Then when would it end? Quadroons, are almost always white in color and looks. If they are "mixed" their children will be "mixed" and their grandchildren, etc. Then the one drop rule would be in effect.
Then when would it end? Quadroons, are almost always white in color and looks. If they are "mixed" their children will be "mixed" and their grandchildren, etc. Then the one drop rule would be in effect.
Well known examples of Quadroons and Octoroons (I'm only using this terminology because the meaning is immediately understood) involving European/African ancestry and European/Asian ancestry. It's obvious that in these two particular cases whiteness dominated.
Eartha Kitt with daughter Kitt Shapiro and granddaughter Rachel.
Princess Alexandra - ex-wife of Prince Joachim of Denmark - and sons Nikolai and Felix.
There are exceptions to the rule however as in the case of Tais Araujo's and Yannick Noah's sons, and Thandie Newton's eldest daughter.
Last edited by zsana on Thu 10 Aug 2006 14:58; edited 1 time in total
Then when would it end? Quadroons, are almost always white in color and looks. If they are "mixed" their children will be "mixed" and their grandchildren, etc. Then the one drop rule would be in effect.
I don't think it should end or see how it could. How can one's immediate descendants who don't start breeding in an isolated population get unmixed? Genes don't just go away they are selected.
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Thu 10 Aug 2006 15:02 Post subject: Mixings
sagascend wrote:
GermanChocolate wrote:
Then when would it end? Quadroons, are almost always white in color and looks. If they are "mixed" their children will be "mixed" and their grandchildren, etc. Then the one drop rule would be in effect.
I don't think it should end or see how it could. How can one's immediate descendants who don't start breeding in an isolated population get unmixed? Genes don't just go away they are selected.
Half the genes of the parents "go away", get lost, every time they have a child.
You have to get rid of the idea of mixing is like a chemical process. Mixing people of different "genetics" is not like mixing paints of different colors. If you mix yellow and red you obtain orange, for example, and you'll never be able to recover yellow or red once again. In genetics, in the following generations, both yellow and red will have around 1/4 of probabilities each of reappear, and orange 1/2.
What compite for the phenotype of complexion in people are alleles, particular configurations of genes. Is a "digital" and not an "analog" process.
There are lots of myths in genetics, but the only think for certain is that the "external" aspect of people is commanded for a small group of genes that are chosen at random during the conception. So after two or more generations of "mixing" the aspect of the children will depend more on the throwing of a dice rather than on the original genes.
You have to get rid of the idea of mixing is like a chemical process. Mixing people of different "genetics" is not like mixing paints of different colors. If you mix yellow and red you obtain orange, for example, and you'll never be able to recover yellow or red once again
That was exactly the point I was trying to make. Once the mix occurs how does it "revert" to something unmixed? The mixture does not go away, it is not lost. Over time natural selection occurs.
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Thu 10 Aug 2006 15:29 Post subject: Genetics 101
sagascend wrote:
oevega wrote:
You have to get rid of the idea of mixing is like a chemical process. Mixing people of different "genetics" is not like mixing paints of different colors. If you mix yellow and red you obtain orange, for example, and you'll never be able to recover yellow or red once again
That was exactly the point I was trying to make. Once the mix occurs how does it "revert" to something unmixed? The mixture does not go away, it is not lost. Over time natural selection occurs.
Genetical mixture do revert. Let me show you a "mental" genetical experiment. Forget about recombinations for a while.
If you mix 1000 individuals of pure dark eyes (both alleles for dark eyes) with 1000 individuals of blue eyes, for example, and 2000 children are born, all that population will have 1 allele for blue and 1 for dark eyes.
Now, make that population mix once again the next generation, and, let's suposse they gave birth to 1000 babies. Of them:
a: 250 will have only dark eyes alleles and dark eye phenotype.
b: 500 will have both dark and blue alleles and dark or intermediate phenotype.
c: 250 will have both blue eyes alleles and blue eye phenotype.
In the follow generations, if you re-mix b with c, 1/2 of the descendents will have blue eyes.
