The Study of Racialism

Salsassin · Suspended Joined: 04 Apr 2005 {Posts: 3508 }

Frank you are being a hypocrite. Suspend me all you want. YOU have provided no evidence that all Puerto Ricans have mixed the same. Jewish communities have been traditionally less exogamous than the rest. Many of those Jews migrated from Israel. Again, where is YOUR evidence that all Puerto Ricans of recent immigration have mixed enough o absorb recent African ancestry. I dare you to hold yourself up to your own standards for everyone else. When I say unimodal I am stating that all populations in Puerto Rico did not mix in one mode. Certain populations are historically known for being more endogamous. I may not have genetic evidence, but you have providen NO genetic evidence that those Endogamous ethnic groups show similar levels of admixture as the general population. ANd studies that sample the general population and not these groups are irrelevant to those endogamous groups.

Again, show me that all Puerto Ricans have historical African ancestry.

punjabtrini · Mentor Joined: 04 Sep 2007 {Posts: 253 } Location: USA

Salassin,
Many of the Jews in Puerto Rico are late comers (1920's an exteremly small group (Eastern Europe) and a larger group, who came in the 1940 and 50's to escape persecution, were chased from Cuba and ended up in PR) as opposed to those from Barbados (some late Askenazi influence)and Curacao who tended to be Sepharad who spoke Ladino and came from Spain, Portugal and Holland.

The Meseta central of Spain, has a 5-15% sub-Saharan influence based on the influence of West Africa (the Sanhaja and some Mauritanian groups who controlled certain sections of the peninsula and that was brought to the Americas. Of course, places like Galicia and Catalunya has/had less sub Saharan influence along with Pais Vasco.

I will say that recent immigrants from Spain (1900's-a guess) will have no sub Saharan influence if they originate in Catalunya, Pais Vasco or Galicia. Obviously if they marry into the local PR population then their said family sub Saharan quotient will go up,e.g. if someone from Loiza Aldea is a potential partner or environs.

I will tend not to agree that endogenous groups ahve the same degree of admixture. If the group known as hispano arabe (lebanese or palestinian origin) marry within their own group they will surely have less of admixture. If they out marry, the that admixture will obviously change (more heterogenous, more admixture). Their region of origin in their homeland (as another variable) can also affect degree of admixture!
I will try to add some links later.

punjabtrini · Mentor Joined: 04 Sep 2007 {Posts: 253 } Location: USA

High-Resolution Analysis of Human Y-Chromosome Variation Shows a Sharp Discontinuity and Limited Gene Flow between Northwestern Africa and the Iberian Peninsula

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=11254456
Source above:

Sub-Saharan gene flow into NW Africa. H22 (defined by mutation M2, also referred to, by Seielstad et al. [1994], as “sY81”; see fig. 2a) and H28, which belong to group III, show a sub-Saharan distribution pattern (Seielstad et al. 1994; Hammer et al. 1997; Underhill et al. 2000). The highest frequency of H22 was found in Mali (30%), and the highest frequencies of H28 were found in southern (51%) and central Africa (57%). Both haplotypes together constitute 8% of the NW African Y chromosomes, and, given their geographical distribution, their presence in NW Africa can be interpreted as resulting from sub-Saharan gene flow.

The NW African contact with the southern peoples was especially important during the Almoravid Berber expansion (A.D. 1056–1147), which reached as far south as present-day Senegal and Mali (Kasule 1998), and it has been maintained, until recently, by the trans-Saharan commercial routes.

mtDNA control-region sequence analysis (Rando et al. 1998) detected female-mediated gene flow from sub-Saharan Africa to NW Africa. In particular, 21.5% of the mtDNA sequences in a set of different NW African populations were found to belong to haplogroups L1, L2, and L3a, which constitute most of the sub-Saharan mtDNA sequences.

It was this 21.5% that was found to be L1 L2 and L3, similat to West Africa.

pianoplayer111 · Mentor Joined: 16 May 2007 {Posts: 379 }

G-Man, I hear what you're saying. This is a point I've discussed with Ms. Powell, too. What is it that excludes "Latinos" from the black classification here in the U.S.?

Example: When photos of sex offenders are shown in my hometown, their racial classification is listed in addition to other information. I have seen some of the darkest men with African features classified as white males simply because of their Spanish/Latin names. Yet biracial and multiracial people will immediately all be classified as "black".

Salsassin · Suspended Joined: 04 Apr 2005 {Posts: 3508 }

MisterLawyer · Posted: Fri 18 Jan 2008 13:45 Post subject:

Salsassin · Suspended Joined: 04 Apr 2005 {Posts: 3508 }

MisterLawyer · Posted: Fri 18 Jan 2008 16:30 Post subject:

Salsassin · Suspended Joined: 04 Apr 2005 {Posts: 3508 }

MisterLawyer · Posted: Fri 18 Jan 2008 16:59 Post subject:

Since it appears we are going in circles, so let me be as clear as I can possible be.

Salsassin · Suspended Joined: 04 Apr 2005 {Posts: 3508 }

Salsassin · Suspended Joined: 04 Apr 2005 {Posts: 3508 }

I looked at the study itself and the sample was collected as part of an obesity study at Saint Luke’s-Roosevelt Hospital Center. Hardly would be controlling for what ancestry the people had.
Age 66.89±3.46
Years of education 8.36±3.80
Annual average income 3.44±1.30 (Mean income range of $ 5,000–10,000)

MisterLawyer · Posted: Fri 18 Jan 2008 17:39 Post subject:

If it wasn't controlling at all for "what ancestry the people had" then how are they deeming them "Puerto Rican" ? Clearly they had some measure of what ancestry the people had, even if it is only self identifying. And even if it was only self identity, based on the avarage age of the people-66-I would assume that if they were part african-american-(which would almost certainly mean they were born in NY around oh 1940) they would self identify as black. I assume you disagree....

Salsassin · Suspended Joined: 04 Apr 2005 {Posts: 3508 }

Salsassin · Suspended Joined: 04 Apr 2005 {Posts: 3508 }

Mark just informed me all the women were born in Puerto Rico.So if anything it is a valid sample of Puerto Ricans who immigrated from Puerto Rico.

Antoinette · New User Joined: 24 Jan 2008 {Posts: 27 }

fwsweet

OTHER · Posted: Sat 26 Jan 2008 15:56 Post subject: Illogical, through and through

Antoinette, here is a visual example of what is being discussed.

For those who subscribe to the one drop rule, Jennifer Beals might be considered "black", in spite of the fact that she is half white and OBVIOUSLY has more than just sub-Saharan African genes.

But, even for those who subscribe to the one drop rule, Lauren Velez is simply Puerto Rican and never "black", even though she is darker than Jennifer Beals and has facial features that might be considered closer to African than Jennifer Beals.

Anatole Broyard IS considered to have been "black" by those who subscribe to the one drop rule, in spite of the fact that he looked white enough to live as a white man AND is Creole and not "black".

Meanwhile, Manny Ramirez is typically identified as Dominican or Latino, apparently even by those who subscribe to the one drop rule, in spite of the fact that his sub-Saharan African ancestry is FAR more obvious than Anatole Broyard's.

In my opinion, the selective application of the one drop rule only serves to further illustrate how illogical the one drop rule is to begin with. Yellow and blue makes green. Not blue.

Antoinette · New User Joined: 24 Jan 2008 {Posts: 27 }