Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Mixed Kids are NOT 'Prettier' (a memo on Mixed Stereotypes))

Expand Messages
  • ashley smith
    I looked to see who wrote this article, because I didn t last time I replied, but replied to the content of, I guess, another person who knows ALL about it,
    Message 1 of 7 , Sep 13, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      I looked to see who wrote this article, because I didn't last time I replied, but replied to the content of, I guess, another person who knows ALL about it, and I can't find who wrote this. A Chinese (Han)/European (White) mix. The speech pattern reflects the speech of someone from the American South, in saying 'y'all' and such, so I don't know if the White is American Southern White or what. Or if the person was born and has always lived in China but is familiar with English, or was born in China and has moved back and forth.
      Why does this matter? Because each culture has its own idea of who and what is 'beautiful'. I don't know what the authors standard of 'beautiful' is. I know a few standards from a few cultures and some unique standards from within a culture. Are slanted eyes beautiful to you, or not? Do you think tall women are beautiful, or not? Some people really do think that all, yes all, babies are beautiful, especially when they are smiling, or sleeping. There is an expression that I go by, and it even has a song, 'Everything is beautiful in its own way', and 'beauty is more than skin deep'. Maybe the author is missing something? Yes, there are a few people in the world who are beauty challenged, but most of these people are people who have not taken care of themselves, obese, rotten teeth, dirty and disheveled, slumped over. I agree that it's not all just about Mendel's perfect peapod.
       
      Ashley

    • rosanna_armendariz
      Yes, I always find it insulting when people make comments about mixed folk being exotic, alluring, mysterious, and so on. The people making the comments
      Message 2 of 7 , Sep 19, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Yes, I always find it insulting when people make comments about mixed folk being "exotic," "alluring," "mysterious," and so on. The people making the comments usually don't see why it's offensive, but I find it objectifying.



        In Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com,
        "multiracialbookclub" <soaptalk@...> wrote:



        ARTICLE:


        Mixed Kids are not "Prettier":
        Blowing Up "Hybrid-Vigor"

        <http://choptensils.wordpress.com/2010/02/28/mixed-kids-are-not-prettier-blowing-up-hybrid-vigor/>


        -- By CVT


        Okay, I'm done.

        Just done with this s---.

        I am so sick of hearing people talk about Mixed folks
        like we're some sort of science experiment.

        "Positive" stereotyping out of ignorance and lack
        of exposure to make us just a new kind of "other."

        And I know people mean well, but . . .
        it gets 'tiring', to say the least.

        A few days ago, my cousin ("E"), his
        girlfriend ("J"), and I ("me") met up with
        a married couple that they are friends with.

        In this couple, the man is a white Australian
        man, and the woman is a Chinese woman.


        (*1) The guy's a nice one, but he's not
        killing it in the looks department.
        The woman (also quite wonderful) is
        average-looking. (*2) She's pregnant.

        So after we part ways, "J" (also Chinese)
        is excited about the baby, and she says,
        "I can't wait for their baby to be
        born – she is going to be so beautiful.
        Because she is Chinese and he is a
        foreigner, the baby must be so pretty."

        'Record-scratch'. I look at her, "What?!"
        I don't say it, but I'm thinking
        – `Has she looked at the father?
        What the H--- is wrong with people?'

        Because this isn't the first time
        I've heard this kind of thing.

        I hear it all the time –
        "Mixed kids are just so 'pretty'."

        And – although I'd love to bathe in the ego-stroking
        that entails (an interesting counterpoint to
        "Asian men 'aren't' hot") – I'm not having it.

        And before I break it down further, let me just say
        my family is now 'chock-full' of Mixed kids,
        and there's not a whole lot of "beautiful"
        running around (I'm so sorry family, but
        I just got to be honest here). (*3)

        The few kids that are actually above-average?
        Well, the ones with the above-average 'parents', of course.
        Just like with the majority of pretty "mono-racial" children.

        It doesn't end there, though. I've also heard that
        Mixed kids are "so intelligent" (mostly here in China).
        I've even been told (back in high school)
        that "all Mixed kids are just so 'nice'." (*4)

        When this topic gets brought up on a larger level
        – how beautiful and wonderful and 'healthy' Mixed kids
        are – we inevitably get a reference to "Hybrid-Vigor."

        In these cases, the person making the argument (wrongly)
        describes "Hybrid-Vigor" as the genetic superiority
        of "cross-bred" animals and plants in the world.

        "It's 'science'," they say – and people usually buy it.

        Well, sorry, people – but 'this' particular gorgeous,
        super-intelligent and wondrously kind Mixed-race
        "cross-breed" has a science background.

        And y'all – apparently, from your
        mis-use of scientific understanding – don't.

        So step into my class for a second.

        First-off, don't wrongly cite Gregor Mendel
        and his pea-experiments as any sort of
        evidence – either way – of "Hybrid-Vigor".

        Yes, his cross-breeds did better than those plants
        he did 'not' cross-breed, on an overall level.

        But . . . uh . . . you're missing a vital fact here:
        those plants that he 'didn't' cross-breed?

        He 'self-pollinated' them.

        As in, they were 'inbred'.
        Even closer relatives than brother and sister –
        because the sex cells came from the 'same plant'.

        It was practically 'cloning'.

        And even though lots of people like to say
        members of a particular "mono-racial" group
        "all look the same," you're really not all clones.

        Okay, so then our faulty scientists will say,
        "well fine, what about with dogs and
        pigs and horses and sheep, etc.?

        Cross-breeding 'them' increases fitness."

        Well, yes and no.

        First off, "Hybrid-Vigor" actually just references
        the times when cross-breeding 'happens' to
        increase fitness – 'not' a fact that it always occurs.

        There's another term, "Outbreeding Depression,"
        for when cross-breeding causes 'more' problems.

        So, again, y'all are skipping some important details.

        "But cross-breeding 'more often' increases fitness, then."

        Sure, sure.
        In dogs and pigs and other
        domestic animals, that's true.

        But again – look at the comparison –
        those animals that do 'not' get cross-bred:

        these are either "pure-bred" animals
        (like pugs, for instance) or "inbred" animals.

        We've talked about inbreeding (and no,
        I don't think mono-racial folks are all the
        products of thousands of years of inbreeding), so . . .

        "Pure-breeds"?

        Artificially, 'selectively-bred' animals?

        These are animals that have been forced to breed together
        for many many generations to enhance some specific physical
        characteristics –--- at the cost of a lot of health problems.


        These are not real-world animals.

        Outside of the domesticated world,
        "pure-breeds" simply 'do note exist'.

        Because, in the real world, "pure-breeds" would die out
        within a couple generations because of all their problems.

        All that remains in the natural world are cross-bred animals.

        So comparing races or ethnicities to
        "breeds" is just stupid, and poor science.

        Every racial and ethnic group out
        there is a result of "cross-breeding".

        Our human gene pool is all mixed up – because we
        have been (mostly) avoiding the inbreeding and
        artificial selection that creates domestic animals.

        Our DNA is more varied 'within' any particular
        "racial group" than it is 'between' them.