The same happened with most of the "racial" alleles. The genotypes of the original people are not distroyed in mixing, only change the frecuencies.
In the Mexican, Latino, Arabs and Afgan populations, and in the Caribbean as well, you can see white, blond, colored eyes people that are born once in a while. Counting how many of them appear per generation you can estimate how much of the "nordic" phenotype is present in the genetic pool of that population. The genes are there and have not dissapeared by mixing at all. They will reapear forever.
Posted: Thu 10 Aug 2006 15:41 Post subject: Re: Genetics 101
oevega wrote:
sagascend wrote:
oevega wrote:
You have to get rid of the idea of mixing is like a chemical process. Mixing people of different "genetics" is not like mixing paints of different colors. If you mix yellow and red you obtain orange, for example, and you'll never be able to recover yellow or red once again
That was exactly the point I was trying to make. Once the mix occurs how does it "revert" to something unmixed? The mixture does not go away, it is not lost. Over time natural selection occurs.
Genetical mixture do revert. Let me show you a "mental" genetical experiment. Forget about recombinations for a while.
If you mix 1000 individuals of pure dark eyes (both alleles for dark eyes) with 1000 individuals of blue eyes, for example, and 2000 children are born, all that population will have 1 allele for blue and 1 for dark eyes.
Now, make that population mix once again the next generation, and, let's suposse they gave birth to 1000 babies. Of them:
a: 250 will have only dark eyes alleles and dark eye phenotype.
b: 500 will have both dark and blue alleles and dark or intermediate phenotype.
c: 250 will have both blue eyes alleles and blue eye phenotype.
In the follow generations, if you re-mix b with c, 1/2 of the descendents will have blue eyes.
The same happened with most of the "racial" alleles. The genotypes of the original people are not distroyed in mixing, only change the frecuencies.
In the Mexican, Latino, Arabs and Afgan populations, and in the Caribbean as well, you can see white, blond, colored eyes people that are born once in a while. Counting how many of them appear per generation you can estimate how much of the "nordic" phenotype is present in the genetic pool of that population. The genes are there and have not dissapeared by mixing at all. They will reapear forever.
Omar
I don't think what you and I are saying is different. It's because blue-eyed and brown-eyed populations mixed once upon a time that you have these "throwbacks." The mixture does not disappear - it can reappear in subsequent generations.
Once the mix occurs how does it "revert" to something unmixed? The mixture does not go away, it is not lost.
Not on a genetic level, but on a phenotypical level (to the naked eye) mixture can be lost. Happens all the time and we all know this. People are "racially" categorized (and categorize others), are discriminated against or favored based on what populations they most favor/identically look like. Not based on their DNA.
If it looks like a duck... Well we all know the rest. People assume (without taking into consideration the possiblity of racial admixture) folks are what they look like. Of course what constitutes looking "white", "black", "mulatto", "indian", etc... is going to vary according to which country/culture you hail from.
These first cousins (their mothers are sisters) are a good example of what I'm describing.
Quote:
Although “race”, like “gender” is a socially-constructed category, “colour” still has deep meaning and significance for most people. Often disconcertingly so. In 1998, during a trip to Germany with my daughters, at the time aged two and five, we shared one such experience. The three of us were travelling in the tram (or streetcar) with my sister and her son, aged one at the time. My nephew is phenotypically “white” with fair skin and blonde hair, while my sister and I, and my daughters, are varying shades of brown. At one stop an elderly lady got on board and sat close to me. It must have been obvious that my sister and I and our children belonged together. As the journey progressed it became clear that the woman was very curious about our party of multi-hued individuals. When she could no longer contain her curiosity the woman asked me. I explained the family connections. She wanted to know how come my nephew was so white. I explained that his father was white. The woman then remarked matter-of-factly, “oh – he must have been very relieved that his son didn’t turn out dark.”
Technically speaking all three of these children are mixed. However - because they visibly fall on opposite extremes of the color/racial spectrum instead of the middle - they are perceived as (and will be treated as) belonging to different races. People see two little black girls and a white boy.
