[VXHLrsO1]

One Drop Rule was not for Blacks, it was for Whites with Black ancestry 1/2, 1/4 and 1/8. It had more to due with owning property, economics and sheer racism. This is where *passing* started. Most people who could pass for White, mainly Octroons and Quadroons would relocate to other towns, thus abandoning family members and would resume an new identity as White.

Not only does the one-drop rule apply to no other group than American blacks, but apparently the rule is unique in that it is found only in the United States and not in any other nation in the world. In fact, definitions of who is black vary quite sharply from country to country, and for this reason people in other countries often express consternation about our definition. James Baldwin relates a revealing incident that occurred in 1956 at the Conference of Negro-African Writers and Artists held in Paris. The head of the delegation of writers and artists from the United States was John Davis. The French chairperson introduced Davis and then asked him why he considered himself Negro, since he certainly did not look like one. Baldwin wrote, "He is a Negro, of course, from the remarkable legal point of view which obtains in the United States, but more importantly, as he tried to make clear to his interlocutor, he was a Negro by choice and by depth of involvement--by experience, in fact."

The phenomenon known as "passing as white" is difficult to explain in other countries or to foreign students. Typical questions are: "Shouldn't Americans say that a person who is passing as white is white, or nearly all white, and has previously been passing as black?" or "To be consistent, shouldn't you say that someone who is one-eighth white is passing as black?" or "Why is there so much concern, since the so-called blacks who pass take so little negroid ancestry with them?" Those who ask such questions need to realize that "passing" is much more a social phenomenon than a biological one, reflecting the nation's unique definition of what makes a person black. The concept of "passing" rests on the one-drop rule and on folk beliefs about race and miscegenation, not on biological or historical fact.http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...d/onedrop.html

[gooseCile]

Most Latin American countries are the opposite. If you have One drop of white blood, you're white, lol.

Never heard that happen anywhere in Latin America

[Gymnarnemia]

^me neither; certainly never heard of that amongst Cubans.

[Eugen80]

This is how it all started:

The Invention of the One-Drop Rule in the 1830s North

Thing is, whenever the subject comes up, its creation always get pegged on Southerners for some reason.

[HaroldMY]

This is how it all started:

The Invention of the One-Drop Rule in the 1830s North

Thing is, whenever the subject comes up, its creation always get pegged on Southerners for some reason.

This is interesting from that link.

That “white-looking” is the current form of expression is indisputable. With one exception, every textbook or monograph, published since the turn of the twentieth century that the present author has uncovered, refers to “white-looking” slaves. No modern author can bring himself or herself to state the obvious fact that tens of thousands of White people (by the usage of the time) were enslaved in the antebellum South. Today’s academic canon is that they were merely “white-looking”; they were not “really white” (whatever that means). Just think of all the white Americans descended from those slaves that are not aware that their ancestors were slaves.

[Unhappu]

If you have one-drop of Black blood and you don't look black, I don't think anyone will consider you to be black.

George Zimmerman is Part black and he is somehow a "white hispanic".

[eI7iqNot]

If you have one-drop of Black blood and you don't look black, I don't think anyone will consider you to be black.

George Zimmerman is Part black and he is somehow a "white hispanic".

Any proof of it?

[PyncGyncliacy]

Maybe they can bring Zimmerman onto that show, "Finding Your Roots"...

[sisuarmalmicy]

Any proof of it

He's great grandfather is Afro Peruvian.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...83O18H20120425

I don't have access to his Autosome data, sorry.

[jq0AFTTC]

He must be 1/8 Black(or less) then

[ImmimiFruff]

He must be 1/8 Black(or less) then

what if he was Half black? would it make any difference at all? I doubt it.

He doesn't look black so he is a racist murderer. If he looked black Trayvon would just be another Dead black kid that nobody cared about.

[Metalhead]

what if he was Half black? would it make any difference at all? I doubt it.