        Which then suggests that – if any of this "science"
        can be applied to human beings – then, perhaps,
        so-called "mono-racial" offspring would
        be 'more' likely to have the advantage of
        "Hybrid-Vigor" than "multi-racial" offspring.

        Of course, that would also be abusing the
        science, but I hope you can see my point –
        there is no such thing as "purity" in race.

        Every "race" is the result of hundreds of thousands
        of years of 'inter'-breeding, 'cross'-breeding.

        We've survived as long as we
        have 'because' we are not "pure."


        Mixed kids?

        The result of exactly the same reproductive processes
        and selection pressures as the rest of humanity.

        Flat-out.

        (*5) Some of us are super-hot or
        wondrously intelligent (or both), for sure.

        But, sorry, some of us just have to pull on
        'inner' beauty or wouldn't exactly astound others
        with our coherence of thought (or both), as well.

        B.S. "positive" stereotypes like this are just as
        damaging as negative ones (on a large scale).

        Allowing ourselves to be reduced to the
        equivalence of domesticated animals?

        H-ll no.

        Let somebody "other" you in a "positive" way, and
        you're just setting yourself up for the negative stereotypes
        and prejudice to follow suit – and trust me, it's 'going to happen'.

        And, finally, for those anecdotalists (*6) out there who want to say,
        "but, really, 'all' the Mixed people I know 'really are' beautiful,"
        .... I've got some things for you to ask yourself:

        First off – are they "beautiful" simply
        because they're "different" and "exotic?"

        That would be my first guess if they
        literally all are so gorgeous, in your eyes.

        And I don't need to go further into
        that one about why that's not okay.

        Second – honestly, how many normal,
        everyday Mixed people do you make note of?

        What does it take for you to even get to the point
        where you know for sure that we 'are' Mixed?

        Chances are, for us to be noticed on that level,
        we either have to be in the media (which is going to
        obviously over-represent the "hot" Mixed folks), or else
        we just have to stand out from the backdrop of everyday life.

        And if we're good-looking, that's one way to do so.

        I mean, how often do you think about or even 'ask' some
        "below-average" guy or gal, "wow – you have such an
        'interesting' look, what is your racial background?"

        Right.
        You don't.

        So you likely aren't even 'aware'of the
        thousands of Mixed people you walked
        right by on the street that were 'not' "beautiful."

        It's Confirmation-Bias, people – look it up.


        And that's it.
        I'm done.
        I've gotten it out there now.

        I feel confident in my breakdown of
        that particular line of "othering."
        And, even if I didn't, I tired myself out.


        Mixed folks are great – GO US – but it's simply 'not' due
        to our genetic difference from the rest of humanity.

        We are not aliens; we are not dogs
        or other domesticated animals.

        We're just another socially-defined group of people, and
        a force to be reckoned with – like the rest of our species.

        And if you 'still' don't believe me . . ?

        Well, sh–, 'please' don't make me fully throw my
        extended family under the bus and send you photos . . .


        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


        (*1) In general, if I say "Chinese" without specifying
        another country of origin, then I mean born and
        raised in China and of Han (majority) ethnicity.

        (*2) For perhaps the only time on this blog, I'm working
        off a general, shallow-as-Hell societal concept of physical
        "beauty" here, because that's the level on
        which I mean to take this stereotype down.

        If people were talking about Mixed-race folks being
        "beautiful" within a completely different framework
        for beauty, then we'd be living in a better world than we do.

        (*3) All my Chinese-American cousins except
        one – 8 of them – married white partners.

        (*4) Man, I thought of so many ways to disprove
        that last one after the fact, but – in the moment
        – I was too surprised to do much of anything.

        (*5) This is just plain-damn common-sense, and it
        just irritates the H--- out of me how people who
        have no idea what they're talking about mis-read
        scientific findings to "prove" stupid theories like this.

        (*6) I make up my own words, sometimes –
        because I'm so 'vigorous', I can do that and make it cool.

        (*7) And yes, I am wholly conscious of the fact that
        this entire post so fully falls out the way I lament we
        teach our kids to "argue" in my "Broken System, Part III."


        Sigh . . . see what prejudice can do to a guy?


        SOURCE:
        http://choptensils.wordpress.com/2010/02/28/mixed-kids-are-not-prettier-blowing-up-hybrid-vigor
      • keisha dixon
        why? ________________________________ From: rosanna_armendariz To: Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, September 19,
        Message 3 of 7 , Sep 19, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          why?


          From: rosanna_armendariz <rosanna_armendariz@...>
          To: Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Sun, September 19, 2010 2:48:50 PM
          Subject: [Generation-Mixed] Re: Mixed Kids are NOT 'Prettier' (a memo on Mixed Stereotypes))

           

          Yes, I always find it insulting when people make comments about mixed folk being "exotic," "alluring," "mysterious," and so on. The people making the comments usually don't see why it's offensive, but I find it objectifying.

          In Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com,
          "multiracialbookclub" <soaptalk@...> wrote:

          ARTICLE:

          Mixed Kids are not "Prettier":
          Blowing Up "Hybrid-Vigor"

          <http://choptensils.wordpress.com/2010/02/28/mixed-kids-are-not-prettier-blowing-up-hybrid-vigor/>

          -- By CVT

          Okay, I'm done.

          Just done with this s---.

          I am so sick of hearing people talk about Mixed folks
          like we're some sort of science experiment.

          "Positive" stereotyping out of ignorance and lack
          of exposure to make us just a new kind of "other."

          And I know people mean well, but . . .
          it gets 'tiring', to say the least.

          A few days ago, my cousin ("E"), his
          girlfriend ("J"), and I ("me") met up with
          a married couple that they are friends with.

          In this couple, the man is a white Australian
          man, and the woman is a Chinese woman.

          (*1) The guy's a nice one, but he's not
          killing it in the looks department.
          The woman (also quite wonderful) is
          average-looking. (*2) She's pregnant.

          So after we part ways, "J" (also Chinese)
          is excited about the baby, and she says,
          "I can't wait for their baby to be
          born – she is going to be so beautiful.
          Because she is Chinese and he is a
          foreigner, the baby must be so pretty."

          'Record-scratch'. I look at her, "What?!"
          I don't say it, but I'm thinking
          – `Has she looked at the father?
          What the H--- is wrong with people?'

          Because this isn't the first time
          I've heard this kind of thing.

          I hear it all the time –
          "Mixed kids are just so 'pretty'."

          And – although I'd love to bathe in the ego-stroking
          that entails (an interesting counterpoint to
          "Asian men 'aren't' hot") – I'm not having it.

          And before I break it down further, let me just say
          my family is now 'chock-full' of Mixed kids,
          and there's not a whole lot of "beautiful"
          running around (I'm so sorry family, but
          I just got to be honest here). (*3)

          The few kids that are actually above-average?
          Well, the ones with the above-average 'parents', of course.
          Just like with the majority of pretty "mono-racial" children.

          It doesn't end there, though. I've also heard that
          Mixed kids are "so intelligent" (mostly here in China).
          I've even been told (back in high school)
          that "all Mixed kids are just so 'nice'." (*4)

          When this topic gets brought up on a larger level
          – how beautiful and wonderful and 'healthy' Mixed kids
          are – we inevitably get a reference to "Hybrid-Vigor."

