixture, but they also display a wide range of skin tones. The late Stephen J. Gould, Harvard biology professor and columnist for Natural History magazine, used to explain this principle with a baseball analogy. Plot a scatter diagram of the batting averages of a thousand amateur or minor-league players and you will find a very large range of variation. A few such players are very bad, a few are very good, and most spread across the entire range of batting averages in-between. Now plot the batting averages of professional athletes in the major leagues. All are very good indeed. More importantly, the range of batting averages among them is tiny. The difference between an outstanding star of the game and a rookie is a matter of mere hundredths of a percentage point. The reason, of course, is because you cannot get into the majors unless you are very good at it. Similarly, wild cows vary greatly in the amount of milk that they produce. The cows in a dairy farm produce more milk on average but, more importantly, their milk production varies very little among themselves (compared to wild cows). The reason? Those cows who do not make the cut become hamburger.

And so, why do few if any White Americans display a strongly African appearance (have a high melanin index) despite having detectable African admixture? Because those Americans who “look Black” are assigned involuntarily to the Black endogamous group, whatever their genetic admixture. The scatter diagrams of the two endogamous U.S. groups are not symmetrical because the selection process acts only upon the White group. As revealed in court records, discussed elsewhere, a person of mixed ancestry who “looks European” (like Dr. Shriver or his maternal grandfather) in practice has the option of either adopting a White self-identity, thus joining the White endogamous group or a Black self-identity, thus joining the other group. But a person of mixed ancestry who “looks African” lacks such a choice. U.S. society assigns such a person to membership in the Black endogamous group, like it or not.25

In conclusion, U.S. society has unwittingly applied selection pressure to the color line. The only American families accepted into the White endogamous group have been those whose African admixture just happened not to include the half-dozen alleles for dark skin (or the other physical traits associated with “race”). Since those particular alleles were sifted out of the portion of the White population that originated in biracial families, the relative percentage of the remaining, invisible, African alleles in this population cannot affect skin color. That skin-color does not vary with African genetic admixture among American Whites, despite their measureably recent African admixture, demonstrates and confirms that physical appearance has been an important endogamous group membership criterion throughout U.S. history. It has resulted in genetic selection of the White U.S. population for a European “racial” appearance, regardless of their underlying continent-of-ancestry admixture ratio."

If said mixed person is hated and reviled they remain mixed or evening become white.

no.....take Tiger Woods for example. In the USA, black people don't rock with him but they still see him as "black", the same way we still look at c00ns/sellouts as still "black"

the shyt is all based on emotion and not science.

the science is being of african descent

excusing bad thinking as being 'American' still doesnt make it right.

every society has their own racial rules/colorlines, this way of thinking just happens to be the USA's way

 

[3rdWorld]

how is it goal post moving if it's the norm in USA society historically?



no such thing as an "honorary black" title for someone of african descent in the USA context. That's both the definition and only needed qualification for "black" in the USA






no.....take Tiger Woods for example. In the USA, black people don't rock with him but they still see him as "black", the same way we still look at c00ns/sellouts as still "black"



the science is being of african descent



every society has their own racial rules/colorlines, this way of thinking just happens to be the USA's way

It's moving the goal posts to decide who of the mixed can be Black or not based on affection and affiliation.

You must be mixed the way you posted that dissertation.

I can't rock with mixed people being Black because the roots of that are White racism. Whites calling their mixed offspring Black so they could keep White bloodline pure and Black tainted. Basically dumping their waste onto Black's.

The Africans who arrived in the US were full Blooded Black. the combination of them and Europeans produced something else, unAfrican unBlack unwhite unEuropean..

I don't care about 'norms' and bullshyt from the past. it was normal for Black's 200 years ago to be slaces and subject to horrific abuse at the hands of sadistic whites and that was the norm.
It was also accepted and normal that Black's were 3/5 human. I suppose you're fine with that as well as mutts being imposed onto Black's.

 

[IllmaticDelta]

It's moving the goal posts to decide who of the mixed can be Black or not based on affection and affiliation.

it's not goal post moving because in the USA by default, most people see fair skinned afro-europeans as "black" before they do "white" because there is no real "mixed" identity in the USA

You must be mixed the way you posted that dissertation.

