Black Men In The Hands Of White Women: The Mythology Of Interracial Dating, Covert Reverse Racism And the Re-Education Of The Black Race

Submitted by Terence Blackett

In George Lamming’s debut novel – In the Castle of My Skin (1953), this famous Bajan son of the soil describe the psychic scars of racism in direct and powerful terms. In The Castle of My Skin he wrote, “No Black boy wanted to be white, but it was also true that no Black boy liked the idea of being Black. Brown skin was a satisfactory compromise, and Brown skin meant a mixture of white and Black… There was a famous family on the island which could boast of the prettiest daughters. Their father was an old Scottish planter who had lived from time to time with some of the labourers on the sugar estate. The daughters were ravishing, and one was known throughout the island as the crystal sugar cake.”

Grantley Adams, a British educated lawyer – who later rose to political prominence as the first Black Prime Minister of Barbados – had an English wife.  ‘At that time’ Neville recalled, she was a member of the Aquatic Club in Bay Street and Grantley was not a member, he was a Black man, he wasn’t a member, but she… had that privilege as a white woman to be a member of the Aquatic. And Grantley would carry her to the Aquatic Club, drop her there and turnaround and come back down the road [laughs]. Tell me when you’re ready and I’ll come back and pick you up when you ready to go… He dropped her there. That is your thing. You belong to that club. I’ll put you there, you come back when you’re ready to come, call me and I’ll come back and pick you up.’

It is now 177 years since the Wilberforce Abolition Act of 1833; 147 years since the American Emancipation Proclamation of 1863 and the 44th years of Barbados’ Independence from British rule and sovereignty since 1966.

A whole new generation has grown up across the geographical, geopolitical divide where overt acts of racism are outlawed and where the geo-spatial markers of segregation are now less obviously recognizable.

In Rajen Persaud’s book, ‘Why Black Men Love White Women: Going Beyond Sexual Politics to the Heart of the Matter’ is a fascinatingly funny, yet illuminating discourse on this critical issue of interracial dating and the identity politics which challenges our notions of “RACE” and it effects on the Black psyche today. We are forced to look at ourselves and our cultural intonations pondering matters of how celebrities from Michael Jordan to Bryant Gumbel to Tiger Woods – high-profile interracial affairs and marriages with no shortage of theatre, intrigue and controversy has played upon us as men. We must ask: Are Black men choosing white women – or rejecting Black women because of SEX? Does the issue of “Race” affect how white male insecurity is the key and at the heart of our understanding of structural as well as institutional racism? Is it more than love that brings interracial couples together? How is fear used to gain power, from sexual politics to global war? And finally, how movies and television keep Black men running to white women through the cultural machinations of the media?

Susan Crain Bakos in a NYPress article – ‘A White Woman Explains Why She Prefers Black Men’… begs the question: “How many white men can treat a woman like a lady and ravish her” all at the same time? She forcefully opines, “Black skin is thick and lush, sensuous to the touch, like satin and velvet made flesh. There’s only one patch of skin on a white man’s body that remotely compares to nearly every inch of a Black man’s skin. The first time I caressed Black skin, it felt like a luxury I shouldn’t be able to afford. I craved it more strongly than Carrie Bradshaw craved Manolo Blahnik shoes. That phrase, “Once you go Black, you never go back” is all about the feeling of the skin.”

She further contends that “I want Black men. They want me. We look at one another and exchange a visible frisson of sexual energy in the lingering glances. And our attraction is based first on race… that deliberate seeking of the specific other makes some people, especially Black women, damned mad… We are what they denigrate and castigate: white women and Black men who choose one another because of our racial differences. They resent our taking their men. Black men are two and a half times more likely to marry a white woman than a Black woman is to marry a white man. Black women can point to that statistic in justifying their wrath. But in truth, Black sisters, we’re after the sex, not the ring and these guys aren’t the marrying kind anyway. Yes, the sex!”

Moving beyond the gamut of romantic politics for a moment – what about the notional value of the education of the Black male or in this case, the re-education? In the United States, Black students account for 17% of public school students nationwide, but represent only 6% of the teachers. Black colleges enrol a paltry 16% of Black students, but they produce a mere 37% who since the 1954 Brown vs. Topeka decision to integrate schools has seen a 66% decline in Black teachers.

Black male teachers constitute only 1% of the teaching population.  There are schools without one Black male academic teacher.  They are employed as custodians, security guards and Physical Education teachers.  Often, schools will hire a Black male to be an Assistant Head teacher which translates into being in charge of all male behavioural problems. So what really has happened to Black teachers in the American school system? This is a poignant question for all those who are researching the “HIP HOP Generation” and observing the smashing of cultural barriers.

On the other hand, the turnover of white female staff in the inner city schools system was 40% within a five year period. Is it practical to expect someone who has never lived in the Black community, attended a rural college, nor did their student teaching in that region, took few if any courses on Black history, culture, psychology, family, learning styles, Ebonics, etc. to be truly effective? Can one subsume then that gender, race and romantic politics is an epiphenomenon of late 20th and early 21st century construction emboldened and engendered by stereotypical portrayals of the white woman as both an object of sexual fantasy as well as a psychic mentor – now glamorized in HIP HOP music as an attainable fashion accessory? However for this luminous discourse, I turn to Lacanian psychoanalysis and, in particular, to Lacan’s contentious claim that “There is no such thing as a sexual relationship” – through an explication of Lacan’s position on love, I conclude that love not only has a place within racial pedagogy but is necessary for it as the boundaries of race and sexuality morph into a supposed cogent whole.

