Reply to Thread New Thread |
|
![]() |
#1 |
|
In general. To look "Black" in the US is to bascially look African American, which has a wide range of phenotypes from Pure SSA looking to almost White.
Here's the African American range. Most Aframs are in the Brown skinned column, while the other two are not rare but less common. From Magneto's post. Dark skinned ![]() ![]() ^^2 of my relatives ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() . . ![]() ![]() ![]() ^^something like that could be considered dark skinned unless he's around/next to someone even darker like ![]() . . ![]() Brown skinned ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() . . Redbones to Light skinned ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ^^His parents below: father is a "medium" type and his mother is a "light skinned" type. He came out in the "redbone" range ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() . . . ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() . . . . after them it's people past true mulatto looking and heading into the quad-> white looking ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() . |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
|
African-American to me is more of an ethnicity, similarly to how I view Hispanics and Latinos. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
|
Yeah in the US there's only either black or white .
In the South Africa or old years a lot of people would register in the "colored" category while the rest in the "black " . In the French Carib they would be called "metisse" I think as opposed to "black". It is really weird how the US , the first white majority country with a {current} non white president was so rejectionist about their own bi -racial progeniture. |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
|
Latin American concepts of race go back to the "racial hierarchy" or old Latin America, which had people of mixed ancestry getting a mixed ancestry getting more rights than "pure blooded" non-Europeans, modern "racial systems" in the Americas reflect old "classest" models. In the US, they for the most part considered any people with known African decent to be legally "black", though i'm not sure about free people of African decent prior to the end of slavery. In highschool I remember reading something about illegitimate "mulattoo" children. It said the son of a "white" slave owner was usually not claimed by the father, and therefore left with the slaves, but if the mother gave birth to an partially African child, the kid may be raised by the "white" family if they choose. I'm not sure if that was referring to the US or a Latin American country.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
|
Probably another thread that will turn out to be 47 pages or more, where you on most of the pages can see Game Theory engaging in the discussions.
![]() Do the mother have Asian ancestry? Her eyes looks a bit chinky IMO. |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
|
Wouldn't Aframs who look overwhelmingly European be seen as mixed by the general population, rather than fully Afram? As I would assume that recently mixed Americans with their phenotype are more numerous. Where I live. Half Afram biracials just blend into the general Afram population. They don't really stick out from the mainstream over here. But in somewhere like the Northeast, pred Euro biracials would be seen as "Dominican", "Puerto Rican", or "Biracial" rather than Afram. |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
|
|
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|