Im multi gen admixed but Im 100% "black"

I can't rock with mixed people being Black because the roots of that are White racism. Whites calling their mixed offspring Black so they could keep White bloodline pure and Black tainted. Basically dumping their waste onto Black's.

nope...the first/earliest white looking afro europeans with a "black-negro" identity had nothing to do with a One Drop Rule because they pre-date the rule. You had people walking around as self identified "blacks-negros" way before the rule came about

Robert Purvis (August 4, 1810 – April 15, 1898)

was an African-American abolitionist in the United States. He was born in Charleston, South Carolina, educated at Amherst College in Massachusetts, and lived most of his life in Philadelphia. In 1833 he helped found the American Anti-Slavery Society there and the Library Company of Colored People. From 1845-1850 he served as president of the Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery Society and also traveled to England to gain support for the movement.

One-drop rule

The one-drop rule was not adopted as law until the 20th century: first in Tennessee in 1910 and in Virginia under the Racial Integrity Act of 1924 (following the passage of similar laws in several other states).


Both before and after the American Civil War, many people of mixed ancestry who "looked white" and were of mostly white ancestry were legally absorbed into the white majority. State laws established differing standards. For instance, 1822 Virginia law stated that to be defined as "mulatto" (that is, multi-racial), a person had to have at least one-quarter (equivalent to one grandparent) African ancestry.[quote 2] This was a looser definition than the state's 20th-century "one-drop rule" under the 1924 Racial Integrity Act. This defined a person as legally "colored" (black) for classification and legal purposes if the individual had any African ancestry. Social acceptance and identification were historically the key to classification.

Although the Virginia legislature increased restrictions on free blacks following the Nat Turner Rebellion of 1831, it refrained from establishing a one-drop rule. When a proposal was made by Travis H. Eppes and debated in 1853, representatives realized that such a rule could adversely affect whites, as they were aware of generations of interracial relationships. During the debate, a person wrote to the Charlottesville newspaper:

[If a one-drop rule were adopted], I doubt not, if many who are reputed to be white, and are in fact so, do not in a very short time find themselves instead of being elevated, reduced by the judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction, to the level of a free negro.[5]:230

The state legislators agreed. No such law was passed until 1924, when people's historical memory appeared to have faded.

The Melungeons are a group of multiracial families of mostly European and African ancestry whose ancestors were free in colonial Virginia. They migrated to the frontier in Kentucky and Tennessee. Their descendants have been documented over the decades as having tended to marry persons classified as "white".[9] Their descendants became assimilated into the majority culture from the 19th into the 20th centuries.

Later in the 19th century following Reconstruction, southern states acted to impose racial segregation by law and restrict blacks, specifically passing laws to exclude them from politics and voting. From 1890 to 1908, all the former Confederate states passed such laws, and most preserved disfranchisement until after passage of federal civil rights laws in the 1960s. At the South Carolina constitutional convention in 1895, an anti-miscegenation law and changes that would disfranchise blacks were proposed. Delegates debated a proposal for a one-drop rule to include in these laws. George D. Tillman said the following in opposition:




Jim Crow laws reached their greatest influence during the decades from 1910 to 1930. Among them were hypodescent laws, defining as black anyone with any black ancestry, or with a very small portion of black ancestry.[3] Tennessee adopted such a "one-drop" statute in 1910, and Louisiana soon followed. Then Texas and Arkansas in 1911, Mississippi in 1917, North Carolina in 1923, Virginia in 1924, Alabama and Georgia in 1927, and Oklahoma in 1931. During this same period, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and Utah retained their old "blood fraction" statutes de jure, but amended these fractions (one-sixteenth, one-thirty-second) to be equivalent to one-drop de facto.[12]

Before 1930, individuals of visible mixed European and African ancestry were usually classed as mulatto, or sometimes as black and sometimes as white, depending on appearance. Previously, most states had limited trying to define ancestry before "the fourth degree" (great-great-grandparents). But, in 1930, due to lobbying by southern legislators, the Census Bureau stopped using the classification of mulatto. Documentation of the long social recognition of mixed-race people was lost.

The Africans who arrived in the US were full Blooded Black. the combination of them and Europeans produced something else, unAfrican unBlack unwhite unEuropean..

new world blacks and old world africans they descend from are obviously no longer the same people. The same way new world black culture is creolized, their genetics are also creolized

I don't care about 'norms' and bullshyt from the past.

the past shaped everything of today

it was normal for Black's 200 years ago to be slaces and subject to horrific abuse at the hands of sadistic whites and that was the norm.
It was also accepted and normal that Black's were 3/5 human.

I suppose you're fine with that as well as mutts being imposed onto Black's.

"mutts" aren't imposed on anyone. The USA census even has a mixed identification category. It's just that even the mixed people aren't into it on a large/significant scale

 

[Max Power]

I think shes talking about you nikkas

@Supreme HD youre such a sensitive ass negro

Isn't this dude a cac?