| Author |
Message |
    
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 637
Registered: 03-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 11:36 am: | 
|
Why do people act as if there's NO difference between being Black & Mixed?
|
Fortified
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Fortified
Post Number: 218
Registered: 04-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 12:09 pm: |
|
Because most of society (incl. Whites, Asians, and other Blacks) both groups are seen as BLACK. Barack Obama, Halle Berry and India.Arie are seen as BLACK, regardless of who their parents are. |
Tonya
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 86
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: 
Votes: 3 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 01:03 pm: |
|
Barack Obama, Halle Berry and India.Arie are seen as the same MAINLY by WHITE people. Black people do not see it that way. And when it comes to who's black or not, black people's opinion are the only ones that matter. |
Fortified
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Fortified
Post Number: 219
Registered: 04-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 01:14 pm: |
|
Most black people consider Barack and Halle to be black, even though they know their mothers are white. Most black people see mixed people or light-skinned people as black. All of my black friends regardless of their complexions are black. They see themselves that way. We see each other that way. We are already the "underdogs" of this society. Why do we have to create further divisions amongst ourselves?
We never had colorism issues in our family, or amongst our friends. We are all black, we understand that. There is no denying it or running away from it. We embrace it. We embrace our cultures, ethnicities, nationalities, what makes us similar and what makes us each unique.
We embrace our diversity and the one thing that unites us--WE ARE ALL BLACK.
I have been on dozens of message boards, and this is the only one that emphasizes the skin color differences among BLACK people.
In my humble opinion, authenticity isn't marked by nasal aperture, hair texture, skin tone. It is marked by awareness and acceptance of yourself and your people. I have seen the darkest of black people give into self-hatred, while the lightest of the light embrace and celebrate their heritage and history. Why should the latter individuals be ostracized for something they cannot control? |
Tonya
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 87
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: 
Votes: 4 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 01:22 pm: |
|
And let's be real, if America (white people) truly saw India Arie and Halle Berry the same...India would be kicking ass in the ratings right now.
Instead, people like Beyonce and Thandie Newton and Lena Horn were/are.
Plus how many studies have been provided that shows that lighter skinned blacks are more likely to be hired/promoted than dark-skinned ones? If they really saw us the same, they'd treat us the same, would they not?
|
Tonya
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 88
Registered: 07-2006
Rating:
Votes: 3 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 01:30 pm: |
|
Most black people do not see Halle and India Arie the same breed, Fortified. Yes, some may consider them both black, but the question is: "Why do people act as if there's NO difference between being Black & Mixed?" And the answer is, black people..nor white people for that matter, don't....at least not when it comes to uplifting certain folks--neither group "act" like there isn't a difference. |
Fortified
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Fortified
Post Number: 220
Registered: 04-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 01:37 pm: |
|
Who is doing the signing and the hiring of black people? Is it not Whites? They may be promoting the light over the dark, the woman over the man, but the white supremist institution still deems ALL of us as inferior.
But didn't you state that the only thing that matters is how we view ourselves? What if we just viewed ourselves as one people with diversity amongst us, but as equals, regardless of the divisions placed by white supremacy? Would that be so hard? |
Tonya
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 89
Registered: 07-2006
Rating:
Votes: 3 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 01:41 pm: |
|
Fortified:
We embrace our cultures, ethnicities, nationalities, what makes us similar and what makes us each unique.
We embrace our diversity and the one thing that unites us--WE ARE ALL BLACK.
Tonya:
THAT'S A BOLD FACED LIE AND YOU KNOW IT.
WE DO NOT EMBRACE BLACK BLACK PEOPLE.
AND THIS IS THE TYPE OF BOARD THAT KEEPS EVERYTHING REAL--WHY NOT THAT??? BECAUSE IT MAKES YOU UNCOMFORTABLE?--FUCK YOU! |
Serenasailor
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Serenasailor
Post Number: 631
Registered: 01-2006
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 01:47 pm: |
|
What you are neglecting Fortified and many of you other black ppl is that Black ppl with European features are not so much beautiful as they are considered "acceptable". Many white ppl and non-blacks feel that if we have to accept a Black person he/she better look white.
Halle Berry is considered beautiful "yes". But she is seen more so as "acceptable". She is non-threatening to the white supremacist eye. And so are Black ppl that look like her. |
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 639
Registered: 03-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 02:11 pm: |
|
Fortified you mean to tell me, White folks see this woman
Adriana Lima
to be the SAME, and just as BLACK as
Ms. India Arie?
|
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 640
Registered: 03-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 02:16 pm: |
|
Society sees her as Black, too?
 |
Fortified
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Fortified
Post Number: 221
Registered: 04-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 02:34 pm: |
|
Tonya said:
And when it comes to who's black or not, black people's opinion are the only ones that matter.
I said:
What if we just viewed ourselves as one people with diversity amongst us, but as equals, regardless of the divisions placed by white supremacy? Would that be so hard?
I repeat:
What if we just viewed ourselves as one people with diversity amongst us, but as equals, regardless of the divisions placed by white supremacy? Would that be so hard?
The average white person doesn't know that Adriana Lima is part black. She actually said so herself in an interview. So if you look white, most people are going to assume you are white unless you state otherwise. The same goes for Wentworth Miller and Vin Diesel.
My point is, given that if someone who looks like Adriana Lima identifies herself as black, she SHOULD NOT be treated differently than India.Arie by black people. Yes, she would be, but I say she shouldn't be. Neither of the two women asked to be here, neither of the two women chose the skin color and features that they have. |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2476
Registered: 02-2005
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 02:36 pm: |
|
Fortified:
We embrace our diversity and the one thing that unites us--WE ARE ALL BLACK.
Kola:
I would agree with that statement on the one hand--because I've been raised in this country all my life, and that is how my Black American family is---we have a range of color and we all love each other and get along.
However, I do believe that this argument is GENERATIONAL---because with the end of SEGREGATION----has also come "New Groups" of YOUNG FOLK on BOTH SIDES who are increasingly vocal about the fact that they don't see it that way.
Fortified have you missed out on the "Mixies Revolution" that Danzy Senna writes about??? The growing voting Legislation by many Biracial groups who want their own Racial Group Identifications installed? And though Senna is white but considers herself "black"----how do we FORCE people in 2006----people who look like Rosa Parks and Malcolm's mother, but who NO LONGER are captured by "Segregation"----how do we FORCE them to identify with an experience that is "not all there" for them?
Would Rosa Parks, in 2006, be the same woman she HAD TO BE back in 1966? I don't think so. She'd have many more choices now---and would be FREE to explore her whole being, not just the "stigma" on ALL who were touched by black blood.
Recently...the night Halle Berry won the Oscar...a local Radio Station in Los Angeles became a WAR ZONE as WHITES and BLACKS bitterly argued over what "race" Halle Berry is------the WHITES insisted that Halle was "not black", because "biracials", according to one WHITE caller after the next, aren't ALL black---and Halle, according to the whites, Halle's mother is WHITE and doesn't look like the "regular" black women.
The BLACKS---just as you said Fortified---insisted that Halle is BLACK because that's how she defines herself, that's how the society treats her, the film roles she's in SHOW this treatment, and she LOOKS more black than anything else---and the Blacks also insisted that the only reason the WHITES wanted to claim her as "Half White"---was because she'd just won the Academy Award.
The radio flap went on for two days--WHITES (I suspect college kids) insisting that Halle Berry is "MIXED"---not black.
Now, Fortified...where in live (a valley in S. Cali)...my 2 sons are the ONLY two "CHOCOLATE" skinned black boys with African hair in their entire school.
In our valley---Thomas and I are/were the ONLY Black on Black couple. The other 18 black men in this valley were mated to White or Latino women, and because they are the MAJORITY---they acted much different than interracial couples I was used to back in Maryland, Wash. D.C. and Virginia who were "RARE" and therefore more "friendly" and black-oriented.
Obviously, the other boys at my son's school are BIRACIAL---they have custard complexions, blue/gray eyes, wavy hair (or keep it shaved off)---their WHITE MOTHERS will kill you if you call their children "black"....and this biracial MAJORITY of children---tease and look down on my sons for being "Black"---and their jokes often consist of, "You mother's worse than black--she's an African".
While I know EXACTLY of the "Welcome Table" you're talking about Fortified, and how true that is....there is also the fact that we're FREE-er now.
Multitudes of young Biracial people are not accepting the "one drop rule" (which they shouldn't, because it's a LIE concocted by Slave Masters)---and WHITES are encouraging them to do this and to become a "separate" Buffer group, just as they do in Africa.
The Rage, Anger and Hostility of "DARK BLACKS" comes in when these Yellow/Mixed/Multi people are consistently placed IN THE SPOT called "Black"-----and given the job, the mate, the political power and the social respect-----that Black BLACKS naturally feel should be reserved those who really are Black.
The DIVISION you speak about---is not created by acknowledging and discussing this subject---it's created by the actual forces and changes in the society. We are NOT treated the same, Fortified.
Of course, Dark skinned BLACK MALES are placated by all sides--so that there is no rebellion against this phenomenon, because they notice this far less than the thing that is being despised---the WOMB that creates Black People, the Dark skinned Black Female.
It BENEFITS White Ruling Culture to bring a Mulatto from BRAZIL---call him "BLACK"---and then have him (who is against black people) represent us at a College, Political Office or Social function.
And how anyone can watch "BET"--founded and ran its first 20 years by an ALL black male board---and not notice that the WOMEN celebrated on that network scarcely look anything like the Black women of this country, 80% of whom are darker than a Brown Paper Bag---is RACIST in itself. As one historian noted, and I agree---"BET" set back The Black Power Movement by 100 years. It is, IN HIS WORDS, "The Mulatto Follies". And the reason----is because that's what Black folks TAUGHT little black boys to honor and uphold and celebrate----LIGHT SKIN.
Fortified:
Who is doing the signing and the hiring of black people? Is it not Whites?
Kola:
How did you somehow miss out on books as far back as 1929--"The Blacker the Berry"--that explicitly showed how Segregated Black Business owners would not hire "blue blacks" unless they worked IN THE BACK. And the entire book documents the colorist hiring practices of "Blacks" on ALL HUES...."if you white you right, if you yellow you mellow, if you brown you down--if you black GET BACK!".
I mentioned that one book, but there is a PLETHORA of researched, documented evidence that "Black Business Owners" have traditionally discriminated against darker blacks with more Africoid features and nappy hair.
I have a hugel successful "eye doctor" I go to---a Black Man (though very lightskinned with wavy hair)---and he has 9 women and 2 men running his doctor's office. NOT ONE---is black (or even mixed). His wife is Filipino.
His FATHER was a doctor before him---and when they show the old photograph of him with his "STAFF"---it's all Mulatto women, not one of them anywhere near Halle Berry's "black looks".
So the real dilemna is...why shouldn't Black America be represented by a BLACK face? And especially since all other groups rule through their women----why not a Black WOMAN's face?
And THAT, Fortified, is where the tons of books by people like Marita Golden and the Professors who wrote that recent book documenting all this in the HIRING FORCE are coming from.
A revolution is beginning to form amongst Black People who are FED UP with being the "dark bottom" to the LIGHT ELITE.
It is NOT just this board. Look all around you---the bookstores, the newspapers, the documentaries.
A lot of light skinned people, however, are in FEAR and they are hiding their heads in the sand on this issue.
It's not going away.
|
Fortified
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Fortified
Post Number: 222
Registered: 04-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 02:39 pm: |
|
Fortified:
We embrace our cultures, ethnicities, nationalities, what makes us similar and what makes us each unique.
We embrace our diversity and the one thing that unites us--WE ARE ALL BLACK.
Tonya:
THAT'S A BOLD FACED LIE AND YOU KNOW IT.
WE DO NOT EMBRACE BLACK BLACK PEOPLE.
AND THIS IS THE TYPE OF BOARD THAT KEEPS EVERYTHING REAL--WHY NOT THAT??? BECAUSE IT MAKES YOU UNCOMFORTABLE?--FUCK YOU!
********************
Wow, why do we have to get savage in order to make a point? And who said I was uncomfortable discussing the issue? The "we" I was referring to in my original post was myself, family and friends, not the whole black race. I am aware of the colorism issue, but there are players on both sides who are keeping it alive. |
Fortified
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Fortified
Post Number: 223
Registered: 04-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 02:43 pm: |
|
I never denied the issue exists. My mom grew up in the Caribbean, where the nuns who ran the schools treated the lighter skinned students differently than the medium brown and differently than the dark-skinned students. It still exists.
My issue is, what can be done about it? The shift in attitude begins with us--I don't think reverse discrimination against lighter-skinned, mixed blacks is going to solve the issue. |
Tonya
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 91
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 02:47 pm: |
|
And if you notice, Kola, Halle is now backing away from identifying herself as black. She now calls herself "a woman of color" or "black-slash-woman of color" ...because it's easier (more convenient) for her to do this NOW. |
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 642
Registered: 03-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 02:48 pm: |
|
Women like this are raising Black children..
 |
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 643
Registered: 03-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 02:55 pm: |
|
My initial reason for posing the question, "Why do people act as if there's NO difference between being Black & Mixed?"..
is because I wanted to know if there is a difference in appearance between a Black person who is NOT mixed, and a person who IS mixed or Coloured....
|
Fortified
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Fortified
Post Number: 224
Registered: 04-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:00 pm: |
|
Brownbeauty, everytime I see Puffy mom with that ridiculous blond wig and contacts, I cringe. I'm glad Biggie's mom Voletta doesn't act that way.
Brownbeauty said:
My initial reason for posing the question, "Why do people act as if there's NO difference between being Black & Mixed?"..
is because I wanted to know if there is a difference in appearance between a Black person who is NOT mixed, and a person who IS mixed or Coloured....
*************
See the thread called "Black Looks".
Nice post, Savant. |
Savant
Veteran Poster
Username: Savant
Post Number: 54
Registered: 09-2004
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:02 pm: |
|
Kola:
Multitudes of young Biracial people are not accepting the "one drop rule" (which they shouldn't, because it's a LIE concocted by Slave Masters)---and WHITES are encouraging them to do this and to become a "separate" Buffer group, just as they do in Africa.
Exactly, Kola.
The part you're missing however is that you are encouraging and abetting this trend, by engaging in these kinds of debates and failing to see how this trend is part and parcel of the machinations of white supremacy.
The "biracial" children of white mothers were deliberately engendered to bring about just this phenomenon that you acknowledge. In terms of ideology and affinity, they will cast their lot with their white mothers, who are the handmaidens of white supremacy. (Not all of these "biracial" children will do so, but the great majority will.) This will occur unless we counter that tendency by embracing and RE-ACCULTURATING them--not rejecting and excoriating them from the git-go, which seems to be the overall tenor of the stance played out on these boards.
Many of these "biracial" children of white mothers are languishing in the midst of white communities---teased and tormented relentlessly and estranged from their black roots (often the black father is an absentee father), privy to all kinds of emotional abuse by insensitive and racist extended white families. These children are potential soldiers in a war against white supremacy if we do not forsake them.
The shift in terms of consciousness is already playing out on the ideological terrain---whites are being indoctrinated to "accept" these half-castes as "honorary whites", in keeping with the needs of global white supremacy. Is it a surprise that "scholarly" works will emerge that now promote and buttress this new ideological thrust? White supremacy will undoubtedly harnass its institutional apparatus to do its bidding and the academe---progressive scholars notwithstanding---has always been one of the primary bulwarks of the ideology of white supremacy. We, in turn, are being seduced into promoting this agenda, by engaging in these kinds of spurious debates, which will ultimately undermine us.
Nothing is more frightening to white supremacy that an enemy from "within"---who looks JUST LIKE HIM, who bears his blood. |
Savant
Veteran Poster
Username: Savant
Post Number: 55
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:03 pm: |
|
Thank you, Fortified... |
Serenasailor
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Serenasailor
Post Number: 632
Registered: 01-2006
Rating:
Votes: 3 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:09 pm: |
|
There is going to be a time when these multi/bi-racial ppl are going to classify themselves as what they are multi/bi-racial. And you black ppl who so desperately want to claim them as black will "look silly". You are going to start asking these ppl with a stupid look on your face "Oh I thought you classified yourself as Black"? |
Tonya
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 92
Registered: 07-2006
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:13 pm: |
|
((("Wow, why do we have to get savage in order to make a point?")))
Savage??
I'm being my black nappy-headed straightforward self...not surprised you have not learned--through COLORBLIND "family and friends"--to tell the difference.
((("And who said I was uncomfortable discussing the issue? The "we" I was referring to in my original post was myself, family and friends, not the whole black race.")))
Did you forget making this statement?
"I have been on dozens of message boards, and this is the only one that emphasizes the skin color differences among BLACK people."
Sounds like you have a problem discussing the issue, to me.
((("I am aware of the colorism issue, but there are players on both sides who are keeping it alive.")))
And there are players in the middle as well...those that don't feel the need to explore colorism--because it doesn't affect them the way it does others--and because they benefit from it more than they are oppressed by it...
there are no innocent "players" here, Fortified. |
Serenasailor
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Serenasailor
Post Number: 633
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:13 pm: |
|
The reason why those white callers in that Los Angeles radio station so desperately want multi/bi-racial ppl to seperate from "regular blacks" is because they know that these multi/bi-racial pose no threat to the white supremacist power structure.
They are not as "offensive" to the eye as "regular blacks". Like PBG said in one of her post that your multi/bi-racial ppl are going to be easier to breed out. Whereas your authentic blacks are going to have to seperate and for there own identities. |
Serenasailor
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Serenasailor
Post Number: 634
Registered: 01-2006
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:19 pm: |
|
I agree with everything you say Savant except saying that it is our responsility to acculturate these multi/bi-racial children. Because no one can acculturate these ppl except there parents.
And that is what is happening. These white mothers are acculturating these children. And they are breeding a new band of semi-whites who look and act like regular white ppl. |
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 644
Registered: 03-2006
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:21 pm: |
|
"I agree with everything you say Savant except saying that it is our responsility to acculturate these multi/bi-racial children. Because no one can acculturate these ppl except there parents.
And that is what is happening. These white mothers are acculturating these children. And they are breeding a new band of semi-whites who look and act like regular white ppl."
And how can Black ppl acculturate these mixed kids if their mother is White? |
Fortified
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Fortified
Post Number: 225
Registered: 04-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:21 pm: |
|
I don't benefit from it. Seeing others ostracized for their complexion and features (whatever they may be) is no damn benefit for me.
My question is: what then do we do about it? All this debating and name calling isn't going to change the issue. Do we segregate like loads of laundry? Do we embrace blackness as an umbrella term for a spectrum of African diasporatics? |
Savant
Veteran Poster
Username: Savant
Post Number: 57
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:23 pm: |
|
You're probably right, Serenasailor.
Because we're promoting that agenda, apparently.
And I tell you what the next agenda will be:
the pitting of lighter-skinned blacks who are NOT biracial against darker-skinned blacks. And dark-skinned blacks against DARKER blacks. And so on...
White supremacy is so efficient that it can employ us as our own executioners.
The "multi-biracial" agenda is but the tip of the iceberg. They are testing the waters to see whether we will "bite"---and "bite" we will, as we are doing on these boards. It is not so much that "multi/biracial" people pose no threat to white supremacy, it is that our profound sense of self-hatred and distrust of each other based upon colorism runs so deep that they can incite and aggravate the cleavages that they themselves introduced.
What we fail to understand is that the "one-drop rule" backfired in many ways. The reason why an Adam Clayton Powell so rankled and infuriated whites is because they could not understand why a black man so white in appearance would love his "blackness" so intensely. How could that be? How could he wish to remain "black" when he could easily have passed? And fight so valiantly for his people? And so arrogant to boot---("Keep the faith, baby!")
The three-pronged agenda of white supremacy in the 21st century is well underway. By the end of the 21st century, we will be on the brink of extinction.
|
Savant
Veteran Poster
Username: Savant
Post Number: 58
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:31 pm: |
|
Brownbeauty, Beloved.
These children come into our midst. We meet them when they run wildly from their imperiled homes, desperately seeking acceptance and affirmation. We encounter them on college campuses where we become their mentors as they attempt to reinvent themselves. They are so hungry for blackness that their spirits cry out to us for direction.
Blood yields to blood, my sister. The mitochondrialDNA of the black womb will not be denied, no matter how devious the machinations of white supremacy.
But we must be vigilant and circumspect---not be deceived and duped by those who conspire to destroy us.
|
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 645
Registered: 03-2006
Rating:
Votes: 3 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:31 pm: |
|
We wouldn't have this multi-biracial problem if we just married each other more often and produced more black children...
|
Tonya
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 93
Registered: 07-2006
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:36 pm: |
|
((("I don't benefit from it. Seeing others ostracized for their complexion and features (whatever they may be) is no damn benefit for me.")))
Pull a thread/post/comment where light-skinned folks have been "ostracized for their complexion and features" and let's DEBATE that. I notice that you go around pulling statements out your ass and NEVER have any PROOF to back them up…as white people do on occasion because they know that their words carry more weight.
((("My question is: what then do we do about it? All this debating and name calling isn't going to change the issue. Do we segregate like loads of laundry? Do we embrace blackness as an umbrella term for a spectrum of African diasporatics?")))
ANSWEAR: WE TELL THE TRUTH.
...that simple. |
Savant
Veteran Poster
Username: Savant
Post Number: 60
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:39 pm: |
|
SerenaSailor, are you familiar with the story of the biracial white supremacist who was accused of conspiring to blow up certain Boston landmarks?
A cautionary tale if ever there was one. An absentee black father, a lesbian white mother and a childhood so painful and so estranged that when he entered prison, his thirst for acceptance let him to embrace white supremacist doctrine. A few decades ago, he and those like him would have been embraced by the FOI and inculcated into blackness.
But we have dropped the mantle, Beloved. And they are too eager to pick it up and exploit our weakness... |
Savant
Veteran Poster
Username: Savant
Post Number: 61
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:43 pm: |
|
Brownbeauty---wishful thinking on your part. The wheels are in motion, unfortunately. The estrangment between black men and women will see increasingly more mixed-marriages over the coming decades.
|
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2480
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: 
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 03:55 pm: |
|
SAVANT:
Exactly, Kola.
The part you're missing however is that you are encouraging and abetting this trend, by engaging in these kinds of debates and failing to see how this trend is part and parcel of the machinations of white supremacy.
KOLA:
Savant, I'm not missing the part----the PROBLEM FOR ME is that you refuse to recognize the humanity and similar standards of the AFRICAN---and how can I put this in a way that you will understand and still keep you as my brother?
Although I was raised by Black Americans in America---I am not the descendent of "slavery" or the ideals that it taught for hundreds of years on plantations.
In truth--my view of "color/race" is very much more like the EUROPEAN---only in reverse. I want "BLACK" babies. I see blackness as ultimate beauty--and I see the mulatto as "Colonized", "Compromised"--beautiful, yes--BUT NOT MINE.
Through my African eyes (and you will face this with MILLIONS of Blacks outside the U.S.)---I find it very difficult to TRUST and to see these Mixed People as being "ME". Which is what you're asking me to do.
In fact---I feel INSULTED by it. The idea that just anybody can be me.
But even a sell out like Clarence Thomas---I see him as "ME"---yes, definitely a "traitor" against me and mine. But I still see him as MORE ME than I do Rosa Parks--because he and I are "Black".
And truly Fortified and Savant,
I don't think most Black people HATE or REJECT Mixed, Lightskinned people. What we're sick of is living IN THEIR SHADOW and being considered inferior to them.