          In these cases, the person making the argument (wrongly)
          describes "Hybrid-Vigor" as the genetic superiority
          of "cross-bred" animals and plants in the world.

          "It's 'science'," they say – and people usually buy it.

          Well, sorry, people – but 'this' particular gorgeous,
          super-intelligent and wondrously kind Mixed-race
          "cross-breed" has a science background.

          And y'all – apparently, from your
          mis-use of scientific understanding – don't.

          So step into my class for a second.

          First-off, don't wrongly cite Gregor Mendel
          and his pea-experiments as any sort of
          evidence – either way – of "Hybrid-Vigor".

          Yes, his cross-breeds did better than those plants
          he did 'not' cross-breed, on an overall level.

          But . . . uh . . . you're missing a vital fact here:
          those plants that he 'didn't' cross-breed?

          He 'self-pollinated' them.

          As in, they were 'inbred'.
          Even closer relatives than brother and sister –
          because the sex cells came from the 'same plant'.

          It was practically 'cloning'.

          And even though lots of people like to say
          members of a particular "mono-racial" group
          "all look the same," you're really not all clones.

          Okay, so then our faulty scientists will say,
          "well fine, what about with dogs and
          pigs and horses and sheep, etc.?

          Cross-breeding 'them' increases fitness."

          Well, yes and no.

          First off, "Hybrid-Vigor" actually just references
          the times when cross-breeding 'happens' to
          increase fitness – 'not' a fact that it always occurs.

          There's another term, "Outbreeding Depression,"
          for when cross-breeding causes 'more' problems.

          So, again, y'all are skipping some important details.

          "But cross-breeding 'more often' increases fitness, then."

          Sure, sure.
          In dogs and pigs and other
          domestic animals, that's true.

          But again – look at the comparison –
          those animals that do 'not' get cross-bred:

          these are either "pure-bred" animals
          (like pugs, for instance) or "inbred" animals.

          We've talked about inbreeding (and no,
          I don't think mono-racial folks are all the
          products of thousands of years of inbreeding), so . . .

          "Pure-breeds"?

          Artificially, 'selectively-bred' animals?

          These are animals that have been forced to breed together
          for many many generations to enhance some specific physical
          characteristics –--- at the cost of a lot of health problems.

          These are not real-world animals.

          Outside of the domesticated world,
          "pure-breeds" simply 'do note exist'.

          Because, in the real world, "pure-breeds" would die out
          within a couple generations because of all their problems.

          All that remains in the natural world are cross-bred animals.

          So comparing races or ethnicities to
          "breeds" is just stupid, and poor science.

          Every racial and ethnic group out
          there is a result of "cross-breeding".

          Our human gene pool is all mixed up – because we
          have been (mostly) avoiding the inbreeding and
          artificial selection that creates domestic animals.

          Our DNA is more varied 'within' any particular
          "racial group" than it is 'between' them.

          Which then suggests that – if any of this "science"
          can be applied to human beings – then, perhaps,
          so-called "mono-racial" offspring would
          be 'more' likely to have the advantage of
          "Hybrid-Vigor" than "multi-racial" offspring.

          Of course, that would also be abusing the
          science, but I hope you can see my point –
          there is no such thing as "purity" in race.

          Every "race" is the result of hundreds of thousands
          of years of 'inter'-breeding, 'cross'-breeding.

          We've survived as long as we
          have 'because' we are not "pure."

          Mixed kids?

          The result of exactly the same reproductive processes
          and selection pressures as the rest of humanity.

          Flat-out.

          (*5) Some of us are super-hot or
          wondrously intelligent (or both), for sure.

          But, sorry, some of us just have to pull on
          'inner' beauty or wouldn't exactly astound others
          with our coherence of thought (or both), as well.

          B.S. "positive" stereotypes like this are just as
          damaging as negative ones (on a large scale).

          Allowing ourselves to be reduced to the
          equivalence of domesticated animals?

          H-ll no.

          Let somebody "other" you in a "positive" way, and
          you're just setting yourself up for the negative stereotypes
          and prejudice to follow suit – and trust me, it's 'going to happen'.

          And, finally, for those anecdotalists (*6) out there who want to say,
          "but, really, 'all' the Mixed people I know 'really are' beautiful,"
          .... I've got some things for you to ask yourself:

          First off – are they "beautiful" simply
          because they're "different" and "exotic?"

          That would be my first guess if they
          literally all are so gorgeous, in your eyes.

          And I don't need to go further into
          that one about why that's not okay.

          Second – honestly, how many normal,
          everyday Mixed people do you make note of?

          What does it take for you to even get to the point
          where you know for sure that we 'are' Mixed?

          Chances are, for us to be noticed on that level,
          we either have to be in the media (which is going to
          obviously over-represent the "hot" Mixed folks), or else
          we just have to stand out from the backdrop of everyday life.

          And if we're good-looking, that's one way to do so.

          I mean, how often do you think about or even 'ask' some
          "below-average" guy or gal, "wow – you have such an
          'interesting' look, what is your racial background?"

          Right.
          You don't.

          So you likely aren't even 'aware'of the
          thousands of Mixed people you walked
          right by on the street that were 'not' "beautiful."

          It's Confirmation-Bias, people – look it up.

          And that's it.
          I'm done.
          I've gotten it out there now.

          I feel confident in my breakdown of
          that particular line of "othering."
          And, even if I didn't, I tired myself out.

          Mixed folks are great – GO US – but it's simply 'not' due
          to our genetic difference from the rest of humanity.

          We are not aliens; we are not dogs
          or other domesticated animals.

          We're just another socially-defined group of people, and
          a force to be reckoned with – like the rest of our species.

          And if you 'still' don't believe me . . ?

          Well, sh–, 'please' don't make me fully throw my
          extended family under the bus and send you photos . . .

          ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

          (*1) In general, if I say "Chinese" without specifying
          another country of origin, then I mean born and
          raised in China and of Han (majority) ethnicity.

          (*2) For perhaps the only time on this blog, I'm working
          off a general, shallow-as-Hell societal concept of physical
          "beauty" here, because that's the level on
          which I mean to take this stereotype down.

          If people were talking about Mixed-race folks being
          "beautiful" within a completely different framework
          for beauty, then we'd be living in a better world than we do.

          (*3) All my Chinese-American cousins except
          one – 8 of them – married white partners.

          (*4) Man, I thought of so many ways to disprove
          that last one after the fact, but – in the moment
          – I was too surprised to do much of anything.

          (*5) This is just plain-damn common-sense, and it
          just irritates the H--- out of me how people who
          have no idea what they're talking about mis-read
          scientific findings to "prove" stupid theories like this.

          (*6) I make up my own words, sometimes –
          because I'm so 'vigorous', I can do that and make it cool.

          (*7) And yes, I am wholly conscious of the fact that
          this entire post so fully falls out the way I lament we
          teach our kids to "argue" in my "Broken System, Part III."

          Sigh . . . see what prejudice can do to a guy?

