Joe Rogan, Jordan Peterson give their definition of Being Black .. - Joe Rogan Discussion

[–] joej2923 (3149) 3 years ago

I would argue that calling somebody black is outdated since the technology now exists to provide a percentage breakdown of your DNA. The Henry Gates article below notes that the average African-American has 20-30% European ancestry according to the various DNA services. Halsey and Logic the rapper both had black parents but one wouldn't know from their skin color. My only question is at what percentage is somebody black/white or mixed-race?

Joe Rogan is 3/4 Italian and he looks like he might have some Arab/Turkic ancestry. The southern Italians had more Arab/Turkic/African ethnicity but Rome was also a huge empire that would have allowed for some people from all over the empire to emigrate to Italy.

https://www.amren.com/news/2020/05/italys-north-south-genetic-divide-revealed-first-ever-study-into-italians-genetic-diversity-reveals-it-dates-back-19000-years/ ** Southern Italy diversity **

https://www.theroot.com/exactly-how-black-is-black-america-1790895185 ** Henry Gates article **

reply

[–] DMT (4483) 3 years ago

yeah everybody knew Thomas Jefferson and his boys would get freaky with there sexiest big booty momma slaves at night

reply

[–] joej2923 (3149) 3 years ago

The Henry Gates articles stated that 35% of all African-American men descend from a white male ancestor from the slavery era. I find it a little disturbing that his explanation is that the sex was most likely rape or coerced. It is possible that people found love or had consensual sex.

And for our African-American male guests, there has been still another astonishing fact revealed about their paternal ancestry — their father's father's father's line — through their y-DNA: A whopping 35 percent of all African-American men descend from a white male ancestor who fathered a mulatto child sometime in the slavery era, most probably from rape or coerced sexuality.

reply

[–] DMT (4483) 3 years ago

yeah it probably was mostly rapes but i am sure some love too. there are some beautiful big booty mommas out their i am sure Thomas Jefferson caught some feels for some of em midst his many probable rapes. idk much history involving slave rape during that period but and unusual thing would commonly occur during the three days the Russians were making rapes in Berlin in 1945. it was common for a soviet soldier to rape a woman but then act like boyfriend and protect her from other soldiers wanting to make a rape as well. it was very common for the rapists to catch feelings for their victims and treat them like wife almost for the whole period of permitted rape and looting of the town. better to be raped than gang raped i suppose. its not the best love story in the world, but still better than twilight

reply

[–] joej2923 (3149) 3 years ago

I just don't like using the term rape or coercion when there isn't documented proof. It all happened 200 or so years ago so there isn't a written record. Rape laws also were not favorable for women back in the old days.

There would be more documentation about the rapes that happened in Berlin and there would have been survivors who could tell their stories.

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

It really is pretty simple. If you are half or more of a race you are that race. If you aren't half anything then you are just a mixed race. Only people that could pick their race would be the ones that are 1/2 one race and 1/2 another. Now some people that are less than half of a particular race but have enough physical characteristics of the race to pull it off might be upset but in a situation where someone is 1/4 black and 3/4s white how could you really say they are black.

reply

[–] joej2923 (3149) 3 years ago

50% seems fair. I would say 70% of one race on a dna test is required to meet the requirements to be considered that race. People who don't meet the 70% benchmark would be considered mixed-race. I doubt anyone could ever agree on a percentage benchmark.

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

I'm thinking everyone that isn't 100% one race would be mixed race... but simply being 50% of any race would allow you to claim that race as your own... but even a person that was 90% one race and 10% another would still be mixed race... but could claim whatever they were 90% as their race.

If you look at the way the break down would happen you would never have a 70% or 90% of one race.. Because you are breaking people down by adding the part of 2 parents. a white and black parent would have a 50/50 child... that child marrying a 100 of one of the races would then have a 75/25 child or if they married someone with 50/50 like themselves they would be 50/50... you can come up with a lot of variations but normally you would be looking at 50%, 62.5%, 75%, 87.5% and so on would take some very creating parenting to other percentages and several generations.

reply

[–] 123Guy (7841) 3 years ago

when dealing with people, I treat all colors, ideas, etc the same. color doesn't affect my interaction - it's how I was brought up.

that said... it is literally impossible to keep everybody happy now.
I've had two very close best buddy "black" friends, and we joked a lot about both our races. when I asked them directly what the proper thing to say is (when a reference is needed and usually it is not needed) saying "Black" or "people of color" or something I don't know about, they said both were fine and it didn't really matter.
So, trying to keep up on every new phrasing or reference in a day when everyone is offended by everything that doesn't equal exactly what they expect you to do, and changing that weekly... there is no way to ever keep up.