Some continue to argue vehemently that the continuum line of social and interracial interactions amongst Black & non-Black individuals that were curious about or harbouring a belief in a racist stereotype related to Black sexuality centres squarely on the mythology of the Black penis and the anthropomorphosis of the Black male as a savage, virile beast of a lover – hence the mythology of beauty and the beast.

Sadly, many white Caucasoid women who are taking advantage of these curiosities only serve to promote and perpetuate a form of covert reverse racism which posits a form of pseudo power to the Black male and denies the white female any real lasting psychic wholeness. But more importantly, these metamorphosed interracial interactions make it clear that race, or more accurately racism, often plays a role in the formation and promulgation of such interracial romantic relationships.

John Johnson, the author of “It Ain’t All Good: Why Black Men Should Not Date White  Women” states that the removal of Black men from the Black dating pool may not make race relations worse, but it does contribute to male scarcity problems already present in the Black community. Johnson believes there is a ridiculously large and growing disparity in the number of Black men and women in the US population. According to the 2000 U.S. Census, there are 1.7 million more Black women in the country than Black men. And if you account for incarceration rates, the numbers approach 2.7 million more Black women in the American Black population. Without question, the absence of Black men from the Black population creates its own collection of problems; particularly for Black women who face heightened levels of competition for mates and are often forced into dissatisfying relationship compromises. The siphoning of Black men out of the Black dating pool and into the interracial romantic marketplace only serves to make these existing problems worse. Meanwhile, Black men are cohabitating with non-Black women at close to 4 times the rate of Black female interracial cohabitation and they are interracially marrying at 2.5 times the Black female rate.

Isn’t it possible that the sexual mythology surrounding Black men and the constant celebration of the beauty of white women in the media are combining to create a disturbing, albeit common, racist romantic combination in this new multicultural romantic marketplace? Does a combination of Black female independence and the tormenting history of white male rape prevent Black women from seriously considering, or being considered for, interracial romance? I would think that these and many other questions would need to be considered before we create an environment for individuals to satisfy their interracial fantasies or even pursue “genuine” interracial romantic partnerships?

An article in National Review stated that when compared to white men, white women were 10 times more likely to report that their most recent sexual partner was Black – white women are also more likely to cohabitate with Black men more than any other non-white male group, which may not seem especially disturbing given the size of the Black population in the United States. Research is also looking at European trends. However, when you consider the fact that white women are more likely to marry a Bi/Multiracial man than they are a Black man, even though there are 4 times as many Black men in the population, one might begin to consider the possible influence of racism on romantic partner selection.

What is the logic behind a Black man intentionally seeking out a non-Black romantic partner, especially when you consider that more than 98% of the 55 million married couples in America for example involve individuals of the same race? What is the reasoning for a white woman seeking out Black men to date when in most interracial environments there are far more white men than Black men? Shouldn’t this race-specific romantic preference, at the very least, be questioned as an observable phenomenon?

Whatever the sexual politics is in the bedroom, boardroom or classroom – we recognize that the debate on “race” will continue to take center stage and will be a point of ongoing controversy and contestation across the ideological spectrum.

In the end, whatever the conclusion the racial map must be redrawn!

283 responses to “Black Men In The Hands Of White Women: The Mythology Of Interracial Dating, Covert Reverse Racism And the Re-Education Of The Black Race

  1. millertheanunnaki

    @ natturner:
    Who would have done the genetic manipulations to bring about these mutations? Evolution, Nature or experiments performed by extraterrestrials thousands of year back?
    Just inquisitive (interested)!

  2. @ Millertheanunnaki
    Good question , looking into it.
    “Inbreeding may result in a far higher phenotypic expression of deleterious recessive genes within a population than would normally be expected.”
    Inbreeding,
    from Wikipedia.

    White Genetically Weaker Than Blacks, Study Finds
    Fox News ^ | Friday, February 22, 2008:

    ” White Americans are both genetically weaker and less diverse than their black compatriots, a Cornell University-led study finds.
    Analyzing the genetic makeup of 20 Americans of European ancestry and 15 African-Americans, researchers found that the former showed much less variation among 10,000 tested genes than did the latter, which was expected.

    They also found that Europeans had many more possibly harmful mutations than did African, which was a surprise….

    .It’s been known for years that all non-Africans are descended from a small group, perhaps only a few dozen individuals, who left the continent ( Africa) between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago.