Why is that wrong?
|
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2481
Registered: 02-2005
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 04:06 pm: |
|
"My question is: what then do we do about it? All this debating and name calling isn't going to change the issue. Do we segregate like loads of laundry? Do we embrace blackness as an umbrella term for a spectrum of African diasporatics?"
Children receive their acculturation through their MOTHERS----not their fathers.
As the crude but popular Ethiopian saying goes---"Fathers matter not, Mothers matter a Lot.
What is going to happen is that a "New Black" is going to be born out of these rejected, angry downtrodden (and because of MEDIA) invisible LEGIONS of Dark Skinned black women.
They will LOOK like the black folks we're used to----but like in Toni Morrison's book "PARADISE" (in fact, exactly like it)----they will self-segregate and turn their mother's resentment AGAINST the newly formed "Mixie/Biracial" societies.
Africa and the Third World, who have traditionally and alternately been influenced by men like Sidney Poitier, Michael Jackson, Harry Belafonte--Marcus Garvey, Malcolm X, etc....will now be MORE INFLUENCED by this new breed of "dark rebuking" black children.
In other words...don't discount the manic and "ignored" messages in the music of artists like Lauryn Hill, Erykuah Badu---or writers like Kola Boof.
Just as Harriet Tubman, "revolution" for Blacks always come FIRST through its mothers.
And the Yellow Black American and the Black Black American are about to be DIVIDED and "put asunder" in such a way that's never happened in this country before......but just as Zora Neal Hurston and Toni Morrison and even Martin Luther King predicted (King asked, "am I leading my people to freedom or into a burning house?"}....the end SEGREGATION also marked the beginning of the end for the "Black Community" itself.
Just as Jewish, Italian, Irish and other formerly STRONGHOLDS have been decimated and replaced by militant "pure stock" who are more Orthodox and less diverse.
And as Egypt's Nawal el Sadawii has stated:
"The only thing diversity does is separates us from our own people."
If you pay attention---it only benefits WHITE PEOPLE.
|
Savant
Veteran Poster
Username: Savant
Post Number: 63
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 04:11 pm: |
|
Kola, Beloved.
All that is encoded in you is in me.
But all that is encoded in me is not in you.
My experience is not yours. My history and my bloodline in this country is not yours. My sojourn in hell has not been the same hell as yours.
The mulatto issued forth from the womb of my enslaved Mother. She suckled both of us, the dark and the light. And her tears that baptized our faces bound us together forever. These half-castes are me because they are my siblings, born of the same mother---all Hagar's children.
I will not forsake my siblings. And you do not have the right, Beloved, to ask that of me. You will not tell me who is my blood.
And no, Clarence Thomas is not more mine than my valiant, resolute sista Rosa, whose quiet strength came forth that day. The look in her eye as she fixed her gaze on some unknown vista on the horizon (look closely at that iconic photograph of her seated that day)...and she is supposedly less mine than that traitor Clarence, who has no affinity for the blood, who has dishonored the memory of our Black Mother?
No, Beloved. Rosa is mine. Rosa and Adam and Malcolm and Marcus...all my warriors of variegated hue whose spirits are blacker than the night. |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2482
Registered: 02-2005
Rating:
Votes: 5 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 04:16 pm: |
|
SAVANT:
The mulatto issued forth from
the womb of my enslaved Mother.
She suckled both of us,
the dark and the light.}
KOLA:
Then WHY have you done everything in your power to destroy and kill her?
Have you ever read "The Wife of His Youth" or any of the STACKS of books that Mulatto PEOPLE have written in the last 100 years???
Why have you told your sons not to marry her? Not to breed and make more children with her?
Why have you historically DISALLOWED her, cut your eyes at her at bus stops and degraded and LIED on her???
What does all your HOLKUM mean when the BET network has an unspoken policy that HER FACE is not allowed to be shown in broad daylight?
What poetic EMOTIONALISM do you think is simmering in HER BOSOM, at HER tits?
|
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2483
Registered: 02-2005
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 04:21 pm: |
|
SAVANT,
please don't CLAIM that I told
you WHO is your blood. I am not
against what you believe
Savant---in fact, I think it's
beautiful.
I EXPRESSED "truthfully" my
side as an AFRICAN WOMAN:
----the PROBLEM FOR ME is that you refuse to recognize the humanity and similar standards of the AFRICAN---and how can I put this in a way that you will understand and still keep you as my brother?
Although I was raised by Black Americans in America---I am not the descendent of "slavery" or the ideals that it taught for hundreds of years on plantations.
In truth--my view of "color/race" is very much more like the EUROPEAN---only in reverse. I want "BLACK" babies. I see blackness as ultimate beauty--and I see the mulatto as "Colonized", "Compromised"--beautiful, yes--BUT NOT MINE.
Through my African eyes (and you will face this with MILLIONS of Blacks outside the U.S.)---I find it very difficult to TRUST and to see these Mixed People as being "ME". Which is what you're asking me to do.
In fact---I feel INSULTED by it. The idea that just anybody can be me.
But even a sell out like Clarence Thomas---I see him as "ME"---yes, definitely a "traitor" against me and mine. But I still see him as MORE ME than I do Rosa Parks--because he and I are "Black".
And truly Fortified and Savant,
I don't think most Black people HATE or REJECT Mixed, Lightskinned people. What we're sick of is living IN THEIR SHADOW and being considered inferior to them.
Why is that wrong?
|
Savant
Veteran Poster
Username: Savant
Post Number: 64
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 04:26 pm: |
|
And what of those sons who have embraced her, Beloved? Did not my brotha Adam marry the beautiful Hazel Scott as Malcolm embraced our beloved Betty?
I want our sons to return to the source and revere the Black Goddess rather than to whiten themselves into oblivion, as they are being encouraged to do now.
But if they do so, will they be embraced and accepted or meet taunts deriding their lighter color, questioning their masculinity and "authentiticy" as if only our darkest brothas are truly men?
|
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 255
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: 
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 04:44 pm: |
|
boring, boring, boring, the same topic over and over again. light skin women are NOT going anywhere. if some people like or find lighter skin black women more attractive or beautiful, so be it. its like listening to a bunch of babies talking about "what they can do" about the fact that some light skin women are found more beautiful than some darker skin women.
well the fact is you can't do ANYTHING about it because light skin women are here to stay and are not going anywhere. get used to it BABIES!!!! |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2485
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 04:46 pm: |
|
Well, one of those LIGHTER (in fact, VERY LIGHT-Skinned) inauthentic--in fact he was a GEORGETOWN Boulle---took my virginity Savant.
We are GENERALIZING this subject---which is all we can do with it, and the thing with me (that is rare) is that I tend to discuss things with INCREDIBLE HONESTY as to how I really feel.
It does mean I exactly live out what I'm saying---I'm just being honest with you about ME as an African woman.
But alas, all we can do is GENERALIZE.
Proof being that I've lost my own virginity to a "Mixed" boy and have dated more than a few.
|
Tonya
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 95
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 05:03 pm: |
|
It's easy to generalize when even Savant knows that a women fitting the physical description of the dark-skinned female posted above, is as likely to be paired with a black man THE COLOR of brothas Adam or Malcolm OR Clarence Thomas as she is to be placed on the cover of "People" as number one on their "sexiest woman in the world" list. |
Tonya
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 96
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 05:18 pm: |
|
hERE YOU GO, SAVANT:
The Economic Consequences of Colorism and
Complexion Homogamy in the Black Community:
Some Historical Evidence
Abstract:
Whether measured by social rank, occupational status or educational levels, newlyweds tend to resemble
one another. The pattern of like marrying like, which anthropologists label status homogamy, is observed
across time and place, and is true among both commoners and the nobility. This paper investigates
complexion homogamy (light marries light and dark marries dark) in the African-American community.
The evidence reveals a marked pattern of complexion homogamy dating back to the mid-nineteenth
century. The evidence also reveals that the convention of complexion homogamy had meaningful
economic ramifications. Complexion homogamous marriages among light-complected blacks resulted in
households with higher literacy rates, higher occupational status, and greater wealth.
___________________
The Economic Consequences of Colorism and
Complexion Homogamy in the Black Community:
Some Historical Evidence
Howard Bodenhorn
Department of Economics
Lafayette College
Easton, PA 18042
and
Research Associate
NBER
bodenhoh @ lafayette.edu
August 2004
Revised November 2004
Acknowledgments: I thank Sandy Darity, Jaap Dronkers, Stan Engerman, Josh Sanborn, Andrea Smith,
Derek Smith, and seminar participants at SUNY-Binghamton and Lafayette College for many useful
comments. Financial support from the National Science Foundation (SES-0109165 and SES-0453995)
and the Earhart Foundation is gratefully acknowledged. Martha Osier and Pam Bodenhorn provided
valuable research assistance.
The Economic Consequences of Colorism and
Complexion Homogamy in the Black Community:
Some Historical Evidence
Abstract:
Whether measured by social rank, occupational status or educational levels, newlyweds tend to resemble
one another. The pattern of like marrying like, which anthropologists label status homogamy, is observed
across time and place, and is true among both commoners and the nobility. This paper investigates
complexion homogamy (light marries light and dark marries dark) in the African-American community.
The evidence reveals a marked pattern of complexion homogamy dating back to the mid-nineteenth
century. The evidence also reveals that the convention of complexion homogamy had meaningful
economic ramifications. Complexion homogamous marriages among light-complected blacks resulted in
households with higher literacy rates, higher occupational status, and greater wealth.
1
The Economic Consequences of Colorism and
Complexion Homogamy in the Black Community:
Some Historical Evidence
1. Introduction
In a response to a series of articles outlining the limits of racial discrimination in 1830s New York City, a
contributor to The Colored American (19 August 1837) wrote that “there is a species of prejudice of
color, which have [sic] hitherto passed by in silence ... I mean a prejudice of color, existing among
colored men on account of different shades of complexion.” The writer insisted that every effort should
be made to discountenance such intragroup discrimination because it was divisive and unproductive. But
intragroup colorism – the preference for light complexions -- was a powerful force that manifested itself
in many ways, not the least of which was in the choice of marriage partners. In an article appearing the
National Era (5 October 1854), a writer disputed the contention that “every one of African descent values
himself in proportion to the degree of white blood he has in his veins, and it is rarely the case that
mulattoes are willing to form matrimonial alliances with persons having less.” He labeled it a slander, but
historians believe that the practice of complexion homogamy – light marries light and dark marries dark --
was common. Bogger (1997, p. 113), for instance, contends that in mate selection, “mulattoes showed a
strong preference for other mulattoes”and Johnson (1996) finds that mixed marriages were the exception.1
Of the 30 married or cohabitating couples Johnson discusses, 25 pairs were complexion homogamous.
The habit of light-complected blacks marrying other light-complected blacks reflects the wider
tendency to marry someone from similar social, ethnic, economic, and educational backgrounds -- a
1 I will occasionally use the word mulatto when using it in the contemporary context to describe light-complected
blacks. I recognize that some readers may be offended by the word, with its historically racist connotations, but ask
their indulgence. Some have suggested that the terms biracial or multiracial be used instead, but these do not
accurately reflect the contemporary usage of mulatto, and carry their own modern rhetorical baggage. Throughout
the paper, I will employ the terms light-complected black and dark-complected black to distinguish between groups.
These terms are close to the to the contemporary usages of mulatto and black.
2
practice referred to as status homogamy.2 Whether measured by social rank, occupational status, or
educational level, newlyweds tend to resemble one another (Kalmijn 1994). Sociologists and
anthropologists study the practice of homogamy because they believe that it is relevant to understanding
important social processes. Homogamy, for example, promotes the family’s ability to pass on groupspecific
values to offspring and revitalize the group(s) to which they belong. Social groups reproduce
themselves and maintain their coherence in proportion to their ability to limit intermarriage (Davis 1941).
Despite the attention paid to the intergenerational transmission of economic outcomes,
economists have paid relatively little attention to homogamy, which may be as important a contributor to
the economic capacity of offspring as it is to shared family values.3 Not only will parents from the same
socioeconomic class pass on shared family values, they will also pass along shared economic capabilities.
Studies of education by social scientists, for example, have yielded three stylized facts: (1) educational
homogamy is common (Kalmijn 1991, Smits 2004); (2) historically, there is pronounced intergenerational
educational persistence (Margo 1990); and (3) the education premium is sizable (Ehrenberg and Smith
2000). Combining these three findings leads to the following logical result: we rarely observe
educationally heterogamous marriages and the children of high educationally homogamous marriages
tend to pursue more education than children of low educationally homogamous marriages, so that we will
tend to observe intergenerational persistence of education, which translates into the intergenerational
persistence of wealth, income, employment, opportunities for leisure, and consumption or, in short, of
economic outcomes.
Homogamy, of course, cuts across many dimensions and thus holds out the possibility for the
intergenerational transmission of socioeconomic outcomes across any of several observable
characteristics. Dronkers and Schijf (2003) find that the Dutch nobility has dominated elite positions
2 Sociologists and anthropologists use the term homogamy. Economists sometimes use the term positive assortative
mating to express a comparable idea.
3 Borjas (2000) observes a link between neighborhood ethnic composition and intergenerational economic mobility.
To the extent that ethnic homogamy operates, a link may be inferred between homogamy and the persistence of
economic outcomes noted by Borjas.
3
(government ministers, corporate officers, and university officials, among others) throughout the
twentieth century and attribute that persistence to the continued tendency of its members to practice
endogamy. Historically, class homogamy prevailed among the lower classes, too, as peasants with small
land holdings in nineteenth-century Sweden engaged in intragroup marriage in order to conserve and
consolidate what control they had over land and other resources (Dribe and Lundh 2004).
This paper investigates complexion homogamy (light marries light and dark marries dark) among
free blacks living in the antebellum U.S. South. The results reveal that the modern preference for light
complexions (colorism) within the African-American community has deep historical roots.4 This paper
traces colorism and complexion homogamy to the early nineteenth century. It also shows that the longstanding
convention of complexion homogamy within the black community had meaningful economic
ramifications. In the late-twentieth century, lighter complected blacks tended to work in more prestigious
occupations, earn higher incomes, accumulate more wealth, acquire more education, and live in different
neighborhoods than dark-complected blacks (Keith and Herring 1991; Hill 2000). One behavior that
reinforces the association between achievement and complexion is complexion homogamy. If lightcomplected
blacks achieve more than dark-complected blacks, and light-complected blacks intermarry,
then light-complected blacks will pass along more than just a light complexion to their children. They will
bequeath existing economic advantages. Complexion-based outcomes will persist across generations in
the African-American community in the same way that the advantages of noble birth persist within the
Dutch mobility.
The paper proceeds as follows: Section 2 develops an economic explanation for complexion
homogamy. Section 3 describes the data. Section 4 shows that marriage patterns among early nineteenthcentury
blacks were complexion homogamous. Section 5 then investigates the implications of complexion
homogamy on family economic well-being. The data show that households in which both spouses were
light complected accumulated more wealth than heterogamous light-dark or homogamous dark-dark
marriages. Section 6 concludes.
4 Hughes and Hertel (1990) summarize modern sociological studies.
4
2. An Economic Investigation of Complexion Homogamy
Several contemporary observers, as well as a number of prominent historians of free African Americans
in the antebellum South, note the existence of a mulatto elite in the antebellum South. In 1858 Cyprian
Clamorgan, a free man of French and African American ancestry, published The Colored Aristocracy of
St. Louis, noting the names and accomplishments of blacks of wealth, education, ability and manners.
What distinguished them most from the black masses was their complexion. Only a few dark-complected
blacks moved in their orbit (Gatewood 2000, p. 15). As in St. Louis, free blacks in the cities of the Lower
South placed great significance on subtle gradations in color. In New Orleans a community of gens de
coleur libre worked as skilled artisans or professionals, identified with French culture, were usually fair
complected, and thought of themselves as a “caste apart from other blacks” (Gatewood 2000, pp. 13, 83).
A light complexion took on such special significance in antebellum Charleston that Tocqueville was
dismayed by mulatto attitudes (Toplin 1979, p. 193). Although Charleston’s mulatto elite established a
charity hospital, a free kindergarten, and other civic and racial uplift organizations, they were best known
for their exclusive and exclusionary Brown Fellowship Society. The Society became such a polarizing
entity that a group of accomplished but excluded dark-complected blacks established the aptly named
Society for Free Dark Men. For many of the Charleston’s darker free blacks, the organizations of the
mulatto elite represented malevolent and divisive forces (Gatewood 2000, p. 82).5
When a white abolitionist extolled the virtues of the mulatto elite, an anonymous writer in the
National Era (5 October 1854) snapped back that “because some mutton-headed negroes [sic] in North or
South Carolina have formed quadroon societies to please their white oppressors, he [the abolitionist]
presumes that such mongrel monstrosities exist all over the country” (Anonymous 1854). Although this
anonymous writer denied it, such habits, if not such organizations, existed all over the country. Writing in
1841, Joseph Willson, himself a member of Philadelphia’s black elite, argued that admission into the orbit
5 Johnson (1996), Litwack (1961), and Williamson (1980) document similar attitudes and institutions in other
antebellum cities. It is important not to overemphasize the size or efforts of the mulatto elite because there were
many light-complected “nobodies” and no social firewall, regardless of how well built, was impermeable.
5
of the black elite required observance of proper etiquette, a temperate and virtuous lifestyle in addition to
wealth, education, station, occupation and a light complexion. Like critics of Charleston’s mulatto elite,
Willson chastised Philadelphia’s prominent African Americans for spending so much time excluding and
feuding that they had little energy left for community “uplift” (Gatewood 2000, p. 11).
One brick, perhaps even the keystone, in the wall that the light-complected mulatto elite erected
to maintain the distance between itself and the dark-complected masses was complexion homogamy.
Horton (1993, p. 137) notes a tendency toward homogamy among light-complected blacks in three
northern U.S. cities, and doubts that it was driven by anything other than conscious choice. Indeed, the
social convention toward complexion homogamy held such power that some light-complected blacks
utilized extended intercity networks to find suitable marriage partners. Nancy Fuller, a free-born mulatto
from Norfolk, Virginia married Alexander Jarrett, a light-complected black from Petersburg and the son
of one of the wealthiest free black men in Virginia (Bogger 1997, p. 104). Richard Cowling, a lightcomplected
Norfolk native and reporter for the Southern Argus, traveled to Washington, D.C. to find a
suitable light-complected bride. Similarly unable to find an acceptable light-complected spouse in New
York City, Willis Augustus Hodge traveled to Norfolk to court two eligible mulatto women. When he
found them unacceptable, he returned to New York unmarried. Given the restrictions placed on free black
mobility in the mid-nineteenth century, the impulse toward complexion homogamy must have been
powerful indeed to induce such forays into far removed marriage markets.
Hodge’s decision to return to New York without a wife is consistent with models of the marriage
market derived by Burdett and Coles (1997) and Belding (2004). Complexion homogamy will arise
endogenously in a marriage market given a number of (not unreasonable) assumptions. Burdett and Coles
consider a population of agents that choose to marry based on each other’s desirability or pizazz.6 By
replacing their notion of greater pizazz with that of lighter complexion, the model can be applied to
complexion homogamy in a straightforward fashion. The utility an agent receives from marriage is a
6 Burdett and Coles (1997) and Belding (2004) use the term pizazz to capture the many facets of desirability. The
present discussion assumes that the major determinant of pizazz is complexion, recognizing that it is not the only
determinant.
6
function of his or her partner’s complexion, discounted by how long the agent waits before marriage. If
we assume that agents maximize utility, that they know the rate at which they will meet potential mates,
and that they know the distribution of complexions of the opposite sex, an equilibrium exists in which
each agent maximizes lifetime expected utility by only proposing to those agents whose complexion
meets or exceeds some level, where lighter complected mates presumably yield higher utility.
Complexion homogamy emerges from this model as individuals partition themselves into separate and
distinct complexion groups. Females will only marry males from their own group and vice versa.7
Once a group enjoys a privileged position and captures some distributional rents for its members,
how does it replicate itself and still maintain both its elevated status and its rents across generations?
Olson (1982) argues that endogamy (class homogamy) is an effective mechanism. Exogamy will erode a
group’s distinctiveness and rents received by each member. To effectively enforce the custom of
complexion homogamy among light-complected blacks, the group first had to receive some valuable
distributional rents and, second, develop behavioral norms that induced young men and women to
practice homogamy in order to gain access to but not dissipate those rents in the next generation.
Olson (1982) provides examples based on European nobility and Indian castes that are
straightforwardly extended to colorism in the mid-nineteenth-century South. Suppose that, due to
colorism and the historical legacy of privilege shown by whites, light-complected blacks receive more
education and skill training and are, thus, more likely to work in more skilled, more prestigious, higherpaying
jobs, than dark complected blacks.8 If whites further reinforced the light complexion privilege by
patronizing light-complected black artisans or merchants at the expense of dark-complected black
workers, the observed complexion-based outcome gap will be even greater than if it were driven solely by
7 The interested reader is referred to Burdett and Coles (1997) and Belding (2004) for the details. The important
insight for present purposes is that individuals will segregate themselves into separate and identifiable pizazz
groups. Given historical characterizations of the mulatto elite, it appears that they labored to create and maintain
separate complexion-based groups.
8 Reuter (1917) and Frazier (1957), among others, make this claim. It will be shown below that light-complected
blacks were more likely to be literate, work in more prestigious occupations, and accumulate more wealth than darkcomplected
blacks. The present study, however, does not have sufficient documentary evidence to do more than
infer white attitudes from black outcomes.
7
educational advantages.9 The privilege or preference rents that accrued to skilled, light-complected blacks
will be maintained only if the size of the light-complected group did not substantially increase through
time because “every unnecessary entrant into the favored subset reduces what is left to the rest” (Olson
1982, p. 67).
The favored group must establish a mechanism to maintain exclusivity. European nobles resist
admitting anyone except the children of nobility into the nobility (Dronkers and Schijf 2003). Given this
admission rule, what pattern of marriage will we observe? The more powerful the institutions of the
nobility, the more likely we are to observe endogamy (class homogamy). If the sons and daughters of the
ruling group marry outsiders and both sons and daughters of the current nobility, and their spouses, are
accepted into the nobility in the next generation, the ruling nobility will double in size with each
generation. Not only will the group lose its distinctiveness over time, but each generation will receive
only half the distributional rents of the previous generation.
One potential solution to the problem of exogamy might be to induct only members of one sex
and their spouses into the ranks of the nobility. But members of the current generation of nobility whose
offspring are predominantly those of the excluded sex will oppose the establishment of such a tradition.10
A second, and more palatable, solution is class homogamy. If sons and daughters of the current elite can
be induced to marry within the group, the size of the nobility can be constrained so that the distributional
rents will not be dissipated over time. Because class homogamy limits the size of the group
intergenerationally, families of the existing elite can preserve a legacy for their descendants.
The effectiveness of a homogamy norm, however, will depend on the capacity of each generation
to impose and enforce the social norm on its offspring. Economic analyses of social norms find that
norms will induce homogenous standard of behavior when status or esteem are important relative to the
9 Becker’s (1971) model of discrimination shows that customers’ racial preferences can be as powerful as those of
employers.
10 Not only will the parents be concerned about their sons’ or daughters’ long-run well being, but the parents
themselves may suffer a reduction in lifetime utility is there are significant intergenerational transfers from children
to parents late in the parents’ lives.