          SOURCE:
          http://choptensils.wordpress.com/2010/02/28/mixed-kids-are-not-prettier-blowing-up-hybrid-vigor


        • rosanna_armendariz
          In my view, because it s objectifying and makes it seem as though we are some rare breed of animal or something. And like the author of the article said,
          Message 4 of 7 , Sep 20, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            In my view, because it's objectifying and makes it seem as though we are some rare breed of animal or something. And like the author of the article said, there's no scientific basis for these generalizations. They don't even hold up based on plain old observation. We've all seen plenty of mixed folk who are not especially terrific looking, lol. It's like with any group; there's a lot of variance. I don't want to be labeled with some characteristic b/c I'm mixed.



            --- In Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com,
            keisha dixon <keishakandy@...> wrote:



            why?



            From: rosanna_armendariz <rosanna_armendariz@...>
            To: Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Sun, September 19, 2010 2:48:50 PM
            Subject: [Generation-Mixed] Re: Mixed Kids are
            NOT 'Prettier' (a memo on Mixed Stereotypes))



            Yes, I always find it insulting when people make comments about mixed folk being "exotic," "alluring," "mysterious," and so on. The people making the comments usually don't see why it's offensive, but I find it objectifying.



            In Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com,
            "multiracialbookclub" <soaptalk@...> wrote:



            ARTICLE:

            Mixed Kids are not "Prettier":
            Blowing Up "Hybrid-Vigor"

            <http://choptensils.wordpress.com/2010/02/28/mixed-kids-are-not-prettier-blowing-up-hybrid-vigor/>

            -- By CVT

            Okay, I'm done.

            Just done with this s---.

            I am so sick of hearing people talk about Mixed folks
            like we're some sort of science experiment.

            "Positive" stereotyping out of ignorance and lack
            of exposure to make us just a new kind of "other."

            And I know people mean well, but . . .
            it gets 'tiring', to say the least.

            A few days ago, my cousin ("E"), his
            girlfriend ("J"), and I ("me") met up with
            a married couple that they are friends with.

            In this couple, the man is a white Australian
            man, and the woman is a Chinese woman.

            (*1) The guy's a nice one, but he's not
            killing it in the looks department.
            The woman (also quite wonderful) is
            average-looking. (*2) She's pregnant.

            So after we part ways, "J" (also Chinese)
            is excited about the baby, and she says,
            "I can't wait for their baby to be
            born – she is going to be so beautiful.
            Because she is Chinese and he is a
            foreigner, the baby must be so pretty."

            'Record-scratch'. I look at her, "What?!"
            I don't say it, but I'm thinking
            – `Has she looked at the father?
            What the H--- is wrong with people?'

            Because this isn't the first time
            I've heard this kind of thing.

            I hear it all the time –
            "Mixed kids are just so 'pretty'."

            And – although I'd love to bathe in the ego-stroking
            that entails (an interesting counterpoint to
            "Asian men 'aren't' hot") – I'm not having it.

            And before I break it down further, let me just say
            my family is now 'chock-full' of Mixed kids,
            and there's not a whole lot of "beautiful"
            running around (I'm so sorry family, but
            I just got to be honest here). (*3)

            The few kids that are actually above-average?
            Well, the ones with the above-average 'parents', of course.
            Just like with the majority of pretty "mono-racial" children.

            It doesn't end there, though. I've also heard that
            Mixed kids are "so intelligent" (mostly here in China).
            I've even been told (back in high school)
            that "all Mixed kids are just so 'nice'." (*4)

            When this topic gets brought up on a larger level
            – how beautiful and wonderful and 'healthy' Mixed kids
            are – we inevitably get a reference to "Hybrid-Vigor."

            In these cases, the person making the argument (wrongly)
            describes "Hybrid-Vigor" as the genetic superiority
            of "cross-bred" animals and plants in the world.

            "It's 'science'," they say – and people usually buy it.

            Well, sorry, people – but 'this' particular gorgeous,
            super-intelligent and wondrously kind Mixed-race
            "cross-breed" has a science background.

            And y'all – apparently, from your
            mis-use of scientific understanding – don't.

            So step into my class for a second.

            First-off, don't wrongly cite Gregor Mendel
            and his pea-experiments as any sort of
            evidence – either way – of "Hybrid-Vigor".

            Yes, his cross-breeds did better than those plants
            he did 'not' cross-breed, on an overall level.

            But . . . uh . . . you're missing a vital fact here:
            those plants that he 'didn't' cross-breed?

            He 'self-pollinated' them.

            As in, they were 'inbred'.
            Even closer relatives than brother and sister –
            because the sex cells came from the 'same plant'.

            It was practically 'cloning'.

            And even though lots of people like to say
            members of a particular "mono-racial" group
            "all look the same," you're really not all clones.

            Okay, so then our faulty scientists will say,
            "well fine, what about with dogs and
            pigs and horses and sheep, etc.?

            Cross-breeding 'them' increases fitness."

            Well, yes and no.

            First off, "Hybrid-Vigor" actually just references
            the times when cross-breeding 'happens' to
            increase fitness – 'not' a fact that it always occurs.

            There's another term, "Outbreeding Depression,"
            for when cross-breeding causes 'more' problems.

            So, again, y'all are skipping some important details.

            "But cross-breeding 'more often' increases fitness, then."

            Sure, sure.
            In dogs and pigs and other
            domestic animals, that's true.

            But again – look at the comparison –
            those animals that do 'not' get cross-bred:

            these are either "pure-bred" animals
            (like pugs, for instance) or "inbred" animals.

            We've talked about inbreeding (and no,
            I don't think mono-racial folks are all the
            products of thousands of years of inbreeding), so . . .

            "Pure-breeds"?

            Artificially, 'selectively-bred' animals?

            These are animals that have been forced to breed together
            for many many generations to enhance some specific physical
            characteristics –--- at the cost of a lot of health problems.

            These are not real-world animals.

            Outside of the domesticated world,
            "pure-breeds" simply 'do note exist'.

            Because, in the real world, "pure-breeds" would die out
            within a couple generations because of all their problems.

            All that remains in the natural world are cross-bred animals.

            So comparing races or ethnicities to
            "breeds" is just stupid, and poor science.

            Every racial and ethnic group out
            there is a result of "cross-breeding".

            Our human gene pool is all mixed up – because we
            have been (mostly) avoiding the inbreeding and
            artificial selection that creates domestic animals.

            Our DNA is more varied 'within' any particular
            "racial group" than it is 'between' them.

            Which then suggests that – if any of this "science"
            can be applied to human beings – then, perhaps,
            so-called "mono-racial" offspring would
            be 'more' likely to have the advantage of
            "Hybrid-Vigor" than "multi-racial" offspring.

            Of course, that would also be abusing the
            science, but I hope you can see my point –
            there is no such thing as "purity" in race.

            Every "race" is the result of hundreds of thousands
            of years of 'inter'-breeding, 'cross'-breeding.

            We've survived as long as we
            have 'because' we are not "pure."

            Mixed kids?

            The result of exactly the same reproductive processes
            and selection pressures as the rest of humanity.

            Flat-out.

            (*5) Some of us are super-hot or
            wondrously intelligent (or both), for sure.

            But, sorry, some of us just have to pull on
            'inner' beauty or wouldn't exactly astound others
            with our coherence of thought (or both), as well.