    But the Cornell study, published in the journal Nature Thursday, indicates that Europeans went through a second “population bottleneck,” probably about 30,000 years ago, when the ancestral population was again reduced to relatively few in number.
    The doubly diluted genetic diversity has allowed “bad” mutations to build up in the European population, something that the more genetically varied African population has had more success in weeding out…..”
    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,331949,00.html#ixzz1cCrUhHPm

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,331949,00.html#ixzz1cCqvpwvS

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,331949,00.html#ixzz1cCpy8iGd

    @ Harry.
    Blue Eyes Face Higher Cancer Risk

    ” Exposure to sunshine increases the risk of eye cancer, with blue-eyed people more at risk than those with dark eyes, doctors reported Wednesday.
    A team led by Dr. Margaret Tucker of the National Cancer Institute said a recent study suggests exposure to ultraviolet radiation from the sun increases the risk of intraocular malignant melanoma — a tumor that tends to spread to other organs……

    ” Intraocular malignant melanoma is the most common primary intraocular malignant tumor in adults in the U.S. and Europe. It primarily affects older people, almost exclusively whites, and is a serious cause of death and vision loss…..”
    Blue-eyed subjects had the highest risk of the eye melanoma and were followed closely by those with green, gray or hazel eyes, the study …………”
    - from Press International
    SunSentinel.com
    September 26, 1985.

  3. millertheanunnaki

    @natturner:
    “Inbreeding may result in a far higher phenotypic expression of deleterious recessive genes within a population than would normally be expected.”

    There could be some element of truth to this thesis. In-breeding within “closed” groups can result in genetic malformations. This phenomenon shows it self among certain groups in Barbados (e.g. the poor whites of Barbados- descendants of a group of indentured labourers from the British isles). In-breeding brought about through a caste-like system based on religious or social dogma could have aggravated the early incidence of genetic replication (photocopying). I suppose similar cases of “bathing in the same genetic pool” could be found within Hillbilly communities, Hamish type sects and other “red-neck” enclaves. I suppose that, genetically speaking, promiscuity with an external group focus does have its advantages.

    Be that as it may, the question to be posed is this: How come white dominated societies tend to be more technologically advanced than say black or African controlled populations?
    Can this gulf be explained by genetic or evolutionary factors? Did this advantage come about by the harsh realities of the naturally colder climes thereby developing a genetic capacity to invent material and mechanical techniques to survive these species-threatening conditions? It is postulated that life is a zero-sum game. So if the North wandering band of African-originated tribesmen were to survive the climatic conditions Nature would require a physical genetic price in return for growth in their cranium capacity to adjust and survive the harsh cold environments. There is also an “out-of-the-sky” thesis that the melanin deficient humans are the by-product of a genetic engineering / modification experiment undertaken by earlier astral visitors to the planet of the apes.

    Just Thinking!!

  4. @Nnaki, I think this article by Dr. Carter, dealing with the ‘population bottleneck’ referred to by Natturner, should interest you guys!

    Adam, Eve and Noah vs Modern Genetics
    by Dr Robert W. Carter

    Published: 11 May 2010(GMT+10)

    The evolutionary map of world migrations is startlingly close to the biblical account of a single dispersal of people from Babel. The evolutionary “Out of Africa” theory tells us there was a single dispersal of people, centered near and travelling through the Middle East, with three main mitochondrial lineages, with people traveling in small groups into previously uninhabited territory, and that all of this occurred in the recent past. Every item in that list is something directly predicted by the Tower of Babel account in the Bible. (Image http://www.mitomap.org).
    It comes as a surprise to most people to hear that there is abundant evidence that the entire human race came from two people just a few thousand years ago (Adam and Eve), that there was a serious population crash (bottleneck) in the recent past (at the time of the Flood), and that there was a single dispersal of people across the world after that (the Tower of Babel).1 It surprises them even more to learn that much of this evidence comes from evolutionary scientists. In fact, an abundant testimony to biblical history has been uncovered by modern geneticists. It is there for anyone to see, if they know where to look!

    For our purposes, the most important places to look are in the Y chromosome (which is only found in males and which is passed on directly from father to son) and in the mitochondrial DNA (a small loop of DNA that we nearly always inherit from our mothers only; males do not pass it on to their children). These two pieces of DNA record some startling facts about our past.

    Over the last decade, a vast amount of information has been collected that allows us to answer questions that we could not even consider earlier. The tools of modern genetics allow us to specifically ask questions about history, for our genes carry a record that reflects where we came from and how we got to where we are. The tools at our disposal are powerful.

    Creation and genetics
    There are two brief passages in the Creation account we can use to draw some conclusions about human genetic history. Please note that we cannot use these verses for land animals (because we do not know how many of each kind were initially created) or any of the swimming critters (“with which the waters abounded”—Gen 1:21). These statements apply to people only:

    “And the Lord God formed man out of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being.” Gen 2:7
    “And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.” Gen 2:21–22
    These simple statements have profound implications. They put a limit on the amount of diversity we should find in people living today. The Bible clearly says the human race started out with two people only. But how different were these two people? There is an intriguing possibility that Eve was a clone of Adam. The science of cloning involves taking DNA from an organism and using it to manufacture an almost perfect copy of the original. Here, God is taking a piece of flesh, with cells, organelles, and, importantly, Adam’s DNA, and using it to manufacture a woman. Of course, she could not be a perfect clone, because she was a girl! But what if God had taken Adam’s genome and used it to manufacture Eve? All he would have had to do was to leave out Adam’s Y chromosome and double his X chromosome and, voilá, instant woman!

