Joined: 02 May 2006 {Posts: 358 } Location: Īle-de-France
Posted: Wed 03 May 2006 15:44 Post subject:
You got me Frank, missed that one. But If I recall, that couple are both first generation african/european mixes from england...not members of the "U.S. Black endogamous group." Futhermore, looking at their subtle difference in skin color, in Puerto Rico, we could argue all day if they are white or trigueno. If you asked me, she'd be white, and he'd be trigueno.
that couple are both first generation african/european mixes from england...not members of the "U.S. Black endogamous group."
Yes. I think everyone would agree that it is impossible for parents of strongly sub-Saharan appearance to have a nordic-looking child. To have a nordic-looking child, one parent would have to be of European phenotype and the other mixed, or both would have to be mixed. There is also another subtlety. Kids darken at puberty. And so it is not unusual for a blonde fair-complexioned baby to grow up to become a brown-haired, tanned adult. All of my kids and grandkids show this trait, some more than others.
MisterLawyer wrote:
in Puerto Rico, we could argue all day if they are white or trigueno.
Joined: 02 May 2006 {Posts: 358 } Location: Īle-de-France
Posted: Wed 03 May 2006 16:23 Post subject:
Quote:
Are you from PR?
No. Lived there for a while, got married in catano, el pueblo que se nego a morir, in my wife's home church, but I'm from Wisconsin. We try to get back 2 times a year, but its alot of $$ from WI.
And she looks "pure" white. Actually, she looks whiter than most white americans.
This is true. I've read that 30% of white Americans (not to mention certain hispanic and Arabic populations legally considered white that have much higher percentages) have varying degrees of measurable African ancestry. Small to be sure - but still enough to be detected by ancestry tests.
Could it be that Rae and Victoria's daughter (amongst others) are genetically similar (if not identical) to this 30% of the white American population?
Or would their African genetic percentages be higher - inspite of their utterly European looks - because one parent is directly bi/multiracial?
I think Rae's daughter and Maya's could be mistaken as sisters... (And I just LOVE those hats!)
Below is Tai Babilonia's (African-American mother; Filipino and Hopi-Indian father) son Scout Gabriel Butler. His natural hair was platinum blonde up until recently. (Former skating partner Randy Gardner pictured is not the boys father)
Eartha Kitt with daughter Kitt and granddaughter Rachel Shapiro
Last edited by zsana on Tue 01 Aug 2006 15:03; edited 2 times in total
Joined: 02 May 2006 {Posts: 358 } Location: Īle-de-France
Posted: Wed 10 May 2006 17:21 Post subject:
Quote:
Could it be that Rae and Victoria's daughter (amongst others) are genetically similar (if not identical) to this 30% of the white American population?
Or would their African genetic percentages be higher - inspite of their utterly European looks - because one parent is directly bi/multiracial?
This is a very interesting question, and I don't know the answer, but I am willing to speculate.
My guess is that both of your proposed hypotheses are likely. For example, the child could recieve significant alleles that are African predominant and would show up as such on a DNA test, but they happen to be alleles that are not associated with appearance, or they could have just not recieved any African predominant, and would test with little to no sub-saharan admixture on a DNA test.
A side note, or question: It seems to me that this phenomenon of a parent with a mixed sub-saharan african/european phenotype having a child with a complete non-admixed european phenotype is more common when the parent is a first generation mixed individual, as opposed to a multi-generational mixed person. (I don't know if this is true, but anyways) Could this be because the different "african" and "european" alleles in the chromasomes are less "shuffled" in a first generation mixed individual, thus making it more likely that a sperm or egg will recive the great majority of either "european" or "african" alleles?
My guess is that both of your proposed hypotheses are likely. For example, the child could recieve significant alleles that are African predominant and would show up as such on a DNA test, but they happen to be alleles that are not associated with appearance, or they could have just not recieved any African predominant, and would test with little to no sub-saharan admixture on a DNA test.
This is definitely the case with many people. See Shriver's original study for the infrequent but not improbable likelihood of a mismatch between external traits and internal markers.
MisterLawyer wrote:
A side note, or question: It seems to me that this phenomenon of a parent with a mixed sub-saharan african/european phenotype having a child with a complete non-admixed european phenotype is more common when the parent is a first generation mixed individual, as opposed to a multi-generational mixed person. (I don't know if this is true, but anyways) Could this be because the different "african" and "european" alleles in the chromasomes are less "shuffled" in a first generation mixed individual, thus making it more likely that a sperm or egg will recive the great majority of either "european" or "african" alleles?
Absolutely true. The "shuffling" (called linkage disequilibrium) can be measured with precision in order estimate the date of the original Afro-European mixing.
Great pictures indeed. Thanks for sharing the link!
Isn't it fascinating (yet understandble) how many of the 1/4th black and 1/4th white individuals featured look whiter and blacker than many so called "pure" (or so they think) "white" and "black" Americans?