8
consumption of goods and services (Bernheim 1994, p. 844).11 When status is highly valued, individuals
suppress their individuality and adhere to the norm. The impulse toward conformity among lightcomplected
blacks was so strong that selection of a spouse was less a matter of the heart than one of
familial obligation. Bogger (1997, p. 103) contends that: “When free young blacks reached that stage in
their life when they were ready for marriage, the selection of suitable partner became a concern to all
close relatives, because the family could very easily lose what little respectability or social distinction it
enjoyed if new members were not chosen with care.... Factors such as skin color, respectability, property
ownership, and legal and residential status were considered along with personal qualities .... but the
attribute most sought after was light skin.” Norms, like that toward complexion homogamy, were further
reinforced because deviations were evidence of extreme preferences and displays of extreme preferences
often invoked punishment. Among the nobility, disinheritance was an effective threat. Given the
privileged position of mulattos relative to blacks, disinheritance or excommunication from the group
surely represented equally powerful motivating forces.
For homogamy to be an effective defense of a group’s distributional rents, it must be based on an
observable and verifiable indicator of current membership in the group. In the case of European nobility,
emblems (family crests) and practices (publishing genealogies) emerged to make membership more
transparent. With light-complected blacks in the antebellum South, the situation was comparable. “If a
racially distinct distributive coalition is formed,” Olson (1982, p. 159) contends, “it will be able to
preserve itself over many generations... through endogamy. If it is largely endogamous the differences in
appearance will be preserved.” Light-complected blacks were able to protect their privileged status (and
distributional rents) over generations because it was relatively easy to determine, based on visible
differences, who was in and who was out of the group.
An unfortunate aspect of the social norm supporting complexion homogamy was that it played on
and promoted racial prejudice. The inculcation of color preferences among light-complected blacks
reinforced their opinions of (dark) black inferiority. It also reinforced prejudices outside the group. Even
11 Kandori (1992), Manski (2000), and Young (1996) also analyze social norms and conventions.
9
as late as 1917, Edward Reuter wrote about the superiority of the mulatto and attributed the mulatto’s
elevated social and economic status, in large part, to several generations of selective breeding. In all
likelihood, the elevated status of light-complected blacks was the result of several generations of
economic privilege and greater command over economic resources than to eugenics, but it is easy to see
why observers, such as Reuter, drew their conclusions.
It is important not to push the foregoing argument too far. Complexion homogamy could arise
from a number of sources and motivations, not the least of which is the inherent human trait of feeling
comfortable with those of similar backgrounds. But even families who had held their elite positions for
generations could face pressures that would relax the impulse toward homogamy. If an elite family fell on
hard times, they might maintain their accustomed standard of living by admitting an outsider into the
family. Thus the walls erected by the elite could be breached. Nevertheless, we would expect to observe a
tendency toward complexion homogamy if complexion mattered and light complected individuals were
able to establish and maintain strong social norms in support of it. Later sections document the extent of
complexion homogamy in the black community of the antebellum South.
3. Data
The data come from three principal nineteenth-century sources: registrations of free blacks from
antebellum Virginia, the 1850 population census manuscripts for Maryland, and the 1860 population
census manuscripts for Baltimore and New Orleans. Each data set was originally collected for a different
purpose, but each provides valuable information about the marriage patterns of free blacks in early
America.
Registers of free blacks are data sets unique to the Upper South. A Virginia law of 1793 required
every free-born or manumitted African American to register with the clerk of the county in which he or
she resided. County clerks kept ledgers of the registrations, sometimes in abstract but more often in full,
and provided registrants with a handwritten copy, usually on a half-sheet of paper. It was important for
free blacks to register and retain their freedom papers. White employers were required by law to ask to
see a copy of a black person’s freedom papers before hiring him or her. Registrations were also used to
10
convince constables and slave patrollers that they were indeed free and not runaway slaves. In a few
known instances, free blacks were saved from bondage by producing freedom papers after having been
kidnaped or wrongly arrested and sent to a slave auction (Bogger 1997).
Registers provide detailed descriptions of individuals, recording the registrant’s full name along
with any known aliases, age, sex, height, complexion, any identifying scars, marks or other notable
physical feature, sometimes an occupation, rarely his or her county of birth, and whether the individual
had been born free or manumitted and, if manumitted, when, where, any by whom. The value of the
registers in the present instance is that it was possible to match the registers of 125 married couples to
determine the extent of complexion homogamy among free-born and manumitted African Americans in
antebellum Virginia.12
It was not possible to gather information on every married couple that registered in Virginia
because few registration ledgers specifically identified husbands and wives.13 Although the 1793 law
mandated annual reregistration, few people registered more than once or twice in their lifetimes. Most
free-born individuals registered in their late teens and early twenties, probably to be able to produce
papers demanded by employers. Manumitted slaves tended to register on the day they were granted their
freedom. After appearing before a magistrate to receive their deeds of manumission, most were probably
taken to the clerk’s office to register. Because they were charged 25 cents per registration, few
reregistered except when their copy of the original registration was lost, stolen, or irreparably damaged.
Because they registered early in life, married couples tended not to register together. There were some
exceptions and these are the registrations used here. In some instances, clerks recorded the name of the
12 Previous studies making use of comparable sets of registers include Komlos (1992) and Bodenhorn (1999, 2002),
who used them to study heights as measures of comparative well-being (anthropometrics) among antebellum blacks.
13 Studies of cultural, status, economic, and educational homogamy wrestle with endogeneity. Long-term married
couples tend to grow more similar through time as the low-status spouse takes advantage of the resources brought to
the marriage by the high-status spouse. Thus the most informative studies of status homogamy consider newlyweds.
Although this study considers marriages rather than newlyweds, endogeneity should not represent a significant issue
because people cannot change their complexions. There is an old adage in the black community that “money
whitens,” but it is not clear that, everything else constant, that having a light spouse lightens. A dark-complected
individual often appears strikingly dark when standing next to a light-complected individual. Marrying light may,
therefore, darken rather than lighten.
11
spouse in an individual’s register. In other instances, entire families came before the clerk and registered
in order -- husband, wife, eldest to youngest child -- which made identification of spouses
straightforward. Unless it was unmistakably clear that two individuals were husband and wife, they were
not included in the sample.14 In all, 125 couples were identified from a population of 7,600 adults
registered in 22 Virginia counties between 1800 and 1862 (see data appendix for counties and years).
The registers are a particularly valuable source for the study of complexion homogamy because
they provided detailed descriptions of registrants’ complexions. It was common practice in this period to
simply label African Americans as mulatto or black, but because the registrations were designed to serve
as a form of identification more descriptive terms were used. Descriptions of complexions included: very
black, black, dark, dark brown, brown, copper, chestnut, dark mulatto, bright mulatto, light, tawny, olive,
and nearly white, among a few others. Due to the few occurrences of some descriptors, these various
complexion designations were consolidated into five categories: light (light, bright, tawny, olive, and
nearly white); mulatto (light mulatto, mulatto, dark mulatto); brown (brown, copper, chestnut); dark
(dark, dark brown); and black (black and very black). A marriage is considered complexion homogamous
if husband and wife are assigned to the same complexion category.
Two additional sources of information on marriage patterns in the black community are the 1850
and 1860 manuscript population schedules of the federal census. Unlike the highly descriptive registers,
census marshals recorded African Americans as either black or mulatto in these two censuses.15 In doing
so the census is less helpful than the freedom registers in understanding the subtleties and complexities of
complexion homogamy, but they are more useful in that it is easier to identify married couples. Marshals
collected information at the household level, recording the head of the household first and then additional
14 About 400 potential husband-wife pairs were initially identified, but if it was at all possible that they were
brother-sister pairs they were excluded. The inclusion of brother-sister pairs would increase the likelihood of finding
the hypothesized result (complexion-based assortative mating) because brothers and sisters would tend to be of
similar complexions.
15 Census marshals were instructed to classify anyone as a mulatto if they had any recognizable amount of white
heritage. They were not instructed to inquire into an individual’s racial ancestry to determine the appropriate
classification.
12
members according to their relationship to the household head. Traditional families were listed in order as
husband, wife, children (from oldest to youngest), other family members (grandparents, uncles, aunts,
nieces, nephews, etc.) descending in age, followed by live-in servants and other unrelated people residing
in the household.
The 1860 census manuscripts are also useful to a study of the economic consequences of
complexion homogamy because marshals recorded information on the occupations and literacy of
household members, as well the total value of real and personal estate held by the family.16 Making use of
this information, we can gain a better understanding of the economic advantages accruing to those in
light-light homogamous relationships compared to those in complexion heterogamous or dark-dark
marriages. Although there are some well-known problems with data drawn from the early censuses
(Adams and Kasakoff 1991, Blocker 1996), including underenumeration and inconsistent reporting of
wealth and literacy, the data are widely used and have provided valuable insights into a wide variety of
social and economic issues.
The 1850 census sample includes a random sample of households drawn from all Maryland
counties. Although the data was drawn for a different purpose, it informs the present study because the
database includes detailed information on the household structure of 198 African-American households.17
The sampling procedure, details of which are available from the author, is designed to provide a
representative sample of all households in 1850 Maryland with an oversample of free black households.
The 1850 sample should, therefore, provide an accurate estimate of the extent of complexion homogamy.
Data drawn from the 1860 manuscripts for Baltimore, Maryland and New Orleans, Louisiana
were also originally drawn for a different purpose but they too should provide valuable insight into
complexion homogamy. Baltimore and New Orleans were the largest cities in the antebellum South and
16 The 1850 census did not collect valuation assessments of household personal property. They are less useful than
the 1860 census in this regard because relatively few blacks owned real property in either year.
17 These data were collected for a longitudinal study of blacks and whites in Maryland and Pennsylvania. We are
currently linking members of each household to the 1860 census to investigate the extent of economic and
geographic mobility among free blacks in the antebellum Middle Atlantic region.
13
both had sizable African American populations. There is no guarantee that the samples are representative
of all urban blacks in the antebellum South. Indeed, given that Maryland and Louisiana were unusually
liberal in their treatment of free blacks (they both allowed blacks to receive and education, for example, a
study of which was the initial impetus behind the collection of the data), the populations may not be
representative. These cities may have attracted interstate migrants desirous of educating their children and
migrants tend to be self-selected high achievers (Borjas 1994). On the other hand, data from these cities
may provide a strong test of the convention of complexion homogamy. Traditional histories contend that
light-complected blacks in New Orleans were privileged by whites, while light-complected blacks in
Baltimore received no notable privilege or socioeconomic advantages (Davis 1991). If traditional
histories are correct, Baltimore provides a strong test of the impulse toward complexion homogamy. If
complexion homogamy was driven primarily by economic considerations and lighter complexions
received no marked economic advantage, the impulse toward complexion homogamy would be muted in
Baltimore relative to New Orleans.18
4. Homogamy among Free African Americans
This section provides several measures of complexion homogamy among free blacks living in Virginia
between 1800 and 1862 and appearing in the freedom registers, free blacks in Maryland in 1850, and free
black couples living in Baltimore, Maryland and New Orleans, Louisiana and appearing in the 1860
census manuscripts.
The empirical strategy employed in this section follows that of sociological studies of status
homogamy. Sociologists construct n x n tables, where n equals the number of relevant categories, crossclassified
by husbands (columns) and wives (rows). The cells in the tables report either the observed
number of cases (or the proportion of cases) compared to the number of cases (or proportion) that we
would expect if mating and marriage occurred randomly.
18 The same would be true for the sample drawn from the sample of couples drawn from the Virginia freedom
registers because the traditional interpretation holds that few and weak complexion advantages operated in the Old
South. Bodenhorn (1999, 2002) challenges the traditional interpretation.
14
A second commonly used method for measuring the strength of homogamy is an n x n table
reporting the “log-odds” ratio (see Kalmijn 1991). Define Nij as the number of marriages between a male
of group i and a female of group j. Next define:
(Eq. 1) *ij = log [(Nii / Nij) / (Nji / Njj)]
which is interpreted as the natural logarithm of the ratio of the odds that a type-i male marries a type-i
female relative to the odds that a type-j male marries a type-i female. In more concrete terms, the log-odds
ratio measures the odds that a light-complected man marries a dark-complected woman relative to the
odds that a dark man marries a light woman. The larger (more positive) the log-odds ratio in the diagonal
cells of a table, the stronger is complexion homogamy among the population. Similarly, the smaller (more
negative) the log-odds ratio in the off-diagonal cells, the weaker the impulse toward heterogamy.
If there are more than two groups, the log-odds ratio can be calculated for each group separately
where i represents group i and x represents all other groups (not i):
(Eq. 2) *ix = log [(Nii / Nix) / (Nxi / Nxx)]
which is the natural logarithm of the odds that a type-i male marries any woman not of type-i relative to
the odds that a type-i woman marries a non-type-i male. In other words, it is the logarithm of the ratio of
the odds that a light-complected African American man marries a light-complected woman relative to the
odds that a non-light-complected man (brown, mulatto, dark, or black, for example) marries a lightcomplected
woman. Again, the more positive the log-odds ratio in the diagonal cells, the stronger the
impulse toward complexion homogamy.
The standard error of *ij takes a particularly simple form (Goodman 1969):
(Eq. 3) SE(*ij) = (1 /Nii + 1/Nix + 1/Nxi + 1/Nxx)1/2
For a 2 x 2 interaction table, dividing the observed log odds ratio by its standard error produces a standard
normal Z-score that can be used to test for statistical significance. In interaction tables larger than 2 x 2,
however, this Z-score cannot be legitimately compared to the usual standard normal value (i.e., 1.96 for a
two-tailed test at the 95th percentile). If there is more than one interaction of interest (that is, the relevant
table is larger than 2 x 2 table), the Z-score must be adjusted to reflect the appropriate degrees of freedom.
If the test of interest involves a 2 x 2 table drawn from a larger R x C table, such as the interactions
15
defined in Equation (2), then the appropriate Z-score test statistic is that corresponding to the (2.5/(R x
C))th percentile (assuming a two-tailed test at the underlying 95th percentile). Thus, if the test of interest
involves the 95th percentile of a 2 x 2 subtable drawn from a larger 5 x 5 table, the appropriate Z-score is
that corresponding to the 0.1th (2.5/25) percentile, which is 3.09, not the usual 1.96.
Table 1 presents a 5 x 5 husband-wife complexion interaction or homogamy table categorized by
five complexion groupings appearing in the Virginia freedom registers. The first value in each cell
represents the observed number of occurrences, the second represents the expected value if marriage
partners were selected randomly without regard for complexion. Homogamy is common if the observed
frequencies in the diagonal cells are substantially greater than the expected frequencies. Similarly,
heterogamy is common if observed frequencies exceed expected frequencies in the off-diagonal cells.
The tendency toward homogamy was apparently a powerful social force within nineteenthcentury
Virginia’s African-American community. There is substantial overrepresentation in the diagonal
cells, relative to random probabilities. Given their relative proportions in the underlying population we
would expect to observe just two marriages in 125 involving a light-complected male and a light female.
The sample produced 10 such matches. If mating and marriage was truly random we would expect to
observe just 19 marriages in 125 involving a pair of mulattoes. The sample generated 38 such matches.
There are substantially fewer heterogamous marriages between mulatto men and women of any other
complexion than expected. Among marriages drawn from this sample of African Americans,
homogamous marriages are observed at about 2 to 3 times more often than if marriages were contracted
randomly. Among the very lightest African Americans, there are 10 times as many homogamous
marriages as expected.
Table 2 reports the log odds ratio for each combination, along with the relevant Z-score tests for
the statistical significance of each cell. Recall that positive values of the log-odds ratios in the diagonal
cells imply greater than expected homogamy; large negative values in off-diagonal cells imply less than
expected heterogamy. The results reported in Table 2 are, of course, consistent with those reported in
Table 1, namely that the most significant departures from random matching occur in the diagonal
(homogamy) cells. The value 3.7 in the upper left cell implies that marriages between a light-complected
16
male and a light complected female are 3.7 times more likely than a marriage between a light complected
female and a male of any other complexion. The result is both meaningful and statistically significant.
Values of the log-odds ratio reported in the other diagonal cells in Table 2, with the exception of brownbrown
cell, are also large and statistically significant. The only off-diagonal cell that approaches statistical
significance is the light male - mulatto female cell. The large and nearly significant negative value implies
that the lightest African Americans strictly observed complexion homogamy. Not only did they display a
strong impulse toward homogamy, but light-complected males displayed an equally strong impulse
against marrying women of darker complexions. This finding accords with the mathematical models of
homogamy developed by Burdett and Coles (1997) and Belding (2004) discussed in Section 2 above,
where a complexion-based separating equilibrium will naturally emerge in the marriage market as
individuals segregate themselves in complexion groups.
Because the federal censuses categorized African Americans as either black or mulatto, Tables 3
through 6 are 2 x 2 homogamy tables constructed from data reported in either the 1850 or the 1860
population manuscript censuses. Table 3 reports the results from a sample of 198 Maryland households in
1850. Random matching would imply just five mulatto-mulatto marriages, but we actually observe 24.
Because Table 3 is a simple 2 x 2 categorization, the log-odds ratios are symmetric (i.e., the diagonal cells
are the same, and the off-diagonal cells equal the negative log-odds ratio of the diagonals) and equal
5.14.19 This implies that the odds that mulatto man married a mulatto woman was 5 times the odds that a
black man married a mulatto woman. Tables 4 through 6 report comparable 2 x 2 tables for Baltimore,
Maryland; New Orleans, Louisiana; and Norfolk, Virginia in 1860. In all three instances, there are large
disparities between the observed and expected values in all cells, disparities consistent with complexion
homogamy. The number of mulatto-mulatto marriages in 1860 Baltimore, for example, is more than three
times as great as random mating would generate. The log-odds ratios for all three tables are also
consistent with complexion homogamy: 4.63 (Z-score = 18.52) for Baltimore; 4.11 (Z-score = 7.33) for
New Orleans; and 3.30 (Z-score = 4.23) for Norfolk.
19 The Z-score is 6.51, with a critical value of 1.96 for a two-tailed test at 99% significance.
17
Homogamy was a powerful impulse in the antebellum South. Light-complected blacks married
other light-complected blacks at rates far outside rates we would observe if mating was color blind.
Contemporary anecdotal evidence, as well as the findings of several historical studies, support these
empirical results. Light-complected blacks behaved as if the culture either strongly supported complexion
homogamy or punished complexion heterogamy. Moreover, the results are consistent with Olson’s belief
that groups capable of capturing rents will develop norms consistent with the continued collection of
those rents. In caste societies, intramarriage is a common and powerful norm. The next section
investigates the extent to which the norm toward complexion homogamy among light-complected blacks
protected the “preference” rents they received from whites and other blacks.
5. Economic Consequences of Complexion Homogamy
Data reported in the population manuscripts of the 1860 provide a rare opportunity to investigate the
economic consequences of colorism and complexion homogamy in the African-American community.
Olson (1982) and Smits (2004) argue that members of elite social and economic groups labor to insulate
themselves from lower status groups. Proscriptions against heterogamy maintain the boundaries between
elites and lower classes, which preserves assets, and status, intergenerationally. Although the census data
does not separately report the value of assets brought to a marriage by the husband and by the wife,
households made up of two light-complected spouses will have greater wealth than households with a
dark-complected spouse, all else constant, if Olson’s thesis holds. This section tests for complexion-based
differences in economic outcomes, including household wealth, controlling for a number of relevant
correlates. The results are consistent with Olson’s hypothesis in that households with two lightcomplected
spouses were wealthier than others.
Tables 7 and 8 motivate the argument that follows. Table 7 reports literacy rates by sex and
complexion for married spouses included in the sample. The most literate group was light complected
men married to light complected women (71 percent). The second most literate group (68 percent) was
light complected women married to light complected men. The least literate male-female combination
was the light male-dark female match, wherein only 51 percent of men and 32 percent of women were
18
literate. It appears that light males who selected dark females were less desirable males who attracted less
desirable females. Black men who attracted light women were no more literate, on average, than black
men who married black women. Educational homogamy is strong in modern societies (Smits 2004), and
was seemingly so among light-complected blacks in the antebellum South.
It seems likely that economic homogamy was also a powerful force in the early African-
American community. Table 8 reports average wealth cross-classified by sex and complexion. Light
male-light female marriages were the wealthiest by far, with about four times the wealth of black malelight
female and black male-black female marriages. Similarly, light-light marriages were more than
twice as wealthy as light-black households. Together, Tables 7 and 8 imply a powerful set of social
conventions that reinforced the norm of complexion homogamy. The remainder of this section uses
multiple regression techniques to control for factors that influenced household wealth, including
complexion homogamy.
5.1 The Determinants of Black Household Wealth
The empirical strategy of this section is to estimate household-level wealth regression equations
that include likely correlates between household wealth and household structure, including the
complexion composition of the marriage partners (i.e., whether the observed partners were light-light,
light-dark, dark-light, or dark-dark). The 1860 census provides a unique opportunity because it was the
first federal census to collect and report household-level information on a household’s real and personal
wealth; and was the second census to report the details of the age, sex, literacy, nativity, and occupation
of each household member. Additionally, and most importantly, it separated African-American
respondents into light- and dark-complected categories (mulatto and black). The estimated regressions
equations take the general form:
(Eq. 4) ln(Tj) = " + $1Xj + $2Yj + $3Zj + ((Light-Light)j + ,j
where the j’s index households so that ln(Tj)represent the natural logarithm of total household wealth; the
Xj’s capture the husband’s characteristics; the Yj’s capture the wife’s characteristics; the Zj’s capture
household characteristics; and the last term captures the complexion combinations of husbands and wives,
19
with the husband’s complexion listed first. The excluded category is any marriage involving a darkcomplected
individual.20 The " represents the estimated constant parameter, the $k’s the relevant slope
coefficients, the ( the homogamy shift term, and ,j is the error term.
As with all empirical work using the federal manuscript census records there are several issues of
data quality that need to be addressed. First and most relevant, is that some census marshals were more
diligent in recording information than others. It was not uncommon for marshals to have returned
incomplete information on some households. Information on household structure is almost always
reported, along with sex and age of the household members. Male occupations were typically reported,
but blanks are not uncommon and are difficult to interpret. It is unclear whether the information was not
provided, if the person was unemployed, or if they were retired, though the last is discernible, to some
extent, by considering the respondent’s age. There were just 43 instances of nonreporting of occupation
for husbands in an original sample of 1,452 households. Those 43 cases were dropped from the sample
used in estimating the regression equations. Another 24 households were dropped because other pertinent
data was missing or clearly miscoded, leaving a final sample of 1,385 households.
The more perplexing problem in the use of data from the 1860 federal censuses is that
nonreporting of wealth data was not uncommon. Indeed, of the final household sample, marshals recorded
wealth data for just 967 (or 69.8 percent of households). Researchers have long debated the meaning of
the missing wealth data (Conley and Galenson 1994 provide a review). Some have interpreted it to imply
that a household had no tangible wealth, but it is hard to imagine 439 African-American households
owning absolutely nothing of discernible value. The personal property category in the 1860 federal census
was to include all household property (furniture, fixtures, kitchen utensils, and so forth) not otherwise
enumerated in the valuation of real property, and it is hard to imagine a viable household without at least
a few basic amenities. A second common interpretation is that households concealed or obscured wealth
20 Initial regressions were estimated with three marriage combinations (Light-Light, Light-Dark, and Dark-Light,
with Dark-Dark as the excluded category). The estimated coefficients on Light-Dark, and Dark-Light were not
statistically significant and were not significantly different from each other. Thus, the reported regressions include
only a Light-Light category with the default excluded group including all marriages with at least one dark partner.
20
from authority figures who may have reported them to the tax collector. Again, this seems an
unreasonable interpretation, given that any household would have a difficult time concealing everything it
owned. A third, and more plausible, explanation is that marshals simply failed to report small wealth
holdings.