    I do not know if Eve was genetically identical to Adam. The only reason I bring this up is because we have two possibilities in our biblical model of human genetic history: one original genome or two. Either result is still vastly different from the most popular evolutionary models,2 but we need to discuss the range of possibilities that the Bible allows.

    Your genome is like an encyclopedia (almost literally). And, like an encyclopedia, the genome is broken down into volumes, called chromosomes, but you have two copies of each volume (with the exception of the X and Y chromosomes; women have two Xs but men have one X and one Y). Imagine comparing two duplicate volumes side by side and finding that one word in a particular sentence is spelled differently in each volume (perhaps “color” vs “colour”). Can you see that if Eve was a clone of Adam, there would have been, at most, two possible variants at any point in the genome? If Eve was not a clone, however, there would have been, at most, four possible variants at any point in the genome (because each of the original chromosomes came in four copies). This still allows for a lot of diversity overall, but it restricts the variation at any one spot to 2, 3, or 4 original readings.

    Does this fit the evidence? Absolutely! Most variable places in the genome come in two versions and these versions are spread out across the world. There are some highly variable places that seem to contradict this, but most of these are due to mutations that occurred in the different subpopulations after Babel.

    There are indications, however, that Eve may not have been a clone. The ABO blood group is a textbook example of a gene with more than two versions.3 There are three main versions of the blood type gene (A, B, and O). However, many, but not all, people with type O blood carry something that looks very much like a mutant A (the mutation prevents the manufacturing of the type A trait on the outside of cells). So here is a gene with more than two versions, but one of the main versions is clearly a mutation. This is true for many other genes, although, as usual, there are exceptions. The important take home point is that essentially all of the genetic variation among people today could have been carried within two people, if you discount mutations that occurred after our dispersion across the globe. This is a surprise to many.

    The Flood and genetics
    Like in the Creation story, there are only a few verses in the Flood account that help us with our model. But as seen before, these verses are profound.

    Like in the Creation story, there are only a few verses in the Flood account that help us with our model. But as seen before, these verses are profound. About 10 generations after Creation, a severe, short bottleneck occurred in the human population. From untold numbers of people, the entire world population was reduced to eight souls with only three reproducing couples.

    “So Noah, with his sons, his wife, and his sons’ wives, went into the ark because of the waters of the flood.” Gen 7:7
    “Now the sons of Noah who went out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth… These three were the sons of Noah, and from these the whole earth was populated.” Gen 9:18–19
    We can draw many important deductions from these statements. For instance, based on Genesis 7 and 9, how many Y chromosomes were on the Ark? The answer: one. Yes, there were four men, but Noah gave his Y chromosome to each of his sons. Unless there was a mutation (entirely possible), each of the sons carried the exact same Y chromosome. We do not know how much mutation occurred prior to the flood. With the long life spans of the antediluvian patriarchs, it may be reasonable to assume little mutation had taken place, but all of Creation, including the human genome, had been cursed, so it may not be wise to conclude that there was no mutation prior to the Flood. The amount of mutation may be a moot point, however, for, if it occurred, the Flood should have wiped out most traces of it (all of it in the case of the Y chromosome).

    How many mitochondrial DNA lineages were on the Ark? The answer: three. Yes, there were four women, but the Bible does not record Noah’s wife as having any children after the Flood (in this case, girl children). And notice the claim in Gen 9:19, “These three were the sons of Noah, and from these the whole earth was populated.” This is a strong indication that Noah’s wife did not contribute anything else to the world’s population. With no prohibition against sibling marriage, yet,4 one or more of the daughters-in-law may have been her daughter, but this does not change the fact that, at first glance, we expect a maximum of three mitochondrial lineages in the current world population. There is a chance that there will be less, if there was very little mutation before the Flood or if several of the daughters-in-law were closely related. At most, we do not expect more than four.

    How many X chromosome lineages were on the Ark? That depends. If you count it all up, you get eight. If, by chance, Noah’s wife passed on the same X chromosome to each of her three sons (25% probability), then there were seven. If Noah had a daughter after the Flood (not expected, but possible), there could be as many as nine X chromosome lineages. Either way, this is a considerable amount of genetic material. And since X chromosomes recombine (in females), we are potentially looking at a huge amount of genetic diversity within the X chromosomes of the world.

    Does this fit the evidence? Absolutely! It turns out that Y chromosomes are similar worldwide. According to the evolutionists, no “ancient” (i.e., highly mutated or highly divergent) Y chromosomes have been found.5 This serves as a bit of a puzzle to the evolutionist, and they have had to resort to calling for a higher “reproductive variance” among men than women, high rates of “gene conversion” in the Y chromosome, or perhaps a “selective sweep” that wiped out the other male lines.6 For the biblical model, it is a beautiful correlation and we can take it as is.

