The Study of Racialism

I reviewed Frank's essay on the rate of Black-White switching, which averages to .0012 a year, or 1.2% each decade. The degree of switching is MUCH more significant than his essay suggests. If all of these people are at least 75% European (only 1.8% of AA's are at least 75% European), then 6.7% of those that can switch do so each year, or 67% each decade.

So, just to keep from losing European blood, .0018 of African Americans must marry "pure" Whites and successfully raise their children as African Americans each year (all of whom must inmarry), or .018 per decade. However, as it turns out, the intermarriage rate with Whites is .06 among African Americans, which means that 33% of Biracials must marry African Americans to keep their European ancestry at parity. But far fewer than this actually marry African Americans (somewhere around 15% if I recall). Even though intermarriage is greater than ever before, the exchange of genes is not reciprocal. This means that:

(a) Most of the White genes from intermarriages are going back into the White community (~50%) or into non-Black marriages.

(b) The Black community is steadily leaking European genes at an unsustainable rate into the White community.

(c) Nearly the entire leakage is coming from the Mulatto Elite (if presumption of 75% Euro ancestry holds).

(d) The African American community in general is mostly receiving the European genes which do pass into it through intermarriage (because mating is class mediated but not exclusive to the elite).

(e) The mulatto elite is darkening from loss of White blood, and intermixture with more African persons.

(f) African Americans in general appear to be lightening as they actually darken, because European ancestry is diffusing not accumulating.

If this trend is relatively new (say within the last 80 years), then it may have major implications for the development of identity and political rhetoric in the African American community.

maybe I'm slow, but I'm confused here on who's being called AA and who's being called White.

I reviewed Frank's essay on the rate of Black-White switching, which averages to .0012 a year, or 1.2% each decade. The degree of switching is MUCH more significant than his essay suggests. If all of these people are at least 75% European (only 1.8% of AA's are at least 75% European), then 6.7% of those that can switch do so each year, or 67% each decade.

So, just to keep from losing European blood, .0018 of African Americans must marry "pure" Whites and successfully raise their children as African Americans each year (all of whom must inmarry), or .018 per decade. However, as it turns out, the intermarriage rate with Whites is .06 among African Americans, which means that 33% of Biracials must marry African Americans to keep their European ancestry at parity. But far fewer than this actually marry African Americans (somewhere around 15% if I recall). Even though intermarriage is greater than ever before, the exchange of genes is not reciprocal. This means that:

Your use of African-American is not clear in your ideas here. I believe this group has developed a usage of terms that we all should adhere to for clarity.

African-Americans as we refer in this group are not defined by biological SSAfrican dominate genes. But by a cultural historic connection. Your usage of AA is like saying pure africans ie SSA. Many people who identify as African-American are very much 'visually' mixed.
We sometimes use the term MGM.

Can you prove your percentage of Biracial(Mulatto) intermarriage with African Americans?

I mean the scenario is wide. 1.) don't choose to marry
2.) don't choose to have kids
3.) are gay or lesbian
4.) marry other biracials of any admixture
5.) marry white
6.) marry black
7.) marry latino of any admixture
8.) marry MGM
etc etc etc

(a) Most of the White genes from intermarriages are going back into the White community (~50%) or into non-Black marriages.

where are you getting this info from?

(b) The Black community is steadily leaking European genes at an unsustainable rate into the White community.

where are you getting this info from?

(c) Nearly the entire leakage is coming from the Mulatto Elite (if presumption of 75% Euro ancestry holds).

(d) The African American community in general is mostly receiving the European genes which do pass into it through intermarriage (because mating is class mediated but not exclusive to the elite).

In the real world mating is animal instinct,
in many poor mixed neighborhoods, interacial dating and marrying of all sorts is probably more common this in middle - upperclass.

(e) The mulatto elite is darkening from loss of White blood, and intermixture with more African persons.

Where is this mulatto elite? what states do you find them in?
I mean I can find large Italian-American, Irish-American or Native-American communities neighborhoods etc etc, where is this Mulatto-American community?

(f) African Americans in general appear to be lightening as they actually darken, because European ancestry is diffusing not accumulating.

If this trend is relatively new (say within the last 80 years), then it may have major implications for the development of identity and political rhetoric in the African American community.


3.3.11. black — The word “black” has different meanings that are easily confused. Readers often misunderstand which meaning was intended by the writer, especially since many readers are not native speakers of U.S. English. For example, each of the following sentences uses the word to mean something different: “Black neighborhood traditions center on Protestant churches.” “Many Brazilians have Black ancestry.” “The untouchables of India are Black.” “Australian Aborigines self-identify as Black.” “Walter White was actually Black even though he looked White.” “Black people around the world, especially in Asia and the Middle East, were exploited and oppressed by European conquest and colonization.”