Rather than exclude households with no reported wealth, which eliminates a large proportion of
the sample, it is assumed that marshals had idiosyncratic lower-bound censoring thresholds. That is,
marshals regularly left the wealth cell blank for households failing to meet some minimum threshold. In a
study of 26 southern rural counties, Bodenhorn (2002) finds that most marshals tended to censor at values
less than $10, a few censored below $25, and a handful censored below $50. The strategy adopted here is
to impute a value for each nonreporting household equal to one-half the lowest value reported by any
marshal canvassing a city ward.21 For nonreporting households in Baltimore’s fifth ward, a wealth value
of $12.50 was imputed for each nonreporting household because the lowest reported value was $25,
which was approximately the median censoring threshold in these two city’s 31 wards. The lowest
censoring threshold was $3 in Baltimore’s seventeenth ward; the highest was $100 in three of Baltimore’s
20 wards and in 5 of New Orleans’ 11 wards.
The first column of Table 9 reports the means of the independent variables. The husband’s birth
cohort is included to capture age effects in wealth accumulation (the 1791-1800 cohort is the excluded
category).22 Older African American couples are likely to have accumulated more wealth than younger
couples. Not only did older couples have more time to save, but traditional histories hold that slaves freed
in the post-Revolutionary period were freed under particularly favorable circumstances (Berlin 1974).
The egalitarian impulse following the Revolution led many slaveholders to manumit slaves, providing
them with land, livestock, and cash or other assets to embark on a life under freedom. After the 1810s and
1820s, manumitting slaveholders were less generous.
21 Altonji, Doraszelski and Segal (2000) adopt a similar practice in a study involving modern data and determine
that doing so introduces little bias while preserving sample size.
22 Alternative specifications including a quadratic in the husband’s age, with and without cohorts, generated few
statistically significant coefficient estimates on the age variables and are not reported.
21
A second pair of independent variables are dummy variables taking a value of 1 if the husband
and/or wife migrated to Baltimore or New Orleans from another state or country. Migrants tend to be
more highly motivated or accomplished than people who stay behind. Because high productivity
individuals tend to self-select for migration, migrants and immigrants may have accumulated greater
wealth for a given set of characteristics. The regressions also include indicator variables capturing the
husband’s and/or wife’s illiteracy. Less educated people tend to earn lower incomes, which may lead to
lower savings rates and less accumulation of assets. The number of individuals residing in the household
is also included in the regrssions. Extended households may have had greater agglomerations of wealth
than nuclear families. An indicator variable for Baltimore was included to capture any city or regional
differences influencing the abilities of African-American households to accumulate wealth.
An important determinant of wealth is occupational status. High-status occupations tend to be
high-income occupations so that individuals with high status occupations are likely to accumulate more
wealth, everything else constant, than individuals laboring in low-status occupations. To capture
occupational status, the regressions include a socioeconomic index value (SEI) that corresponds to Otis
Dudley Duncan’s occupational socioeconomic index score. Rather than categorizing occupations into
broad categories (professional, skilled, unskilled, etc.) as is often done, this variable is capable of
capturing more subtle differences in occupation-related abilities to save and amass wealth. The
conventions followed here were the same as those followed in putting together the IPUMS data sets.
Using Duncan’s Index (see Reiss 1961) necessarily generates some anachronisms in job classifications.
Some occupations common in 1860 had disappeared by the 1950s when Duncan created his index. There
were few carriage drivers or draymen in the 1950s, for example, but there were taxi drivers (the 1950s
equivalent of the 1850s carriage driver) and truck drivers (the 1950s equivalent of the 1850s drayman)
and the modern codings were assigned to older occupations. When the modern equivalent of the
nineteenth-century occupation was less obvious, Duncan’s generic SEI score by job class (craftsman,
operative, or laborer) and industry (construction, metals, machinery, food and kindred products, leather
products, etc.) was assigned to the individual.
22
Finally, each regression includes an indicator variable (Light-Light) capturing the type of
marriage by complexion. The excluded category is a combination of Dark-Light, Light-Dark, and Dark-
Dark, or any household in which at least one of the partners was dark complected. Tables 7 and 8, and
some preliminary but unreported regressions suggest that households including a dark partner resembled
each other more closely than households made up of two light complected individuals. If Olson’s (1982)
contention that the purpose of homogamy among the elite is to preserve assets across generations holds,
the coefficient estimates on the Light-Light variable will be large, positive, and statistically significant.
Because light-complected individuals who marry dark may have violated a community norm, they may
have been punished or shunned. The group of light-complected blacks who married dark may also have
initially been outside the elite as their lower literacy rates attest (see Table 7), which implies that they
brought fewer assets to the marriages. But by marrying dark, these initially less wealthy light-complected
individuals effectively excluded themselves from later acceptance into the “mulatto elite.” Regardless of
whether light-complected blacks who married a dark partner were outsiders or were insiders shunned for
their choice, the homogamy norm was an effective exclusionary device.
The regressions were estimated using ordinary least squares (OLS), robust regression, and median
regression. Given the missing wealth data in the census, OLS regression is problematic because it may
return inconsistent estimates (Conley and Galenson 1994).23 Moreover, parameter estimates in
semilogarithmic specifications relying on the imputation of some value for missing or zero-value
observations are sensitive to different imputations. Despite potential estimation problems with OLS, it
remains a useful basis of comparison and the imputed values used here are reasonable and justified given
23 The equations were also estimated using maximum likelihood techniques for truncated and censored observations
(using the truncreg and tobit commands in STATA). Truncated and censored data are generated by different
sampling processes and should be handled differently. A sample is censored if no observations have been excluded,
but some of the information contained in them is suppressed. This seems to explain the failure to record wealth
information for some households. A truncated sample is one in which observations falling below some point are
excluded. Given concerns with underenumeration in early censuses, it is possible that low-wealth households were
more likely to be overlooked than medium- or high-wealth households. Regression techniques for truncated samples
use only that part of the sample above the truncation point to generate coefficient estimates. Maximum likelihood
estimates for truncated regressions were estimated with truncation points between $10 and $150. The regression
coefficients (or marginal effects) for the tobit and truncated regressions were not substantially different in sign or
magnitude from OLS estimates and are not reported.
23
the census marshals’ censoring practices. The values were not arbitrarily chosen (i.e., some very small
nonnegative value), as is often the case, to produce a mathematically defined value of the logarithm in
cases with missing or nonpositive values.
A second statistical concern is the presence of several large outliers. The smallest reported wealth
value was $3; the largest was $23,000, with a mean of $336 and standard error of $542. Rather than
discarding the outliers, the specifications were estimated by robust regression and median regression.
Robust regression uses an iterative weighting algorithm to reduce the influence of observations with large
residuals. Median (or least absolute deviation) regression is more apt to return unbiased parameter
estimates even when the basic assumptions underlying OLS break down. Median regression is also an
attractive method when the sample data contains outliers or is censored. Neither robust regression nor
median regression resolves all the estimation issues, but they provide reasonable estimates of the central
tendency of the data when the classical assumptions underlying OLS break down.
The second through fourth columns of Table 9 report parameter estimates generated by OLS,
robust regression, and median regression. The parameter estimates from the three techniques agree in
sign, significance, and general magnitude. Coefficients on the cohort indicator variables, for instance,
support the traditional interpretation that African-Americans who attained their freedom just after the
American Revolution were treated more generously than later freed slaves, though the estimates also
capture the positive age-wealth correlation found in most modern studies. It not possible to separate the
independent influences without knowing whether an individual was free-born or manumitted, which we
do not observe. According to the OLS estimate, the cohort of husbands born between 1831 and 1840 had
51 percent less wealth than the cohort born between 1791 and 1800 (e-0.718 = 0.49). Estimates from both
the robust and median regressions are consistent with, though somewhat smaller than, the OLS estimate.
Older cohorts had greater wealth than younger ones.
Literacy, as expected, had a meaningful influence on household wealth. Holding all else
constant, a household with an illiterate husband had just 72 percent of the wealth of one with a literate
male head. The impact of female illiteracy was modestly larger, which is surprising given that the census
24
marshals recorded occupations for only 220 of the 1,385 wives included in the sample.24 If the census
provides an accurate assessment of female labor force participation, female literacy was related to
household wealth in a more complex manner than through the wife’s ability to generate labor market
income and add to the savings of her family. If a woman’s literacy was positively associated with her
parent’s economic status and if married women were unlikely to be engaged in the labor market, the
correlation between household wealth and female literacy may reflect the wife’s ability to bring physical
and social capital, more so than human capital, to the marriage. It is little wonder that light-complected
men sought light-complected women who, on average, had more human capital (see Table 7).
Larger households are associated with greater wealth. And black households in Baltimore had
significantly less wealth than comparable households in New Orleans, a finding in accordance with
traditional interpretations of attitudes toward free blacks in the Upper and Lower South.
The findings most relevant to the issue of colorism and complexion homogamy are captured by
the coefficient estimates on the spouses’ complexion variables. Relative to either complexion
heterogamous or Dark-Dark homogamous households, homogamous Light-Light households had
significantly more wealth. The OLS estimates imply that light-complected homogamous marriages had
about 47 percent (e0.384 = 1.468) more wealth than homogamous dark marriages. The robust regression
estimates imply a modestly larger light complexion advantage, or a premium of about 50 percent. Median
regression estimates imply a smaller, but still substantial 39 percent advantage for the median household.
The light-light complexion homogamy advantage was statistically significant and economically
meaningful. Light-light homogamous marriages had one third to one half more household wealth than
dark-dark marriages.
Given the social norm toward complexion homogamy within the black community, particularly
the light-complected elite, it is possible that the Light-Light variable is endogenous. If it is, OLS estimates
are inconsistent and may not be close to the true value even in a large sample. Instrumental variable or
24 Wive’s occupational SEI’s were not included in the regressions because there were too few of them and because
most were listed as “washer” or “laundress,” with a few listed as seamstresses or nurses, which generated little
variation in the data to obtain a reliable coefficient estimate.
25
two-stage least squares (2SLS) can be used to correct for this inconsistency if a valid instrument can be
identified. The OLS regression was reestimated as a two-stage least squares regression using the age
difference between the marriage partners (male age minus female age) as the instrument.
The age difference between partners should a priori be a valid instrument because it should be
correlated with the potentially endogenous variable (Light-Light) and uncorrelated with the dependent
variables in the second stage (log wealth). Bogger (1997) and other historians recount often unsuccessful
attempts among elite free black men to find compatible partners their own age. If the impulse toward
complexion homogamy outweighed the impulse toward marrying another of similar age, we are more
likely to observe substantial age differentials among light-light homogamous pairings than among
heterogamous or dark-dark pairings. The first stage regression contains the full set of variables in addition
to the age difference of married couples. This regression is well specified. The F-statistic of the first-stage
regression is 32.04 and the chi-square statistic of the Hausman test is 0.01 with a p-value of 0.99. Thus,
the test fails to reject the null hypothesis that the OLS estimator is consistent.25 Thus, we are confident
that the coefficient on the OLS estimate captures the true, and powerful, effect of homogamous marriage
on wealth accumulation.
The findings reported in this section support Olson’s (1982) hypothesis that elite groups will
maintain their privileges intergenerationally by developing social conventions conducive to homogamy.
Although it is impossible to determine which spouse brought what to the marriages observed here, the
results suggest that light-light couples accumulated wealth than dark-dark or dark-light combinations. The
next section employs widely used Blinder-Oaxaca regression decomposition techniques to determine the
relative influence of systematic differences in household characteristics and differences in treatment on
household outcomes.26
25 The augmented regression test suggested by Davidson and McKinnon (1993) is consistent with the Hausman test.
The p-value of the Light-Light coefficient in the augmented regression is 0.883, implying that the OLS estimator is
consistent. With only one available instrument, the standard overidentification test is unavailable.
26 See Blinder (1973) and Oaxaca (1973) for the original derivations of the procedure. They are now widely used in
the literature.
26
5.2 Did Those with Lighter Complexions Receive Better Treatment: Evidence from Regression
Decompositions
Wealth differences between any two groups may be due to differences in the average
characteristics of that group (characteristics effects), or to systematic variations in how a given
characteristic is rewarded in the marketplace and affects an individual’s ability to accumulate wealth
(treatment effects). The premise of this article is that colorism interacts with the complexion homogamy
norm such that light-light homogamous partners will receive preferential treatment, relative to
heterogamous pairings, for a given set of observable characteristics. This section explores the issue by
decomposing complexion wealth gaps using standard decomposition techniques.
The initial step in the decomposition methodology is to estimate separate regressions for relevant
subgroups. The sample is separated into four groups or subsamples. First, the groups are separated by
city, with separate regressions estimates by city. This decision is driven by both empirical and historical
considerations. The large and significantly negative parameter estimate on the Baltimore dummy variable
suggests different regional treatment, a common contention among historians of the antebellum black
experience. The city subsamples are then further separated by marriage type. Separate parameters are
estimated for light-light households in each city and compared to parameter estimates for households with
at least one black marriage partner (light-dark, dark-light, and dark-dark). These eight regressions are
reported in Table 10. Because there are some concerns that the socioeconomic index variable (SEI) may
be endogenous, regressions and decompositions are reported with and without the variable. The results do
not differ in any meaningful way.
Once these separate city-complexion subsample regressions are estimated, it is possible to predict
the wealth (ë) for a city-complexion type.27 For mulattos residing in Baltimore, for example, the
estimated mean household wealth of a light-light household is ëm
m = µm $m, where µm represents the
vector of mean characteristics of mulattos and $m represents the vector of estimated regression
27 This discussion follows that found in Goldsmith, Hamilton, and Darity (2004).
27
coefficients for mulattoes appearing in the Baltimore subsample (city subscripts are suppressed). Next,
define ëm
b = µm $b, where µm remains the vector of mean characteristics of light-light (mulatto)
households and $b is a vector of estimated regression coefficients for marriages involving a black spouse.
Other combinations are defined analogously, where the subscript on the ë refers to the mean group
characteristics and the superscript refers to the group parameter estimates.
Next, define the Treatment Advantage as: TA = (-1)[(ëm
b - ëm
m) / ëm
m]. The treatment advantage
measures the percentage wealth gain the preferred group receives as a result of the preferences shown it,
independent of any group characteristics that may provide its members with an ability to generate and
accumulate wealth. Because decompositions can be calculated from the viewpoint of either group, we can
also define the Treatment Disadvantage as TD = [(ëb
m - ëb
b) / ëb
b]. The treatment disadvantage measures
the percentage wealth shortfall realized by the discriminated-against group as a result of colorism,
independent of the group’s mean characteristics. By calculating treatment effects both ways, the analysis
generates a range of average estimated benefits associated with being a member of the preferred group.
In addition to treatment effects, the decomposition procedure makes it possible to produce
estimates of the percentage of the complexion-based wealth gap explained by differences in group
characteristics. The analog of the treatment advantage is the Characteristic Advantage, which is
calculated as: CA = (-1)[(ëb
m - ëm
m) / ëm
m]. The characteristic advantage takes the preferred group as the
reference group and estimates the percentage of the wealth gap attributable to differences in household
characteristics that influence the generation and accumulation of wealth. The Characteristic
Disadvantage is calculated as: CD = [(ëm
b - ëb
b) / ëb
b], which uses households with a black spouse as the
reference group and provides an estimate of the wealth shortfall of households with a black spouse due to
differences in productive characteristics.
Table 11 provides estimates of Treatment Effects and Characteristic Effects for Baltimore and
New Orleans based on the OLS regressions reported in Table 10. The second column of Table 11 reveals
that the estimated wealth of households with a black spouse ranged between 88.8 and 91.6 percent of the
wealth of light-light households. Subsequent columns report estimates of the Treatment and Characteristic
Effects. Treatment advantages experienced by light-light households ranged between 8.4 and 9.3 percent
28
of average estimated wealth in Baltimore. In New Orleans treatment advantages experienced by
households with two light-complected households varied from 7.3 to 7.4 percent of estimated wealth.
Estimates of the treatment disadvantages experienced by Baltimore households with at least one black
spouse parallel the estimated advantages when using light-light households as the reference group. They
range between 7.9 and 9.4 percent of average estimated wealth.
Differences in wealth-producing characteristics account for a much smaller fraction of the
complexion-based wealth gaps than the treatment effects. In the Baltimore subsample, the characteristic
advantage experienced by mulatto households was 2.7 to 4.4 percent; it was 1.6 for both models in New
Orleans. If we use households with at least one black spouse as the reference group, the characteristic
disadvantage ranges between 2.1 and 3.3 percent in Baltimore and 1.2 and 1.3 percent in New Orleans.
Differences in wealth-producing characteristics account for about one-fourth to about one-half as much of
the complexion wealth gap as differences in treatment. Thus, while differences in household
characteristics account for some of the differences observed between dark and light households, treatment
effects account for a much larger share of the wealth gap. The results are consistent with the colorism
hypothesis.
6. Concluding Remarks
This paper demonstrates that one implication of intraracial black colorism was complexion homogamy.
Light-complected blacks married light-complected blacks, darks married darks, and there was less
complexion mixing than would be expected if love was truly color blind. Homogamy was the norm and
there were apparently strong social conventions within the black community supporting the practice.
Some scholars have noted its persistence to modern times (Udry, Bauman and Chase 1971; Graham
1999). The black elite in major U.S. cities remains overwhelmingly light complected and its members
encourage their children to mingle with others of like complexion.
A second finding of the paper is that light-light complexion homogamous households have more
wealth than complexion heterogamous or dark-dark homogamous households. An implication of this
finding is that complexion homogamy generates an intergenerational persistence of status, education, and
29
wealth. In this regard complexion homogamy was not (and is) not an innocuous tradition. It had (and has)
significant social and economic ramifications. Homogamous marriage practices have the benefit of
preserving assets and status among the existing elite, but it may deny access to deserving individuals
outside the elite. Graham (1999), for example, documents instances in which the light complected elite
still use exclusive clubs and organizations to deny access to important social and economic networks
(social capital) to the emerging black middle class. Gatewood (2000) dated to practice to Reconstruction
and Williamson (1980) reports some evidence of it in antebellum Charleston, South Carolina. This paper
pushes the twin traditions of colorism and complexion homogamy back to the Early National Period and
broadens its geographic scope. Light complected blacks have seemingly maintained their elite position in
the United States through homogamy for more than two centuries. On one hand, social capital like that
developed through clubs and organizations can be an effective mechanism for advancement, which
appears to have been an important element in the success achieved by light-complected men and women
in the antebellum South. On the other, the exclusivity of clubs and organizations can have negative
consequences for outsiders (Fukuyama 1999). Because they are denied access to valuable social and
economic networks, outsiders find advancement difficult because there is a connection between the
accumulation of social capital and access to economic resources. Future research should more fully
investigate the extent to which the black elite’s networks exclude nonelite blacks and the consequences of
that exclusion for black advancement.
Data Appendix
Virginia Freedom Registers
Alleghany County: Register of Free Negroes and Mulattoes in Alleghany County, 1855-1856. Microfilm
at Library of Virginia (hereafter LOV).
Arlington County: Register of Free Negroes, 1797-1861. LOV.
Bedford County: Register of Free Negroes, 1803-1820. LOV.
Augusta County: Katherine Bushman (ed.). 1989. The Registers of Free Blacks, 1810-1864: Augusta
County, Virginia and Staunton, Virginia. Verona: Va.: Mid-Valley Press, Inc.
30
Botetourt County: Dorothy A. Boyd-Rush (ed.). 1993. Free Negroes Registered in the Clerk’s Office,
Botetourt County, Virginia, 1802-1836. Athens, Ga.
Brunswick County: Frances Holloway Wynne. 1983. Register of Free Negroes and also of Dower Slaves:
Brunswick County, Virginia, 1803-1860. Fairfax, Va.
Campbell County: Register of Free Negroes, 1801-1850. LOV.
Charles City County: Register of Free Negroes, 1839-1864. LOV.
Chesterfield County: Register of Free Negroes, 1804-1854. LOV.
Cumberland County: Register of Free Negroes, 1821-1863. LOV.
Essex County: Register of Free Negroes, 1843-1861. LOV.
Fairfax County: Donald Sweig. 1977. Registrations of Free Negroes Commencing September Court 1822,
Book No. 2 and Register of Free Blacks 1835 Book 3. Fairfax, Va.: Office of Comprehensive
Planning.
Fauquier County: Karen King Ibrahim, Karen Hughes White and Courtney Gaskins. 1993. Fauquier
County, Virginia Register of Free Negroes, 1817-1865. Afro-American Historical Association of
Fauquier County.
Fluvanna County: Register of Free Negroes, 1851-1862. LOV.
Lancaster County: Register of Free Negroes, 1803-1860. LOV.
Middlesex County: Register of Free Negroes, 1800-1860. LOV.
Montgomery County: Richard B. Dickenson. 1981. Entitled! Free Papers in Appalachia Concerning
Antebellum Freeborn Negroes and Emancipated Blacks of Montgomery County, Virginia.
Washington, DC: National Genealogical Society.
Northampton County: Frances Bibbins Latimer. 1992. The Register of Free Negroes: Northampton
County Virgnia, 1853 to 1861. Bowie, Md.: Heritage Books, Inc.
Orange County: Free Negro Papers, 1837-1850. LOV.
Rockingham County: Dorothy A. Boyd-Rush (ed.). 1992. Register of Free Blacks, Rockingham County,
Virginia, 1807-1859. Bowie, Md.: Heritage Books, Inc.
Westmoreland County: Register of Free Negroes, etc., 1828-1849. LOV.
31
References
A Colored American. “Prejudice among Ourselves.” The Colored American (19 August 1837).
Adams, John W. and Alice Bee Kasakoff. 1991. “Estimates of Census Underenumeration Based on
Genealogies.” Social Science History 15:x (month), 527-543.
Altonji, Joseph G., Ulrich Doraszekski, and Lewis Segal. 2000. “Black/White Differences in Wealth.”
Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago Economic Perspectives 24:1, 38-50.
Anonymous. “What Becomes of the Free Colored People?” The National Era (5 October 1854).
Becker, Gary. 1971. The Economics of Discrimination. Second edition. Chicago and London: University
of Chicago Press.
Becker, Gary. 1981. A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Belding, Theodore C. 2004. “Nobility and Stupidity: Modeling the Evolution of Class Endogamy.”
Technical Report CSCS-2004-001, University of Michigan Center for the Study of Complex
Systems. Available at http://arXiv.org/abs/nlin/0405048.
Berlin, Ira. 1974. Slaves without Masters: The Free Negro in the Antebellum South. New York: The New
Press.
Bernheim, B. Douglas. 1994. “A Theory of Conformity.” Journal of Political Economy 102:5 (October),
841-77.
Blinder, Alan S. 1973. “Wage Discrimination: Reduced Form and Structural Estimates.” Journal of
Human Resources 8:x (month), 436-55.
Blocker, Jack S. 1996. “Bias in Wealth and Income Records: An Ohio Case Study.” Historical Methods
29:x (month), 25-36.
Bodenhorn, Howard. 1999. “A Troublesome Caste: Height and Nutrition of Antebellum Virginia’s Rural
Free Blacks.” Journal of Economic History 59:4 (December), 972-96.
Bodenhorn, Howard. 2002. “The Mulatto Advantage: The Biological Consequences of Complexion
among Free Blacks in Antebellum Virginia.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 33:1 (Summer),
21-46.
32
Bogger, Tommy L. Free Blacks in Norfolk, Virginia, 1790-1860: The Darker Side of Freedom.