    The evidence from mitochondrial DNA fits our model just as neatly as the Y chromosome data. As it turns out, there are three main mitochondrial DNA lineages found across the world. The evolutionists have labeled these lines “M”, “N”, and “R”, so we’ll refer to them by the same names. They would not say these came off the Ark. They claim they were derived from older lines found in Africa, but this is based on a suite of assumptions (I discussed these in detail in a recent article in the Journal of Creation7). It also turns out that M, N, and R differ by only a few mutations. This gives us some indication of the amount of mutation that occurred in the generations prior to the Flood.

    Let’s assume ten female generations from Eve to the ladies on the Ark. M and N are separated by about 8 mutations (a small fraction of the 16,500 letters in the mitochondrial genome). R is only 1 mutation away from N. This is an indication of the mutational load that occurred before the Flood. Given the assumption that mutations occur at equal rates in all lines, about four mutations separate M and N each from Eve (maybe four mutations in each line in ten generations). But what about R? It is very similar to N. Were N and R sisters, or perhaps more closely related to each other than they were to M? We’ll never know, but it sure is fascinating to think about.

    One more line of evidence crops up in the amount of genetic diversity that has been found within people worldwide. Essentially, much less has been found than most (i.e., evolutionists!) predicted. The general lack of diversity among people is the reason the Out of Africa model has humanity going through a disastrous, near-extinction bottleneck with only about 10,000 (and perhaps as few as 1,000)8 people surviving. However, the reason for this lack of diversity is twofold. First, the human race started out with only two people. Second, the human race is not that old and has not accumulated a lot of mutations, despite the high mutation rate. Third, there actually was a bottleneck event, Noah’s Flood!

    The Tower of Babel and genetics
    The Tower of Babel has been a favorite bedtime story for generations. But is it more than a fairy tale? Could it be possible that there is evidence to back up this tale of rebellion and judgment? Like the Creation and Flood accounts, there are only a couple of verses that apply to our model of genetics. But, like the others, these verses are as profound as they are simple.

    “Now the whole earth had one language and one speech.” Gen 11:1
    “And they said, ‘Come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower whose top is in the heavens; let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth.’” Gen 11:4
    It sounds like they were in a homogenous culture, but what do people in that situation do? Would you expect them to mix freely? Were language or cultural barriers present that would have prevented the sons of Shem from marrying the daughters of Japheth? Would the daughters of Ham be expected to marry freely with the sons of any of the three men? Note in Gen 11:4 that they knew about the potential for spreading out and getting separated from one another and intentionally did the opposite! However, this was against the express command of God, who had ordered them to spread out (to populate the earth). So, He took matters into His own hands.

    “’Come, let Us go down and confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.’ So the Lord scattered them abroad from there over the face of all the earth, and they ceased building the city.” Gen 11:7–8
    There are tremendous implications that come from the Babel account. First it explains the amazing cultural connectivity of ancient peoples—like pyramid building, common flood legends, and ancient, non-Christian genealogies that link people back to biblical figures (e.g., many of the royal houses of pagan northern Europe go back to Japheth, the son of Noah9).

    The dramatic rise in world population over the past several decades is a well known fact. From a biblical perspective, the current human population easily fits into the standard model of population growth using very conservative parameters.10 In fact, starting with 6 people and doubling the population every 150 years more than accounts for the current human population (a growth rate of less than 0.5% per year!). Population size would have increased quickly given the rate at which the post-Flood population reestablished agriculture, animal husbandry, industry and civilization. So we must ask the question, “Why are there so few people in the world today?” The answer is that the world is young and we have not been here many thousands of years.

    When did the dispersion occur? Our best clue about the timing of the event comes from Genesis 10:25. In referencing the 5th generation descendent of Shem, a man named Peleg, it says, “in his days the earth was divided.” To what is this referring? Many people believe this is referring to a division of the landmasses (plate tectonics). This may be true, but it would require a huge amount of geologic activity after the Flood, and this would have occurred in historical times with no record of the events. The interpretation I favor is that this passage is referring to the division of people at Babel. Just a few verses after the Peleg reference, the section is summed up with another reference to the division at Babel. This fits both the context and the science. In context, Peleg was closely associated with Babel.

    How large was the population at the time? We would expect rapid population growth, but we cannot know exactly. There are 16 named sons born to the three brothers, Shem, Ham and Japheth. If we assume about the same number of daughters, Noah had on the order of 30 grandchildren. At that rate of growth, there would have been about 150 children in Salah’s generation, about 750 in Eber’s generation, and about 3,750 in Peleg’s generation. Of course, these generations overlap, etc., so let’s say there were between 1,000 and 10,000 people alive at the time of Babel. This fits nicely with the available data. It is a high rate of growth, but wars and disease had yet to start taking their toll.

    There is one more verse in this section that we need to discuss:

    “These were the families of the sons of Noah, according to their generations, in their nations; and from these the nations were divided on the earth after the flood.” Gen 10:32
    At Babel, God did not separate the nations according to language. He used language to separate them according to paternal (male) ancestry! This has monumental significance and is the key to understanding human genetic history.

