But unlike "African American" no one is saying they aren't okay.
Glenn Beck: 'African-American Is A Bogus, PC, Made-Up Term... Not A Race'
- Thread starter komobb
- Start date
But unlike "African American" no one is saying they aren't okay.
^ like I said, white people migrate to colder climates. It is more comfortable for them. The Sun burns them up.
Can you show a single example of white people turning Black because they moved to Africa?
I am. Not really that they're not okay, just unnecessary.
Its not ok...
Last edited:
Many people migrated but the mutated ones were better adapted so they thrived. In other words, whites flourished after the migration, not before.
I understand what you're saying and I am well aware of the history of the word "cracker," but when I use the term, I use the term analogously. An actual cracker is unnaturally white, dry, tasteless, and/or salty, full of holes, and square. There's nothing empowering about the comparison I'm making b/w White folks and actual crackers. It's quite condescending.
On a different note:
It is my understanding that Jesse Jackson or some other prominent black figure coined the term "African-American."
I do agree with Glenn Beck, but fuck Glenn Beck because he will not decide how we choose to classify ourselves.
As for the term "negro," ya'll already know what it is with that bullshit. The spaniards were the biggest slave traders in the game, and it's no secret that the term "negro" is analogous to the spanish and portuguese definition of "black," the literal color, meaning "dark."
The word "negro" is not a race classification. The term is fucking racist, and if anyone were to ever refer to me as a "negro," I will fuck them up without hesitation.
true, the 'American' part is very unnecessary. We all know if you ask any Japanese American what they are, they say Japanese. Koreans say Korean. Africans say African.. doesn't matter how they are in the US or for how many generations. They don't say I'm American... until CAC's try to profile them (like after WWII, and 911)
That's a personal judgement and opinion but there isn't the same uproar over other groups using hyphenated names like with Black people and "African American". The term was only coined in response to other groups already using them while we were only referred to as a color. You can't even get people to use a capital "B" when they're writing/typing about Black people.
But you are saying that they migrated because they mutated. I'm saying that many Africans migrated and those with lighter skin were better able to deal with the climate.
In the beginning there would have only been a few individuals with that mutation. I don't think they could have migrated to a new continent by themselves and survived.
No I am not.. I am saying they are a mutation.. and they tend to migrate to climates that is more comfortable to them.
And you are incorrect about Africans with lighter skin being better able to deal with the colder climates.. regardless of climate, dark genes(skin, eyes) dominate when mixed... so that will not produce white people. The mutation is the cause.
And you are incorrect about Africans with lighter skin being better able to deal with the colder climates.. regardless of climate, dark genes(skin, eyes) dominate when mixed... so that will not produce white people. The mutation is the cause.
Now that's the truth. Whether Italian or Greek or Korean, even if they never set a foot in those countries, they'll claim it and drop the "American".
When i said light skinned, I was referring to the mutated ones. I just got tired of saying 'mutation'.
Dude, it takes thousands of years for the process to take place. Have you checked out Ivan Van Sertima? He explains all of what I'm saying. Look up: Pink African
Not sure which Ivan Van Sertima you are reading, but in his works he talks about the very GENETIC MUTATIONS I speak about.. and talks about Albinism (Pink African) being a cause of white skin in Europe... not simply environment like you are trying to suggest. Lastly, it does not work the other way around. White people don't genetically mutate and turn Black.
This is from his book.
This is from his book.
Last edited:
Word they just mutants from Africa.
Divine, I respect you but this is getting silly to me.
You're saying that white people won't mutate and turn black. Of course not, not within a lifetime or two. That would be silly to assume. I'm talking about over at least 40-50,000 years.
Regardless of how they BECAME white people, they CAME from black people. That's the main idea. Albinism vs. Adaptation vs. Mutation are all one in the same for me in the context of this debate, I think they all contributed to the white race. If I'm wrong, I'll stand corrected.
And I also add that there are varying shades of white. Check out this map:
This gives you a more realistic idea of how skin color progresses from top to bottom. There is no such thing as white, red, yellow, brown and black.
We use those terms to connect race to culture.
But in actuality, the lines are far more blurred than we realize. That gives evidence that the variance in skin shades are influenced by the climate, and not solely by 2 random mutations. East Asians come in all shades, and the closer they get to the equator, the darker they are.
You're saying that white people won't mutate and turn black. Of course not, not within a lifetime or two. That would be silly to assume. I'm talking about over at least 40-50,000 years.
Regardless of how they BECAME white people, they CAME from black people. That's the main idea. Albinism vs. Adaptation vs. Mutation are all one in the same for me in the context of this debate, I think they all contributed to the white race. If I'm wrong, I'll stand corrected.
And I also add that there are varying shades of white. Check out this map:
This gives you a more realistic idea of how skin color progresses from top to bottom. There is no such thing as white, red, yellow, brown and black.
We use those terms to connect race to culture.
But in actuality, the lines are far more blurred than we realize. That gives evidence that the variance in skin shades are influenced by the climate, and not solely by 2 random mutations. East Asians come in all shades, and the closer they get to the equator, the darker they are.
Its getting silly because you are wrong.
The will not, ever turn Black (unless they mix with Black people) no matter how much sun they get. (they will develop cancer first). You cited Ivan Van Sertima as your source, and I showed you his works where he said it was a genetic mutation.... remember, that was your source.
Yes they did.. that is what I said they are a genetic mutation from Black people. Not the other way around.. no matter how much sun they get.. they will not turn Black.
No they are not all the same. However, yes, they all contributed.. but it does not work the other way around.
Again.. go read the source you cited. No one is talking about shades. The average person changes a shade or two from winter to summer.
We are talking about mutations.