Charlottesville and London: University Press of Virginia, 1997.
Borjas, George. 1994. “Economics of Immigration.” Journal of Economic Literature 32:4 (December),
1667-1717.
Borjas, George. 2000. “Ethnic Enclaves and Assimilation.” Swedish Economic Policy Review 7:2 (Fall),
89-122.
Burdett, Ken and Melvyn G. Coles. 1997. “Marriage and Class.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 112:1
(February), 141-168.
Conley, Timothy G. and David W. Galenson. 1994. “Quantile Regression Analysis of Censored Wealth
Data.” Historical Methods 27: (month), 149-165.
Davidson, R. and J. G. MacKinnon. 1993. Estimation and Inference in Econometrics. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Davis, Kingsley. 1941. “Intermarriage in Caste Societies.” American Anthropologist (New Series) 43:3
(July), 376-395.
Davis, F. James. 1991. Who is Black? One Nation’s Definition. University Park, Pa.: The Pennsylvania
State University Press.
Dribe, Martin and Christer Lundh. 2004. “Finding the Right Partner: Rural Homogamy in Nineteenth-
Century Sweden.” Working paper, Lund University.
Dronkers, Japp and Huibert Schijf. 2003. “Marriages between Nobility and High Bourgeoisie as a Way to
Maintain Their Elite Positions in Modern Dutch Society.” Paper presented at European
Sociological Association Conference (September).
Ehrenberg, Ronald G. and Robert S. Smith. 2000. Modern Labor Economics: Theory and Policy. 7th
edition. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.
Frazier, E. Franklin. 1957. Black Bourgeoisie. New York: The Free Press.
Fukuyama, Francis. 1999. “Social Capital and Civil Society.” Paper presented at IMF Conference on
Second Generation Reforms. (October). Available at IMF web site.
33
Gatewood, Willard B. 2000. Aristocrats of Color: The Black Elite, 1880-1920. Fayetteville, Ark.:
University of Arkansas Press.
Goldsmith, Arthur H., Darrick Hamilton, and William Darity, Jr. 2004. “From Dark to Light: Skin Color and
Wages among African-Americans.” Unpublished working paper (August).
Goodman, Leo A. 1969. “How to Ransack Social Mobility Tables and Other Kinds of Cross-
Classification Tables.” American Journal of Sociology 75:1 (July), 1-40.
Graham, Lawrence Otis. 1999. Our Kind of People: Inside America’s Black Upper Class. New York:
Harper Collins Publishers.
Hill, Mark E. 2001. “Color Differences in the Socioeconomic Status of African American Men: Results of
a Longitudinal Study.” Social Forces 78:4 (June), 1437-1460.
Horton, James Oliver. 1993. Free People of Color: Inside the African American Community. Washington,
D.C. and London: Smithsonian Institution Press.
Hughes, Michael and Bradley R. Hertel. 1990. “The Significance of Color Remains: A Study of Life
Chances, Mate Selection, and Ethnic Consciousness among Black Americans.” Social Forces
68:4 (June), 1105-20.
Johnson, Whittington B. 1996. Black Savannah, 1788-1864. Fayetteville, Ark.: University of Arkansas
Press.
Kalmijn, Matthijs. 1991. “Shifting Boundaries: Trends in Religious and Educational Homogamy.”
American Sociological Review 56:6 (December), 786-800.
Kalmijn. Matthijs. 1994. “Assortative Mating by Cultural and Economic Occupational Status.” American
Journal of Sociology 100:2 (September), 422-52.
Kalmijn, Matthijs. 1998. “Intermarriage and Homogamy: Causes, Patterns, Trends.” Annual Review of
Sociology 24, 395-421.
Kandori, Michihiro. 1992. “Social Norms and Community Enforcement.” Review of Economic Studies
59: 1 (January), 63-80.
Keith, Verna M. and Cedric Herring. 1991. “Skin Tone and Stratification in the Black Community.”
American Journal of Sociology 97:3 (November), 760-778.
34
Komlos, John. 1992. “Toward an Anthropometic History of African-Americans: The Case of the Free
Blacks in Antebellum Maryland.” In Strategic Factors in Nineteenth Century American
Economic History: A Volume to Honor Robert W. Fogel, 297-329. Edited by Claudia Goldin and
Hugh Rockoff. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Litwack, Leon F. 1961. North of Slavery: The Negro in the Free States, 1790-1860. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press.
Manski, Charles F. 2000. “Economic Analysis of Social Interactions.” Journal of Economic Perspectives
14:3 (Summer), 115-36.
Margo, Robert A. Race and Schooling in the South, 1880-1950. Chicago and London: University of
Chicago Press, 1990.
Oaxaca, Ronald. 1973. “Male-Female Earning Differentials in Urban Labor Markets.” International
Economic Review 14:x (month), 693-709.
Olson, Mancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Olson, Mancur. 1982. The Rise and Decline of Nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation, and Social
Rigidities. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Reiss, Albert J. 1961. Occupations and Social Status. New York: The Free Press.
Reuter, Edward B. 1917. “The Superiority of the Mulatto.” American Journal of Sociology 23:1 (July),
83-106.
Smits, Jeroen. 2004. “Social Closure among the Higher Educated: Trends in Educational Homogamy in
55 Countries.” Unpublished working paper available at http://home.planet.nl/~smits.jeroen.
Toplin, Robert B. 1979. “Between Black and White: Attitudes toward Southern Mulattoes, 1830-1861.”
Journal of Southern History 45:2 (May), 185-200.
Udry, J, Richard, Karl E. Bauman, and Charles Chase. 1971. “Skin Color, Status, and Mate Selection.”
American Journal of Sociology 76: 4 (January), 722-733.
Williamson, Joel. 1980. New People: Miscegenation and Mulattoes in the United States. New York: The
Free Press.
35
Young, H. Peyton. 1996. “The Economics of Convention.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 10:2
(Spring), 105-22.
36
Table 1: Homogamy within Nineteenth-Century Virginia’s African-American Community
Observed / Expected Frequencies by Complexion Combinations
Husbands
Wives Light Mulatto Brown Dark Black
Light 10 / 2 0 / 4 1 / 1 1 / 1 0 / 3
Mulatto 2 / 10 38 / 19 4 / 6 3 / 6 7 / 13
Brown 7 / 3 2 / 7 6 / 2 0 / 2 4 / 5
Dark 2 / 3 0 / 6 1 / 2 11 / 2 2 / 4
Black 1 / 4 4 / 8 2 / 2 0 / 3 17 / 6
Notes: Random marriage probabilities calculated assuming no colorism as follows: Assume 125 males, of
which 22 are light, 44 are mulatto, 14 are brown, 15 are dark, and 30 are black (column totals), and 125
females in proportion to their row totals. Label each male from 1 to 125 and each female from 1 to 125.
The size of the event of interest is the number of all possible male-female pairs, which in this case is
15,625 (125 time 125) because there are 125 choices for males and 125 choices for females assuming any
male-female pair is possible. The probability of a light male-light female marriage is 0.017 (22 males x 12
females all divided by 15,625). The expected number
Sources: Virginia freedom registers. See data appendix.
37
Table 2: Homogamy within Nineteenth-Century Virginia’s African-American Community
Log Odds Ratios and Z-statistics (in parentheses) by Complexion Combinations
Husbands
Wives Light Mulatto Brown Dark Black
Light 3.7‡
(4.44)
-0.3
(-0.28)
-0.5
(-0.46)
Mulatto -2.3
(-3.00)
3.2‡
(6.22)
-0.7
(-1.13)
-1.2
(-1.79)
-1.2
(-2.51)
Brown 1.3
(2.36)
-1.7
(-2.20)
1.8
(2.92)
-0.1
(-0.16)
Dark -0.5
(-0.63)
-1.3
(-1.21)
4.0‡
(5.39)
-1.7
(-2.14)
Black -1.8
(-1.71)
-1.5
(-2.55)
-0.4
(-0.5)
2.8‡
(17.35)
Notes: ‡ implies statistical significance at 95th percentile. See text following Eqs. (1) and (2) for
discussion of the calculation of Z-statistics for interaction tables of size (R x C). Critical Z-value is 3.09.
Sources: Virginia freedom registers. See data appendix.
Table 3: Homogamy among Black Residents of Maryland in 1850
Observed / Expected Frequencies by Complexion Combinations
Mulatto Male Black Male
Mulatto Female 24 / 5 2 / 21
Black Female 14 / 33 158 / 139
Notes: Expected frequencies reflect underlying probabilities if marriage partners were selected randomly
without regard for complexion. Calculated from complexion percentages by gender in sample.
Sources: Population census manuscripts for Maryland (1850).
38
Table 4. Homogamy among Black Residents of Baltimore, Maryland in 1860
Observed / Expected Frequencies by Complexion Combinations
Mulatto Male Black Male
Mulatto Female 238 / 71 90 / 257
Black Female 21 / 188 855 / 688
Notes: See Table 3.
Source: Population census manuscripts for Baltimore, Maryland (1860).
Table 5. Homogamy among Black Residents of New Orleans, Louisiana in 1860
Observed / Expected Frequencies by Complexion Combinations
Mulatto Male Black Male
Mulatto Female 142 / 123 8 / 27
Black Female 7 / 26 24 / 5
Notes: See Table 3.
Source: Population census manuscripts for New Orleans, Louisiana (1860).
Table 6. Homogamy among Black Residents of Norfolk, Virginia in 1860
Observed / Expected Frequencies by Complexion Combinations
Mulatto Male Black Male
Mulatto Female 13 / 5 6 / 14
Black Female 3 / 11 38 / 30
Notes: See Table 3.
Source: Bogger (1997, p. 113).
39
Table 7: Literacy Rates by Sex and Complexion in Baltimore and New Orleans in 1860
Male Literacy Rate / Female Literacy Rate
Mulatto Male Black Male
Mulatto Female 0.71 / 0.68 0.54 / 0.46
Black Female 0.51 / 0.32 0.56 / 0.48
Sources: See Table 3.
Table 8: Mean Household Wealth by Marriage Type in Baltimore and New Orleans in 1860
Mulatto Male Black Male
Mulatto Female $804.37 $208.44
Black Female $337.00 $200.66
Sources: See Table 3.
40
Table 9: Determinants of Household Wealth among African Americans in 1860 Baltimore and New
Orleans
(Dependent variable = ln(household wealth))
OLSa Robust Median
Regression Regression
Variable Mean Coefficient Coefficient Coefficient
(S.E.) (S.E.) (S.E.) (S.E.)
Cohort 1801-10 0.136 -0.247 -0.263 -0.283
(0.343) (0.201) (0.216) (0.213)
Cohort 1811-20 0.374 -0.542‡ -0.509‡ -0.486†
(0.484) (0.197) (0.201) (0.198)
Cohort 1821-30 0.316 -0.751‡ -0.727‡ -0.621‡
(0.465) (0.179) (0.203) (0.200)
Cohort 1831-40 0.136 -0.773‡ -0.706‡ -0.609‡
(0.343) (0.226) (0.217) (0.215)
Male Mover 0.072 0.252 0.241 0.084
(0.259) (0.160) (0.158) (0.157)
Female Mover 0.057 -0.091 -0.053 0.091
(0.232) (0.191) (0.176) (0.174)
Male Illiterate 0.393 -0.313† -0.276‡ -0.162*
(0.489) (0.151) (0.089) (0.087)
Female Illiterate 0.468 -0.366† -0.421‡ -0.243‡
(0.499) (0.175) (0.088) (0.087)
Household Size 6.170 0.044† 0.044‡ 0.040†
(2.175) (0.019) (0.017) (0.017)
ln (SEI) 2.477 0.404‡ 0.445‡ 0.409‡
(0.568) (0.127) (0.066) (0.065)
Baltimore 0.869 -1.098‡ -1.061‡ -1.351‡
(0.337) (0.251) (0.124) (0.123)
Light-Light 0.274 0.384‡ 0.406‡ 0.329‡
(0.446) (0.084) (0.093) (0.091)
Constant 4.787‡ 4.632‡ 4.778‡
(0.507) (0.311) (0.308)
No. Obs. 1,385 1,385 1,385 1,385
F-stat 36.27‡ 34.41‡
Adj-R2 0.22 0.09
Notes: a standard errors adjusted for clustering by census ward. ‡ implies statistical significance at 1%
level; † at 5%; and * at 10%.
41
Table 10: Determinants of Household Wealth by City and Marriage Type
Panel A: Baltimore (OLS)
Variable Light-Light Light-Light Heterogamous Heterogamous
(S.E.) Marriages Marriages Marriages Marriages
Cohort 1801-10 -0.332 -0.104 -0.164 -0.244
(0.433) (0.446) (0.331) (0.312)
Cohort 1811-20 0.166 0.322 -0.501 -0.551
(0.457) (0.496) (0.238) (0.232)
Cohort 1821-30 -0.100 0.071 -0.690 -0.753
(0.451) (0.478) (0.243) (0.236)
Cohort 1831-40 -0.278 -0.110 -0.723 -0.782
(0.490) (0.493) (0.298) (0.300)
Male Mover -0.619 -0.563 0.388 0.312
(0.529) (0.483) (0.208) (0.188)
Female Mover 0.391 0.258 -0.137 -0.124
(0.380) (0.431) (0.210) (0.193)
Male Illiterate 0.112 0.184 -0.454 -0.443
(0.267) (0.247) (0.175) (0.177)
Female Illiterate -0.510 -0.633 -0.313 -0.330
(0.250) (0.218) (0.214) (0.215)
Household Size 0.144 0.132 0.018 0.015
(0.038) (0.039) (0.020) (0.021)
Ln (SEI) 0.715 0.486
(0.198) (0.119)
Constant 3.846 1.985 4.799 3.704
(0.499) (0.823) (0.501) (0.610)
No. Obs. 238 238 966 966
Adj. R2 0.09 0.15 0.08 0.11
42
Table 10 continued:
Panel B: New Orleans (OLS estimates)
Light-Light Light-Light Heterogamous Heterogamous
Marriages Marriages Marriages Marriages
Cohort 1801-10 -0.024 0.043 -1.022 -1.020
(0.148) (0.522) (0.825) (0.838)
Cohort 1811-20 -1.098 -1.042 -2.980 -2.978
(0.423) (0.474) (0.194) (0.197)
Cohort 1821-30 -1.376 -1.312 -2.754 -2.736
(0.287) (0.596) (0.211) (0.289)
Cohort 1831-40 -0.987 -0.926 -3.726 -3.698
(0.435) (0.597) (0.465) (0.602)
Male Mover 0.607 0.607 0.074 0.077
(0.581) (0.584) (0.876) (0.885)
Female Mover -0.552 -0.568 0.711 0.697
(0.580) (0.534) (0.865) (0.822)
Male Illiterate -0.328 -0.329 0.119 0.124
(0.219) (0.229) (0.352) (0.327)
Female Illiterate 0.113 0.117 0.114 0.097
(0.318) (0.337) (0.429) (0.402)
Household Size 0.154 0.156 0.059 0.055
(0.021) (0.021) (0.076) (0.059)
Ln (SEI) -0.044 0.038
(0.323) (0.291)
Constant 5.840 5.891 7.566 7.486
(0.350) (0.504) (0.680) (1.185)
No Obs. 142 142 39 39
Adj R2 0.14 0.14 0.37 0.37
43
Table 11. Color-Based Wealth Decompositions: Treatment and Characteristics Effects, Baltimore and
New Orleans in 1860
Mulatto-
Mulatto
Marriages
relative to
All others
Other Group
Wealth
% of
Mul-Mul
Households
Mulatto
Coefficients
Treatment
Advantage
Other
Coefficients
Treatment
Disadvantage
Mulatto
Coefficients
Characteristic
Advantage
Black
Coefficients
Characteristic
Disadvantage
Baltimore
Model 1 88.8% 9.3% 9.4% 2.7% 2.1%
Model 2 88.7 8.4 7.9 4.4 3.3
New Orleans
Model 1 91.6 7.3 7.5 1.6 1.2
Model 2 91.4 7.4 7.7 1.6 1.3
Notes: Model 1 decompositions are those from regressions without ln(SEI) variable in Table 10. Model 2
decompositions are from those that include the ln(SEI) variable.
If we define ëm
m = µm $m, where µm represents the vector of mean characteristics of mulattos and
$m represents the vector of estimated regression coefficients. Define ëm
b = µm $b, where µm defined
previously and $b is a vector of estimated regression coefficients for black-involved marriages. Other
combinations are defined analogously. The treatment advantage is calculated as: TA = (-1)[(ëm
b - ëm
m) /
ëm
m]. The treatment disadvantage is calculated as TD = [(ëb
m - ëb
b) / ëb
b]. The characteristic advantage
is calculated as: CA = (-1)[(ëb
m - ëm
m) / ëm
m]. The characteristic disadvantage is calculated as: CD =
[(ëm
b - ëb
b) / ëb
b].
Sources: Manuscript population censuses for Baltimore, Maryland and New Orleans, Louisiana (1860).
http://www.aeaweb.org/annual_mtg_papers/2006/0107_1015_1804.pdf
|
Savant
Veteran Poster
Username: Savant
Post Number: 65
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 05:28 pm: |
|
Tonya, Beloved, do not be deceived.
The beautiful-beyond-belief sista pictured in Kola's post is the source and fountainhead of life on the planet and the reason the white inteloper laid siege to Africa, to gain access to her beauty.
No matter how her image is defiled or denigrated, she is what white supremacy desires to encode in its genes. (Witness who Prince Albert procreated with.)
Black men, be they dark, light or white-appearing, no matter how deluded, will inevitably return to the Black Goddess. |
Savant
Veteran Poster
Username: Savant
Post Number: 66
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 05:31 pm: |
|
Tonya, there is no such thing as disinterested scholarship.
At whose behest is such scholarly work employed, disseminated and funded? And to what end? |
Schakspir
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Schakspir
Post Number: 359
Registered: 12-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 05:41 pm: |
|
To those who keep whining endlessly about color, I present you with the following:
 |
Tonya
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 99
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 06:02 pm: |
|
SAVANT:
Tonya, there is no such thing as disinterested scholarship.
At whose behest is such scholarly work employed, disseminated and funded? And to what end?
TONYA:
Funny. Every black person that I know have at least one family member and/or several black friends that are in prison....Yet black folks are going around saying that the statistics on black male incarceration rates are a conspiracy...lies trumped up by "The Man."
Forgive me but I'm taking what you just said with a grain of salt; though I know that you sincerely do mean well. |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 258
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: 
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 06:04 pm: |
|
schakspir, right on. it like a never ending stream of people crying and whining about something that cannot be changed. hey, simple, jealous cry babies, light skin people are not going anywhere. you are not going to get rid of them, so i relly don't understand the point of post after post talking about light skin this and light skin that. i get the feeling that some of the people (some women especially) are just jealous or something of light skin women. i really don't understand what some of these bitter posters want to see done? do you want all "light skin" people eliminated? do you want all people who are darker than a brown paper bag to hate all lighter skin people? do you want a national holiday titled "dark skin women are beautiful too"? do you want all record companies and tv stations to hire 3 dark skin females for every light skin one that is hired? what the hell do you want? light skin women are here to stay, and i personally think many of them are beautiful. so to all of you repetative, bitter, whining, light skin obbsessed posters, my question is what the hell to you want? to exterminate all people (women) who are lighter than a brown paper bag? |
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 647
Registered: 03-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 06:07 pm: |
|
I'm so jealous of HER...
 |
Savant
Veteran Poster
Username: Savant
Post Number: 67
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 06:10 pm: |
|
But Brownbeauty....isn't she "mixed"? |
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 648
Registered: 03-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 06:12 pm: |
|
"But Brownbeauty....isn't she "mixed"?"
Lil_ze thinks all darkskin women are just sooo "jealous" of women like HER...
|
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 650
Registered: 03-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 06:18 pm: |
|
Darkskin Black women would sure looove to trade places with her
 |
Tonya
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 101
Registered: 07-2006
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 06:41 pm: |
|
Savant:
But Brownbeauty....isn't she "mixed"?"
BB:
Lil_ze thinks all darkskin women are just sooo "jealous" of women like HER...
Tonya:
ROTFLMAO @ you BB!!!
You didn't make that clear when you posted it so I'm like whaaa???
And, OMG, Savant, did you actually think she was serious?? WOW!!
Anyway, Lil_ze thinks that we're jealous because he's ignorant, sexist and has an overblown ego---he thinks it's all about cat fights and hating light skinned women rather than economics, education, recognition and status. But just let him believe what ever he wants if it's going to make him feel better, lol. |
Savant
Veteran Poster
Username: Savant
Post Number: 72
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 06:55 pm: |
|
Tonya: And, OMG, Savant, did you actually think she was serious?? WOW!!
Tonya, Beloved. I'm not sure what to think...
I'm still holding out hope that all of these threads about who is black, who is "mixed", "authentic" vs. "inauthentic", etc is some sick parody and send-up of misplaced energies and divisive agendas, a tongue-in-cheek joke taken to the extreme....
No such luck, huh?
|
Fortified
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Fortified
Post Number: 226
Registered: 04-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 06:58 pm: |
|
LMAO!!! @ Brownbeauty putting up pics of Rain Pryor!!
This woman is gorgeous.
Kola said:
What is going to happen is that a "New Black" is going to be born out of these rejected, angry downtrodden (and because of MEDIA) invisible LEGIONS of Dark Skinned black women.
They will LOOK like the black folks we're used to----but like in Toni Morrison's book "PARADISE" (in fact, exactly like it)----they will self-segregate and turn their mother's resentment AGAINST the newly formed "Mixie/Biracial" societies.
Africa and the Third World, who have traditionally and alternately been influenced by men like Sidney Poitier, Michael Jackson, Harry Belafonte--Marcus Garvey, Malcolm X, etc....will now be MORE INFLUENCED by this new breed of "dark rebuking" black children.
In other words...don't discount the manic and "ignored" messages in the music of artists like Lauryn Hill, Erykuah Badu---or writers like Kola Boof.
Just as Harriet Tubman, "revolution" for Blacks always come FIRST through its mothers.
And the Yellow Black American and the Black Black American are about to be DIVIDED and "put asunder" in such a way that's never happened in this country before......but just as Zora Neal Hurston and Toni Morrison and even Martin Luther King predicted (King asked, "am I leading my people to freedom or into a burning house?"}....the end SEGREGATION also marked the beginning of the end for the "Black Community" itself.
Just as Jewish, Italian, Irish and other formerly STRONGHOLDS have been decimated and replaced by militant "pure stock" who are more Orthodox and less diverse.
And as Egypt's Nawal el Sadawii has stated:
"The only thing diversity does is separates us from our own people."
If you pay attention---it only benefits WHITE PEOPLE.
**************************
This was the type of response I was looking for to my question. Thanks.
So are you saying that this divide amongst "black" folk is going to take shape and we should do nothing about it? That we are going to have divisions amongst us like the Jews (Ashkenazi, Shephardic and Mizrahi)? We are going to become like separate tribes?