            B.S. "positive" stereotypes like this are just as
            damaging as negative ones (on a large scale).

            Allowing ourselves to be reduced to the
            equivalence of domesticated animals?

            H-ll no.

            Let somebody "other" you in a "positive" way, and
            you're just setting yourself up for the negative stereotypes
            and prejudice to follow suit – and trust me, it's 'going to happen'.

            And, finally, for those anecdotalists (*6) out there who want to say,
            "but, really, 'all' the Mixed people I know 'really are' beautiful,"
            .... I've got some things for you to ask yourself:

            First off – are they "beautiful" simply
            because they're "different" and "exotic?"

            That would be my first guess if they
            literally all are so gorgeous, in your eyes.

            And I don't need to go further into
            that one about why that's not okay.

            Second – honestly, how many normal,
            everyday Mixed people do you make note of?

            What does it take for you to even get to the point
            where you know for sure that we 'are' Mixed?

            Chances are, for us to be noticed on that level,
            we either have to be in the media (which is going to
            obviously over-represent the "hot" Mixed folks), or else
            we just have to stand out from the backdrop of everyday life.

            And if we're good-looking, that's one way to do so.

            I mean, how often do you think about or even 'ask' some
            "below-average" guy or gal, "wow – you have such an
            'interesting' look, what is your racial background?"

            Right.
            You don't.

            So you likely aren't even 'aware'of the
            thousands of Mixed people you walked
            right by on the street that were 'not' "beautiful."

            It's Confirmation-Bias, people – look it up.

            And that's it.
            I'm done.
            I've gotten it out there now.

            I feel confident in my breakdown of
            that particular line of "othering."
            And, even if I didn't, I tired myself out.

            Mixed folks are great – GO US – but it's simply 'not' due
            to our genetic difference from the rest of humanity.

            We are not aliens; we are not dogs
            or other domesticated animals.

            We're just another socially-defined group of people, and
            a force to be reckoned with – like the rest of our species.

            And if you 'still' don't believe me . . ?

            Well, sh–, 'please' don't make me fully throw my
            extended family under the bus and send you photos . . .

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            (*1) In general, if I say "Chinese" without specifying
            another country of origin, then I mean born and
            raised in China and of Han (majority) ethnicity.

            (*2) For perhaps the only time on this blog, I'm working
            off a general, shallow-as-Hell societal concept of physical
            "beauty" here, because that's the level on
            which I mean to take this stereotype down.

            If people were talking about Mixed-race folks being
            "beautiful" within a completely different framework
            for beauty, then we'd be living in a better world than we do.

            (*3) All my Chinese-American cousins except
            one – 8 of them – married white partners.

            (*4) Man, I thought of so many ways to disprove
            that last one after the fact, but – in the moment
            – I was too surprised to do much of anything.

            (*5) This is just plain-damn common-sense, and it
            just irritates the H--- out of me how people who
            have no idea what they're talking about mis-read
            scientific findings to "prove" stupid theories like this.

            (*6) I make up my own words, sometimes –
            because I'm so 'vigorous', I can do that and make it cool.

            (*7) And yes, I am wholly conscious of the fact that
            this entire post so fully falls out the way I lament we
            teach our kids to "argue" in my "Broken System, Part III."

            Sigh . . . see what prejudice can do to a guy?

            SOURCE:
            http://choptensils.wordpress.com/2010/02/28/mixed-kids-are-not-prettier-blowing-up-hybrid-vigor
          • multiracialbookclub
            Well said -- Rosanna !!!! And I agree with you 100% on this !!!! For me it s another of those so-called positive stereotypes (like all Asian people are good
            Message 5 of 7 , Sep 20, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Well said -- Rosanna !!!!

              And I agree with you 100% on this !!!!

              For me it's another of those so-called 
              "positive stereotypes" (like all Asian
              people are 'good at math' or Black
              people have 'natural rhythm'; etc.).

              The target of the comment walks away 
              feeling insulted and 'typed' while the 
              person who offered it just happily
              walks away with no more knowledge
              of the actual person than before.

              No group wants to be stereotyped --
              especially not with some ingratiating
              pandering nonsensical phrases like:
              "you guys are the prettiest"
              "mixed people are the cutest"
              -- as if we were a bunch of 15 year
              old high school kids who need our
              fragile egos built up after being
              rejected for the cheerleader squad.

              And let's not forget that "positive" stereotypes
              have a way of both limiting knowledge of the
              true person AND of coming back to haunt the
              person when being thrown at them as an insult.

              It's like you said, Rosanna, we are
              NOT some 'rare breed of animal'.  

              We are also not some rare 
              anomaly of the human race.

              The members of most monoracial groups
              would never tolerate being condescended
              to in such a manner nor allow themselves
              to be 'set up' to come across as if they are
              "fishing for compliments" at every turn
              -- nor would they be expected to do so.

              Being 'objectified' is an insult
              - and is not a compliment!!



              --- In Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com,
              "rosanna_armendariz" <rosanna_armendariz@...> wrote:



              In my view, because it's objectifying and makes it seem as though we are some
              rare breed of animal or something. And like the author of the article said,
              there's no scientific basis for these generalizations. They don't even hold up
              based on plain old observation. We've all seen plenty of mixed folk who are not
              especially terrific looking, lol. It's like with any group; there's a lot of
              variance. I don't want to be labeled with some characteristic b/c I'm mixed.



              --- In Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com,
              keisha dixon <keishakandy@...> wrote:



              why?



              From: rosanna_armendariz <rosanna_armendariz@...>
              To: 
              Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Sun, September 19, 2010 2:48:50 PM
              Subject: [Generation-Mixed] Re: Mixed Kids are
              NOT 'Prettier' (a memo on Mixed Stereotypes))



              Yes, I always find it insulting when people make comments about mixed folk being
              "exotic," "alluring," "mysterious," and so on. The people making the comments
              usually don't see why it's offensive, but I find it objectifying.



              In Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com,
              "multiracialbookclub" <soaptalk@...> wrote:



              ARTICLE:

              Mixed Kids are not "Prettier"
              :
              Blowing Up "Hybrid-Vigor"

              -- By 
               CVT 


              Okay, I'm done. 

              Just done with this s---. 

              I am so sick of hearing people talk about Mixed folks 
              like we're some sort of science experiment. 

              "Positive" stereotyping out of ignorance and lack 
              of exposure to make us just a new kind of "other." 

              And I know people mean well, but . . . it gets '
              tiring', to say the least.

              A few days ago, my cousin ("E"), his girlfriend ("J"), and I ("me") 
              met up with a married couple that they are friends with. 

              In this couple, the man is a white Australian 
              man, and the woman is a Chinese woman. 


              (*1) The guy's a nice one, but he's not killing it in the looks department. 
              The woman (also quite wonderful) is average-looking. (*2) She's pregnant.

              So after we part ways, "J" (also Chinese) is excited about the baby, and she 
              says, "I can't wait for their baby to be born – she is going to be so beautiful. 
              Because she is Chinese and he is a foreigner, the baby must be so pretty."

              'Record-scratch'. I look at her, "What?!" 
              I don't say it, but I'm thinking – `Has she looked at the father? 
              What the H--- is wrong with people?'

