|
This is far from my usual haunt (got pulled in by the teaser on the forum menu page), so if I repeat something that is commonly said on this forum, I apologize.
To the OP--I feel curiousity is great and recognize that it can, however, lead to misunderstandings that are sometimes hurtful or upsetting to others. More and more these days, we hear about the "browning" of America. I think that probably for awhile many people will be trying to mentally organize others by race and be confused when the answer is like the old Lee Middleton "play baby girl doll ethnic." At some point, we will just be who we are and not a what....
Anyway, just wanted to remind everyone that race is a CULTURAL concept and has NO basis in biology. "Biracial" and "full AA" are cultural and personal perceptions, not genetic or biological facts. The fact is, everyone on the planet is "multiracial"....
Populations that live and mix for many generations within geographical or cultural boundaries will tend to see some traits become more common. All human traits, however, have the potential for being expressed in any population. Think of it in the negative way: antennae are not a human trait and would never be expressed in any population. Blue eyes are a human trait and can be expressed, carried or introduced into any population.
In a novel I read once (I think it was an Oprah selection), a little girl on Martha's Vineyard was lost. Everyone on the island was looking for a little "AA" girl, and no one noticed the blue-eyed, blond, curly-haired youngster wandering around....
Just a few years ago, a "white" mom at our DD's gym had a "white" husband and a clearly AA child. Most people assumed the child was adopted even though it was plain as day to me that her mother's facial features were clearly stamped on her little self. She was her mom's biological child and it was nobody's business "where that hair came from."
Whether or not an individual or family identifies as "biracial" or "full AA," ESPECIALLY in the United States, which has hundreds of years of "mixing," is a matter of personal choice and family tradition and culture.
It may be that a family that identifies as "white" (most aren't actually Caucasian, unless their ancestors came from the Caucasus) may find it easier to deal with the cultural balance of both "black" and "white" and so might prefer a child whose family identifies as biracial or identifies the child as biracial due to more recent family history.
What makes a child of a "black" dad and "white" mom more "biracial" than the "black" dad whose ancestors were "mixed" 300 years ago? Perception, culture and tradition, not genetics.
Lighter, darker, browner, yellower, redder, duskier; smoother, coarser, nappier; taller, shorter; full featured, aquiline, etc.--these things are determined by the particular genetics of the individuals, not their self- or socially identified racial culture.
Good luck with your adoption journey. Just keep in mind that you are delving more into culture than biology and will probably find more helpful questions and answers there.
|