I am afraid of this because this divide will divide not only based on color and racial make-up, but class as well. This might set the stage for an even wider gap among "upper class" and the larger "lower class" blacks. |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 261
Registered: 01-2006
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 07:53 pm: |
|
notice that they posted pictures of ugly light skin women. you know dam well that there are many, many. light skin women that are beautiful. the fact that these jealous women went out of their way to post pictures of ugly light skin women proves that they are very jealous of light skin women. the above picture of the dark skin woman is ugly. that dark skin woman is UGLY. india arie is UGLY. lets post some more photos of ciara or beyonce and we'll see who is better looking. rain pryor is not the issue. the issue is why the hell are some of you women SO concerned about light skin women.
brownbeauty, you claim the issue is about "recognition and status". what the hell does that mean? who do dark skin women want to be recognized by? do you want to FORCE people to say "ohh, dark skin females are great", "ohh, dark skin females are beautiful". what is this "status' you are talking about? if some people think light skin women are more beautiful so what? you can't control how people think. these light skin females are black women. so outside of jealousy, i don't know what the point is of all this light skin foolishness. all of our women don't look like india arie (thank god), our women who are light are no less "black" than anybody else. can you women stop being so envious of light skin women? and stop trying to prove a point by posting pictures of the ugliest light skin women you can find. we ALL know that if certain posters wanted to, they could put up photos of light skin females that would put india arie or most of these dark females to shame. im not saying light skin females are more attractive, but if some of these posters want to try and act like light skin women look like rain pryor, they are in for a rude awakening.
does anybody really think india arie is as attractive as ciara? i don't think so. |
Savant
Veteran Poster
Username: Savant
Post Number: 73
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 08:02 pm: |
|
Lil_ze, that darkskinned sista pictured above is sublime. Her beauty is breathtaking.
How can you not see that? |
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 653
Registered: 03-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 08:03 pm: |
|
Savant...Lil_ze is a nazi. |
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 655
Registered: 03-2006
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 08:13 pm: |
|
Lil_ze as a kid
Papa raised him right |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 264
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 08:33 pm: |
|
brownbeauty, if i have a different opinion than you it doesn't make me a nazi. i just don't think the above picture of the dark skin woman is beautiful. wow, i have a different opinion, so i must be a nazi.
the dark skin woman abov's beauty is sublime? she is breathtaking? not to me. id jump over that woman to get to ciara or keisha cole. and its not about skin color, because tyrell hicks is much more beautiful than that above woman. and tyrell hicks is dark skin. dominique dawes is more beautiful than the above photo. its not about skin color. i don't have to think every dark skin woman is beautiful just because she is dark.
ciara, beyonce, keyshia cole are all more beautiful than the above photo or india (ugly)arie. its how i feel. so do ALOT of other men. india (ugly) arie is no more a representation of our women than ciara, keyshia cole, or aaliyah (god rest her soul). our women have many different looks. so im not going to be so simple minded as to think someone is more beautiful or authentic because they are darker. |
Shemika
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Shemika
Post Number: 132
Registered: 02-2006
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 08:59 pm: |
|
If Lil_ze is so turned off by anyone African or too black he should take his azz over to the white-supremacist websites where he belongs. Or perhaps he should go to some of the many bi-racial websites opposing anything too black. That's why I don't give praise where praise isn't due. Any bm that talks like he does isn't worth a hot shyt. He has no business commenting on bw let alone trying to act like he's worthy of being upheld and esteemed as a representative of the black woman's king. -Especially those into ww. He's trying to play this double role of a bm when he's got the mentality of the rednecks whose azzholes he's been rimming. It's entirely unacceptable. He's needs his azz kicked, but too bad there's nothing but sorry lace wearing punks out there calling themselves men. |
Schakspir
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Schakspir
Post Number: 361
Registered: 12-2005
Rating: 
Votes: 3 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 10:25 pm: |
|
Lil_ze: schakspir, right on. it like a never ending stream of people crying and whining about something that cannot be changed. hey, simple, jealous cry babies, light skin people are not going anywhere. you are not going to get rid of them, so i relly don't understand the point of post after post talking about light skin this and light skin that. i get the feeling that some of the people (some women especially) are just jealous or something of light skin women. i really don't understand what some of these bitter posters want to see done? do you want all "light skin" people eliminated? do you want all people who are darker than a brown paper bag to hate all lighter skin people? do you want a national holiday titled "dark skin women are beautiful too"? do you want all record companies and tv stations to hire 3 dark skin females for every light skin one that is hired? what the hell do you want? light skin women are here to stay, and i personally think many of them are beautiful. so to all of you repetative, bitter, whining, light skin obbsessed posters, my question is what the hell to you want? to exterminate all people (women) who are lighter than a brown paper bag?
Schakspir: if these bitter bitches on here really had it going on, they wouldn't complain....Look at some of the blue-black women in the Caribbean and South America, or Senegambia, or Angola. They are totally fucking hot. These bitter cunts know they will never look like those sweet deep cocoa-brown babes in Bahia, so they bitch and bitch and bitch about "lighter-skinned" women because these bitter women know they look like something that crawled out of a Mexican compost heap. |
Shemika
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Shemika
Post Number: 134
Registered: 02-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 11:22 pm: |
|
Schakspir, what the hell do you mean 'Got it going on?' How the hell old are you, f'g twelve!! You stupid azz nikkas are so damn juvenile it’s riotous. You're a f'n JOKE! I would never honor your sorry azz in some thread! There is more to being a man or a woman then being 'hot'. There are physically beautiful people all over the globe, include African people and African Americans. And there are those who are not so physically ‘hot’ within all human types, 'race' is irrelevant stupid. That just discloses how simple you two are and how racist. You have absolutely nothing going on upstairs otherwise you'd have better comprehension skills. And if you think looks are what makes a man or a woman then you're in for a shock because most people look pretty attractive in their youth, and youth doesn't last all that long for a lot of people. LOL! Dummy! |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 270
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 11:29 pm: |
|
i agree. there are many, many fine very dark women out there. but it seems like somr of the women posters on this board are SO dam angry, that their only way to deal with it is to cry about light skin women. the dark women who are from the dominican rebublic, brazil (bahia), columbia, and other places are way fine. gabrielle union is way fine. tyrell hicks is way fine. roshumba (the model) is way fine. kiara (the african model) is straight up beautiful. so its clear that nobody is "turned off" by somebody who is "too black". this is more non-sense. it seems to me that some of these bitter women are just so angry, that they will look for any way to project their feelings of inferiority on anyone else. light skin women being first. and then any male who does not buy into their color-struck fooloishness.
if any women on this board feel that some how i or anyone else on this board is somehow stuck on color, or doesn't like women who are dark. you are mistaken. tyrell hicks is AMAZING looking. she is a dark skin female. im not stuck on color of skin. there are many, many dark skin females that are good enough to eat (and i meam EAT). just as there are many, many light skin females that are good enough to eat (and yes i mean EAT). id lick ciara and keyshia cole's.... uh, maybe im getting carried away. but they are fine as hell. this whole light skin dark skin fooloishness gets us nowhere. but its only perpetuated by some women who feel VERY insecure and threatened by women who are lighter than they are.
calm down women. light skin women are not going to hurt you. |
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 657
Registered: 03-2006
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 11:48 pm: |
|
"if these bitter bitches on here really had it going on, they wouldn't complain....Look at some of the blue-black women in the Caribbean and South America, or Senegambia, or Angola. They are totally fucking hot. These bitter cunts know they will never look like those sweet deep cocoa-brown babes in Bahia, so they bitch and bitch and bitch about "lighter-skinned" women because these bitter women know they look like something that crawled out of a Mexican compost heap."
You've got your head so far up your ass you can chew your food twice.
|
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 274
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 12:10 am: |
|
notice how nobody responds to the issues bought up. they just name call.
very intelligent and insightful response brownbeauty. |
Schakspir
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Schakspir
Post Number: 363
Registered: 12-2005
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 01:09 am: |
|
Shemika: Schakspir, what the hell do you mean 'Got it going on?' How the hell old are you, f'g twelve!! You stupid azz nikkas are so damn juvenile it’s riotous. You're a f'n JOKE! I would never honor your sorry azz in some thread! There is more to being a man or a woman then being 'hot'. There are physically beautiful people all over the globe, include African people and African Americans. And there are those who are not so physically ‘hot’ within all human types, 'race' is irrelevant stupid. That just discloses how simple you two are and how racist. You have absolutely nothing going on upstairs otherwise you'd have better comprehension skills. And if you think looks are what makes a man or a woman then you're in for a shock because most people look pretty attractive in their youth, and youth doesn't last all that long for a lot of people. LOL! Dummy!
Schakspir: Stop smoking crack, you ugly bitch. |
Shemika
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Shemika
Post Number: 135
Registered: 02-2006
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 01:40 am: |
|
Stop projecting, you stank sissy azz, worthless disease breeding punk. |
Ntfs_encryption
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Ntfs_encryption
Post Number: 499
Registered: 10-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 02:25 am: |
|
"Why do people act as if there's NO difference between being Black & Mixed?"
Because most people don't care. Why should they?
|
Ngo
Regular Poster
Username: Ngo
Post Number: 44
Registered: 05-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 08:12 am: |
|
Lil_ze: "id jump over that woman to get to ciara or keisha cole."
 @ "Keisha Cole" - Just whatever MTV pumps out at the given moment? Eh?   |
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 660
Registered: 03-2006
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 09:41 am: |
|
We dedicate entire forums to these black men and they still treat us like shit. |
Tonya
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 103
Registered: 07-2006
Rating:
Votes: 3 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 09:49 am: |
|
...that should be a clue: WAKE UP! |
Tonya
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 108
Registered: 07-2006
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 10:45 am: |
|
The black American Man has made his living off of BITCHING & WHINING. It has been his bread-n-butter throughout his history on this land. If you want to get sexist, one could argue that it's in a woman's nature to bitch and complain. What's the black American man's excuse? ...besides the obvious???
If the black American man were a black woman's only prospects for happiness, who could blame her for eating herself & worrying herself into an early grave? |
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 662
Registered: 03-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 12:00 pm: |
|
"Because most people don't care. Why should they?"
73 posts and STILL counting proves otherwise... |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 280
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, July 30, 2006 - 04:24 pm: |
|
what men are treating black women like shit? ive read on this thread men making comment that recognize the beauty of ciara, keyshia cole, tryell hicks, bianca lawson etc. so where is the evidence of "black women' being treated like shit?
the balck man has made his living off of "bitching and whining"? where is the proof of this? its been "HIS" bread and butter? i see no proof of this at all. i do see many, many angry black females who try to pin all of their insecurities anf frustration on "black men". there are MILLIONS of black men in american alone. so how a handful of you obviously bitter and angry women can try and play the "blame game" with 15 million is beyond me.
im not concerned with if the black american man is the black woman's only prospect for happiness. could anyone imagine if the black american man's only prospect for happiness were black women like some of the ones on this board? what a nightmare. thank god there are feminine, decent black women for columbia, jamaica, panama, the dominican republic, st. lucia, trinidad and tobago, the bahamhas etc. of course there are good black american women also. but many of them are just so blinded by their bitterness, that they are just to nasty to deal with. its kind of sad to be honest. but what the hell do i care. i speak spanish and english, so the prospects for me are much wider than just dealing with a bunch of angry black american women. the black women from spanish speaking countries actually know how to be women. sadly many black american women only know how to be angry and bitter. no human wants to be around or deal with someone who is angry all the time. if you black women can't learn how to be women you will be left behind. alone, bitter, and angry.
i really want to know where on this thread or any other tread are "black women" being treated like shit? |
Shemika
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Shemika
Post Number: 136
Registered: 02-2006
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, July 31, 2006 - 03:14 am: |
|
After all the hateful, disrespectful, racist and chauvinistic comments you make about bw on here, you have the nerve to act like some innocent saint that they should treasure. The reason you think bw here are bitter is likely because you’re too dense to figure out that not all bw appreciate arrogant, obnoxious morons. You sound like you've picked up a lot of racist Hispanic biases, so why wouldn't they like you? It’s obvious you only appreciate multiracial women anyway. You are as indifferent to real bw and children as they are.
All you talk about is how bw should fulfill your self-centered expectations by silently and sweetly tolerating whatever BS you dish out. Jerks like you don’t have the guts to pull BS like that on anyone else, so you scapegoat bw to help you wash down all of the Hispanic and redneck butt cracks you’ve been kissing.
|
Serenasailor
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Serenasailor
Post Number: 645
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, July 31, 2006 - 12:40 pm: |
|
I am going to propose to you Shemika!! |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 285
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, July 31, 2006 - 03:21 pm: |
|
"real black women"? shemika? what the hell is a real black woman? do ALL black women have to be the color of a keyboard to be thought of as a "real black woman"? who the hell is anyone to say who is a "real black woman"? you mean to tell me aaliyah was not a "real black woman"? what is ciara not a "real black woman"? keyshia cole is a "fake" black woman right? how stupid. i guess all black women have to look like india (ugly) arie to be considered a "real" black woman right?
man some of you women are REALLY jealous, aint ya. |
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 675
Registered: 03-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, July 31, 2006 - 03:23 pm: |
|
You keep defending women who don't give a SHIT about you. |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 288
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, July 31, 2006 - 03:54 pm: |
|
the issue is not if these women "give a shit" about me or not. i don't know these women. i think they are beautiful. i don't have to know them to think they are beautiful.
its not about these women per se, its about what these women represent. alot of women on this board seem to hate women that look like them for no other reason than their shade of skin. i defend women that look like that because they are black, and they should not be castigated just because some women are jealous of the way these women look. i give a shit about these women. |
Shemika
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Shemika
Post Number: 138
Registered: 02-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, August 01, 2006 - 02:09 am: |
|
Lil_ze, You are nothing but a troll. You continue to disrespect bw and try to censure them from addressing colorism by intentionally misconstruing any comment about it as jealousy of light skinned females. Well, if being light skinned attracts stupid azzholes like you there is certainly NOTHING to be jealous of. Your comments are outright stupid, unoriginal demonstrations of what a piss poor excuse for a black man you are.
Your impudent name calling and references to dark skinned bw as ugly is no different from the hateful insults against blackness made by racist rednecks. Just because you idolize the image of a glorified ww to the point you can only appreciate bw that remind you of it doesn't mean everyone else suffers from the same mental illness as you do. Then you wish to define being black broadly enough to include scornful azz kneegrows like yourself and any other narcissistic borderline that feels superior to darker skinned bw. As if claiming the label black is justification for such conduct.
thanks Serenasailor |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 303
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, August 01, 2006 - 02:37 am: |
|
oh shemika, ive never refered to dark skin women as ugly. this is nonsense. if you think "addressing" colorism invoves constantly whining and complaining about light skin females, fine. but its not "black" women who are "addressing" so-called "colorism", but it's a few bitter JEALOUS black females. there is no idolization of "glorified white women". i suffer from no "mental illness". i just know the difference between UGLY and beautiful. i like women who are beautiful. you really need to get over your jealous rantings about light skin women. a piss poor exuse for a black woman is one who bitches and moans without end over something they cannot change. light skin women are not going ANYWHERE. men who find light skin women beautiful are not going ANYWHERE. so get used to it, angry black woman. black women with dark skin are NO more black than black women with light skin. who the hell do you think you are to define who's "black" or not? |
Ntfs_encryption
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Ntfs_encryption
Post Number: 509
Registered: 10-2005
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, August 01, 2006 - 06:11 am: |
|
"You continue to disrespect bw and try to censure them from addressing colorism by intentionally misconstruing any comment about it as jealousy of light skinned females. Well, if being light skinned attracts stupid azzholes like you there is certainly NOTHING to be jealous of. Your comments are outright stupid, unoriginal demonstrations of what a piss poor excuse for a black man you are."
Absolutely brilliant commentary! I've always been fascinated by intelligent and objective scholarly insight such as this. Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!
|
Shemika
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Shemika
Post Number: 139
Registered: 02-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, August 01, 2006 - 11:07 pm: |
|
Lil_ze, who the hell do you think YOU are to define who's black? Some redneck's butt wipe? Because that's exactly what you sound like. You are the one who keeps whining in defense of light skinned women as if that's all its about. Just because you're too simple-minded to comprehend the real issue at hand is your problem, I'm not getting stuck in your shallow web of idiocy. And the only thing ugly is ghastly acting bm like YOU with your nasty attitude. You need to keep out of grown folks business and stop making up excuses to signify your devotion to light skinned women. You've got the mental acuity of a toddler. |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 304
Registered: 01-2006
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 - 06:15 am: |
|
shemika, whats the "real issue"? i defend ALL of our people. but, i won't sit back and allow a bunch of bitter, jealous women try to take "shots" at light skin women just because they are light. it just not logical to hate or try to pick apart certain members of our nation, just because they are light skinned. ihave too many family members that are light skinned and who i love dearly. its just stupid to focus on light skin people (women), (i don't read to many posts about light skin men). you mean to tell me that the members on this board don't have family members of EVERY shade? when you go to a family cookout or reunion, you don't see our people of EVERY shade present?
so my goal is not to "defend" light skin women, but to "defend" the right our people have to live free of UNJUST PERSECUTION.
my ability to recognize the beauty of the light skin members of our nation, aswell as the beauty of the dark skin members of our nation, is evidence that i only want to see our people NOT divided by something as superficial as skin tone. if i did have a "thing" for light skin females, what would it matter? do not some of the female posters have a "thing" for dark skin men like tyress? so "its neither here, nor there", for us as a people to be so caught up in shade of skin. it just is a waste of time.
we as a people can like a certain type of people and still find ALL of our people beautiful.
until some of the members of this board stop with the ignorant rants about light skin people (women especially), i will not cease in my defense of them. lighter shade of skin, or darker shade of skin, we are ALL black people, members of the same nation. when can we as a people get past this light/dark shade of skin madness? |
Urban_scribe
Regular Poster
Username: Urban_scribe
Post Number: 45
Registered: 05-2006
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 - 09:30 am: |
|
Lil_ze wrote:
lighter shade of skin, or darker shade of skin, we are ALL black people, members of the same nation.
Lil_ze, I feel you. I tend to think of Blacks as coming in "all flavors" as well. When I see people who my eyes perceive as Black, light or dark, I feel a natural affinity toward them. I feel that I am amongst my people.
Throughout my life, I've encountered Blacks who have wronged me. What Black person hasn't been shitted on by another Black person? So, I am not unique in this. I'm certain Whites shit over other Whites, Asians shit over other Asians...
In the vast majority of cases the people who've shitted me over have been dark-skinned Blacks. But I've never blamed every single dark-skinned Black for the actions of a handful. That's just...insane. Nor can I overlook the kindness shown to me over the years by dark-skinned Blacks. Furthermore, history tells us there've been numerous dark-skinned Blacks who've shitted over the Black community as a whole. Whereas they've been numerous light-skinned Blacks who've gone above and beyond the call of "Black loyalty" and have served to uplift the Black community as a whole. For these reasons, and many others, it doesn't make sense to me to distinguish light-skinned Blacks from dark-skinned Blacks based solely on skin tone.
However, Lil_ze, it would appear that your and my opinions are quickly becoming minority, if you will, opinions regarding who is and who isn't Black.
For the past 20 years there OFFICIALLY has been a movement to separate light-skinned Blacks from dark-skinned Blacks. (Unlike the unofficial Brown Bag Test). Some have gone as far as saying light-skinned Black is an oxymoron. How could someone be LIGHT and BLACK at the same time? Therefore, people like you and I, Lil_ze, who make no distinction among Blacks based solely on skin tone are actually "THE PROBLEM". We are "One-droppers" forcing our own colorist opinions upon the so called light-skinned Blacks en masse.
Most light-skinned Blacks are trying earnestly to have the decennial US Census recognize them as being different from dark-skinned Blacks by adding a "multiracial" category, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT from the Black race (read: dark-skinned Blacks), to the 2010 Census; and every census thereafter.
Blacks (NAACP) are actually against this "multiracial" category because of the fear of losing numbers. Allocated government monies for Blacks based on the Black population, programs for Blacks, etc, will naturally be decreased if not eliminated altogether.
Whites, of course, are thrilled about this because it's beneficial to their historical "divide and conquer" agenda.
And these "multiracials," who for the most part are light-skinned Blacks, don't seem to be able to see through the duplicity of the Whites they glorify. Either that or they choose to ignore it. Here, they (light-skinned Blacks) were historically FORCED to be Black due to LAWS WRITTEN BY WHITE men who regarded their few drops of Black blood as inferior and tainted, therefore did not accept these light-skinned Blacks, mulattoes, creoles, quadroons, etc, as one of their own - but WROTE LAWS to place them in the NIGGER CATEGORY to maintain the White infrastructure in this country. Now these light-skinned Blacks seek to break away from Blacks and create their own "multiracial" categories because Whites will NEVER allow them into the White category - although they've been WELCOMED into the Black category since the founding of this country. Ironic, no? Self-hating, no? Confused, no?
These multiracial motherfuckers are making my LIGHT-SKINNED BLACK ass look bad. Yes, the skin is light, the features are keen, and the hair is "good". If you saw me walking down the street you'd swear I was Latino; or Latina in my case.
Many Blacks (dark-skinned) do not accept me as Black because I don't "look" Black, I don't "act" Black, I don't "talk" Black. But I don't focus on the Blacks who don't accept me as Black. I focus on the Blacks who do. However, I don't want to be accpeted as Black and/or by Blacks based on one drop rule dictates. I seek to be accepted as Black and/or by Blacks because my accomplishments have been/are an attribute to the Black community.
|
Sabiana
Newbie Poster
Username: Sabiana
Post Number: 3
Registered: 08-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 - 09:43 am: |
|
THANK YOU! THANK YOU! |
Tonya
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 155
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 - 03:33 pm: |
|
Urban_scribe
((("In the vast majority of cases the people who've shitted me over have been dark-skinned Blacks.")))
Could that be because THE VAST MAJORITY of people that have accepted you were/are DARK-SKINNED (probably more than they've accepted their own)? Most people are only "Shitted over" by the people they know.
((("But I've never blamed every single dark-skinned Black for the actions of a handful.")))
A handful?? I thought you said THE VAST MAJORTY. Are you saying you've only been screwed over a handful of times? Well, if that's the case, you had it good. I don't blame you for not blaming dark-skinned folks...as no light-skinned person should. Where else could you have gone and received such treatment? |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 5645
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 - 04:05 pm: |
|
Urban_scribe,
Could it be that many biracial types are QUITE aware of what will come of this divide/conquer tactic and are enabling it because they expect to greatly BENEFIT from being severed from African American?
Hey. It's happened before (e.g., in South Africa). |
Schakspir
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Schakspir
Post Number: 380
Registered: 12-2005
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 - 04:50 pm: |
|
Shemika: Lil_ze, who the hell do you think YOU are to define who's black? Some redneck's butt wipe? Because that's exactly what you sound like. You are the one who keeps whining in defense of light skinned women as if that's all its about. Just because you're too simple-minded to comprehend the real issue at hand is your problem, I'm not getting stuck in your shallow web of idiocy. And the only thing ugly is ghastly acting bm like YOU with your nasty attitude. You need to keep out of grown folks business and stop making up excuses to signify your devotion to light skinned women. You've got the mental acuity of a toddler.