              Because this isn't the first time I've heard this kind of thing. 

              I hear it all the time – "Mixed kids are just so 'pretty'." 

              And – although I'd love to bathe in the ego-stroking 
              that entails 
              (an interesting counterpoint to 
              "Asian men '
              aren't' hot") – I'm not having it.

              And before I break it down further, let me just say my family is now
              'chock-full' of Mixed kids, and there's not a whole lot of "beautiful" 
              running around (I'm so sorry family, but I just got to be honest here). 
              (*3) 

              The few kids that are actually above-average? 
              Well, the ones with the above-average '
              parents', of course. 
              Just like with the majority of pretty "mono-racial" children.

              It doesn't end there, though. I've also heard that 
              Mixed kids are "so intelligent" (mostly here in China). 
              I've even been told (back in high school) 
              that "all Mixed kids are just so '
              nice'." (*4) 

              When this topic gets brought up on a larger level 
              – how beautiful and wonderful and '
              healthy' Mixed kids 
              are – we inevitably get a reference to "Hybrid-Vigor." 

              In these cases, the person making the argument (wrongly) 
              describes "Hybrid-Vigor" as the genetic superiority 
              of "cross-bred" animals and plants in the world. 

              "It's '
              science'," they say – and people usually buy it.

              Well, sorry, people – but 'this' particular gorgeous, 
              super-intelligent and wondrously kind Mixed-race 
              "cross-breed" has a science background. 

              And y'all – apparently, from your 
              mis-use of scientific understanding – don't.

              So step into my class for a second.

              First-off, don't wrongly cite Gregor Mendel 
              and his pea-experiments as any sort of 
              evidence – either way – of "Hybrid-Vigor". 

              Yes, his cross-breeds did better than those plants 
              he did 'not'
               cross-breed, on an overall level.

              But . . . uh . . . you're missing a vital fact here: 
              those plants that he 'didn't'
               cross-breed? 

              He '
              self-pollinated' them. 

              As in, they were 'inbred'
              Even closer relatives than brother and sister – 
              because the sex cells came from the '
              same plant'

              It was practically 'cloning'. 

              And even though lots of people like to say 
              members of a particular "mono-racial" group 
              "all look the same," you're really not all clones.

              zgs4f2

              Okay, so then our faulty scientists will say, 
              "well fine, what about with dogs and 
              pigs and horses and sheep, etc.? 

              Cross-breeding 'them'
               increases fitness."

              Well, yes and no. 

              First off, "Hybrid-Vigor" actually just references 
              the times when cross-breeding 'happens'
               to 
              increase fitness – 'not'
               a fact that it always occurs. 

              There's another term, "Outbreeding Depression,"
              for when cross-breeding causes 'more'
               problems. 

              So, again, y'all are skipping some important details.

              "But cross-breeding 'more often' increases fitness, then." 

              Sure, sure. 
              In dogs and pigs and other 
              domestic animals, that's true. 

              But again – look at the comparison – 
              those animals that do 'not'
               get cross-bred: 

              these are either "pure-bred" animals 
              (like pugs, for instance) or "inbred" animals. 

              We've talked about inbreeding (and no, 
              I don't think mono-racial folks are all the 
              products of thousands of years of inbreeding), so . . .

              "Pure-breeds"? 

              Artificially, '
              selectively-bred' animals? 

              These are animals that have been forced to breed together 
              for many many generations to enhance some specific physical 
              characteristics –--- at the cost of a lot of health problems. 


              These are not real-world animals. 

              Outside of the domesticated world, 
              "pure-breeds" simply 'do note exist'


              Because, in the real world, "pure-breeds" would die out 
              within a couple generations because of all their problems. 

              All that remains in the natural world are cross-bred animals.

              So comparing races or ethnicities to 
              "breeds" is just stupid, and poor science. 

              Every racial and ethnic group out 
              there is a result of "cross-breeding".

              Our human gene pool is all mixed up – because we 
              have been (mostly) avoiding the inbreeding and 
              artificial selection that creates domestic animals. 

              Our DNA is more varied '
              within' any particular 
              "racial group" than it is '
              between' them. 

              Which then suggests that – if any of this "science" 
              can be applied to human beings – then, perhaps, 
              so-called "mono-racial" offspring would 
              be 'more'
               likely to have the advantage of 
              "Hybrid-Vigor" than "multi-racial"
               offspring.

              Of course, that would also be abusing the 
              science, but I hope you can see my point – 
              there is no such thing as "purity" in race. 

              Every "race" is the result of hundreds of thousands 
              of years of '
              inter'-breeding, 'cross'-breeding. 

              We've survived as long as we 
              have '
              because' we are not "pure."

              Mixed kids? 

              The result of exactly the same reproductive processes 
              and selection pressures as the rest of humanity. 

              Flat-out. 


              (*5) Some of us are super-hot or 
              wondrously intelligent (or both), for sure. 

              But, sorry, some of us just have to pull on 
              'inner' beauty or wouldn't exactly astound others 
              with our coherence of thought (or both), as well.

              B.S. "positive" stereotypes like this are just as 
              damaging as negative ones (on a large scale
              ). 

              Allowing ourselves to be reduced to the 
              equivalence of domesticated animals? 

              H-ll no. 

              Let somebody "other" you in a "positive" way, and 
              you're just setting yourself up for the negative stereotypes 
              and prejudice to follow suit – and trust me, it's 'going to happen'.

              And, finally, for those anecdotalists (*6) out there who want to say, 
              "but, 
              really, 'all' the Mixed people I know 'really are' beautiful," 
              .... I've got some things for you to ask yourself:

              First off – are they "beautiful" simply 
              because they're "different" and "exotic?" 

              That would be my first guess if they 
              literally all are so gorgeous, in your eyes. 

              And I don't need to go further into 
              that one about why that's not okay.

              Second – honestly, how many normal, 
              everyday Mixed people do you make note of? 

              What does it take for you to even get to the point 
              where you know for sure that we 'are'
               Mixed? 

              Chances are, for us to be noticed on that level, 
              we either have to be in the media (which is going to 
              obviously over-represent the "hot" Mixed folks), or else 
              we just have to stand out from the backdrop of everyday life. 

              And if we're good-looking, that's one way to do so.

              I mean, how often do you think about or even 'ask' some 
              "below-average" guy or gal, "wow – you have such an 
              'interesting' look, what is your racial background?" 

              Right. 
              You don't. 

              So you likely aren't even 'aware'
              of the 
              thousands of Mixed people you walked 
              right by on the street that were 'not'
               "beautiful."

              It's Confirmation-Bias, people – look it up.

              And that's it. 
              I'm done. 
              I've gotten it out there now. 

              I feel confident in my breakdown of that particular line of "othering." 
              And, even if I didn't, I tired myself out.


              Mixed folks are great – GO US – but it's simply '
              not' due 
              to our genetic difference from the rest of humanity. 

              We are not aliens; we are not dogs 
              or other domesticated animals. 

              We're just another socially-defined group of 
              people, and 
              a force to be reckoned with – like the rest of our species.

              And if you 'still' don't believe me . . ? 

