These nigerian women are Igbo, who have distant semitic/arab bloodlines.
Odocoileus already pointed out, based upon their appearance alone, that the women are probably Fulani, not Ibo.
As it turns out, the website does not imply that they are Ibo. According to the website where anonymouse retrieved the picture, the women are from Benin (formerly Dahomey), and not from Nigeria at all. This makes it vanishingly unlikely that they are Ibo. Other than tourists and visitors, there are few Ibo in Benin (formerly Dahomey), but there are many Fulani. Most likely the women pictured are Fulani muslims, whose Arabic ancestry is no more distant than that of Tunisians or Algerians.
Joined: 05 Feb 2007 {Posts: 5 } Location: New York
Posted: Tue 16 Oct 2007 02:03 Post subject:
Just playing devil's advocate here, who's to say the kid wearing the 100% African shirt wasn't actually from Africa. I know some North Africans and white South Africans who refer to themselves as African not based upon the color of their skin but do to the fact that that's the continent they come from.
Just playing devil's advocate here, who's to say the kid wearing the 100% African shirt wasn't actually from Africa. I know some North Africans and white South Africans who refer to themselves as African not based upon the color of their skin but do to the fact that that's the continent they come from.
I totally agree, I've said the same, weither someone is biracial or Afrikaaner, if they are native African it works.
Just playing devil's advocate here, who's to say the kid wearing the 100% African shirt wasn't actually from Africa. I know some North Africans and white South Africans who refer to themselves as African not based upon the color of their skin but do to the fact that that's the continent they come from.
Well, that would be the only plausible explanation. Maybe he was born in Africa, but I doubt it. I went to school with him and never heard anything to that effect. But, you never know.
No that has nothing to do with it, A person is mixed period, you don't have to look unmistakenly like some other ethnic group to be mixed. 2 mulattoes can have children and those children can mixed with other mulattoes and most likely the family will still look part black part white. If you put Lenny Kravitz Boris Kodjoe Rachael True Mariah Carey / Vanesse Williams Jada Pinkett Sinbad Michael Ealy all on an island, generations later the kids will still look like the above mentioned. They will still have very visible features from Africa & Europe.
The ODR did not force mulattoes to live among blacks. And the slave quarters don't count.
There is a rapper named Eric Sermon he is dark skinned and has green eyes(natural) no one is going to tell me that isn't exotic, that he doesn't look mixed nor that the eye color isn't obviously from Europe or white admixture.
You're so right to emphasize the multigenerational view of this issue. So many Blacks are mixed because of the genetic diversity within the population, definitely brought about in large part by the ODR. But to negate the cultural and kinship ties that resulted from the color line/ODR is not only insulting, but quite disingenous. Whenever a poster attempts to liken the participation of visibly mixed Blacks in their culture (not Creoles or folks with their own cultures, but African American/Negro/Colored/BLACK people) as "hostages" it is unbelievably dishonest. I could see if someone was applying a Latin definition of identity, which is based on appearance rather than ancestry. It is one thing to say that there are Black mulattos, blancos, pardos, zambos etc. etc. within the population and quite another to say that these people who self-identify as Blacks, who were raised in Black families and partake in Black culture are frauds, delusional, hostages, or victims. It is one thing to offer an alternative choice in self-identification to mixed people and quite another to do so by denying that kinship bonds over generations have blurred the lines between the Blacks folks want to claim and the Blacks they'd rather not. I can see such activists all over my fairskinned, green eyed uncle like a cheap suit and looking at my more African looking father and saying "eh, no thanks." Makes you wonder what the agenda really is. My sense is that many wish to create a group based on visbile Afro-Euro mixture, with certain phenotypes of mixed individuals becoming highly desirable and others best relegated to "blackness."
I agree with this - basically, you cannot separate a family/siblings by saying some are mixed and others (dark) are unmixed. Due to slavery, ODR, etc AAs/Black Americans come in a variety of shades and often all in the same family. Despite looks, most of these people share the same habits, culture, identity, language, etc. Futhermore, many, if not most Americans are 'mixed' so 'Mixed', in a racial sense, IMO, in our American culture is meaningless (nice trivia, etc.)
That is why my opinion is that offical/legal 'mixedness' as a separate non-Black status/cateogory be reserved for RECENT mixes only and for those who do not look part-Black. The Heather Locklear's, Wentworth Miller's, Carol Channings, etc.