And how sometimes 1/4th black individuals look - at least to American eyes - first generation biracial?
Then just look at Thandie newtons daughters... Although they appear to have the same features - signifying they're sisters - their coloring and hair textures are different. Giving the impression that one is biracial and the other white.
Genes (and the endless possibilities of phenotypes due to their various expressions) are simply amazing...
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Sun 28 May 2006 23:36 Post subject: Phenotypes
zsana wrote:
Salsassin wrote:
Quote:
This thread is related. Some great pictures.
Great pictures indeed. Thanks for sharing the link!
Isn't it fascinating (yet understandble) how many of the 1/4th black and 1/4th white individuals featured look whiter and blacker than many so called "pure" (or so they think) "white" and "black" Americans?
And how sometimes 1/4th black individuals look - at least to American eyes - first generation biracial?
Then just look at Thandie newtons daughters... Although they appear to have the same features - signifying they're sisters - their coloring and hair textures are different. Giving the impression that one is biracial and the other white.
Genes (and the endless possibilities of phenotypes due to their various expressions) are simply amazing...
Hi zsana:
Yes. The so called "mixed" people sometimes looks more like the "ideal" phenotype of a single race than the ones considered "pure".
I believe the problem starts with a false idea people have. The idea of purity in the first place. Let us talk one second about a Mulatto, for instance. To have an idea of what is the phenotype the person has one has to know how the parents look. It is not enough to say the person is a Mulatto, but one should know how the mother and parent looked. Because kind inherit the genetics of two individuals and not the one of abstract races. If the parents have long noses the kid will have those, if the parents have thick lips the kid will inherit that as well. If one parent is white and curly and the other is black and straigh, the kid will be curly because of its white parents. I don't know if I transmit the idea.
Now, it is now enough to know a parent was Black and the other was White because there are MANY DIFFERENT kinds of both Blacks of Whites.
The resulting children will be a "fuction" of the particular kind of white and the particular kind of black that participated in the mixture in the first place. The Mulatto between a Russian and an Ethiopian, for instance I bet it will look quite different from a Mulatto whose parents are Sicilian and Nigerian.
Let me explain it with another example. People believe human phenotypes vary from Black to White like in a scale. One can move the control from zero to one (or from black to white) like in the old radios. That does not seem to be the case. For instance, in Mestizos of Southern European and Indian (common in Latin America) almost every single person have dark eyes and light cooper colored skin. People is very uniform looking in those countries. All have dark hair and dark eyes, have the same shape of nose, the same general look.
On the other hand, in the Mulattoes of Jamaica and some part of Brazil, where mixtures where between Dutch and Guineans, people of colored eyes are common. Many of those people have a Nordic look. Also in those populations people vary quite a lot.
Now, if you compare both population, the Mestizos and the Mulattoes I have already mentioned, the one where you could find many individual that look Northern European is in the Mulatto population and not in the Mestizo one. (There are exceptions of course)
One should not forget that terms like "White", "Black", "Red" and "Yellow" define groups that have a lot of variety inside them. In short, terms like Mulatto, Mestizo or Zambo (Black Indian) are very fuzzy. There is not a single White or a single Black group but many.
Now, if the parents are not "pure", but hybrids, that have "black" or "white" phenotypes, the resulting children could have almost any aspect. That also applies for Indian populations where the differences in look between one region to other are unbelievable.
Joined: 28 Apr 2006 {Posts: 282 } Location: 51st State
Posted: Mon 29 May 2006 09:06 Post subject: Re: Phenotypes
oevega wrote:
zsana wrote:
Salsassin wrote:
Quote:
This thread is related. Some great pictures.
Great pictures indeed. Thanks for sharing the link!
Isn't it fascinating (yet understandble) how many of the 1/4th black and 1/4th white individuals featured look whiter and blacker than many so called "pure" (or so they think) "white" and "black" Americans?
And how sometimes 1/4th black individuals look - at least to American eyes - first generation biracial?
Then just look at Thandie newtons daughters... Although they appear to have the same features - signifying they're sisters - their coloring and hair textures are different. Giving the impression that one is biracial and the other white.
Genes (and the endless possibilities of phenotypes due to their various expressions) are simply amazing...
Hi zsana:
Yes. The so called "mixed" people sometimes looks more like the "ideal" phenotype of a single race than the ones considered "pure".
I believe the problem starts with a false idea people have. The idea of purity in the first place. Let us talk one second about a Mulatto, for instance. To have an idea of what is the phenotype the person has one has to know how the parents look. It is not enough to say the person is a Mulatto, but one should know how the mother and parent looked. Because kind inherit the genetics of two individuals and not the one of abstract races. If the parents have long noses the kid will have those, if the parents have thick lips the kid will inherit that as well. If one parent is white and curly and the other is black and straigh, the kid will be curly because of its white parents. I don't know if I transmit the idea.
Now, it is now enough to know a parent was Black and the other was White because there are MANY DIFFERENT kinds of both Blacks of Whites.