It comes down to probabilities. Considering only skin tone, a first-generation Nordic-Bantu child must have an in-between (50-50) skin tone. But where both parents are first-generation Nordic-Bantu mix, then their children could span a very broad range--a bell curve of probabilities centered on the 50-50 skin tone, but with the two tails going all the way to the extremes. Finally, if one parent is already at one extreme, but the other is 50-50, then the bell curve is skewed or shifted toward the extreme parent.
For the specific computed probabilities of a White-looking child born to Black-looking parents and vice versa for Philadelphia, Spain, and the Sea Islands of South Carolina, see The Heredity of Racial Traits http://backintyme.com/Essay041215.htm.
Once the mix occurs how does it "revert" to something unmixed? The mixture does not go away, it is not lost.
Not on a genetic level, but on a phenotypical level (to the naked eye) mixture can be lost. Happens all the time and we all know this. People are "racially" categorized (and categorize others), are discriminated against or favored based on what populations they most favor/identically look like. Not based on their DNA.
If it looks like a duck... Well we all know the rest. People assume (without taking into consideration the possiblity of racial admixture) folks are what they look like. Of course what constitutes looking "white", "black", "mulatto", "indian", etc... is going to vary according to which country/culture you hail from.
These first cousins (their mothers are sisters) are a good example of what I'm describing.
Quote:
Although “race”, like “gender” is a socially-constructed category, “colour” still has deep meaning and significance for most people. Often disconcertingly so. In 1998, during a trip to Germany with my daughters, at the time aged two and five, we shared one such experience. The three of us were travelling in the tram (or streetcar) with my sister and her son, aged one at the time. My nephew is phenotypically “white” with fair skin and blonde hair, while my sister and I, and my daughters, are varying shades of brown. At one stop an elderly lady got on board and sat close to me. It must have been obvious that my sister and I and our children belonged together. As the journey progressed it became clear that the woman was very curious about our party of multi-hued individuals. When she could no longer contain her curiosity the woman asked me. I explained the family connections. She wanted to know how come my nephew was so white. I explained that his father was white. The woman then remarked matter-of-factly, “oh – he must have been very relieved that his son didn’t turn out dark.”
Technically speaking all three of these children are mixed. However - because they visibly fall on opposite extremes of the color/racial spectrum - they are perceived as (and will be treated as) belonging to different races.
It comes down to probabilities. Considering only skin tone, a first-generation Nordic-Bantu child must have an in-between (50-50) skin tone. But where both parents are first-generation Nordic-Bantu mix, then their children could span a very broad range--a bell curve of probabilities centered on the 50-50 skin tone, but with the two tails going all the way to the extremes. Finally, if one parent is already at one extreme, but the other is 50-50, then the bell curve is skewed or shifted toward the extreme parent.
For the specific computed probabilities of a White-looking child born to Black-looking parents and vice versa for Philadelphia, Spain, and the Sea Islands of South Carolina, see The Heredity of Racial Traits http://backintyme.com/Essay041215.htm.
This is true, of course. But since the majority of humans are mixed - even a FGM is not a mix of 2 pure "races," though people believe that to be true because the parents look different. If we don't get to the point where we start questioning our cultural assumptions about race by looking at the genetic picture things will be very bleak indeed.
That's what I'm always trying to point out. What good is to have identities of Multiracial, Biracial, Mixed race etc etc if it isn't to question their world wide terms of Racial identity of BLACK WHITE RED YELLOW.
I say all the time, either accept the way it is or stop playing with race. Is the purpose of seeing oneself as multiracial/biracial/mixed a way to escape a minority status or is it to break away from the falsehood of race...
Even though the world looks flat we know that it isn't. We consider anyone who is fooled by their eyes into believing that the world is flat quite ignorant of the facts. Acceptance of scientific advances is what changed this, and now a heretical idea is something every child can tell you is true without controversy. We have to get to the same level of understand about "race" for all of our sakes.
Are you trying to give a crude definition of ancestral regions? Or are you trying to define who they are. If they are raised multiethnic that is what they are. If they are raised in the Black ethnicity and identify as such, that is what they are as well.
