Dancing On Our Own: Why White America Ditched Couple Dancing

TikiTaka said:
I agree with this . The monglres concept is unfamiliar to me so I can't comment on that.
Click to expand...

All it means is that we all have mixed genetics. We all have genes from various ancestries, and the only difference is that some have a lower vs. higher % of genes from a certain region/population, and there's no way to categorize "races" based on genetics. In the words of the scientists in the article I posted above:

"racial categories are weak proxies for genetic diversity and need to be phased out "
"What the study of complete genomes from different parts of the world has shown is that even between Africa and Europe, for example, there is not a single absolute genetic difference, meaning no single variant where all Africans have one variant and all Europeans another one, even when recent migration is disregarded. It is all a question of differences in how frequent different variants are on different continents and in different regions."

"In one example that demonstrated genetic differences were not fixed along racial lines, the full genomes of James Watson and Craig Venter, two famous American scientists of European ancestry, were compared to that of a Korean scientist, Seong-Jin Kim. It turned out that Watson (who, ironically, became ostracized in the scientific community after making racist remarks) and Venter shared fewer variations in their genetic sequences than they each shared with Kim."
 
Sabrosura said:
All it means is that we all have mixed genetics. We all have genes from various ancestries, and the only difference is that some have a lower vs. higher % of genes from a certain region/population, and there's no way to categorize "races" based on genetics. In the words of the scientists in the article I posted above:

"racial categories are weak proxies for genetic diversity and need to be phased out "
"What the study of complete genomes from different parts of the world has shown is that even between Africa and Europe, for example, there is not a single absolute genetic difference, meaning no single variant where all Africans have one variant and all Europeans another one, even when recent migration is disregarded. It is all a question of differences in how frequent different variants are on different continents and in different regions."

"In one example that demonstrated genetic differences were not fixed along racial lines, the full genomes of James Watson and Craig Venter, two famous American scientists of European ancestry, were compared to that of a Korean scientist, Seong-Jin Kim. It turned out that Watson (who, ironically, became ostracized in the scientific community after making racist remarks) and Venter shared fewer variations in their genetic sequences than they each shared with Kim."
Click to expand...
Ok then it's pretty much in line with my own perceptions of the concept of "race". Personally my genes are probably >50% European, but since I am mixed, my socially assigned race is probably close to 0 % "white".
 
TikiTaka said:
Ok then it's pretty much in line with my own perceptions of the concept of "race". Personally my genes are probably >50% European, but since I am mixed, my socially assigned race is probably close to 0 % "white".
Click to expand...

I know someone who is from Latin America and has close to 50% African ancestry genes (meaning, from recent ancestry) according to his 23andme, and the rest European, but he looks and would be considered white almost anywhere. And there are many white latinos like this, as was mentioned above; the irony is when some of them try to deny their African ancestry and discriminate against their countrymen who have darker skin.
 
Sabrosura said:
I know someone who is from Latin America and has close to 50% African ancestry genes (meaning, from recent ancestry) according to his 23andme, and the rest European, but he looks and would be considered white almost anywhere. And there are many white latinos like this, as was mentioned above; the irony is when some of them try to deny their African ancestry and discriminate against their countrymen who have darker skin.
Click to expand...
Yeah. The "make jokes about black people while claiming key elements of the music and dance" thing has never made sense to me.
 
About the original thread question. I recall it had something to do with the disco era and gays being discouraged from dancing together. And the "death" of disco.
Other than that depends how you live. Couple dancing has always been alive and well in certain circles. But if you go mainstream yes couple dancing is uncommon. But consuming alchohol is very common. Venues make money selling alchohol, it's well known people who go to dance don't consume. IMO because they have their needs met. People turn to alchohol when there's nothing else to do. Bars want to make money so it suited them well to promote this lonely desparate culture of drinking and dancing alone.
Also partner dancing is a skill, a hard earned skill, for many unattainable, at least to be proficient at it. The non partner dancing culture gave the majority a chance by bringing the playing field to a lower level, and they embraced it.
manzanadulce said:
there are white hispanics/latinos and darker ones. i happen to be married to a white one. (cue the accusations of racism since I didn't marry a POC).
Click to expand...
You feel the need to be apologetic about it.. wow what have we come to. I'm white, and happy. I do my best to keep a tan, I feel I look better tanned. And it's healthy to get sun, keeps the Kung flu away better than the stupid vaccine.
 
Last edited:
SoFloW said:
You feel the need to be apologetic about it.. wow what have we come to. I'm white, and happy.
Click to expand...

I think that line was a bit exaggerated for dramatic purposes ;) haven't seen anyone on here accuse someone of racism just because their partner is white lol
 
Last edited:
Why do Americans (Statians) always need to put things in racism context and perspective? Is this frowned upon to like music and dance that's originated from people of slightly different skin color? Would you hide that from your parents and friends?
And how much it's relevant with regard to salsa, because it's huge racial hybrid both music and dance wise?

Should any thing belong to just one race exclusively there?

Would it be that black peoples disco culture (music, dance, clothing, parties) is different than white peoples, than yellow peoples, than brown peoples, than pink peoples, than green ones? Little overlap in people and patterns that appear in one color group won't appear in another?
 