He doesn't look black so he is a racist murderer. If he looked black Trayvon would just be another Dead black kid that nobody cared about.

I understand double standards are no good.

[xesvideo]

If the one drop rule was one drop of white ancestry instead of one drop of black ancestry, I seriously think there would only be like 1-2,000,000 Aframs in the U.S.

[Swidemaiskikemu]

If the one drop rule was one drop of white ancestry instead of one drop of black ancestry, I seriously think there would only be like 1-2,000,000 Aframs in the U.S.

I don't think there would be any.

[Vzkdgdqx]

He must be 1/8 Black(or less) then

He also looks Triracial in phenotype.

[Wahwlsnt]

what if he was Half black? would it make any difference at all? I doubt it.

He doesn't look black so he is a racist murderer. If he looked black Trayvon would just be another Dead black kid that nobody cared about.

If he was half "black" I'm pretty sure most people would consider him "black" even if they had initially mistaken him for "white". This specific case though has apolitical dimension to it. Funny thing is that Trayvon was just another "black" that got shot for like a month before anything happened, people literally protested, and the media ate it up, and things got political.

[ROYMANgo]

I always thought that the "one drop rule" was due to the dynamic adaptive nature of white supremacist systems, which depending on population demographics and other factors could adapt its definition of white. In societies where "real" whites were outnumbered and needed support from "mixed" classes, white could have an inclusive definition, including the mixed descendants. In societies, like anglo-America, where such a compromise wasn't necessary, a stringently exclusive definition of whiteness could be applied. Just a theory, I'm sure it's full of holes.

[ordercigsnick]

^ this is somewhat accurate but even the American definition o f"white" has adapted with more and more immigration, but even in the accepted "white" group, there exists a hierarchy of "whiteness", with swarthy "off-whites" and MENAs at the bottom and Northern Europeans at the top, this is also a cultural concept in America, Anglo-Germanic Christian (WASP) culture is dominant and others are further and further away from the American capitalist model and therefore other cultures are forced to conform to a kind of "cultural whiteness" in America as well.

[Assunkkensatt]

If a white guy has a drop of black blood and it shows a little... why is he considered only black?

But why is a black guy, who is half white, considered only black?

Does this have to do with whites being seen as pure white? And other races don't have to be pure?

If you find a non-white ancestor, say, 2,000 years ago, you aren't white? Why? Why doesn't the same apply to other races?

There is no one drop rule any longer, if a peckerwood like Anodyne for example had a black ancestor 300 years ago and all whites after that he is white, nothing in the law automatically classifies him as black.

[smazibummigue]

For what it's worth, I am AfAm, and here's my take on the one drop rule and it's impact on people today.

Over time, we have been conditioned to think of ourselves as "black" instead of "mixed," (even if we are) just as you mixed people from LatAm, Caribbean, etc., are conditioned to think of yourselves as the composite of separate racial/ethnic identities.

White Americans see Afams as one group. Again, conditioning. Person #1 can be "light-skinned" with a mixed phenotype and they'll say he's no different from his more African-looking buddy.

After years of laws that said you were "just this" or "just that," and then being able to turn "just that" into a position of political strength, we have (somewhat) risen above the original negativity attached to the one drop rule. Despite having had a very good sense of who's mixed based on pheonotype, forever, the Civil Rights movement encouraged us to stand united for socio/political/economic change. We were successful. I think we have made advances that some of our fellow dark hued/African phenotyped cousins in LatAm have not.

In the U.S, there's no tangible advantage for being "mixed" that I can think of. In LatAm, looking like me might mean you can't get a good job. Here, regardless of hue/phenotype, we are both educated/poor; successful/impoverished.

Honestly, outside of forums like this, I never have this conversation. And, when I do, it's generally with people who aren't Afams.

The questions about "what are you" generally come from non-Americans. They are much more observant about the subtle differences of phenotypes among Afams.

I have asked myself the question, where is it better to be a darker hued/African phenotype person?

What do you think?