Does someone run a blog with current updates with the least offensive terms of the moment? Please post the link. Could be helpful, except, no, there's no point in chasing moving goal posts.

reply

[–] TheArgentinian (7251) 3 years ago

These white men have zero self awareness.

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 3 years ago

No, black with a lower case b. He's talking about skin color, not race, heritage, or ethnicity. He's not gatekeeping who is black, he's saying they literally aren't black (color). Peterson said the two of them weren't white, to which Rogan agreed. Their intention is clear.

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

And these are the same people who want Rogan cancelled for spreading misinformation. The media they are listening to told them Rogan was talking about their identity, not making a point about how the words we use don't really describe the skin color.

I imagine they'll be repeating this constantly now like they do the horse dewormer/ivermectin Rogan tells people cures Covid lies.

reply

[–] Keelai (36161) 3 years ago

White people aren't white.

reply

[–] kuatorises (7467) 3 years ago

That's what I said.

And most black people are brown.

Neither of these statements are offensive.

reply

[–] Keelai (36161) 3 years ago

Most blacks in the diaspora are light from 300 years of white men raping them. Ditto re: mestizos.
Why would Rogan want to highlight that atrocity? Majority of American blacks have 20% white ancestry, therefore blacks don't exist according to Rogan.

In some circles, Rogan isn't white because his ancestors were likely raped by Moors. Perhaps, he brought it up because the only way he can be accepted as white is if other light-skinned blacks (like him) no longer identify as black?

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

It's already been pointed out to you twice that he wasn't talking about race, he was talking about peoples' actual skin tones, and you keep ignoring it.

reply

[–] Keelai (36161) 3 years ago

""Unless you are talking to someone who is like 100% African from the darkest place where they are not wearing any clothes all day and they have developed all of that melanin to protect themselves from the sun, even the term Black is weird," the podcaster added. "When you use it for people who are literally my color, it becomes very strange.""

That's race talk since he's talking about Black people calling themselves Black.

"Peterson responded by saying that he isn't "white," but rather, "kind of tan."

"And he was actually not Black, he was sort of brown," Peterson added, referring to Dyson's skin tone.

Rogan went on to comment that "the Black and white thing is so strange because there's such a spectrum of shades of people.""

Still more race talk.

https://www.businessinsider.com/joe-rogan-calling-people-black-strange-unless-darkest-place-africa-2022-1

reply

[–] Keelai (36161) 3 years ago

Why are whites called white instead of light pink? White is a stupider term because there are no white people. At least there are people with black skin.

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

Peterson pointed out that white people aren't actually white skinned, either.

This is what watching those media outlets that want Rogan cancelled does to your brain. They've got people believing all kinds of things that aren't true.

reply

[–] joej2923 (3149) 3 years ago

I do want to quibble with your assertion that 300 years of white male rapes led to light complexions among black people. I assert that too much time has passed to argue that every interracial relationship over the last 400 years were rapes.

The Henry Gates article pointed out that 35 percent of all African-American men descend from a white male during the slavery era. I do believe the 35 percent number could be used to arrive at a rough percentage for all African-Americans. A lot of blacks earned their freedom so some pregnancies could have resulted from consensual relationships outside of slavery. There also could have been sexual relationships between a slave and master that were based on a quid pro quo instead of coercion. Colorism might be another factor since a lot of men desire light-skinned black women. The article below also notes that colorism is a worldwide issue.

From the Gates article:

through their y-DNA: A whopping 35 percent of all African-American men descend from a white male ancestor who fathered a mulatto child sometime in the slavery era, most probably from rape or coerced sexuality.

https://www.theroot.com/exactly-how-black-is-black-america-1790895185 ** Gates article **

https://news.uga.edu/history-of-colorism-sheds-light-on-discrimination/ ** Colorism article **

reply

[–] Keelai (36161) 3 years ago

"...every interracial relationship over the last 400 years were rapes."