Yes, Omar, you transmit the idea very good. It's the same nuanced understanding of genitic admixture I have picked up in a short time, reading the scholarly articles and intelligent posts from people on this discussion board.
Posted: Mon 29 May 2006 15:04 Post subject: Re: Phenotypes
Quote:
Isn't it fascinating (yet understandble) how many of the 1/4th black and 1/4th white individuals featured look whiter and blacker than many so called "pure" (or so they think) "white" and "black" Americans?
if you mean less geographic admixture, yeah this is true. Many people's ideas of their backgrounds have huge blind spots.
Quote:
Yes. The so called "mixed" people sometimes looks more like the "ideal" phenotype of a single race than the ones considered "pure".
Don't know what you mean by ideal. DO you mean the average stereotype? Then I agree.
Quote:
I believe the problem starts with a false idea people have. The idea of purity in the first place.
There are people that are relatively 'pure', in other words their ancestry has been consistent in all its lines with no major influxes of peoples from other territories. But the majority of the world has seen admixture through major migrations. I could still go to many stasis populations and point out relatively 'pure' people.
Quote:
Let us talk one second about a Mulatto, for instance. To have an idea of what is the phenotype the person has one has to know how the parents look. It is not enough to say the person is a Mulatto, but one should know how the mother and parent looked. Because kind inherit the genetics of two individuals and not the one of abstract races. If the parents have long noses the kid will have those, if the parents have thick lips the kid will inherit that as well. If one parent is white and curly and the other is black and straigh, the kid will be curly because of its white parents. I don't know if I transmit the idea.
You are partially correct. Some characteristics show codominance or partial dominance. Such that the kid might not have curly or straight hair, but waivy hair inbetween the two parents.
Quote:
Now, it is now enough to know a parent was Black and the other was White because there are MANY DIFFERENT kinds of both Blacks of Whites.
Of course, they are social constructs that vary with populations.
Quote:
The resulting children will be a "fuction" of the particular kind of white and the particular kind of black that participated in the mixture in the first place. The Mulatto between a Russian and an Ethiopian, for instance I bet it will look quite different from a Mulatto whose parents are Sicilian and Nigerian.
Correct. Of course, first you would have to make sure the Ethiopian was of a group that identified itself as Black.
Quote:
Let me explain it with another example. People believe human phenotypes vary from Black to White like in a scale. One can move the control from zero to one (or from black to white) like in the old radios. That does not seem to be the case. For instance, in Mestizos of Southern European and Indian (common in Latin America) almost every single person have dark eyes and light cooper colored skin. People is very uniform looking in those countries. All have dark hair and dark eyes, have the same shape of nose, the same general look.
I disagree. It just has to do with how much variability you had in the parent populations. If they originate from smaller populations (like in the case of a genetic bottleneck) variability will be smaller.
Quote:
On the other hand, in the Mulattoes of Jamaica and some part of Brazil, where mixtures where between Dutch and Guineans, people of colored eyes are common. Many of those people have a Nordic look. Also in those populations people vary quite a lot.
Again, it varies by the variety of influx of populations and the variability within them as well.
Quote:
Now, if you compare both population, the Mestizos and the Mulattoes I have already mentioned, the one where you could find many individual that look Northern European is in the Mulatto population and not in the Mestizo one. (There are exceptions of course)
Which Mestizopopulation are you comparing? If the founding family contains northern Europeans then many of the Mestizos will have those same phenotypes. Just go look at the Mestizos of Amazonians and Germans in Oxapampa or English and German in certain parts of the serrania.
Quote:
One should not forget that terms like "White", "Black", "Red" and "Yellow" define groups that have a lot of variety inside them. In short, terms like Mulatto, Mestizo or Zambo (Black Indian) are very fuzzy. There is not a single White or a single Black group but many.
Right, on average they are saying African and European, African and Amerind, or European and Amerind. Problem is, in many areas, not only do you have influx of different Africans, Euroepans and/or Amerinds, which already allows for huge variety, but you also have people who come from different lands who at different points in history have been called Black or White. Finally you have usage of words that has changed with time and region. For example, mulato has also been used to identify European and Amerind admixture. Mestizo has been used to refer to African and European, and Zambo has been used to refer to African and European with more African than European. Then many people that have all three ancestries have used all the terms as well. And that is before the influx of people from the Middle East and Asia.
Quote:
Now, if the parents are not "pure", but hybrids, that have "black" or "white" phenotypes, the resulting children could have almost any aspect. That also applies for Indian populations where the differences in look between one region to other are unbelievable.
wow... great pictures. I had never seen Jasmine Guy's children
I'm actually suprised that the members at mulatto.org considered the 3/4th black people ("griffes"), to be mulattos.
Some don't. They just made a rule that any posts arguing who is or isn't a mulatto will be deleted. So all the variation of opinions can be posted. And none are disputed.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