    Do you see the implication in this simple verse? At Babel, God did not separate the nations according to language. He used language to separate them according to paternal (male) ancestry! This has monumental significance and is the key to understanding human genetic history. Paternal sorting would lead to specific Y chromosome lineages in different geographical locations. Since males and females from the three main families should have been freely intermixing prior to this, it also leads to a mixing of the mitochondrial lines. It is as if God put all the people into a giant spreadsheet and hit a button called “Sort According to Father.” He then took that list and used it to divide up and separate the nations.

    We already saw that Y chromosomes have little variation among them. We now add the fact that this little bit of variation is almost always geographically specific. That is, after the nations were separated according to Y chromosome, mutations occurred in the various lines. Since the lines were sent to specific geographical areas, the mutations are geographically specific. The current distribution of Y chromosome lines is a tremendous confirmation of the biblical model.

    Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) adds another confirmation. We have already learned that there are three main lineages of mtDNA. We now add the fact that these three lineages are more or less randomly distributed across the world. Also, the various mutations within each of the three main families of mtDNA are geographically specific as well.11 In other words, as the three mixed mitochondrial lines were carried along with the Y chromosome dispersal, each line in each area began to pick up new mutations, just like we would predict.

    After the Flood
    The last remaining significant reference in the Bible that will help us build our model of human genetic history is called The Table of Nations. It is found in Genesis chapters 9 and 10. The Table of Nations is a record of the post-Babel tribes, who they descended from, and where they went. If the Bible is an accurate source of history, one might expect to be able to find a significant amount of evidence for the Table of Nations in genetic data. The truth is not that simple, however, and it is important to keep several things in mind. First, the account was written by a person in the Middle East and from a Middle Eastern perspective. It is incomplete in that there are huge sections of the world that are not discussed (sub-Saharan Africa, Northern Europe, Most of Asia, Australia, the Americas, and Oceania). It also reflects a snapshot in time. It was written after the dispersion began, but not necessarily before the dispersion was complete. Indeed, much has changed in the intervening years. People groups have migrated, cultures have gone extinct, languages have changed, separate cultures have merged, etc. The history of man has been full of ebb and flow as people mixed or fought, resisted invasion or were conquered. The history of man since Babel is very complicated. Modern genetics can answer some of the big questions, but answers to many of the smaller details may elude us forever.

    This is an important topic for the creation model. The world does not look at the Bible in a favorable light. In fact, it disparages it, sometimes with open hostility. Attacks are often centered on the claim that the Bible is not reliable on historical grounds, and if the history of the Bible is inaccurate, what about the theology? Think about what Jesus told Nicodemus in John 3:12, “If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?” Many people today see no history in the Bible; therefore, the spiritual implications are meaningless to them. What would happen for evangelism if the history of the Bible turns out to be true after all?

  5. @ millertheanunnaki.

    ” Worldwide, more than 4,000 genetic diseases have been identified, most fortunately very rare. Almost all began with a mutation in the DNA which, because of inbreeding, was passed on rather than selected out. In Israel’s Arab population, in which consanguinity (blood relationship) is very high, every village, almost every family, carries its own disorders.

    Jews are afflicted with their own particular disorders. Ashkenazim, who until some 40 years ago largely married within the group, carry a dozen recessive genetic anomalies in a relatively high frequency….”

    Jewish Genetic Diseases
    from Hadassah Magazine, January 2001 (82:5).

  6. White women have a short shelf life .

    Bone Thinning Occurs Faster Among Whites:

    ” Black women are known to have higher bone mineral density, associated with stronger bones, than white women. New findings suggest that one reason for this may be due to the slower rate of bone loss among elderly black women.
    A team of researchers studied 6,007 Caucasian women and 482 African-American women, aged 65 to 94 years, and found that the rate of bone density loss was roughly two times slower in the black women than among their white counterparts…..”

    “The reason for black women’s higher bone mineral density is unclear, yet, such differences have been found to be evident even during the childhood years. Studies have shown that the higher bone mineral density found among African-American children, in comparison to white children, seems to persist into old age, in some cases, even among women in their 80s or older…..”
    (Source: Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, Reuters Health, February 2005.).

    ” White women may be quicker to develop wrinkles after menopause than black women, and the effects seem to have more to do with age than declining estrogen levels, a small study suggests………………”

    “The theory is that white women show wrinkles sooner because their skin is more susceptible to damage from a lifetime of sun exposure, according to senior researcher Dr. Hugh S. Taylor, of Yale University School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut……..”

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2010/11/11/white-womens-skin-wrinkles-

    sooner/#ixzz1cHAapJ00….http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itX3V4kCvQk.

  7. Race or Wealth

    If Blacks were in possession of the wealth, would they be inclined to discriminate against Whites and others, as the Whites now do against Blacks and others? Are current race relations really a reflection of the allocation of wealth rather than beliefs of inferiority and superiority? I believe it is the wealth. Unfortunately, however, Blacks seem to think that money is for spending rather than for security and power.

  8. White women have a short shelf life :

    More Wrinkles Could Mean Weaker Bones, Research Shows

    Frustrated by your facial wrinkles? Well, the news may have just gotten worse.

    Those pesky lines aren’t just a cosmetic concern, a new study suggests. They may also be a sign of lower bone density, a measure of how much calcium and other key minerals are within your bones.