Two usages are particularly confusing: African-American and Sub-Saharan. Most usages of “Black” on this site refer to the African-American ethnic community as in, “Black neighborhood traditions center on Protestant churches.” To avoid ambiguity use “African American” instead (or “A-A” for short). Another usage denotes someone of apparently African phenotype or ancestry. As in, “Many Brazilians have Black ancestry.” To avoid ambiguity use “sub-Saharan ancestry” instead (or “S-S ancestry” for short). The two usages of “Black” in combination make your text virtually unintelligible. If you write, for example “Black neighborhood traditions center on Protestant churches and most Brazilians have Black ancestry, ” no one will be able to decipher what you mean. The first clause uses “Black” to mean “African American” (since the vast majority of Brazilians are Catholics), but the second then suggests that most Brazilians have African-American ancestors (obviously a false statement). But if the reader assumes that “Black” means “sub-Saharan,” then the second clause makes sense (most Brazilians really do have some sub-Saharan ancestry) but the first clause is obviously false, since Protestant church-centered neighborhoods are unique to North America. And so, always avoid using “Black,” rather than the site-recommended terms, “African-American (A-A)” or “Sub-Saharan (SSA)” unless you make very clear which meaning you intended. Never strive for deliberate ambiguity. Never refuse to clarify which meaning you intended. And never insist, for example, that Australian Aborigines are “Black” in the same sense that Walter White was “Black.”


3.3.12 mixed (biracial, multiracial, mulatto, etc.) — These terms are often employed with three different meanings: self-identity, DNA, and appearance. Confusion results when members fail to make clear which of those meanings they intend in any given message.


Self-identity mixed — refers to people who, when asked which side of the color line they are on, answer something other than solely “Black” or solely “White.” For example, less than 3 percent of the U.S. population who check off “Black” on the census, also check off something else. According to the census, less than three percent of African Americans are self-identity mixed.


Genetically mixed — refers to people whose autosomal DNA shows both subsaharan and European ancestry-informative markers. One-third of the White U.S. population and virtually all African-Americans show markers from both continents. In this sense, virtually all Black Americans and one-third of White Americans are mixed.


Visually mixed — refers to people who, in the eyes of the person writing, “look mixed.” For example, to the person writing these words, Mariah Carey looks unmixed White.

When you use the term “mixed” (biracial, multiracial, mulatto, etc.) please make clear which of those meanings you intend. You will not be challenged if the context makes your meaning clear. For example, most threads in the “Molecular Anthropology” forum deal with genetic admixture while most in the “Ethnicity in America” forum refer to ethno-political self-identity. But you will be warned by a moderator if your meaning is not clear. Finally, your posting privilege will be suspended if you do not clarify which meaning you intend or if you are deliberately ambiguous in this regard.

_________________
"Until the Lion writes his own story, the tale of the hunt will always glorify the hunter." - African proverbs

"I am Black & I am White, and know there is no difference. Each 1 casts a shadow, and all shadows are dark." -Walter White

@ Gemini



I mean it within the definition adhered to on this site.



Yes. I obtained this figure from a recent sociological study. I will look for it and post the citation.



I calculated it from the available data on African American genomics, intermarriage rates, and population sizes in the US. I can provide a full citation list.




I calculated it from the available data on African American genomics, intermarriage rates, and population sizes in the US. I can provide a full citation list.





Upper and Middle-class African Americans are more European than lower class African Americans, according to studies. This is because (a) skin-color correlates with SES in African Americans, and (b) skin-color correlates with continental ancestry. I can provide citations if you would like.



They are NOT a separate community in that sense. The Mulatto elite refers to upper and middle class African Americans, who are very disproportionately "mixed race".These people form an elite because they are (a) much wealthier, (b) much more educated, (c) in control of the African American community both politically and economically, (d) comprise the base of the African American academia and intellectual community, and (e) perceive of themselves as a special class of African Americans, apart from the "darker Blacks". I will have trouble proving this last point is true, but it appears to be so from a wide variety of mostly anecdotal evidence I can provide. I would roughly estimate that these African Americans are perhaps 30-35% European on average. Additionally, it appears that nearly all of the highly (over 50% European) "mixed-race" African Americans, are drawn from the upper and middle class strata.

In the past one could make such a claim, but is this the case currently? Is it indeed the case in today's America that middle and upper class African Americans are mostly mulatto in some sense? Or could it be that such people are represented disproportionately in the middle and upper classes of African America?

There are just as many 'non mixed/visually mixed' AA who are middle-upper middle class, wealthy, educated, owning business, governers and mayors

_________________
"Until the Lion writes his own story, the tale of the hunt will always glorify the hunter." - African proverbs

"I am Black & I am White, and know there is no difference. Each 1 casts a shadow, and all shadows are dark." -Walter White

Yes, you may be correct about that NOW. What's your point? I am drawing attention to the estimated gene flow between "Whites" and "Blacks". I think this will have consequences on the overall phenotype of both groups, and their relative European and African admixture. It could be relevant to socio-political dynamics between them.