************************************************
AALBC Profile of the Week #1
Shemika Jackson
Age: 34
Born, lives: in a hollow log
Height: 5'3"
Weight: 457 pounds
Favorite foods: Kentucky Fried Chicken, Roy Rogers fried chicken, Church's Fried Chicken, Popeye's Fried Chicken, Sandusky's Fried Chicken, Uncle ben's fried chicken, Kennedy Fried Chicken, Ben Ho Wang's egg-rolls and Fried Chicken, Fried Chicken, Fried Chicken and Fried Chicken, French Fries, Whoppers, Pig's Feet, Cajun rice, Biscuits, pork ribs, Big Macs, onion rings, barbequed potato chips and fried chicken
Favorite music: rap, rap, rap, r and b, rap, rap, rap, rap, r and b, kirk franklin(NOT gospel!!), kenny G, rap, rap, rap, rap rap, and rap rap rap. And r and b
Favorite performers: Jay-Z, Chingy, Mary J. Blige, Lil Kim, Notorious BIG, Tupac, NWA, and Lil John
Favorite hair colors: green and pink
Measurements: 65-78-137(inches)
Ambitions: to have my own message board, so I can sling shit at anybody who thinks I'm not a beautiful black queen, even though all the mirrors in my house are shattered by my hideous face!!
|
Savant
AALBC .com Platinum Poster
Username: Savant
Post Number: 83
Registered: 09-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 - 05:25 pm: |
|
Urban_scribe, it is not just the "biracials/multiracials" who are actively promoting this agenda, but many darkskinned blacks who are equally as duped by this nascent movement. And you're absolutely right---the watershed period is roughly 20 years ago, when the "biracial" agenda, promoted by disgruntled white women, in particular, began to lobby for a distinct "biracial" category on the census and craft the ideological parameters of a new "biracial" ideology. These white handmaidens of white supremacy function at the behest of global white supremacy which must shift its agenda in order to retain hegemony on a worldwide basis. Having successfully derailed the black power/consciousness movement of the 60's, white supremacy began to actively promote an agenda of multiculturalism, increased upward mobility and access for a certain sector of black folks along with an increase in integration and mixed marriage between white women and black men primarily.
Because white supremacy has become increasingly sophisticated and subtle in its approach, it is able to exploit and exacerbate our weaknesses (colorism being a key issue)and render us increasingly politically and culturally impotent. At this juncture in history, what we see is an implosion of all of the fissures and fractured tendencies within the black community. Thus we have increased gender tensions, class and color (complexion) antagonisms with the overarching objective being to fracture the black community so that it is ripe and vulnerable to extinction, both culturally and physically.
And the more I read the threads on this forum--supposedly indicative of our "best and brightest", certainly folks who are supposedly well-educated, culturally aware and politically conscious---I fear that this agenda will be successful.
I never thought that black folks were so damaged by colorism that we would voluntarily fragment our own families---actually cleave the dark cousin from the light cousin, be willing to categorize and pit one sibling against another on the basis of color. Make no mistake---this is where this new movement will inevitably lead. Since there is no way to tell a light biracial from a light-skinned person with two black parents or a dark biracial from a darkskinned black person, once the color war is in place and we have finally bought into this madness, blacks will be pitted against other blacks on the basis of features, hue, complexion.
The most insidious and sophisticated conspiracy to enact black genocide is now in place. And tragically, we are aiding and abetting it with our naivete and our insecurities. I doubt we will see the dawn of the 22nd century...
|
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2597
Registered: 02-2005
Rating:
Votes: 3 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 - 05:55 pm: |
|
The fact remains, however, that URBAN_SCRIBE is not a black person, irregardless of ancestry---and like so many people from AFRICA---I am not the least bit influenced by White Women seeking "Biracial" agendas for their children---I am speaking for the majority of BLACK PEOPLE (Africa having 850 million blacks, the highest number on the planet)---and our RIGHT, as AFRICANS, not to have your White Slave Master's ONE DROP rule sully our Humanity by classifying people like "Urban_Scribe" as something they are not---BLACK.
Ur.Sc. is the overly-represented mixed race person who has nowhere else to belong and rule---so she endeavors to fit in where she can.
In her ARROGANCE, it never occurs to her that Black people would have any integrity, self-love or self-respect. She's so accustomed to a NIGGER culture where "blacks" are the one group she can feel superior to and be placed above WITHIN their own communities. Notice how she acts as though Blacks OWE her something---but not the races she actually looks like.
BLACK GENOCIDE started the day the African Woman was RAPED and enslaved and colonized by OUTSIDERS--be they white, Arab, Asian, etc.
It is NOT Black Genocide for BLACKS to expect their children to be born.....with a richness of Brown skin and African hair.
Mulattoes do not represent Black people, and the notion of them being "BLACK" is COMPLETELY a LIE created by the White American Slave Master.
I LOVE MANY "Mulatto" and "MIXED PEOPLE with all my heart---in my own family, we have Mulatto/Mixies. We are FAMILY....but we are not the same race anymore than WHITE RELATIVES are the same race---and it's showing more and more every day.
Because of DE-SEGREGATION, the awful TRUTH is about to descend up on the Black Americans.....and MY CHILDREN ("the darkies and negroid cornbread yellows") are going to be liberated at last.
|
Urban_scribe
Regular Poster
Username: Urban_scribe
Post Number: 48
Registered: 05-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 - 07:29 pm: |
|
Tonya - what I said was I WOULD NOT hold EVERY SINGLE DARK-SKINNED BLACK PERSON accountable for the actions of the ones I've had bad experiences with. That's like saying I broke a heel on a pair of red shoes so, I'll never buy red shoes again because all of the heels are going to break off. That's ridiculous. And while certainly I've been screwed over by more than a handful of dark complexioned Blacks, in comparison to all the Blacks throughout the world who I don't know - and NEVER will meet them ALL - the number is quite small. A drop in a bucket. A handful out of millions.
For the record, Whites have screwed me over as well. But because I have always considered myself Black and NOTHING BUT BLACK, I expected bullshit from Whites. So, I was prepared for that. I never expected it from those I consider my own kind.
ABM - I believe many who are pushing for a "multiracial" identity separate from Black have indeed concluded that it would be beneficial to them to differentiate themselves. They'll still receive all of the minority benefits of being Black without actually being considered Black.
However, separate identity or no, these self-identified multiracials are still niggers in the eyes of Whites and that's the part they choose to deny and overlook.
Savant - I never thought that black folks were so damaged by colorism that we would voluntarily fragment our own families---actually cleave the dark cousin from the light cousin, be willing to categorize and pit one sibling against another on the basis of color. Make no mistake---this is where this new movement will inevitably lead. Since there is no way to tell a light biracial from a light-skinned person with two black parents or a dark biracial from a darkskinned black person, once the color war is in place and we have finally bought into this madness, blacks will be pitted against other blacks on the basis of features, hue, complexion.
Urban_Scribe - Savant, you're light years ahead of your time.
Kola Boof - I am speaking for the majority of BLACK PEOPLE
Urban_Scribe - Who appointed you to speak for the MAJORITY of Black people?
Do you even know the MAJORITY of Black people throughout the world that you presume to speak for?
Have you taken a poll, (beyond the miniscule sampling of Blacks on this forum), to determine the feelings, ideologies, and beliefs of the MAJORITY of Blacks who you presume to speak for?
Or are you merely spewing your personal colorist rhetoric and insinuating, without proof, that the vast MAJORITY of Black people worldwide agree with you because they can neither think nor speak for themselves? Talk about ARROGANCE!
And exactly what am I ruling over? I'm really a threat to Blacks worldwide with my 40-odd posts on Thumper's Corner Discussion Board. My, my, my such influence! That's too much power for one woman to have...
Again, I choose not to focus on Blacks who do not accept me as such. I choose to focus on the loving and kind Blacks, and the loving-kindness of Blacks, and NOT the colorstuck Blacks who presume to separate all Blacks while defining Black BASED on matters as trivial as skin color, hair texture, and features - as if all it takes to be Black is dark skin, kinky hair, full lips, and a flat nose. Give me a break!
Before revealing my physical appearance in my previous post, NO ONE here had a clue as to what I looked like. I was just as Black as any of the darkest Black members here; some of whom no longer view me as Black. If I didn't "out" myself, what would have changed?
P.S. I belong to MANY forums. I am a forum moderator, in fact. Only three of the forums I belong to are predominantly Black. Clearly, I don't come here because I have "nowhere else to belong and rule." Once again, Kola Boof, presumes to speak for people when she doesn't know the half. |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 306
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 - 08:56 pm: |
|
black people don't have to be "mixed" or "bi-racial", to be light-skinned. how many members of this board have brothers or sisters that come in all shades? our people DON"T look one way. we have many different types of looks. some of our people are light-skinned, but this light-skin does not not come from only being "mixed" or "bi-racial".
does any one on this board know about the jackson family (michael jacksons' brothers and sisters)? joe and katherine jackson jackson are both brown skin. most of their children are brown skin. but, LATOYA JACKSON is light skin. both of latoya jackson's parents are brown skin, but she is light skinned. just because some of our people are lighter-skinned does not mean they are less "black" or the product of being "bi-racial" or "mixed".
i hate having to tell certain people these obvious points. but, it seems like some of these posters are so dam simple minded and hateful/jealous of light-skin people, that the obvious points are lost in the constant whining about color. |
Sabiana
Newbie Poster
Username: Sabiana
Post Number: 11
Registered: 08-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, August 02, 2006 - 11:14 pm: |
|
You can't win with these people. If Urban_Scribe was ten shades darker we consider her black and virtuous? Why not celebrate the wide array of shades black people come in and are. My mother, ight enough to be "white" married and ebony man.
My family never bragged about the "Indian" or the "White". I was raised to be a black woman first and being "multicultural" was a cop out.
My father is not colorstruck, as many would accuse him to be. He is the main one who taught me to LOVE MYSELF and other black people. (Shade did not matter.)
So if I marry a Black American man(Multicultural) who has dark skin, and my daughter has light skin, she isn't black?
I have medium brown skin, AND I find all shades to be beautiful. If you're not, you're not. I'll be damned that in the year 3005 black people will still be debating and seperating themselves over how "light she is" or how "Dark she is". People rant and rave about color on this board, but in only in a few CHERISHED INTELLIGENT POSTS have I heard us coming together as a black community and doing good.
Picture a wound. The would festers and burns. The would is cleaned and slowly over time heals.
How can the would ever heal if people keep re-opening the would, letting it burn, instead of taking care of it, eventually turning the wound into a scar. A reminder of how we were so easily seperated.
On this board, when you read some of the posts,HOW IS THIS ever going to take place?
So Rosa Parks is not Black?
Malcolm X?
As a black community during those times, people came together. So why aren't we doing it now?
Honestly I have no problems finding black men.
If a black man dates a light woman with light skin he's afflicted with colorism?Could it be that he celebrates the multitudes of shades of the black woman, and married the woman he loved most?
If a man finds only finds black women with dark skin attrative, and light skin women "stuck-up", is he not "colorist" to?
If I have children, IF, the sole fact of color being a important issue in the relationship will sadden me.
Why should we listen to what a white man tells us who we are, like we still to. I find my mother and my aunt to be black women. I never noticed her skin tone until comments such as "that yo mom?"-looking at my medium brown skin. They didn't see her as black. Why should she constantly have to defend her position as a black woman because her skin was light? My brother has light-brown skin and light brown eyes. So he is not black to people. How would you feel to get asked the question "What are You?"
How is this any different from the paper bag tests? This time, however, IT's
You have to be this black to ride on BLACK AUNTHENTICITY. The more melanin in your skin, the more tokens you have to ride on the ride.
I consider my family to be black. My ancestors who came here were truly African but comformed and condensed to live.
Urban_Scribe,
You remind me of my mother. I will consider you black even if others don't.
I tired of this "Color-Thang". What can we physically do instead of talking about it? Any suggestions? How about raising the next generation of black children to look beyond beauty, shade, and color, and hold importance on other issues. |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 307
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 12:05 am: |
|
SABIANA,if you are a woman, my words are for you. how beautiful you are! not only are you beautiful, you have the intelligence to be able to see through the non-sense and non-issues many of our people have been duped into believing. im so glad you are on this board. you are the most beautiful type of woman. i don't know what you look like, but i can only hope i can find a female with your mind to marry. you get the highest level of respect from me. sabiana, please keep posting. also all of the other fair minded posters keep posting. our people should have a balanced point of view. all of our people are not color-struck, with serious issues dealing with color of skin. all this shade of skin non-sense is getting old. |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 5666
Registered: 04-2004
Rating:
Votes: 3 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 12:24 am: |
|
Urban_scribe: "However, separate identity or no, these self-identified multiracials are still niggers in the eyes of Whites and that's the part they choose to deny and overlook."
Perhaps...But, really, who the hell CARES whether White foks consider Mariah Carey and Halle Berry to be Black, White or other?
I don't. |
Ntfs_encryption
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Ntfs_encryption
Post Number: 522
Registered: 10-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 02:06 am: |
|
"Perhaps...But, really, who the hell CARES whether White foks consider Mariah Carey and Halle Berry to be Black, White or other? I don't."
Uhhhhhh...Thank you very much! I'm sure you would be hard pressed to find a discussion board of whites who are debating whether Carey or Berry are black! THEY COULD CARE LESS! Only confused Negroes who are desperately trying to "out black" other people, rant and foam at the mouth over who is light complexioned and who is dark complexioned and who should be given perks and special privileges based on the color of their face and nothing else. Their entire psyche revolves around finger pointing and howling "foul" at anyone that does not pass their bogus authentically black criteria.
Nothing else matters to them -personal accomplishment and character mean nothing! The only thing that matters, is the color of the accused individuals skin. The exact same depraved standard that white America used to brutalize and oppress their parents and grandparents and their race. They arrogantly and mindlessly grin with a sense of accomplishment (being blacker than the next person) for using the exact same racist standard that is used to marginalize their own people -the color of ones skin!
|
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 5673
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 02:21 am: |
|
Ntfs,
You're attempting to assert some dubious intellectual slight-of-hand here that I do not concur with or subscribe to.
I believe skintone DOES play a factor in the fortunes of MYRIAD people throughout the globe. And for MANY of them, it is a DECIDING factor. |
Nels
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Nels
Post Number: 480
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 02:26 am: |
|
Urban_scribe:
"Most light-skinned Blacks are trying earnestly to have the decennial US Census recognize them as being different from dark-skinned Blacks by adding a "multiracial" category, SEPARATE AND DISTINCT from the Black race (read: dark-skinned Blacks), to the 2010 Census; and every census thereafter."
And Ward Connerly continues to press on.
--------
It kills me (rollin' and LOL) how the chocolate pieces on these boards just about phuckin melt down in the hot August Sun when "light skin" anything comes up. Some of those jackasses just don't seem to understand that their miniscule black asses will be black for the rest of their black lives, so get on with it. |
Ntfs_encryption
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Ntfs_encryption
Post Number: 523
Registered: 10-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 03:15 am: |
|
”I believe skintone DOES play a factor in the fortunes of MYRIAD people throughout the globe. And for MANY of them, it is a DECIDING factor.”
You are absolutely correct! I CONCUR 100%. Having spent time in the Orient, I have personally seen the matrix of privilege and access based on skin color within a particular group. That I cannot deny. What I was referring to is the silly and divisive rhetoric that dominates this board about light complexioned vs. dark complexioned people. I have no idea what they believe such thinking is going to accomplish or prove. Pitting black people against other black people because one is lighter or darker than another is poisonous and ignorant at the very least.
I was not suggesting skin color is insignificant in reference to the world. We all know that is not true. People are oppressed and abused daily in the worse ways throughout the world because of their skin color. But there is no excuse nor justification for American blacks to create an arbitrary ordinal ranking for respect and race privilege based on the skin color of another black person. I’m sure you will agree with this. Am I wrong?
|
Urban_scribe
Regular Poster
Username: Urban_scribe
Post Number: 49
Registered: 05-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 08:58 am: |
|
ABM wrote:
Perhaps...But, really, who the hell CARES whether White foks consider Mariah Carey and Halle Berry to be Black, White or other?
I don't.
_______________________
ABM, if you care about inner-city public libraries, if you care about inner-city public schools, if you care about inner-city after school programs, if you care about inner-city hospitals, if you care about inner-city housing, if you care about inner-city playgrounds and parks, if you care about inner-city public pools, if you care about inner-city community centers, if you care about inner-city senior centers, if you care about inner-city safety patrol, if you care about the inner-city drug epidemic, if you care about the inner-city drop out rate, if you care about the inner-city teen pregnancy epidemic...then you should care who Whites consider Black.
If you think Whites are not determining who is Black and who is not, you're in dire need of a reality check. Our nation's fiscal budget is prepared and determined based on racial data.
Whites needn't waste their time going on public message forums discussing who's Black and who is not - as this is ineffective and has no impact. Rather, Whites are recording demographic statistics, racial data, education info, earned income, etc, and determining what they will and will not give Blacks accordingly.
If you don't think it matters to Whites who is Black and who isn't - THINK AGAIN! |
Urban_scribe
Regular Poster
Username: Urban_scribe
Post Number: 50
Registered: 05-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 09:38 am: |
|
Sabiana
You are a breath of fresh air! Minds such as yours are what led me to this forum. I came here on the recommendation of a Black poster on another forum (non-Black) which I moderate. This member always struck me as intelligent and compassionate. Therefore, I valued his/her opinion and decided to check out this discussion board.
As you can tell from my registered date, I'm relatively new here myself. Sadly, the great Black minds I'd hope to encounter here are few and far between. Those few minds are what keep me coming back to this forum, because, really, I have my own children to contend with and needn't waste my time coddling adults with the mentality and emotional capacity of toddlers.
So, I thank you and the few other members of this forum for being consistent in their maturity, intellect, humor, social graces, and social, cultural, and political consciousness; without resorting to grade school sensibilities and tactics.
To echo Lil_Ze, I hope you continue to post on this forum; as I've added you to my "elite few" list. |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 5680
Registered: 04-2004
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 10:10 am: |
|
Urban_scribe,
If you think what we do is a waste of your time, then please feel free to pursue OTHER interests.
I'm sure we all can survive your absence. |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2627
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 10:14 am: |
|
Urban_Scribe Wrote:
ABM, if you care about inner-city public libraries, if you care about inner-city public schools, if you care about inner-city after school programs, if you care about inner-city hospitals, if you care about inner-city housing, if you care about inner-city playgrounds and parks, if you care about inner-city public pools, if you care about inner-city community centers, if you care about inner-city senior centers, if you care about inner-city safety patrol, if you care about the inner-city drug epidemic, if you care about the inner-city drop out rate, if you care about the inner-city teen pregnancy epidemic...then you should care who Whites consider Black.
If you think Whites are not determining who is Black and who is not, you're in dire need of a reality check. Our nation's fiscal budget is prepared and determined based on racial data.
Whites needn't waste their time going on public message forums discussing who's Black and who is not - as this is ineffective and has no impact. Rather, Whites are recording demographic statistics, racial data, education info, earned income, etc, and determining what they will and will not give Blacks accordingly.
If you don't think it matters to Whites who is Black and who isn't - THINK AGAIN!
KOLA:
Notice how she can't see how ARROGANT she is.
And by the way--I could agree that you and I are FAMILY, because you have a Black ancestor, but not that you are "black"---as though black people are so LOW that just anybody can be black. That is very disrespectful, and because of American plantation Slavery---you were taught to disrespect us and blacks were taught to disrespect themselves.
Why do NON-Black people like you always see yourselves as our "Savior"?
We have this same shit in Africa with the missionaries.
As I tell White people all the time---"Instead of showing us pictures of YOU saving us...why don't you show us pictures of US saving US."
And no self-respecting BLACK human should ever give a damn about what WHITE people think about black people--especially WHO is black.
They are NOT the standard-bearers of our race and YOU telling us that they are just proves everything I said about you earlier.
|
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2628
Registered: 02-2005
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 10:22 am: |
|
Urban_Scribe, did you actually READ this shit you wrote:
Sabiana
You are a breath of fresh air! Minds such as yours are what led me to this forum. I came here on the recommendation of a Black poster on another forum (non-Black) which I moderate. This member always struck me as intelligent and compassionate. Therefore, I valued his/her opinion and decided to check out this discussion board.
As you can tell from my registered date, I'm relatively new here myself. Sadly, the great Black minds I'd hope to encounter here are few and far between.
You even moderate a "Non-Black" FORUM and you just popped in to LEGISLATE who has a "Great Black Mind" (WTF!?) and who doesn't?
Can't you see that you're nothing but an imitation white bitch with a Miss Anne complex!?
You even have an "elite few" list!!!!?
You need to get your head OUT of your ass and go back to a place where they won't notice your only "blackness" is the doo-doo shit hiding your real face.
|
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 5683
Registered: 04-2004
Rating:
Votes: 1 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 10:31 am: |
|
Kola,
It's always interesting how some foks will appear here from out of the anonymous cybernetic ether and immediatly presume themselves to be some omniscient authority about HOW this Board should be conducted.
Troy owns it. And Thumper's it creator and namesake. But it's mostly you, myself, Cynique, Chris H, Yvettep, Yukio, Tonya, Mzuri, Carey, Moonsigns, Sis_gal, A_womon and a few others who have SUSTAINED this sucker over the years.
I welcome fresh, new voices and perspectives. Especially those that can eloquently express themselves. But you'd think common etiquette would warrant that a certain level of respect - NOT blind agreement or acquiesce - be extended toward the more senior and faithful patrons of Thumper's Corner. |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2629
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 10:52 am: |
|
Well put, Abm.
|
Urban_scribe
Veteran Poster
Username: Urban_scribe
Post Number: 51
Registered: 05-2006
Rating:
Votes: 3 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 11:38 am: |
|
ABM wrote:
Urban_scribe,
If you think what we do is a waste of your time, then please feel free to pursue OTHER interests.
I'm sure we all can survive your absence.
__________________________________________
Sir, I don't doubt that this forum or the world as a whole would carry on just fine without me. I don't suffer from any delusions of self-importance. I simply do what I can do with the hope of contributing something needed for the betterment of the world in which I live.
However, it is interesting how my voluntary revelation of my physical appearance has suddenly rendered me as ARROGANT and persona non grata on this forum.
This was a test and I'm saddened to say most of you failed miserably. You are the same folks who would be the first to hollar that BLACK PEOPLE CAN'T BE PREJUDICE.
_____________________________
Ms. Boof, would you please tell me what it is you do personally to help rebuild the Black diaspora you so profess to love?
So far I've witnessed your guerilla marketing tactics which serve to your exclusive benefit.
I've witnessed your contradictory statements. Again, which serve to your exclusive benefit.
In one breath you behoove Blacks to "get Blacker". In the next breath you shout "Fuck Black men!"
I've witnessed you placing your African-born status above Black American-born status.
Are we discussing the same Africa? You act as though Africa is blameless in the destruction of the Black diaspora. If we were to trace the collapse of the Black diaspora to its original source, it would prove painfully obvious the preponderance of culpability lies with "Mother Africa;" who willfully led her children to the slaughter.
We were Africa's oats, raisins, brown sugar, eggs, salt, and ghee. Africa handed us over to the European, IN EXCHANGE FOR TRINKETS. The European added his flour then made oatmeal cookies.
Yet, you place your African birth above American birth and play to the insecurities and fears of Black Americans while drilling into their minds that they are LESS THAN you.
If more Black Americans viewed themselves as equal to you or perhaps BETTER THAN you - you would have been chased off this forum at your first attempt to run that nonsense on Black Americans. It is YOU, who see yourself as inferior. You know this Ms. Boof. This is the reason you constantly must indicate how "superior" you are to Black Americans, how you do not descend from slavery and therefore view the conditioning of American Blacks with clearer vision not afforded to them due to their American brainwashing. Tsk! Tsk!
Indeed, Ms. Boof, you are NOT a descendant of slavery. You descend from the CULTIVATORS of slavery.
So many fail to see that you seek nothing more than to remove the focus off your duplicity:
1. You wear the White man's weave.
2. You sleep with the White man.
3. You've carried the White man's seed.
4. You work for the White man.
4. You've gone under the knife to fit into the White man's idea of beauty.
5. You do the White man's bidding by separating light-skin Blacks from dark-skin Blacks.
From day one, you've done nothing but talk out the side of your neck warning Blacks against assimulating AS YOU HAVE. I liken you to an abusive husband who constantly belittles, degrades, and berates his wife in an effort to control her.