              Well, sh–, '
              please' don't make me fully throw my 
              extended family under the bus and send you photos . . .


              ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


              (*1) In general, if I say "Chinese" without specifying 
              another country of origin, then I mean born and 
              raised in China and of Han (majority) ethnicity.

              (*2) For perhaps the only time on this blog, I'm working 
              off a general, shallow-as-Hell societal concept of physical 
              "beauty" here, because that's the level on 
              which I mean to take this stereotype down. 

              If people were talking about Mixed-race folks being 
              "beautiful" within a completely different framework 
              for beauty, then we'd be living in a better world than we do.

              (*3) All my Chinese-American cousins except 
              one – 8 of them – married white partners.

              (*4) Man, I thought of so many ways to disprove 
              that last one after the fact, but – in the moment 
              – I was too surprised to do much of anything.

              (*5) This is just plain-damn common-sense, and it 
              just irritates the H--- out of me how people who 
              have no idea what they're talking about mis-read 
              scientific findings to "prove" stupid theories like this.

              (*6) I make up my own words, sometimes – 
              because I'm so '
              vigorous', I can do that and make it cool.

              (*7) And yes, I am wholly conscious of the fact that 
              this entire post so fully falls out the way I lament we 
              teach our kids to "argue" in my "Broken System, Part III." 


              Sigh . . . see what prejudice can do to a guy?


              SOURCE:  

              http://choptensils.wordpress.com/2010/02/28/mixed-kids-are-not-prettier-blowing-up-hybrid-vigor  

            • keisha dixon
              i just think it s the first thing that comes to peoples minds when they see mixed people we re so rare, they think of us as exotic.in my opinion it beats being
              Message 6 of 7 , Sep 20, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                i just think it's the first thing that comes to peoples minds when they see mixed people we're so rare, they think of us as exotic.in my opinion it beats being told you're pretty for a dark-skin girl.


                From: multiracialbookclub <soaptalk@...>
                To: Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Mon, September 20, 2010 11:19:32 PM
                Subject: [Generation-Mixed] Re: Mixed Kids are NOT 'Prettier' (a memo on Mixed Stereotypes))

                 

                Well said -- Rosanna !!!!

                And I agree with you 100% on this !!!!

                For me it's another of those so-called 
                "positive stereotypes" (like all Asian
                people are 'good at math' or Black
                people have 'natural rhythm'; etc.).

                The target of the comment walks away 
                feeling insulted and 'typed' while the 
                person who offered it just happily
                walks away with no more knowledge
                of the actual person than before.

                No group wants to be stereotyped --
                especially not with some ingratiating
                pandering nonsensical phrases like:
                "you guys are the prettiest"
                "mixed people are the cutest"
                -- as if we were a bunch of 15 year
                old high school kids who need our
                fragile egos built up after being
                rejected for the cheerleader squad.

                And let's not forget that "positive" stereotypes
                have a way of both limiting knowledge of the
                true person AND of coming back to haunt the
                person when being thrown at them as an insult.

                It's like you said, Rosanna, we are
                NOT some 'rare breed of animal'.  

                We are also not some rare 
                anomaly of the human race.

                The members of most monoracial groups
                would never tolerate being condescended
                to in such a manner nor allow themselves
                to be 'set up' to come across as if they are
                "fishing for compliments" at every turn
                -- nor would they be expected to do so.

                Being 'objectified' is an insult
                - and is not a compliment!!



                --- In Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com,
                "rosanna_armendariz" <rosanna_armendariz@...> wrote:



                In my view, because it's objectifying and makes it seem as though we are some
                rare breed of animal or something. And like the author of the article said,
                there's no scientific basis for these generalizations. They don't even hold up
                based on plain old observation. We've all seen plenty of mixed folk who are not
                especially terrific looking, lol. It's like with any group; there's a lot of
                variance. I don't want to be labeled with some characteristic b/c I'm mixed.



                --- In Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com,
                keisha dixon <keishakandy@...> wrote:



                why?



                From: rosanna_armendariz <rosanna_armendariz@...>
                To: 
                Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Sun, September 19, 2010 2:48:50 PM
                Subject: [Generation-Mixed] Re: Mixed Kids are
                NOT 'Prettier' (a memo on Mixed Stereotypes))



                Yes, I always find it insulting when people make comments about mixed folk being
                "exotic," "alluring," "mysterious," and so on. The people making the comments
                usually don't see why it's offensive, but I find it objectifying.



                In Generation-Mixed@yahoogroups.com,
                "multiracialbookclub" <soaptalk@...> wrote:



                ARTICLE:

                Mixed Kids are not "Prettier"
                :
                Blowing Up "Hybrid-Vigor"

                -- By 
                 CVT 


                Okay, I'm done. 

                Just done with this s---. 

                I am so sick of hearing people talk about Mixed folks 
                like we're some sort of science experiment. 

                "Positive" stereotyping out of ignorance and lack 
                of exposure to make us just a new kind of "other." 

                And I know people mean well, but . . . it gets '
                tiring', to say the least.

                A few days ago, my cousin ("E"), his girlfriend ("J"), and I ("me") 
                met up with a married couple that they are friends with. 

                In this couple, the man is a white Australian 
                man, and the woman is a Chinese woman. 


                (*1) The guy's a nice one, but he's not killing it in the looks department. 
                The woman (also quite wonderful) is average-looking. (*2) She's pregnant.

                So after we part ways, "J" (also Chinese) is excited about the baby, and she 
                says, "I can't wait for their baby to be born – she is going to be so beautiful. 
                Because she is Chinese and he is a foreigner, the baby must be so pretty."

                'Record-scratch'. I look at her, "What?!" 
                I don't say it, but I'm thinking – `Has she looked at the father? 
                What the H--- is wrong with people?'

                Because this isn't the first time I've heard this kind of thing. 

                I hear it all the time – "Mixed kids are just so 'pretty'." 

                And – although I'd love to bathe in the ego-stroking 
                that entails 
                (an interesting counterpoint to 
                "Asian men '
                aren't' hot") – I'm not having it.

                And before I break it down further, let me just say my family is now
                'chock-full' of Mixed kids, and there's not a whole lot of "beautiful" 
                running around (I'm so sorry family, but I just got to be honest here). 
                (*3) 

                The few kids that are actually above-average? 
                Well, the ones with the above-average '
                parents', of course. 
                Just like with the majority of pretty "mono-racial" children.

                It doesn't end there, though. I've also heard that 
                Mixed kids are "so intelligent" (mostly here in China). 
                I've even been told (back in high school) 
                that "all Mixed kids are just so '
                nice'." (*4) 

                When this topic gets brought up on a larger level 
                – how beautiful and wonderful and '
                healthy' Mixed kids 
                are – we inevitably get a reference to "Hybrid-Vigor." 

                In these cases, the person making the argument (wrongly) 
                describes "Hybrid-Vigor" as the genetic superiority 
                of "cross-bred" animals and plants in the world. 

                "It's '
                science'," they say – and people usually buy it.

                Well, sorry, people – but 'this' particular gorgeous, 
                super-intelligent and wondrously kind Mixed-race 
                "cross-breed" has a science background. 

                And y'all – apparently, from your 
                mis-use of scientific understanding – don't.