Most bi-racials will at least acknowledge their African/Black parent/ancestry and for most they don't even have to - it is obvious via eyeballing. In my experience, SSA's would NEVER claim these people (White/Hispanic Quads) like Black Amercans can 'justifabily' claim mulattoes BY CULTURE (and 1 or 2 features).
So, IMO, to solve the 'Who is mixed debate?' Quadroons (<25% SSA) should not be labeled Black/AA by ANYONE because just about everyone/most mixed people above that level of SSA decent will look part Afro-descente and be subject to ODResque descrimination by many Americans/our culture. IMO, Quads more than anyone are in a 'racial no mans land'. I remeber reading about Mariah Carey (Mulatto who looks Quadesque) saying she felt invisible and that was the reasoning behind one of her songs (that dealt w/race isses).
Yes, its not fair, but our current American reality (and reality does change ). As a 'mulatto' I claim being biracial, but it is obvious I have recent SSA ancestry, so that puts me in the 'Black' label for many American people. And for those who cannot tell, if asked, I tell them. And no, not all 'Whites' et al. are racist, some have even pushed me to call myself mixed/non-Black, but I am part of AAs culturally.
Most 'Light-Skinned Blacks' even most Creoles, do not look totally non-Black so that shuts the door on any arguement about phenotype. Only some Creoles approximate this level of Whiteness/Non-Blackness without having RECENT admixure and these Creoles/VLSBs (i.e Broyard-types) are gradually dying out/being eliminated via intermarriage (w/ 'Whites' & 'Blacks'). And most AAs, I would imagine, would claim a person (esp against their will) with 3 non-Black (identifed) grandparents, Dr. Gates notwithstanding.....
No that has nothing to do with it, A person is mixed period, you don't have to look unmistakenly like some other ethnic group to be mixed. 2 mulattoes can have children and those children can mixed with other mulattoes and most likely the family will still look part black part white. If you put Lenny Kravitz Boris Kodjoe Rachael True Mariah Carey / Vanesse Williams Jada Pinkett Sinbad Michael Ealy all on an island, generations later the kids will still look like the above mentioned. They will still have very visible features from Africa & Europe.
The ODR did not force mulattoes to live among blacks. And the slave quarters don't count.
There is a rapper named Eric Sermon he is dark skinned and has green eyes(natural) no one is going to tell me that isn't exotic, that he doesn't look mixed nor that the eye color isn't obviously from Europe or white admixture.
You're so right to emphasize the multigenerational view of this issue. So many Blacks are mixed because of the genetic diversity within the population, definitely brought about in large part by the ODR. But to negate the cultural and kinship ties that resulted from the color line/ODR is not only insulting, but quite disingenous. Whenever a poster attempts to liken the participation of visibly mixed Blacks in their culture (not Creoles or folks with their own cultures, but African American/Negro/Colored/BLACK people) as "hostages" it is unbelievably dishonest. I could see if someone was applying a Latin definition of identity, which is based on appearance rather than ancestry. It is one thing to say that there are Black mulattos, blancos, pardos, zambos etc. etc. within the population and quite another to say that these people who self-identify as Blacks, who were raised in Black families and partake in Black culture are frauds, delusional, hostages, or victims. It is one thing to offer an alternative choice in self-identification to mixed people and quite another to do so by denying that kinship bonds over generations have blurred the lines between the Blacks folks want to claim and the Blacks they'd rather not. I can see such activists all over my fairskinned, green eyed uncle like a cheap suit and looking at my more African looking father and saying "eh, no thanks." Makes you wonder what the agenda really is. My sense is that many wish to create a group based on visbile Afro-Euro mixture, with certain phenotypes of mixed individuals becoming highly desirable and others best relegated to "blackness."
I agree with this - basically, you cannot separate a family/siblings by saying some are mixed and others (dark) are unmixed. Due to slavery, ODR, etc AAs/Black Americans come in a variety of shades and often all in the same family. Despite looks, most of these people share the same habits, culture, identity, language, etc. Futhermore, many, if not most Americans are 'mixed' so 'Mixed', in a racial sense, IMO, in our American culture is meaningless (nice trivia, etc.)