    In a study that examined more than 100 early menopausal women, researchers from the Yale School of Medicine found that participants with more wrinkles on their face and neck were more likely to have lower bone density and be at higher risk of fracture.

    “The data supports the hypothesis that the physical properties of the skin can give us a sense of what’s happening with the skeleton,” said Dr. Lubna Pal, a professor in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine and the study’s lead author. “At every skeletal site we looked at, wrinkling was translated to lower bone density.”
    - by Catherine.Pearson@huffingtonpost.com,
    06/ 7/11 .

  9. millertheanunnaki

    @ natturner:
    “White women have a short shelf life:”
    You ought to demonstrate a bit of liking for equal opportunity and fair play!
    What about women of other racial groups, say Afro-American women?

  10. White people will go to any length to defy nature .

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIuokI647D8 .

  11. @ natturner
    ” white women have a short shelf life”.

    No wonder why they are addicted to botox injections and cosmetic surgery.

  12. @ millertheanunnaki.
    Photoshop healing brush can edit digital images and remove wrinkles from the faces creating a younger look.

  13. It does not take a Solomon to figure ou who are tht the unadulterated racists on this section, which is good because it proves that some black people are as racist as can be. Surely we all appreciated this all along, as all races have tons of racists closet or otherwise.

  14. @ x-man, I read yr comments and a similar thing happen to me when I moved to England some 20 years ago, when I went out in pubs and club black women just did not want to know me I got ridicule for my accent, black women would ignore me when I tried to strike up a civil conversation. Of course I am now with a white woman for the last 19 years and although trying at times, it has been bliss. Sorry to offend some of you.

  15. A lot of interesting information which by the way is not new. Scientists have long known yet dismissed facts concerning the origins of the human race, despite the fact that every known early fossil found whether it be in the rift valley of Africa or the Snowy bogs of Russia. The fact is that civilization began in Africa and that all humans and races trace their origins to early African peoples of the world. Even the bible in many places describe african people including Jesus. And after the contributions of the Monk Gregory Mendel and naturalist Charles Darwin we now know that the reasons that some humans changed into different races over time had more to do with both changing genetic diversity and natural selection as well as environment. Our early black cousins who left the home land and forged northwards before separation of the continents had to survive in environments that were dramatically different from the sunny plains of the African homeland. There was less sun if any in the cold, foggy snowy and rainy northern hemispheres so skin had to lighten to allow the sun to penetrate skin and allow its absorbtion so the body could continue to produce vitamin B. And in colder climes where it was darker for longer periods it was necessary for the eyes to adapt and change color since melanin to protect from direct bright sunlight was no longer needed. And in the northern hemispheres there were more mountains and caves so that bodys needed to change to accomodate climbing, squatting and less running over flat savannah’s that were more aboundant in Africa but rare in the North. Then finally due to the extreme cold it was more necessary for the body to retain and maintain more body fat stored on it so that paticularly in caucasians, asians and some indians bodies became more round and plumb vice more tall and lean as the earliest African ancestors had. And as these Northern groups were of smaller numbers and groups the ability for the gene pool to continue to mix and remain diverse meant that it was only a matter of time before genes lacking diversity began to degrade resulting in more common occurance of genetic related diseases. But that is not to say that the superior African Race did not suffer a trade off and have certain conditions occur more commonly such as heart disease or diabetes. It was simply nature imposing these conditions on an otherwise superior race both physically and spiritually. For a single continent Africa contains more distinct family groups (although more than 90% black) more languages or dialects, (as many as 200 in some countries)
    and a race with the stamina to endure in the harshest conditions found in Africa. So the bottom line is that the African race is in fact the salvation of the human race and that by racial mixing the far superior African genes ensure the gene pool remains strong and diverse and that humanity has a continued chance for survival by contributions African genes offer. And one only has to look at the final product of African and non African unions to see the dominant features and beauty the off-spring have. Humans have denied these things for too long and it is time for Africans to be accorded the respect due them for the sacrifices and contributions made throughout human history.

  16. I am a white woman madly in love with a black man. My dating preferance started as a sexual preference(smooth skin, contrast, hair, larger…). Instead of looking at it as we are taking black men from black women, look at it as we are slowly helping to eliminate the white race…every child born of an inertracial couple is no longer considered white, thus eventually with so much mixing there will be no more “white”. i don’t blame black women for not wanting white men…throughout history they have proved to be self-righteous and judgmental, they have bumpy skin and pink dicks… overall unattractive. Many white men who do date black women are inclined to take advantage of them… personally i get along with most black woman, the racism and hatred towards me is usually from other white people, futuring my opinion of them as a whole. Obviously not all white people have the same mindset but sadly there is alot of believers in the negative sterotypes, usually born from ignorace-which when cultivated turns to hatred. I think mixing is the cure for white people, my large white family will soon have a black baby to call cousin nefew or grandchild and they will be forced to learn and love…. or disown me.