                So step into my class for a second.

                First-off, don't wrongly cite Gregor Mendel 
                and his pea-experiments as any sort of 
                evidence – either way – of "Hybrid-Vigor". 

                Yes, his cross-breeds did better than those plants 
                he did 'not'
                 cross-breed, on an overall level.

                But . . . uh . . . you're missing a vital fact here: 
                those plants that he 'didn't'
                 cross-breed? 

                He '
                self-pollinated' them. 

                As in, they were 'inbred'
                Even closer relatives than brother and sister – 
                because the sex cells came from the '
                same plant'

                It was practically 'cloning'. 

                And even though lots of people like to say 
                members of a particular "mono-racial" group 
                "all look the same," you're really not all clones.

                zgs4f2

                Okay, so then our faulty scientists will say, 
                "well fine, what about with dogs and 
                pigs and horses and sheep, etc.? 

                Cross-breeding 'them'
                 increases fitness."

                Well, yes and no. 

                First off, "Hybrid-Vigor" actually just references 
                the times when cross-breeding 'happens'
                 to 
                increase fitness – 'not'
                 a fact that it always occurs. 

                There's another term, "Outbreeding Depression,"
                for when cross-breeding causes 'more'
                 problems. 

                So, again, y'all are skipping some important details.

                "But cross-breeding 'more often' increases fitness, then." 

                Sure, sure. 
                In dogs and pigs and other 
                domestic animals, that's true. 

                But again – look at the comparison – 
                those animals that do 'not'
                 get cross-bred: 

                these are either "pure-bred" animals 
                (like pugs, for instance) or "inbred" animals. 

                We've talked about inbreeding (and no, 
                I don't think mono-racial folks are all the 
                products of thousands of years of inbreeding), so . . .

                "Pure-breeds"? 

                Artificially, '
                selectively-bred' animals? 

                These are animals that have been forced to breed together 
                for many many generations to enhance some specific physical 
                characteristics –--- at the cost of a lot of health problems. 


                These are not real-world animals. 

                Outside of the domesticated world, 
                "pure-breeds" simply 'do note exist'


                Because, in the real world, "pure-breeds" would die out 
                within a couple generations because of all their problems. 

                All that remains in the natural world are cross-bred animals.

                So comparing races or ethnicities to 
                "breeds" is just stupid, and poor science. 

                Every racial and ethnic group out 
                there is a result of "cross-breeding".

                Our human gene pool is all mixed up – because we 
                have been (mostly) avoiding the inbreeding and 
                artificial selection that creates domestic animals. 

                Our DNA is more varied '
                within' any particular 
                "racial group" than it is '
                between' them. 

                Which then suggests that – if any of this "science" 
                can be applied to human beings – then, perhaps, 
                so-called "mono-racial" offspring would 
                be 'more'
                 likely to have the advantage of 
                "Hybrid-Vigor" than "multi-racial"
                 offspring.

                Of course, that would also be abusing the 
                science, but I hope you can see my point – 
                there is no such thing as "purity" in race. 

                Every "race" is the result of hundreds of thousands 
                of years of '
                inter'-breeding, 'cross'-breeding. 

                We've survived as long as we 
                have '
                because' we are not "pure."

                Mixed kids? 

                The result of exactly the same reproductive processes 
                and selection pressures as the rest of humanity. 

                Flat-out. 


                (*5) Some of us are super-hot or 
                wondrously intelligent (or both), for sure. 

                But, sorry, some of us just have to pull on 
                'inner' beauty or wouldn't exactly astound others 
                with our coherence of thought (or both), as well.

                B.S. "positive" stereotypes like this are just as 
                damaging as negative ones (on a large scale
                ). 

                Allowing ourselves to be reduced to the 
                equivalence of domesticated animals? 

                H-ll no. 

                Let somebody "other" you in a "positive" way, and 
                you're just setting yourself up for the negative stereotypes 
                and prejudice to follow suit – and trust me, it's 'going to happen'.

                And, finally, for those anecdotalists (*6) out there who want to say, 
                "but, 
                really, 'all' the Mixed people I know 'really are' beautiful," 
                .... I've got some things for you to ask yourself:

                First off – are they "beautiful" simply 
                because they're "different" and "exotic?" 

                That would be my first guess if they 
                literally all are so gorgeous, in your eyes. 

                And I don't need to go further into 
                that one about why that's not okay.

                Second – honestly, how many normal, 
                everyday Mixed people do you make note of? 

                What does it take for you to even get to the point 
                where you know for sure that we 'are'
                 Mixed? 

                Chances are, for us to be noticed on that level, 
                we either have to be in the media (which is going to 
                obviously over-represent the "hot" Mixed folks), or else 
                we just have to stand out from the backdrop of everyday life. 

                And if we're good-looking, that's one way to do so.

                I mean, how often do you think about or even 'ask' some 
                "below-average" guy or gal, "wow – you have such an 
                'interesting' look, what is your racial background?" 

                Right. 
                You don't. 

                So you likely aren't even 'aware'
                of the 
                thousands of Mixed people you walked 
                right by on the street that were 'not'
                 "beautiful."

                It's Confirmation-Bias, people – look it up.

                And that's it. 
                I'm done. 
                I've gotten it out there now. 

                I feel confident in my breakdown of that particular line of "othering." 
                And, even if I didn't, I tired myself out.


                Mixed folks are great – GO US – but it's simply '
                not' due 
                to our genetic difference from the rest of humanity. 

                We are not aliens; we are not dogs 
                or other domesticated animals. 

                We're just another socially-defined group of 
                people, and 
                a force to be reckoned with – like the rest of our species.

                And if you 'still' don't believe me . . ? 

                Well, sh–, '
                please' don't make me fully throw my 
                extended family under the bus and send you photos . . .


                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


                (*1) In general, if I say "Chinese" without specifying 
                another country of origin, then I mean born and 
                raised in China and of Han (majority) ethnicity.

                (*2) For perhaps the only time on this blog, I'm working 
                off a general, shallow-as-Hell societal concept of physical 
                "beauty" here, because that's the level on 
                which I mean to take this stereotype down. 

                If people were talking about Mixed-race folks being 
                "beautiful" within a completely different framework 
                for beauty, then we'd be living in a better world than we do.

                (*3) All my Chinese-American cousins except 
                one – 8 of them – married white partners.

                (*4) Man, I thought of so many ways to disprove 
                that last one after the fact, but – in the moment 
                – I was too surprised to do much of anything.

                (*5) This is just plain-damn common-sense, and it 
                just irritates the H--- out of me how people who 
                have no idea what they're talking about mis-read 
                scientific findings to "prove" stupid theories like this.

                (*6) I make up my own words, sometimes – 
                because I'm so '
                vigorous', I can do that and make it cool.

                (*7) And yes, I am wholly conscious of the fact that 
                this entire post so fully falls out the way I lament we 
                teach our kids to "argue" in my "Broken System, Part III." 


                Sigh . . . see what prejudice can do to a guy?


                SOURCE:  

                http://choptensils.wordpress.com/2010/02/28/mixed-kids-are-not-prettier-blowing-up-hybrid-vigor  


              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.