That is why my opinion is that offical/legal 'mixedness' as a separate non-Black status/cateogory be reserved for RECENT mixes only and for those who do not look part-Black. The Heather Locklear's, Wentworth Miller's, Carol Channings, etc.
Most bi-racials will at least acknowledge their African/Black parent/ancestry and for most they don't even have to - it is obvious via eyeballing. In my experience, SSA's would NEVER claim these people (White/Hispanic Quads) like Black Amercans can 'justifabily' claim mulattoes BY CULTURE (and 1 or 2 features).
So, IMO, to solve the 'Who is mixed debate?' Quadroons (<25% SSA) should not be labeled Black/AA by ANYONE because just about everyone/most mixed people above that level of SSA decent will look part Afro-descente and be subject to ODResque descrimination by many Americans/our culture. IMO, Quads more than anyone are in a 'racial no mans land'. I remeber reading about Mariah Carey (Mulatto who looks Quadesque) saying she felt invisible and that was the reasoning behind one of her songs (that dealt w/race isses).
Yes, its not fair, but our current American reality (and reality does change ). As a 'mulatto' I claim being biracial, but it is obvious I have recent SSA ancestry, so that puts me in the 'Black' label for many American people. And for those who cannot tell, if asked, I tell them. And no, not all 'Whites' et al. are racist, some have even pushed me to call myself mixed/non-Black, but I am part of AAs culturally.
Most 'Light-Skinned Blacks' even most Creoles, do not look totally non-Black so that shuts the door on any arguement about phenotype. Only some Creoles approximate this level of Whiteness/Non-Blackness without having RECENT admixure and these Creoles/VLSBs (i.e Broyard-types) are gradually dying out/being eliminated via intermarriage (w/ 'Whites' & 'Blacks'). And most AAs, I would imagine, would claim a person (esp against their will) with 3 non-Black (identifed) grandparents, Dr. Gates notwithstanding.....
Or, how about we just let people identify as they please, based on their ancestry and cultural upbringing?
I agree with this - basically, you cannot separate a family/siblings by saying some are mixed and others (dark) are unmixed. Due to slavery, ODR, etc AAs/Black Americans come in a variety of shades and often all in the same family. Despite looks, most of these people share the same habits, culture, identity, language, etc. Futhermore, many, if not most Americans are 'mixed' so 'Mixed', in a racial sense, IMO, in our American culture is meaningless (nice trivia, etc.)
That is why my opinion is that offical/legal 'mixedness' as a separate non-Black status/cateogory be reserved for RECENT mixes only and for those who do not look part-Black. The Heather Locklear's, Wentworth Miller's, Carol Channings, etc.
Most bi-racials will at least acknowledge their African/Black parent/ancestry and for most they don't even have to - it is obvious via eyeballing. In my experience, SSA's would NEVER claim these people (White/Hispanic Quads) like Black Amercans can 'justifabily' claim mulattoes BY CULTURE (and 1 or 2 features).
So, IMO, to solve the 'Who is mixed debate?' Quadroons (<25% SSA) should not be labeled Black/AA by ANYONE because just about everyone/most mixed people above that level of SSA decent will look part Afro-descente and be subject to ODResque descrimination by many Americans/our culture. IMO, Quads more than anyone are in a 'racial no mans land'. I remeber reading about Mariah Carey (Mulatto who looks Quadesque) saying she felt invisible and that was the reasoning behind one of her songs (that dealt w/race isses).
Yes, its not fair, but our current American reality (and reality does change ). As a 'mulatto' I claim being biracial, but it is obvious I have recent SSA ancestry, so that puts me in the 'Black' label for many American people. And for those who cannot tell, if asked, I tell them. And no, not all 'Whites' et al. are racist, some have even pushed me to call myself mixed/non-Black, but I am part of AAs culturally.
Most 'Light-Skinned Blacks' even most Creoles, do not look totally non-Black so that shuts the door on any arguement about phenotype. Only some Creoles approximate this level of Whiteness/Non-Blackness without having RECENT admixure and these Creoles/VLSBs (i.e Broyard-types) are gradually dying out/being eliminated via intermarriage (w/ 'Whites' & 'Blacks'). And most AAs, I would imagine, would claim a person (esp against their will) with 3 non-Black (identifed) grandparents, Dr. Gates notwithstanding.....
