Just accept that you are mostly Negroid.sophisticate wrote:The only one that appears to make sense at the moment srsbsns. Also a forum is not a credible source.

I see Negroid traits in your avatar.
Moderators: Moderators, Junior Moderators
Just accept that you are mostly Negroid.sophisticate wrote:The only one that appears to make sense at the moment srsbsns. Also a forum is not a credible source.
sophisticate wrote:The only one that appears to make sense at the moment srsbsns. Also a forum is not a credible source.
When there is a Nilo-Saharan cluster. ethnic Horn Africans are 0% West African. That is just statistical noise.JamalAddow wrote:Paleo-African being Khoisans.
Itrah just read Somalis are 0.8% West African.
Itrah wrote:Just accept that you are mostly Negroid.sophisticate wrote:The only one that appears to make sense at the moment srsbsns. Also a forum is not a credible source.
I see Negroid traits in your avatar.
You're not supposed to take everything you read as gospel. Your source of knowledge is not infallible nor grounded in absolute fact.JamalAddow wrote:sophisticate wrote:The only one that appears to make sense at the moment srsbsns. Also a forum is not a credible source.
Paleo-African being Khoisans.
Itrah just read Somalis are 0.8% West African.
Scientists still euphemistically use the term Negroid as ''Sub-Saharan African''. It's essentially a synonym for Negroid and used in many scientific papers.sophisticate wrote:I do not identify myself with a eurocentric classification, that was meant to be pejorative. Of the (5) groups you lump sum I would not use that label on any of them.
It wasn't. I just wanted more clarification as to why you object to the term Negroid.sophisticate wrote:Also, if that is your way of making small talk - you failed.
This is the definition from Google -Itrah wrote:Scientists still euphemistically use the term Negroid as ''Sub-Saharan African''. It's essentially a synonym for Negroid and used in many scientific papers.sophisticate wrote:I do not identify myself with a eurocentric classification, that was meant to be pejorative. Of the (5) groups you lump sum I would not use that label on any of them.
It wasn't. I just wanted more clarification as to why you object to the term Negroid.sophisticate wrote:Also, if that is your way of making small talk - you failed.
You are not familiar with orientalism are you? Those 'scientists' you promote, invariably have a Eurocentric perspective. Anthropologists, non European historians were primarily concerned with creating a fictional caricature of 'savage' people for audiences of white euro nations and acted to justify policies of slavery and imperialism.Itrah wrote:Scientists still euphemistically use the term Negroid as ''Sub-Saharan African''. It's essentially a synonym for Negroid and used in many scientific papers.sophisticate wrote:I do not identify myself with a eurocentric classification, that was meant to be pejorative. Of the (5) groups you lump sum I would not use that label on any of them.
It wasn't. I just wanted more clarification as to why you object to the term Negroid.sophisticate wrote:Also, if that is your way of making small talk - you failed.
Interesting you say that. I remember reading that the term Sub-Saharan African is also racist. South Saharan African is the preferred term as it doesn't offend.Itrah wrote:Scientists still euphemistically use the term Negroid as ''Sub-Saharan African''. It's essentially a synonym for Negroid and used in many scientific papers.sophisticate wrote:I do not identify myself with a eurocentric classification, that was meant to be pejorative. Of the (5) groups you lump sum I would not use that label on any of them.
It wasn't. I just wanted more clarification as to why you object to the term Negroid.sophisticate wrote:Also, if that is your way of making small talk - you failed.
It's not just used in population genetics but also in medical studies that have nothing to do with ethnicities. Just go to google scholar and type ''Sub-Saharan African+risk factors". Tons of medical studies using it.srsbsns wrote:You are not familiar with orientalism are you? Those 'scientists' you promote, invariably have a Eurocentric perspective. Why is it is generally white Europeans who want to validate your ancestry and make labels for you? and then promote a fairytale theories for people like you with little self-esteem.
The research that comes up uses the term because it has become convention, widely accepted. When they use sub-Saharan Africa they mean black people, irrespective of diversity or cultural and religious traditions. The way it is used is meant to imply inferiority, to differentiate the whiter populations of north Africa with the rest of the continent.Itrah wrote:It's not just used in population genetics but also in medical studies that have nothing to do with ethnicities. Just go to google scholar and type ''Sub-Saharan African+risk factors". Tons of medical studies using it.srsbsns wrote:You are not familiar with orientalism are you? Those 'scientists' you promote, invariably have a Eurocentric perspective. Why is it is generally white Europeans who want to validate your ancestry and make labels for you? and then promote a fairytale theories for people like you with little self-esteem.
Even Japanese and East Asian scientists are labeling Negroids as Sub-Saharan Africans and distinguishing them from other people.
west african women are sexy.. curvy bodies and big futosXildiiid wrote:Itrah,
My children are half madow. My mother is 2 shades away from having a white skin color and unfortunately I inherited her skin tone. On top of that I wanted my children to have the superior athletic genes of the madaw.![]()
West Africa