Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hug someone you love today. Today is a Great Day!

Today is the 50th anniversary of Loving Day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

oving Day


Loving Day is an annual celebration held on June 12, the anniversary of the 1967 United States Supreme Court decision Loving v. Virginia which struck down all anti-miscegenation laws remaining in sixteen U.S. states."[1][2][3] In the United States, anti-miscegenation laws were U.S. state laws banning interracial marriage, mainly forbidding marriage between non-whites and whites.

Yup, some things *do* get better... it's a journey ya'll.

Loving v. VA, a celebratory cause if there ever was one! I got my own "Loving" day tomorrow...25y Wedding Anniversary. She still hasn't offed me in my sleep, God knows why.

 BigWaaagh wrote:
Loving v. VA, a celebratory cause if there ever was one! I got my own "Loving" day tomorrow...25y Wedding Anniversary. She still hasn't offed me in my sleep, God knows why.

Your life insurance is in that "sweet spot", where they will be ok if you die, but not enough to provoke thoughts...


In all seriousness, this is awesome, and I didn't know that much about it. It's good to learn that we can indeed learn.

With time, the older bigoted generations is dying out. And the number of people that inherited that same bigoted mindset in the younger generations are getting smaller as well.

It's important to celebrate this legal milestone. But it's also important to remember that the 'values' that inspired these laws to begin still exist in many places.

The looks in public have gotten less over the past 20 years, but we still get them. People who don't know I am in an interracial marriage have talked about how God created the races to be separate and that having mixed children should count as child abuse. People who do know that I am in an interracial marriage have called me a race trader and a n***** lover, and my kids mutts and mulattos.

I know that I shouldn't feel that way, but there are days when I am glad that my mixed children look "passable". Somebody shouldn't feel like that, not in 2017, not in "post racial" America. And maybe, by the time they are grown, I won't feel a need to think like that.

I do celebrate how far we've come. But I am also reminded how far we still need to go.

God created the races to be separate

Dog shall suffer the Cat to live!

I never understood the argument, maybe because the argument is so stupid. You are correct. Kids seem much more adapted than my generation.

Of course your kids are mutts. You're an American! Us Heinz 57s have better immune systems, and we have a genetic heritage that proves our ancestors know how to party.*


*Even the rad filled muties in New Mexico now how to party...and glow in the dark!

Is "mulattos" a racial slur in english?

Here we used it to refer to people of mixed ascendency, normally from natives of southamerica and spain, with no negative connotations. Like "criollo"

In a modern context I don't think so.

The term "mutt" is often bandied about as a term of endearment... than anything else.

d-usa would have a better anecdote... but I've heard "mixed" race carries a more negative connotation than "mutt". But, then again... it could simply be because that word isn't really used in common vernacular.

 Galas wrote:
Is "mulattos" a racial slur in english?

It's circumstantial. The expression on the face of the person saying it usually determines if it's a slur or not.

I've not heard that term applied in..some time...and by that I mean decades (I've heard the term in Louisiana as more of a creole word) . There may be groups that still use that term however, but I don' cotton those folk. Those groups have fewer teeth on average but I digress.

It is a controversial term and often used disparagingly in the US. Much like the n-words, foreign use of the term does not line up with US history. Generally, anyone trying to track racial purity using terms like "mulatto" is denigrating the non-white ancestry.

The faster that stupidity dies out, the better. Unfortunately, it seems to be infectious and will likely linger on forever. It will always be crucially important to reject such divisions of humanity to unite for common causes. Love, decency, compassion- these know neither color nor race.

Lol, purity.

US, Europe, we are all Mutts as such, ancestry between movements of peoples, wars, general inter relation, and such mean there is barely any pure national lines ever left genetically.

Most people likely if knew going down the line come from 4-5 nations at least with all the above id bet. Mine is 6 different nations at least.

The only "pure" groups as such are ones that had less contact and isolation by geography like aboriginals, Native American population, but even they interbred with other groups in regions, inter marry as incest or close relations makes weaker offspring.

And even now, with meeting others that they themselves are partly interbred into white or settler populations.

Irony being there looked down upon..

We all humans come form Africa so yes, people claiming "white purity" are deluding themselves

Recent studies have shown this to be not so correct.

"Modern" humanity is the result of several groups interbreeding from different regions. There wasn't one great big source point.

I thought those several regions were likely different parts of Africa, though? As opposed to just eastern Africa, which was the going theory before.

Unless you believe that humans somehow evolved from separate isolated lines in multiple locations, yes there is a common point. And that origin is, by all evidence, Africa. Now, that doesn't mean that all humans came out at the same time- there appears to have been multiple waves of migration. Additionally, they didn't all go to the same places at the same time and some became isolated. The big debate is relative influence of regional development versus migration influence.

"As it is usually presented, there are two major competing models on this subject—recent African origin and multiregional evolution. The debate concerns both the relative amount of replacement or interbreeding that occurred in areas outside of Africa, when waves of humans (or human ancestors) left it to colonize other areas, and the relative importance of more recent waves as opposed to more ancient ones."

Even the multiregion school acknowledges the common ancestors came out of Africa. DNA evidence supports the migrational model, and it is the most widely accepted. Indeed, more recent evidence indicates that there may have been some level of interbreeding with regional, non modern homo sapiens species. It is almost certain that modern homo sapiens co-existed with other archaic hominids at some point, but the degree of intermixing (if any) is disputed.

Do not confuse multiregionalism with polygenism. Parallel evolution was never part of the multiregional model and is not supported by mainstream science. It is generally trotted out by racists based on 19th century pseudo science and backed up by misinterpretations of multiregional theory.

Parallel evolution is an alternate fact.