1. Why do you include Heather Locklear? There is no conclusive proof that she has African American heritage, despite the last name and her paternal ties to the Lumbee tribe.
2. Why do you suggest only "black looking" multiracials be exluded? What about "white looking" multiracials?
I agree with this - basically, you cannot separate a family/siblings by saying some are mixed and others (dark) are unmixed. Due to slavery, ODR, etc AAs/Black Americans come in a variety of shades and often all in the same family. Despite looks, most of these people share the same habits, culture, identity, language, etc. Futhermore, many, if not most Americans are 'mixed' so 'Mixed', in a racial sense, IMO, in our American culture is meaningless (nice trivia, etc.)
That is why my opinion is that offical/legal 'mixedness' as a separate non-Black status/cateogory be reserved for RECENT mixes only and for those who do not look part-Black. The Heather Locklear's, Wentworth Miller's, Carol Channings, etc.
Most bi-racials will at least acknowledge their African/Black parent/ancestry and for most they don't even have to - it is obvious via eyeballing. In my experience, SSA's would NEVER claim these people (White/Hispanic Quads) like Black Amercans can 'justifabily' claim mulattoes BY CULTURE (and 1 or 2 features).
So, IMO, to solve the 'Who is mixed debate?' Quadroons (<25% SSA) should not be labeled Black/AA by ANYONE because just about everyone/most mixed people above that level of SSA decent will look part Afro-descente and be subject to ODResque descrimination by many Americans/our culture. IMO, Quads more than anyone are in a 'racial no mans land'. I remeber reading about Mariah Carey (Mulatto who looks Quadesque) saying she felt invisible and that was the reasoning behind one of her songs (that dealt w/race isses).
Yes, its not fair, but our current American reality (and reality does change ). As a 'mulatto' I claim being biracial, but it is obvious I have recent SSA ancestry, so that puts me in the 'Black' label for many American people. And for those who cannot tell, if asked, I tell them. And no, not all 'Whites' et al. are racist, some have even pushed me to call myself mixed/non-Black, but I am part of AAs culturally.
Most 'Light-Skinned Blacks' even most Creoles, do not look totally non-Black so that shuts the door on any arguement about phenotype. Only some Creoles approximate this level of Whiteness/Non-Blackness without having RECENT admixure and these Creoles/VLSBs (i.e Broyard-types) are gradually dying out/being eliminated via intermarriage (w/ 'Whites' & 'Blacks'). And most AAs, I would imagine, would claim a person (esp against their will) with 3 non-Black (identifed) grandparents, Dr. Gates notwithstanding.....
1. Why do you include Heather Locklear? There is no conclusive proof that she has African American heritage, despite the last name and her paternal ties to the Lumbee tribe.
2. Why do you suggest only "black looking" multiracials be exluded? What about "white looking" multiracials?
I was thinking the same, it has never been confirmed that Heather has Black ancestry, maybe Native Ancestry according the information many have present on the last name.
Why do you include Heather Locklear? There is no conclusive proof that she has African American heritage, despite the last name and her paternal ties to the Lumbee tribe.
gemini072 wrote:
I was thinking the same, it has never been confirmed that Heather has Black ancestry.
I hate to take another moderator to task on rule 3.3.11. If you guys mean membership in the African-American ethno-political group then neither Locklear, nor her Lumbee father, nor any other Lumbee to my knowledge has ever claimed any such membership. But if you mean having ancestors who were African slaves in the New World, then the Lumbees average about 47 percent SSA, so it would be astonishing if Ms. locklear had a SSA admixture of less than 10 percent.
P.S.: Famu, I would not use the phrase "conclusive proof" in this website. If you mean to appeal to science, say "peer-reviewed evidence." If you mean to appeal to authority (a much weaker claim) say "experts believe." And if you mean to express a personal belief to which evidence is irrlevant, say "my faith requires me to believe." This site is not a court of law and so is not the place to invoke the chimera "conclusive proof."
Why do you include Heather Locklear? There is no conclusive proof that she has African American heritage, despite the last name and her paternal ties to the Lumbee tribe.
gemini072 wrote:
I was thinking the same, it has never been confirmed that Heather has Black ancestry.