1derpalm said:
That's fine but if I call a white latino white I don't wanna stick around to see what happens to me.
Click to expand...

ummmm....?

there are literally millions of latinos who identify as white. and just as many i'm sure that identify as mixed or black. my ethnicity is latvian, lithuanian, german, polish, ukrainian...but i am clearly white. i don't go around confusing ethnicity with race. i can't imagine that calling a white latino white should be offensive. caucasians come in many shades of light skin, that's not to say that a caucasian greek or hispanic is necessarily any less caucasian than an eastern european variety like me.
 
To be more precise, Latino isn't an ethnicity either, it's a denomination for people with Latin American heritage. The population of Latin America consists of many different ethnicities, and some do not identify as "latino".
 

This song is satire but gives quite an interesting perspective on how some Uruguayans may perceive themselves (not sure to which extent it is actually representative though).
 
A general observation I have scene is that is a woman is white a white gu
Smejmoon said:
Why do Americans (Statians) always need to put things in racism context and perspective? Is this frowned upon to like music and dance that's originated from people of slightly different skin color? Would you hide that from your parents and friends?
And how much it's relevant with regard to salsa, because it's huge racial hybrid both music and dance wise?

Should any thing belong to just one race exclusively there?

Would it be that black peoples disco culture (music, dance, clothing, parties) is different than white peoples, than yellow peoples, than brown peoples, than pink peoples, than green ones? Little overlap in people and patterns that appear in one color group won't appear in another?
Click to expand...

Because the country was literally segregated for racist reasons until only 50 years ago and there are people still alive who lived through it.
 
voomer said:
Because the country was literally segregated for racist reasons until only 50 years ago and there are people still alive who lived through it.
Click to expand...
Your part after "Because" is true/fact, but the "Because" is just another piece of the narrative. Blacks are afforded the same opportunities as whites in the US. Actually by law they're afforded more opportunities. Sure there are some hard core racists still running around. But for the average well mannered white person, in this day and age in the US, to blatantly discriminate against a black person is the exception not the rule. If anything the average person has a sensitivity to that beyond what they normally should. Hence my initial comment to Manzana dulce. But BLM is turning all that around, BLM is very bad for black people. A lot of black people know it too. And with that I'm out of this lame topic.
 
SoFloW said:
the "Because" is just another piece of the narrative. Blacks are afforded the same opportunities as whites in the US. Actually by law they're afforded more opportunities. Sure there are some hard core racists still running around. But for the average well mannered white person, in this day and age in the US, to blatantly discriminate against a black person is the exception not the rule.
Click to expand...

Gotta love it when a white guy goes around claiming with such tremendous confidence that racism is almost nonexistent in the US :rofl:

Obviously everyone in the US knows by now that they can't "blatantly" discriminate. But there are many ways to discriminate and be racist that are not "blatant" yet can have a profound negative effect on those that are discriminated against. The fact one actually has to explain this to you goes to show you are in no position to discuss this topic.

Much worse health outcomes among American blacks vs. whites -- that are not explained by differences in income, education, etc. -- are just one example.

Here is a telling statistic:

Babies born to well educated, middle-class black mothers are more likely to die before their first birthday than babies born to poor white mothers with less than a high school education.

On the employment side of things, blacks have had higher unemployment for decades. In case you want to blame this on them, there was actually a study done that showed racism definitely plays a role: this Harvard University study found that when Blacks "whitened" their resumes — for example, used "American" or "white"-sounding names — they got more callbacks for corporate interviews. 25% of black candidates received callbacks from their whitened resumes, while only 10% got calls when they left ethnic details on their resume.
 
Last edited:
"Proving racism is, in a practical sense nowadays, impossible. Legislators can claim with popular support to be taking a principled stand against, say, the Affordable Care Act or curbing federal spending without ever talking about how their positions disproportionately affect communities of color. Then, if challenged, they claim to be victims of reverse racism."

www.americanprogress.org

Racism Is Impossible to Prove, But History Provides Insight

Amid charges of racism and reverse racism, only time will tell how history will judge today’s political figures.
www.americanprogress.org www.americanprogress.org
 
SoFloW said:
Your part after "Because" is true/fact, but the "Because" is just another piece of the narrative. Blacks are afforded the same opportunities as whites in the US. Actually by law they're afforded more opportunities. Sure there are some hard core racists still running around. But for the average well mannered white person, in this day and age in the US, to blatantly discriminate against a black person is the exception not the rule. If anything the average person has a sensitivity to that beyond what they normally should. Hence my initial comment to Manzana dulce. But BLM is turning all that around, BLM is very bad for black people. A lot of black people know it too. And with that I'm out of this lame topic.
Click to expand...

I can't think of a polite response to this post.
 
Sabrosura said:
this Harvard University study found that when Blacks "whitened" their resumes — for example, used "American" or "white"-sounding names — they got more callbacks for corporate interviews. 25% of black candidates received callbacks from their whitened resumes, while only 10% got calls when they left ethnic details on their resume.
Click to expand...
This is why I (and many of my acquaintances) never put a picture on the CV :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top