  17. also, and im not sure what this means to anyone…but i am a redhead and i looked on google…there is not a single picture i could find of a redhead and a black man…i think thats makes us special :)

  18. It’s consistently intriguing to compare and contrast the differences and similarities of two American countries in terms of this topic. In Brazil, interracial mixing, opposite than the racial protectionism of the US, was a scheme cooked up by Brazilian elites as a goal to eliminate all vestiges of blackness from the country. Today, that plan includes the mass marketing of IR or white couples on Brazilian TV networks. Rarely does one see a black couple. Its seems to work because rarely does one see a prominent black Brazilian man with a black woman: http://wp.me/p1XDuf-405

  19. MC1R (Melanocortin 1 receptor ) gene :

    The MC1R gene provides instructions for making a protein called the melanocortin 1 receptor. This receptor plays an important role in normal pigmentation. The receptor is primarily located on the surface of melanocytes, specialized cells that produce melanin. Melanin is the substance that gives skin, hair, and eyes their color. Melanin is also found in the retina, where it plays a role in normal vision.
    Melanocytes make two forms of melanin, eumelanin and pheomelanin. The relative amounts of these two pigments help determine the color of a person’s hair and skin. People who produce mostly eumelanin tend to have brown or black hair and dark skin that tans easily. Eumelanin also protects skin from damage caused by ultraviolet (UV) radiation in sunlight. People who produce mostly pheomelanin tend to have RED or BLONDE HAIR , freckles, and PALE SKIN that tans poorly.
    MUTATION OF THE MC1R GENE PRODUCES A RED /BLONDE HAIR PALE SKIN PHENOTYPE.
    40% of people in UK carry the red hair gene .
    It has long been known that people with red hair, fair skin, freckles, and an inability to tan are at the highest risk for melanoma ( the deadliest form of skin cancer ).

    Researchers from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Boston University School of Medicine found that the same genetic mutation that gives a person red hair — a mutation on the melanocortin-1 (MC1R) gene receptor — also seems to play a role in the development of cancer.

    When a person with red hair is exposed to UV radiation, this gene mutation seems to promote a signaling pathway known to play a role in cancer development.

    The researchers found that the “normal” form of MC1R protects a cancer-suppressing protein called PTEN from being broken down when skin cells are exposed to ultraviolet light (UV) light. The team then went on to demonstrate that MC1R-RHC mutations found in red-haired individuals lacked this protective mechanism , leading to increased destruction of PTEN . Lack of PTEN promotes a signaling pathway known to play a role in cancer development.

  20. The Genesis of White Europeans:
    White Europeans originated from albinism .

    Modern White Europeans are the descendants of the “Second” Albino invasion of Europe: that of the Germanics, Slavs, and Alan’s.

    We know with certainty that they were Albinos because ancient writers described them as such, as they moved towards Europe.

    In Book 4 – MELPOMENE: Herodotus describes the Budini people, east of the Ister (Danube) River, thusly:
    [4.108] The Budini are a large and powerful nation: they have all deep blue eyes, and bright red hair. There is a city in their territory, called Gelonus………
    ( Archeologist have uncovered the Scythian capital Gelonus in the Ukraine )

    The Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus (56-118 A.D.) said this about the Germanic tribes :
    All have fierce blue eyes, red hair, huge frames, fit only for a sudden exertion.
    Germanic countries – Great Britain, Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Belgium, France, Spain, portugal, Scandinavians (Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Iceland, Faroe Islanders .

    Today’s Europeans are just slightly different from the original second-wave Albinos into Europe – but still changing. Whereas before, they ALL had Red hair and Blue Eyes: today Red hair is the Rarest hair color. Likewise, Blue Eyes are slowly being “Bred-out” by admixture with Normal people .

    “Since the turn of the century, people born with blue eyes in the United States have dramatically decreased, with only about 10 percent having blue eyes today. According to Mark Grant, an epidemiologist from Loyola University in Chicago. During the turn of the last century, the percentage of people with blue eyes stood at 57.4% for those born between 1899 through 1905; and 33.8% for those born between 1936 through 1951. According to Grant, in a study titled “Cohort effects in a genetically determined trait: eye color among US whites.” This decrease in the occurrence of blue eyes is due to many factors, with the majority pointing to the increase in brown-eyed immigrants, mainly Hispanics and Asians, as well as heightened interracial relationships: as the other determinant. Blue eyes, next to green, are the rarest eye color in the world, as people of counties in Asia and Africa possess brown eyes.”

    N.B , blue eyes, red hair ,blonde hair and pale skin are all due to mutations that cause melanin deficiency .

    THE NAZIS CREATED A PROGRAM OF SELECTIVE BREEDING FOR TRAITS LINKED TO ALBINISM / MELANIN DEFICIENCY.

    To ensure the genetic purity of his country, Hitler implemented selective human breeding through the racial pseudo-science of eugenics.

    In Nazi Germany in the 1930’s, a secret plan was hatched to create a so-called Aryan Master Race of blonde haired, blue eyed children,while millions of genetic undesirables were eliminated.
    This project was called Lebensborn – the brainchild of SS chief Heinrich Himmler.
    He said, “Should we succeed in establishing this Nordic race and from this seed bed produce a race of 200 million then the world will belong to us.”
    To swell master race numbers Himmler then went on to kidnap 200,000 Polish children with blonde hair and blue eyes for “Germanisation”.

Post a comment and join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s