I hate to take another moderator to task on rule 3.3.11. If you guys mean membership in the African-American ethno-political group then neither Locklear, nor her Lumbee father, nor any other Lumbee to my knowledge has ever claimed any such membership. But if you mean having ancestors who were African slaves in the New World, then the Lumbees average about 47 percent SSA, so it would be astonishing if Ms. locklear had a SSA admixture of less than 10 percent.
No I wasn't talking about the later half. I understand the triracial history of the Lumbees.
Melanie wrote:That is why my opinion is that offical/legal 'mixedness' as a separate non-Black status/cateogory be reserved for RECENT mixes only and for those who do not look part-Black. The Heather Locklear's, Wentworth Miller's, Carol Channings, etc.
As far as I understand Heather has never discussed anything of mixed heritage (I could be wrong) more specifically being part AA Wentworth Miller & I believe Carol have
P.S.: Famu, I would not use the phrase "conclusive proof" in this website. If you mean to appeal to science, say "peer-reviewed evidence." If you mean to appeal to authority (a much weaker claim) say "experts believe." And if you mean to express a personal belief to which evidence is irrlevant, say "my faith requires me to believe." This site is not a court of law and so is not the place to invoke the chimera "conclusive proof."
Why do you include Heather Locklear? There is no conclusive proof that she has African American heritage, despite the last name and her paternal ties to the Lumbee tribe.
gemini072 wrote:
I was thinking the same, it has never been confirmed that Heather has Black ancestry.
I hate to take another moderator to task on rule 3.3.11. If you guys mean membership in the African-American ethno-political group then neither Locklear, nor her Lumbee father, nor any other Lumbee to my knowledge has ever claimed any such membership. But if you mean having ancestors who were African slaves in the New World, then the Lumbees average about 47 percent SSA, so it would be astonishing if Ms. locklear had a SSA admixture of less than 10 percent.
P.S.: Famu, I would not use the phrase "conclusive proof" in this website. If you mean to appeal to science, say "peer-reviewed evidence." If you mean to appeal to authority (a much weaker claim) say "experts believe." And if you mean to express a personal belief to which evidence is irrlevant, say "my faith requires me to believe." This site is not a court of law and so is not the place to invoke the chimera "conclusive proof."
1. I don't consider my comments to be chimeric, but I will respectfully withdraw the question in light of the rules this community has already established. It was a bad phrase to use.
I also didn't think that I needed to explain what I mean by "African American" as I was replying to another poster who already defined the term. If I need to define each and every time I use such terms, I will. Let me know--it's not a problem.
It took me a long time to conclude and appreciate that Spike Lee is coming from a genuine social disposition of disadvantage. He's not loyal to any phenotype or degree of full-bloodedness, anthropologically speaking. Is genuine to a social experience - lack of equality.
His mindset and work is a product of ODR, he and his recent predecessors were institutionalized, socially, under it's gist. This is why neither, he, his wife, and people like Vanessa L. Williams - and the like, can not be criticized for their pro Black stance and identities. At least, I don't criticize them.
It was in their lifetimes, mind you, that lynching was a common practice in the south. It was in their lifetimes that Martin Luther King, Jr was shot and people were marching for civil rights. It's not something you can just expect people to depreciated. When people struggle a certain way to get to a certain place, you can't just devalue that struggle especially when it occurred during the lifetimes of those who are still living. Some of them witness this, felt the pain of this, experiences this, and/or fell victim to this.
It counts for a whole lot. It counted for how Spike Lee and the rest above...how their parents were able to put food on the table so that they could grow up to be the people they are today. It counted for how those mentioned above were able to get the money they needed to go to college. Because if it wasn't for those mixed race people who were proud to be 100% black, and nothing else, the doors would still be closed to many regardless of whether they identify, or look, mixed race or black.
Their struggle is the reason why, today, it's ok to say I'm mixed; or I'm black, but mixed. It's becoming more and more ok to say this, and this started with those people struggling back then for our rights to civility and individuality. Our INDIVIDUAL rights.
These nigerian women are Igbo, who have distant semitic/arab bloodlines.
Odocoileus already pointed out, based upon their appearance alone, that the women are probably Fulani, not Ibo.