If this is what you regard as being AUTHENTIC then I am eternally grateful that you do not include me among your kind. |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 5687
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 12:01 pm: |
|
Urban_scribe,
I have not for a single instance factored what you are alleged to look like in my assessment of the persona that you've presented here. Honestly, I almost never concern myself with such a thing.
I have and likely always will address another person's opinions sans any concern about where they might score on a "paper bag test".
Whether others think and do otherwise is not within my ability and desire to curb or prohibit. |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 5688
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 12:05 pm: |
|
Urban_scribe,
Btw: There's a very handy feature at the bottom of the main Thumper's Corner "Culture, Race & Economy" site titled "Start New Thread". Please feel free to USE it. |
Urban_scribe
Veteran Poster
Username: Urban_scribe
Post Number: 52
Registered: 05-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 01:16 pm: |
|
ABM - I've never noticed the "start new thread" button. This forum is laid out quite differently from the format I'm accustomed to. For instance, we have to insert our own htmls and emoticons. Most forums you only need click on them, which comes in handy for those who don't know html. Fortunately, I know html so for me it's more to the task of proofing my alignment.
In any case, I probably would not have started a new thread even if I'd known where the button was located. For continuity's sake, I posted here (on-topic, initially) then continued to reply to posts on this thread addressed to me; some of which went off-topic therefore I, too, went off-topic.
You say that you've never factored my alleged appearance into your assessment of my persona; judging me solely on how I've conducted myself. I find that disingenuous on your part, Abm. I can point to threads on this forum where you've previously agreed with a few of my perspectives while effecting lighthearted camaraderie. However, upon your learning not what I allegedly look like but what I ACTUALLY look like, I do sense a noted hostility. What else should I attribute that to?
In any case, for what it's worth, your opinion is one of the few here that I actually respect. I shall continue to post to topics which interest me and I shall continue to dedicate my time, talents, skills, and monies to the restoration of the Black community, my community, rather than its destruction.
Good day, Sir. |
Schakspir
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Schakspir
Post Number: 397
Registered: 12-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 01:33 pm: |
|
Urban_scribe, well done. You are one of the board's most enlightened and articulate members, and did a far better job than most of us in putting that fascist Kola in her place.
Oh, yeah, and ignore Abm: he's just come out of some kind of closet concerning Kola Boof. Maybe he's fallen in love with her, from all these naughty pics she's posted on this board. |
Schakspir
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Schakspir
Post Number: 398
Registered: 12-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 01:35 pm: |
|
And Kola is just going through her shit on this board because this is one of her many publicity stunts to sell her books. That's all. |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2634
Registered: 02-2005
Rating:
Votes: 3 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 02:40 pm: |
|
Urban_Scribe, it would take all day to tell you what I HAVE DONE.
But you're not worth my time.
|
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 717
Registered: 03-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 02:57 pm: |
|
Why does Lil_ze get a free pass when all he does is say how "ugly" darkskin blacks are? |
Moonsigns
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Moonsigns
Post Number: 1296
Registered: 07-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 04:17 pm: |
|
Urban_scribe,
I've enjoyed reading your posts! |
Abm
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Abm
Post Number: 5697
Registered: 04-2004
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 04:26 pm: |
|
Urban_scribe,
*yawn*
This is crazy. Again. I've never THOUGHT about how you do or do not look. But, hey. It seems clear you're firmly inured in your viewpoint and position.
So then I shall simply extend to you the one courtesy you did to me: Good day, (Forgive me. I do not recall whether you are male or female.). |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 308
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 05:01 pm: |
|
brownbeauty, i NEVER said "dark skin blacks" were ugly. i just never said that. sure i called SOME darker skin women ugly. but thats because i think they are ugly. its not that i think they are ugly because they are darker skinned. i don't have to blindly praise every dark skin person and gush about how beautiful they are SIMPLY because they are dark. there are people who i think are ugly who are light, but i don't think they are ugly because they are light.
how many times on this board can we talk about light skin and dark skin before it gets tired? |
Tonya
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 171
Registered: 07-2006
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 06:01 pm: |
|
Brownbeaty:
Why does Lil_ze get a free pass when all he does is say how "ugly" darkskin blacks are?
Tonya:
Because he's a part of Urban_Scribe's intellectual "elite." (LOL)
Urban_Scribe wrote: "Lil_ze, I feel you. . .However, Lil_ze, it would appear that your and my opinions are quickly becoming minority, if you will, opinions regarding who is and who isn't Black."
___
And if that doesn't say it all, let's not forget..
she started her RANT by claiming that DARK-SKINNED blacks are the one group of people that has "SHITTED OVER" her most. YET she alleges SHE'S the one being hated on for HER phenotype??? ....man ....lotta nerves. |
Tonya
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 172
Registered: 07-2006
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 06:13 pm: |
|
Lil_ze has made it crystal clear who he does and does not deem black. Africans are not "one of us" to him because he doesn't consider them HUMAN. He has said as much on many occasions. So, yeah, Urban_Scribe, you and Lil_ze's opinions regarding who is and who isn't Black is very much in the minority within the African American Community…especially the URBAN parts. |
Urban_scribe
Veteran Poster
Username: Urban_scribe
Post Number: 53
Registered: 05-2006
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 06:23 pm: |
|
Kola Boof wrote:
But you're not worth my time
Urban_scribe wrote:
The feeling's quite mutual, love.
It is now the end of my work day and I shall go on to live my SUPERIOR light-skinned, good hair life where I rule over all of you cursed with hyperpigmentation, with an iron fist, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it except TALK and BITCH and MOAN! ROTFLM HIGH YELLA AO!
I think I'll stop by the BLACKEST lounge I can find and have an after work cocktail. That and steal all the attention of adoring deep chocolate brothers away from their deep chocolate women. Still ROTFLM HIGH YELLA AO
You see, it requires ZERO intelligence to COME DOWN to your abysmal level(s).
Now if I may borrow a page from Madame Cynique's book:
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2639
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 07:29 pm: |
|
Urban_Scribe,
I hope that's a PROMISE, because it means you'll be no longer talking to me.
Be a woman of integrity and keep your promises.
adios
|
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2640
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 07:31 pm: |
|
Well, TONYA, I see that you summed up good old "Sesame Cracker" in two beats as well.
**on the porch yawn'n along with you**
|
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 309
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 08:10 pm: |
|
intellectual elite? tonya, there is no "intellectual elite" on this board. just because all of us are not caught up in your "light skin/dark skin" madness , does not mean some of the posters think we are part of some "intellectual elite". there are posters who are intelligent and can see through the divide and conquer foolishness.
its clear that some of our people are well thought out and rational, and some of our people are totally IRRATIONAL and blinded by some kind of skin shade insecurity.
those of us who are rational, KEEP posting. those of us who are intelligent need to keep posting in order to balance the madness, put forth by some of the posters on this board. |
Tonya
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 176
Registered: 07-2006
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 09:49 pm: |
|
Lil_ze
What do you mean: "see through the 'divide and conquer' foolishness?"
Don't you mean the FURTHER divide and FURTHER conquer...foolishness? |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 310
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 10:32 pm: |
|
tonya, i don't consiser the africans "our people", because i think the dark races in the land called africa, are a different racial group than we are. as hard for this concept for some of our people to understand, there is NOT one racial group in africa called "africans". there are different racial groups in the land called africa. i have the opinion that there is not one racial group called "the africans". in the land called africa. there are different racial groups who all have dark skin and similar texture hair.
i have a love for our people. our people were sold as slaves and then scattered throughout north, south, and central america. i feel our nation is special and distinct. how do some of you posters feel its a bad thing to have pride in your people? |
Sabiana
Newbie Poster
Username: Sabiana
Post Number: 17
Registered: 08-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, August 03, 2006 - 10:44 pm: |
|
^^ You know Lil_ze, someone commented that I needed a hug, perhaps I do. It is really is useless to try to make a point on this board. If you do not agree with the majority, (light skin-ded people vs. dark skin-ded people) screw anyone taking you with a grain of sand.
About "our people" since I listen to people points of views without casting them as colorist, this or that, can you elaborate?
( |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 311
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, August 04, 2006 - 02:11 am: |
|
sabiana.thanks for asking. when i refer to "our people", im speaking about our forefathers that were placed in captivity, and sold as slaves in america, jamaica, brazil, cuba, columbia, the dominican republic, venezuela, trinidad, the bahamas, st. lucia, barbados etc.
most people have the idea that there wsa one racial group in africa, and then the europeans came and took a bunch of random "africans and transported them to the new world as slaves. i disagree with this historical account.
in the land that is known as africa, there are differeent racial groups who have "dark skin" and a similar texture of hair. the people in ethiopia have dark skin and similar texture hair as the people who dwell in the region of nigeria etc, but the ethiopians and the nigerians etc, are clearly 2 different racial groups. the aboriginies of australia are a dark skin people. but the aboriginies of australia are clearly a different racial group than the bushmen (saan people) who dwell in the region of namibia.
hence, its my contention that the people who were sold throughout the "new world" via slave ships, are a different racial group than the dark races in the land called africa, some of our people went back to africa to form the nation of liberia. these amer-liberians are the decendants of our foreparents. but the vast majority of people in the land known as africa, these are not our people. the dark nations in african sold our forefathers to arab slave traders, who in turn sold our people to the european to be transported to the new world as slaves. the land called africa is 3 times the size of the united states. dark skin does not equal the same racial group. yes the majority of our people came from the land called africa (some of our people came to america as freemen from europe. read the book "before the mayflower" by lerone bennett), but that does not mean that our people were part of one big happy "african family". the dark races in the land called africa understand that there are different racial groups in africa. there has NEVER been such a thing as the "african race".
our forefathers were not captured as slaves by random. it was a concentrated effort on the part of the enemies of our people (europeans, arabs, dark races in africa) to place us in a position of servitude. my position is that our people (nation) who's fathers and forefathers were brought to the new world on the slave ships, are a unique, and distinct racial group. the nations in africa have never said a WORD about the people who were sold out of africa and sold as slaves. have the governments of the nations in africa ever said,"let my brothers who were sold as slaves come home"? of course not. because the racial groups in africa knoe that we are not their people. again, dark skin does not equal identical racial groups. the chinese and the japanese are two DIFFERENT racial group, but they "look" similar. likewise many of the nations of the earth look "similar", but they are not the same racial group.
sabiana, when i speak about our people, im refering to the nation that was enslaved and have the common history of being brought to the new world as slaves. our people are not some "watered-down", "impure", or newly created racial group. our people have existed since the begining of time. our people today live in brazil, america, jamaica, cuba, columbia, equador, peru, panama, trinidad, the bahamas etc. our people dwell throughout north, south, central america, and the west indian islands.
when i think and speak about "our people", this is who im speaking of. the nations in africa have dark skin, but i don't feel that they are the same racial group as our people. my position has ZERO to do with color of skin. our people have varyind shades of skin, but we are one nation or people. sabiana, i hope ive elaborated enough to answer your question. |
Sabiana
Newbie Poster
Username: Sabiana
Post Number: 18
Registered: 08-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, August 04, 2006 - 01:12 pm: |
|
Now I get it. Thanks!
I actually like that idea.
Correct me if I'm wrong, so because of slavery, the people from "the land of Africa" were removed originally from Africa, This is how when a Black American does a genetic test, they can pinpoint exactly what tribe, or what area you are from (Perfect sense)
However, I recognize my ancestors were originally from Africa, so part of me does not want to completely seperate myself from Africa. I see my people as MY people.
But like I said, I do like you're view.
But then again, people will just lable you a colorist who hates dark skin women and hates Africa and therefore is self-hating-when they most likely don't read your posts anyway. There minds are like a one-way street with colorism being the only exit.
I appreciate posters like you. |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2645
Registered: 02-2005
Rating:
Votes: 2 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, August 04, 2006 - 01:45 pm: |
|
Sabiana, you are so FULLA SHIT (and two-faced). But you claim to be so frustrated.
Desperate to protect what you benefit from is more like it.
|
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 312
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, August 04, 2006 - 02:29 pm: |
|
thanks sabiana, i appreciate a poster like you also. |
Sabiana
Newbie Poster
Username: Sabiana
Post Number: 22
Registered: 08-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, August 04, 2006 - 05:25 pm: |
|
what you benefit from? |
Sabiana
Newbie Poster
Username: Sabiana
Post Number: 23
Registered: 08-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, August 04, 2006 - 05:30 pm: |
|
My point being made is that NO ONE, in the end, when it is all said and done, benefits from colorism.
So Kola, since you are a TRUE African, what do you think Black Americans should identify as?
Do you consider AA to be truly, HONESTLY African?
I actually envy you. You are more closely tied to Africa than I am. All I can say is what area of Africa I come from. Two faced? You are sooooo MEAN Kola....can I still get a hug? |
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2649
Registered: 02-2005
Rating:
Votes: 3 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, August 04, 2006 - 06:54 pm: |
|
Of course Black Americans are AFRICANS----the majority of them still look like us, and because of slavery, they have the blood of more than 200 tribes in them--as the slave masters forced them all to BREED new slaves.
You can look at a Black American and see 6 different tribes in ONE FACE.
Denzel, Don Cheadle, Whoopi, Angela Bassett, Levar Burton, 50 Cents, Kimberly Elise, Toni Morrison, India Arie----they all look AFRICAN---as do MOST Black Americans who are still brown skinned.
For some reason, on the other hand--people who don't know me, ALWAYS think I'm a Black American.
Sabiana, perahps you're just so COMPROMISED with the blood of other races that you can't discern. Is that why you can't see that Black Americans are more African than anything else?
Is that why you, like a lot of mulatto bastards, want to join Lil_ze in further separating the Black Americans from their ancestor's people and their true birthright???
And you can kiss my ass and step the fuck oof, bitch, before I really fix you up with a taste.
I don't like your rotten yellow two-faced ass.
|
Tonya
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 191
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, August 04, 2006 - 07:57 pm: |
|
Lil_ze,
Which Africans--or "Dark People"--do you think are "us?" (Post links to articles with pictures please.) And which do you believe are "Subhuman?" (Post links-w-pics for those too, can you?) |
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 313
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, August 05, 2006 - 02:08 am: |
|
tonya, i don't think ANY of the "africans" or dark nations in africa are "us" or related to our people racially. we are our own distinct racial group. some of our nation or our people went back to the land of africa to establish liberia. these amer-liberians are a part of our people, because their fore-fathers were sold as slaves throughout the new world.
i don't feel that any racial group on the planet earth are "sub-human". there are certain individuals that i feel are less than human, because of their "subhuman additudes".
as far as me posting links to articles with pictures in order to prove my point, i doubt this will happen. in order for me to believe (or know) something is true, i don't need validation from some other human beings articles. if you (tonya or anyone) wants to see photos of the dark races in the land of africa all you have to do is get a hold of some copies of national geographic, and compare the photos of the dark races in africa to our people. its clear that the nations in africa are a different racial group than we are. the dark nations in africa look nothing like our people (and no its not due to "race-mixing"). i can't post pictures of a racial group that i believe are "sub-human", because i don't believe that ANY nation is "sub-human". i believe that our people are superior and special, but i don't think the other nations are "sub-human". agian, if you (tonya) are looking to see "links" posted with pics, this will not happen. there are other people who believe what im saying is true, who i actually learned from. but im not going to post photos or post articles in order to prove my point.
either you believe what im saying is true or you don't. but im not going to play into the "let me see articles and photos, to prove your point to me game". i don't have a pressing desire to try to "twist somebody's arm", in order to prove a point to them. the truth has been presented to you (tonya), you have a choice to believe it or not. if not then there is NOTHING (as far as the issue of racial distinction goes) to say to one another. remember tonya, i have no reason to lie to you or anyone else, you have heard the truth about our people. you can believe what you want. |
Sabiana
Newbie Poster
Username: Sabiana
Post Number: 24
Registered: 08-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, August 05, 2006 - 04:24 am: |
|
Kola,
Because I am a woman, I won't belittle you are call you names because you do not agree with me.
You should know, however
A.) Never wanted to seperate myself from Africa, since my bloodline from the majority is from Africa. (Took the DNA test) 83% sub-Saharan African, 10% Native American, and 7% European
83 percent, (why cling to 10 and 7)
B.) Lil_ze has a view that should be respected
C.) Humans are born the disagree with each other.Children argue and fight. Adults respect views and discuss them in a intelligent fashion
But Lil_ze, are you saying you want seperate AA completly from Africa? OR, do want us to be recognized as a different clan or tribe from Africa (like Trindadians, Afro-Carribians, and such) I don't think you are denying you're african heritage. BUT I do not agree with
"i believe that our people are superior and special" I have pride in my heritage, but is not superior or INFERIOR or any more special than other human races. I don't want to seperate myself from Africa (the least I can do for the ancestors that came before me) I do need to find clarity of this matter from me, and decide what I want to decide for myself.
Actually, even though a do not agree with half the things you say Kola, I do like you and other people on this board.
Tonya, what is you're point? There is no way of knowing since you can have at least 8 different tribes of Africa running coarsing through our veins...caught it.
In the end, though, Are we not all from AFRICA anyway?
|
Lil_ze
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Lil_ze
Post Number: 314
Registered: 01-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, August 05, 2006 - 01:14 pm: |
|
sabiana, as alwyas an intelligent post. "I" don't want to separate so-called "black-americans" from the dark nations in africa, this sepeartion has already been accomplished by nature. the point im trying to make is there is NO such racial group as africans. in the land of africa there are different racial groups (all who have dark skin). yes, the majority of our ancestors came from the land mass called africa. but, our people were seperated from the other dark races, while we were dwelling in the land called africa. we had our own distinct, civilized, and special culture seperated from the other dark races in africa. when the slave trade was began the arabs and the dark races in africa joined together in an effort to either sell all of our people to europeans as slaves or kill many of our people. over time the "stongholds" that our people had in africa (dahomey etc), the places were our people lived and functioned as a nation, were slowly destroyed through war warfare with the dark racial groups that dwelled on the continent of africa also. after the period of the slave trade the vast majority of our people had been "rooted-out" of the land of africa, sold as a NATION to be used as slaves in the new world. the remaining members of our people who were left in africa after the slave trade were killed off.
i want our people to be recogzined as a nation, a racial group distinct from all other people. we came from africa, that doesn't mean all people in the land of africa are the same people or racial group. africa is not a "race", its a land mass. |
Tonya
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Tonya
Post Number: 203
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, August 05, 2006 - 02:17 pm: |
|
Lil_ze, I wanted you to post pix and articles simply so I could read about the people that you are talking about: their cultures, their habits, are they hunters & gatherers, ect. I wasn't expecting you to prove anything
And you’re right: We’re all free to believe what ever we choose
Btw, are you know saying that you never referred to THE SUDANESE PEOPLE--not just one of them, all of them--as being subhuman, monkeys and such? |
Schakspir
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Schakspir
Post Number: 419
Registered: 12-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, August 05, 2006 - 06:07 pm: |
|
 |
Brownbeauty123
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Brownbeauty123
Post Number: 728
Registered: 03-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, August 05, 2006 - 08:25 pm: |
|
"Never wanted to seperate myself from Africa, since my bloodline from the majority is from Africa. (Took the DNA test) 83% sub-Saharan African, 10% Native American, and 7% European"
I've been interested in doing a DNA test to trace my ancestry. How much did this cost? |
Urban_scribe
Veteran Poster
Username: Urban_scribe
Post Number: 57
Registered: 05-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, August 05, 2006 - 08:43 pm: |
|
Schakspir,
You have the BEST pictures! I've been viewing the ones you've sprinkled about the forum and the shit's hilarious. Don't stop. Please, please, please, don't stop! How I envy your photo gallery.
|
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2721
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, August 05, 2006 - 09:51 pm: |
|
You all hear that.
|
Kola_boof
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Kola_boof
Post Number: 2722
Registered: 02-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, August 05, 2006 - 09:53 pm: |
|
Urban_Scab
I am so glad you dragged your Cracker Baffoon ass up in here, because you're about to receive a lesson that you surely couldn't get anywhere else.
Stick around.
|
Urban_scribe
Veteran Poster
Username: Urban_scribe
Post Number: 59
Registered: 05-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, August 05, 2006 - 10:34 pm: |
|
Pink Elephants
|
Nels
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Nels
Post Number: 483
Registered: 07-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, August 06, 2006 - 02:46 am: |
|
Black folks and DNA tests. Looking for another identity. Pathetic. |
Renata
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Renata
Post Number: 1114
Registered: 08-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, August 06, 2006 - 10:09 pm: |
|
Something was missed earlier: White people don't argue over whether Mariah Carey/Halled Berry are white or not....because, as far as they're concerned, if they're not 100% PURE white, they're NOT white and won't be accepted as one of them, no matter how white they LOOK. If you're blonde-haired/blue-eyed but you had ONE black great-grandmother, YOU'RE NOT WHITE and none of your children will be. What's left to debate?
Reminds me of an Oprah show years ago where a "white family" found out they had black blood, and were ostrasized in their community when others found out. One of the kids (I think he was a teen, if I remember correctly) even had schoolmates pulling his hair and laughing that at least they know why his hair is so wavy.
White people hardly have any reason to debate "whether or not" ANYONE with ONE DROP of black blood is white or not. They won't accept them. |
Renata
"Cyniquian" Level Poster
Username: Renata
Post Number: 1115
Registered: 08-2005
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, August 06, 2006 - 10:29 pm: |
|
LOL....Nels, how would a DNA test give us "another" identity apart from what's already IN OUR DNA? I would like see a lot of people actually get one, so all of the people who've argued with me that they're MORE MIXED THAN BLACK (with 8 black great-grandparents?) can shut up when they realize they're actually the opposite. It's these fools who are looking for "another" identity (another one from what they ACTUALLY ARE).
As I tell people all the time, I'm not just ANY American, I'm an AFRICAN one (hence my love for the term African-American). I would LOVE to be able to tell people just WHERE in Africa I'm descended from, or even just know for myself. I have a special affection for Gambians, but I hardly look anything like them, so I doubt I would have blood from there. My grandfather looks like he's FOB from the Ivory Coast.....as Kola said about Morgan Freeman, "if he were in Africa, the natives would ask him for directions." |
Mellany
Newbie Poster
Username: Mellany
Post Number: 2
Registered: 08-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 03:47 pm: |
|
NOPES!!!!! I dont agree....but you can get more about some bright black people over here:
http://www.realtalk.us/my_category.asp?main_cats_id=7&sub_cats_id=22 |
Latina_wi
Newbie Poster
Username: Latina_wi
Post Number: 5
Registered: 08-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 04:07 pm: |
|
Lil_ze; can i just say that the africans shipped to the americas were made up of 200 different tribes which may explain their different look to africans in africa. Some are also racially mixed.
I agree that africa isn't a race per se but I think it is odd that you try to further your stance so far away from africa(saying you as a black man from the USA are 'different' from them racially and culturally), but then you lump all other black groups from the americas' together even though they have very different cultures and very often different looks. A cuban, a jamaican and an african american are three different sets of people.
Firstly, it is most likely that the african american will be the most 'pure' out of these three groups. Whereas the blacks in parts of the caribbean and latin america were seen as 'exotic commodities' the ones in america were vilified and treated terribly. Which is why you have such intense racism in the USA against blacks still and which is lso why you have the gullahs in baltimore who are amongst the purest breed of african americans in the USA (they can trace their african ancestors to the letter). |
|
Email This Page