Of course black folks have been brainwashed. Black folks bought into WHITE FOLKS RELIGION.... why wouldn't they fall for this?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/15/AR2005121501728.html
Scientists Find A DNA Change That Accounts For White Skin
Scientists said yesterday that they have discovered a tiny genetic mutation that largely explains the first appearance of white skin in humans tens of thousands of years ago, a finding that helps solve one of biology's most enduring mysteries and illuminates one of humanity's greatest sources of strife.
The work suggests that the skin-whitening mutation occurred by chance in a single individual after the first human exodus from Africa, when all people were brown-skinned. That person's offspring apparently thrived as humans moved northward into what is now Europe, helping to give rise to the lightest of the world's races.
Leaders of the study, at Penn State University, warned against interpreting the finding as a discovery of "the race gene." Race is a vaguely defined biological, social and political concept, they noted, and skin color is only part of what race is -- and is not.
In fact, several scientists said, the new work shows just how small a biological difference is reflected by skin color. The newly found mutation involves a change of just one letter of DNA code out of the 3.1 billion letters in the human genome -- the complete instructions for making a human being.
"It's a major finding in a very sensitive area," said Stephen Oppenheimer, an expert in anthropological genetics at Oxford University, who was not involved in the work. "Almost all the differences used to differentiate populations from around the world really are skin deep."
The work raises a raft of new questions -- not least of which is why white skin caught on so thoroughly in northern climes once it arose. Some scientists suggest that lighter skin offered a strong survival advantage for people who migrated out of Africa by boosting their levels of bone-strengthening vitamin D; others have posited that its novelty and showiness simply made it more attractive to those seeking mates.
The work also reveals for the first time that Asians owe their relatively light skin to different mutations. That means that light skin arose independently at least twice in human evolution, in each case affecting populations with the facial and other traits that today are commonly regarded as the hallmarks of Caucasian and Asian races.
Several sociologists and others said they feared that such revelations might wrongly overshadow the prevailing finding of genetics over the past 10 years: that the number of DNA differences between races is tiny compared with the range of genetic diversity found within any single racial group.
Even study leader Keith Cheng said he was at first uncomfortable talking about the new work, fearing that the finding of such a clear genetic difference between people of African and European ancestries might reawaken discredited assertions of other purported inborn differences between races -- the most long-standing and inflammatory of those being intelligence.
"I think human beings are extremely insecure and look to visual cues of sameness to feel better, and people will do bad things to people who look different," Cheng said.
The discovery, described in today's issue of the journal Science, was an unexpected outgrowth of studies Cheng and his colleagues were conducting on inch-long zebra fish, which are popular research tools for geneticists and developmental biologists. Having identified a gene that, when mutated, interferes with its ability to make its characteristic black stripes, the team scanned human DNA databases to see if a similar gene resides in people.
To their surprise, they found virtually identical pigment-building genes in humans, chickens, dogs, cows and many others species, an indication of its biological value.
Scientists Find A DNA Change That Accounts For White Skin
Scientists said yesterday that they have discovered a tiny genetic mutation that largely explains the first appearance of white skin in humans tens of thousands of years ago, a finding that helps solve one of biology's most enduring mysteries and illuminates one of humanity's greatest sources of strife.
The work suggests that the skin-whitening mutation occurred by chance in a single individual after the first human exodus from Africa, when all people were brown-skinned. That person's offspring apparently thrived as humans moved northward into what is now Europe, helping to give rise to the lightest of the world's races.
Leaders of the study, at Penn State University, warned against interpreting the finding as a discovery of "the race gene." Race is a vaguely defined biological, social and political concept, they noted, and skin color is only part of what race is -- and is not.
In fact, several scientists said, the new work shows just how small a biological difference is reflected by skin color. The newly found mutation involves a change of just one letter of DNA code out of the 3.1 billion letters in the human genome -- the complete instructions for making a human being.
"It's a major finding in a very sensitive area," said Stephen Oppenheimer, an expert in anthropological genetics at Oxford University, who was not involved in the work. "Almost all the differences used to differentiate populations from around the world really are skin deep."
The work raises a raft of new questions -- not least of which is why white skin caught on so thoroughly in northern climes once it arose. Some scientists suggest that lighter skin offered a strong survival advantage for people who migrated out of Africa by boosting their levels of bone-strengthening vitamin D; others have posited that its novelty and showiness simply made it more attractive to those seeking mates.
The work also reveals for the first time that Asians owe their relatively light skin to different mutations. That means that light skin arose independently at least twice in human evolution, in each case affecting populations with the facial and other traits that today are commonly regarded as the hallmarks of Caucasian and Asian races.
Several sociologists and others said they feared that such revelations might wrongly overshadow the prevailing finding of genetics over the past 10 years: that the number of DNA differences between races is tiny compared with the range of genetic diversity found within any single racial group.
Even study leader Keith Cheng said he was at first uncomfortable talking about the new work, fearing that the finding of such a clear genetic difference between people of African and European ancestries might reawaken discredited assertions of other purported inborn differences between races -- the most long-standing and inflammatory of those being intelligence.
"I think human beings are extremely insecure and look to visual cues of sameness to feel better, and people will do bad things to people who look different," Cheng said.
The discovery, described in today's issue of the journal Science, was an unexpected outgrowth of studies Cheng and his colleagues were conducting on inch-long zebra fish, which are popular research tools for geneticists and developmental biologists. Having identified a gene that, when mutated, interferes with its ability to make its characteristic black stripes, the team scanned human DNA databases to see if a similar gene resides in people.
To their surprise, they found virtually identical pigment-building genes in humans, chickens, dogs, cows and many others species, an indication of its biological value.
Yeah I agree 100% and I posted it here years ago.
To me African American is a load of politically correct bs.
To me African American is a load of politically correct bs.
Similar threads