As it turns out, the website does not imply that they are Ibo. According to the website where anonymouse retrieved the picture, the women are from Benin (formerly Dahomey), and not from Nigeria at all. This makes it vanishingly unlikely that they are Ibo. Other than tourists and visitors, there are few Ibo in Benin (formerly Dahomey), but there are many Fulani. Most likely the women pictured are Fulani muslims, whose Arabic ancestry is no more distant than that of Tunisians or Algerians.
Why do you include Heather Locklear? There is no conclusive proof that she has African American heritage, despite the last name and her paternal ties to the Lumbee tribe.
gemini072 wrote:
I was thinking the same, it has never been confirmed that Heather has Black ancestry.
I hate to take another moderator to task on rule 3.3.11. If you guys mean membership in the African-American ethno-political group then neither Locklear, nor her Lumbee father, nor any other Lumbee to my knowledge has ever claimed any such membership. But if you mean having ancestors who were African slaves in the New World, then the Lumbees average about 47 percent SSA, so it would be astonishing if Ms. locklear had a SSA admixture of less than 10 percent.
P.S.: Famu, I would not use the phrase "conclusive proof" in this website. If you mean to appeal to science, say "peer-reviewed evidence." If you mean to appeal to authority (a much weaker claim) say "experts believe." And if you mean to express a personal belief to which evidence is irrlevant, say "my faith requires me to believe." This site is not a court of law and so is not the place to invoke the chimera "conclusive proof."
Yes, this is what I meant.
In a "Parade" magazine article, the blue-eyed, blonde- haired actress admits she is part African and Native American. Locklear says her last name is very common to members of a tribe called the "Lumbee," and she traces her roots back to that tribe way back on her father's side. She attributes her Caucasian-dominated looks to her mother's side of the family, which is predominantly Scottish.
http://www.jerseygop.com/RepublicanBabes27.html
Why do you include Heather Locklear? There is no conclusive proof that she has African American heritage, despite the last name and her paternal ties to the Lumbee tribe.
gemini072 wrote:
I was thinking the same, it has never been confirmed that Heather has Black ancestry.
I hate to take another moderator to task on rule 3.3.11. If you guys mean membership in the African-American ethno-political group then neither Locklear, nor her Lumbee father, nor any other Lumbee to my knowledge has ever claimed any such membership. But if you mean having ancestors who were African slaves in the New World, then the Lumbees average about 47 percent SSA, so it would be astonishing if Ms. locklear had a SSA admixture of less than 10 percent.
P.S.: Famu, I would not use the phrase "conclusive proof" in this website. If you mean to appeal to science, say "peer-reviewed evidence." If you mean to appeal to authority (a much weaker claim) say "experts believe." And if you mean to express a personal belief to which evidence is irrlevant, say "my faith requires me to believe." This site is not a court of law and so is not the place to invoke the chimera "conclusive proof."
Yes, this is what I meant.
In a "Parade" magazine article, the blue-eyed, blonde- haired actress admits she is part African and Native American. Locklear says her last name is very common to members of a tribe called the "Lumbee," and she traces her roots back to that tribe way back on her father's side. She attributes her Caucasian-dominated looks to her mother's side of the family, which is predominantly Scottish.
http://www.jerseygop.com/RepublicanBabes27.html
I can understand someone's skepticism about her having African ancestry.
Posted: Tue 27 May 2008 14:59 Post subject: Re: spike lee's family
OTHER wrote:
LSGH wrote:
Quote:
i don't know but she does'nt look that mixed to me. she looks maybe bi-racial
I suppose, ULTIMATELY, it's ALWAYS in the eye of the beholder, which explains Tribalism...
I look at this picture and all I can think is DAGGERS. I wonder if Spike Lee realizes that his red-headed daughter is going to have a life experience more similar to mulatto girls/women than to black girls/women.
That girl will most definitely identify as black and not mulatto? Since she IS Spike Lee's daughter? Not everyone who's mixed will call themselves mixed.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
[/url]
). As a 'mulatto' I claim being biracial, but it is obvious I have recent SSA ancestry, so that puts me in the 'Black' label for many American people. And for those who cannot tell, if asked, I tell them. And no, not all 'Whites' et al. are racist, some have even pushed me to call myself mixed/non-Black, but I am part of AAs 
I wonder if Spike Lee realizes that his red-headed daughter is going to have a life experience more similar to mulatto girls/women than to black girls/women.