I didn't say every. Present is consensual.

Most racially-mixed babies during slavery were from rape. White slaveowners could create more slaves by raping female slaves instead of buying new slaves. Rape saved them money.

Second scenario: A slaveowner rapes a slave creating a mulatto slave. Afterwards, the mulatto slave and a newly arrived African slave have a child who would have European ancestry (1/4) even though there was no rape between his parents.

35% sounds extremely low. DNA only goes up to 200 years. U.S. slavery is 400 years old. Is he saying that 65% of Blacks have no white ancestry? Or is he referring to my 2nd scenario?

Don't forget miscegenation was illegal until a few decades ago.

reply

[–] joej2923 (3149) 3 years ago

You didn't say every but you did say most. I just can't see how people can make a blanket statement about the nature of relationships since they are very different. Similarly, not all present relationships are consensual.

You keep saying that the white slave owners raped the females but there could have been a mutual attraction or a quid pro quo. Saving money would not be a concern since plenty of slaves or men would volunteer to impregnate a woman free of charge. A female slave could have been freed and had children through a consensual relationship with a white male. There are endless scenarios and I think it's irresponsible to say that they were mostly rapes or coerced.

He is saying that 35% of all African-American males have a white male ancestor from the years that slavery was practiced in the USA. After some research, I learned that the Y chromosome that only males possess is never swapped so there is only one Y chromosome that each male in a line will possess. The X chromosomes are mixed completely so the origins cannot be tracked.

https://news.stanford.edu/news/2000/november8/chromosome-1108.html ** Y chromosome details **

Also, the USA is only 245 years old so the 400 years timeline is incorrect.

A lot of people had children out of wedlock so the miscegenation argument is irrelevant.

reply

[–] Keelai (36161) 3 years ago

Miscegenation includes sexual intercourse and cohabitation, not only marriage.

The first African slaves were brought to present day U.S. in 1526 by Spaniards - 496 years ago. 1619 by WASPs.

35% is too low. DNA only goes up to 200 years ago.

Equal consensual relationship between a white male slaveowner and black female slave? You're being silly.

reply

[–] joej2923 (3149) 3 years ago

The odds of an equal consensual relationship between a man and a woman back then was slight since women didn't have many rights. I still think there could be a consensual sexual relationship between a white male slaveholder and his black female slave. A lot of slaveholders freed their slaves so not all slave owners were cruel taskmasters. Sally Hemings bore six children with Thomas Jefferson and they had a consensual relationship.

The Y chromosome will stay the same in a son of a son of a son of a son. The Y chromosome will reset when a daughter marries a man. The 35% Y chromosome percentage may not be the best benchmark since it only works for the son of a son of a son of son.

https://genetics.thetech.org/ask-a-geneticist/y-chromosome-passes-virtually-unchanged-father-son

I don't think it's accurate to say that most interracial pregnancies resulted from rape or coercion since the records are less accurate when one looks further back into one's family history.

reply

[–] Keelai (36161) 3 years ago

You're still being silly. Women and Blacks were considered chattel. aka: property.

Hennings was his slave. Period. Notice how Jefferson never freed her and kept his own children slaves. What a sleazebag! His wife was considered his property, too. BTW, Jennings mother (African slave) was raped by her father (white slaveowner). Jennings was the half sister of his wife.

"... interracial pregnancies..."

I specifically wrote during slavery.

"... the mixture generally occurred in the early 1800s, when slavery was legal. That, of course, reflects what historians know about white slave owners raping enslaved women who descended from Africa."
https://www.vox.com/2014/12/22/7431391/guess-where-white-americans-have-the-most-african-ancestry

The Y chromosome thing sounds like nonsense. The overwhelming majority of African-Americans have European ancestry, not only 35%. The study annexed to the above link measures ancestry through the X chromosome.

reply

[–] joej2923 (3149) 3 years ago

I still contend that a slave could have consensual sex with her white male master through an arrangement or a quid pro quo. Women are attracted to powerful men so female slaves might want to have sex with a wealthy plantation owner who would buy them dresses or jewelry. Harvey Weinstein and Jeff Zucker are both ugly but they abused their power to attract ladies.