Salsassin, is this question directed to me or sagascend? I'm a bit confused.
If it's directed towards me in regards to those children, I was just stating what outsiders see - and will react to - based on their phenotypes. Nothing more. Not how the kids view (or will grow up to view) themselves personally. And you're right, they all may be raised to view themselves multiethnically/racially OR the girls may be raised to consider themselves black and the boy white for all I know. Even though their biracial mothers are sisters and their related by blood. Both options would be completely understandble to me.
People can, often do, and should consider themselves whatever they wish "race" wise. I don't think anyone should attempt to try to own or define someone elses self-identity against their will. All that said, I do believe most people unfortunately are crude when it comes to categorizing others and in all likelihood will continue to be. It subconsciously happens in a split second and is largely done by phenotype.
That's why stereotypically looking biracial people often get those "what are you and where are you from?" questions. Many people naturally for some reason have this desire/need to quickly pigeonhole their fellow human being.
This categorizing from the outside, if repetitive and long lasting, can deeply affect ones self perception. So much so, that a person may eventually give up and accept societies racial definition of themselves over their own.
Then when would it end? Quadroons, are almost always white in color and looks. If they are "mixed" their children will be "mixed" and their grandchildren, etc. Then the one drop rule would be in effect.
I doubt a true quadroon would be white. Their children are white but the quadroons are not. Halle Berry is white?
Gimme a break
Then when would it end? Quadroons, are almost always white in color and looks. If they are "mixed" their children will be "mixed" and their grandchildren, etc. Then the one drop rule would be in effect.
Well known examples of Quadroons and Octoroons (I'm only using this terminology because the meaning is immediately understood) involving European/African ancestry and European/Asian ancestry. It's obvious that in these two particular cases whiteness dominated.
Eartha Kitt with daughter Kitt Shapiro and granddaughter Rachel.
Princess Alexandra - ex-wife of Prince Joachim of Denmark - and sons Nikolai and Felix.
There are exceptions to the rule however as in the case of Tais Araujo's and Yannick Noah's sons, and Thandie Newton's eldest daughter.
I read up. Eartha Kitt is a quad her daughter is an octoroon.
I read up. Eartha Kitt is a quad her daughter is an octoroon.
Eartha Kitt says her mother was Black/Cherokee and her father White. Her daughter is therefore considered quadroon and her granddaughter and grandson are octoroon. If one wants to use such terminology...
Quote:
I doubt a true quadroon would be white. Their children are white but the quadroons are not.
There are plenty - and I mean PLENTY - of examples of phenotypically white (many Nordic) appearanced people of mixed European/African ancestry. It's really not that rare of an occurrence at all contrary to popular belief.
Quote:
also someone can look the same as the mulatto parent if they are a quadroon.
I read up. Eartha Kitt is a quad her daughter is an octoroon.
Eartha Kitt says her mother was Black/Cherokee and her father White. Her daughter is therefore considered quadroon and her granddaughter and grandson are octoroon. If one wants to use such terminology...
Quote:
I doubt a true quadroon would be white. Their children are white but the quadroons are not.
There are plenty - and I mean PLENTY - of examples of phenotypically white (many Nordic) appearanced people of mixed European/African ancestry. It's really not that rare of an occurrence at all contrary to popular belief.
Quote:
also someone can look the same as the mulatto parent if they are a quadroon.
This is true.
No quadroon means quarter black. If the daughter is 1/8 black how is she a quadroon?
Even though the world looks flat we know that it isn't. We consider anyone who is fooled by their eyes into believing that the world is flat quite ignorant of the facts. Acceptance of scientific advances is what changed this, and now a heretical idea is something every child can tell you is true without controversy. We have to get to the same level of understand about "race" for all of our sakes.
Tell me about it... I pray this one day comes true. Not likely in our lifetime but one can always hope for the future.
Then when would it end? Quadroons, are almost always white in color and looks. If they are "mixed" their children will be "mixed" and their grandchildren, etc. Then the one drop rule would be in effect.
Not all quadroons are white appearing. Again, color is about genetic roulette.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