Sally Hemings and Jefferson negotiated a deal in Paris where she was FREE that she would return to slavery in the US with extraordinary privileges and her unborn children would be freed. Jefferson did free her two sons in his will and Hemings was allowed by Jefferson's daughter to leave Monticello in order to live with her two sons. While Hemings was a slave, she negotiated a deal to have extraordinary privileges. Thomas Jefferson was a great man and a founding father of the USA. He wrote the Declaration of Independence and he served two terms as President.

https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-a-brief-account/?source=post_page---------------------------

The dna studies show that 20-30% of African-Americans have European ancestry BUT that would reflect interracial relationships after slavery. The Y chromosome is scientifically proven to remain intact in all males(x,y) who descend from a male ( son to son to son to son). The Y chromosome percentage of 35% meant that 35% of African-American males descended from a white male during the slavery era but I'm not sure if this would apply to females (x,x) since the Y chromosome is not passed down from a father (x,y) to his daughter (x,x).

reply

[–] Keelai (36161) 3 years ago

Nonsense! Jefferson was a racist. A hypocrite. A cheater. Selfish. Greedy. Immoral. He knew he was doing wrong, but did it anyway because he didn't care. A sociopath, too.

And he was 44 and she was 14! That made him a pervert and pedophile.

It turns out that Hennings grandmother was also raped by a white slave owner. Three generations of women being raped. How vile! You need to stop defending slavery.

That study sounds irrelevant since it omits half of the population. You don't appear to have a point.

reply

[–] joej2923 (3149) 3 years ago

Great historical figures cannot be judged by today's moral standards. The legal age of consent back then was age 10 or 12 based on English common law. Marriages were arranged back then. Women had very little rights.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-raising-age-sexual-consent-taught-women-about-vote-180975658/

I don't think there is any proof that Hemmings' grandmother was raped. Sally Hemings made an arrangement with Jefferson to return to slavery in exchange for privileges and the promise that her children would be freed. I still contend that a slave could have a consensual sexual relationship with their master in exchange for a quid pro quo.

My overall contention was that the 35% Y chromosome percentage could be used as a rough estimate for all African-Americans BUT it may not work due to the omission of female offspring who do not inherit the Y chromosome.

reply

[–] Keelai (36161) 3 years ago

Hennings grandmother was from Africa. She was kidnapped, enslaved and then raped.

7, 10 or 12? You sound pervey.

"Women had very little rights."

Duh! That's what I've been saying from the outset. You're the bubble-headed bubby who's arguing to just argue.

You're been defending and identifying with rapists, pedophiles and slaveowners. What's the matter with you?

reply

[–] joej2923 (3149) 3 years ago

We will have to agree to disagree. You are once again hurling ad hominem attacks at me. This debate isn't about you or me. Stick to the issues. I don't want to know anything about you and I don't want you to know anything about me.

reply

[–] Keelai (36161) 3 years ago

"Women had very little rights."

Duh! That's what I've been saying from the outset.

Nah! I plan to do a victory lap several times around you.
You're still pervey for defending sex with 7-year-olds and wacky for believing slaves had equal rights with slaveowners.

reply

[–] joej2923 (3149) 3 years ago

You are falsely accusing me of advocating for illegal behavior and that is not the case. As always, your facts are WRONG. Sally Hemings gave birth at age 16 to a child with Thomas Jefferson. I am arguing against presentism and that is the practice of evaluating historical people with the values of the present day.

For the record, I never typed anything about slaves having equal rights with slaveowners but I did point out that Sally Hemings did re-enter slavery under Jefferson with "extraordinary privileges" and a promise that her children would be freed. The article below details their arrangement and that comes from the museum at Monticello, the estate of Thomas Jefferson.

https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-a-brief-account/?source=post_page---------------------------

reply

[–] Keelai (36161) 3 years ago

"Sally Hemings gave birth at age 16 to a child with Thomas Jefferson."

That's not helping your case.

"Sally Hemings did re-enter slavery under Jefferson with "extraordinary privileges""

You're insane.

reply

[–] ccr1633 (1538) 3 years ago

"White people aren't white."

I prefer the term "color reflecting person." I also identify as a mountain cat.

reply

[–] Gd5150 (11966) 3 years ago

Shocking. Imagine if Democrats weren’t racist f…s and could see past skin color and we were all just human beings. Unfortunately exploiting the black community has been a pillar of theirs since their founding.

reply