Talk:Afro-Dominicans

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The one drop rule is so tired[edit]

Racial discrimination against Black people in the Dominican Republic, and else where in Latin America, does not give people the license to implement the one-drop rule on its inhabitants just to make up for the sins of slavery, the caste system, and color bias engrained in this region of the world. All this page does is inflate the number of Afro Dominicans by adding the percentages of mixed-race people and those of Black ancestry all together and hilariously, at the most pathetic attempt of subtly, imply that mixed race Dominicans are "really Black". What gives? The one drop rule is equally toxic way to look at race and it wouldn't be acceptable if the number of Whites/Spanish descended were inflated to such ridiculous percentages. Why does race in the Dominican Republic and else where in Latin American continue to by looked on by American cultural lenses. More importantly, why are those of mixed lineage are constantly reduced to props and commodities to booster up the number of Black people in Latin America? Really, has there been no honest attempt to explain race and ethnic identity without given in the vestiges of American P.C. and Americancentric (made up word, I know) thought? Why are Afro-Americans, Afro-Latinos, and potentially mixed-race people who consign the one-drop rule, are always appeased at the expense of others who do not share this mentality regarding race and identity?

Seriously, I'm getting sick of this Black and White divide in part of the world where, again, race, ethnicity, and identity is more complicated than "not wanting to deal with Blackness".Kzp1990 (talk) 18:55, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh look, some great contradictions we have here:

"Afro-Dominicans are the majority in the country"

"So, the Afro-Dominican are 8,475,600 people in the Dominican Republic" (after adding the percentages of mixed-race people and Afro-Dominicans)

"(the majority of Dominicans are mulattos)"Kzp1990 (talk) 19:09, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not trying to inflate the percentage of Afro Dominican uniting blacks and mulattos people in the same group. The article is dedicated to Afro Dominicans, and they are all Dominican of African descent, whether black or mulatto. So it is always best use the Afro Dominican term when it comes to both groups together, and refer not to them as black people, as many African Dominicans are not black but mulatto. The article does not talk exclusively black Dominicans, but Afro Dominicans. The article say that the black Dominicans are a 12% of the population, based on the censuses of the Dominican Republic, not inflating the percentage. So, a mulatto is Afro Dominican, but an octoroon, with only around 15% of African blood, not. --Isinbill (talk) 14:32, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, as a Dominican man who was born and raised in DR and makes frequent visits a year to DR to see family, I will definitely say that the black dominican population is way more than just 12%, it is more around 40%, but dominicans in general do not like to classify themselves racially since it is not a concern of ours like it has been in the United States in which they want to label everything. These 2 sources give a more accurate estimation of the actual Dominican population

45% mixed, 40% black, 15% white (obviously both the white and the black are mixed to some degree whether they are quadroons or ppl of 3/4 african ancestry) I think we should stop being so sensitive about this cause everyone i dont care where in the caribbean is mixed to some degree so if thats the case with these articles then one can say only 10% of jamaicans are actually black or 20% of haitians. Now if we go by people who are 75%+ european or african, then those numbers i posted on top is definitely true about the dominican population, now that that is out of the way, here are the sources for the numbers above.

http://hisprint.org/filerequest/9396 http://hisprint.org/dominican-republic/travel-to-dominican-republic — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:584:C001:1360:9A2:A127:6BAD:E692 (talk) 00:28, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion[edit]

This page should not be speedily deleted because Article does not speak of a race, not speaking exclusively of black Dominicans but of all Dominicans of African descent. So, today the North Africans can be scarce but if in the future had many in the Dominican Republic also be indicated in the article. This article is not contrary to the white Dominicans, but the European Dominicans and Asians Dominicans. Mulattos can appear in both articles. It is an article about the origin of a population (the Africans), not exactly race. Furthermore, the title of the article itself should define what we are talking American group. Can not be called, for example, "black Dominicans," but "black Dominicans (Dominican Republic)", to distinguish them of the black people from Dominica. I mean, I have my own reasons to believe that the title of the article, as now is wrote, is ill-posed and tries to speak only of part of the population (Black) of the that really tries to talk article (all Dominicans of African origin). The fact that this article spoke only on the black population, when obviously must also mention the mulatto because it is an article that talks about the Afro Dominicans and not only blacks Dominicans was one of Inhakito decisición, not mine (I was the one who published the Article). Therefore the article should be called "Afro Dominican (Dominican Republic)", not "black Dominican," a title which neither even distinguishes between black Dominicans from the Dominican Republic and the Black Dominican that live in Dominica, a title that makes me think that this is wrong. Additional, Afro Dominicans are thus called worldwide. In the Dominican Republic not is so, because their population, in large part, tried to deny their African roots, even if they are recognized as descendants of Africans worldwide, denying, especially being black (in that case, the article neither even should be called as black Dominicans). Therefore, removing the Afro-Dominican title of the article is also a poor excuse.--Isinbill (talk) 17:48, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's something very patronizing and antagonistic for folks who are not Dominican (as in those from Dominican Republic), whether they are Black or not, to lecture/scold Dominicans about their alleged denialism of Black of ancestry/lineage. Once again, race, ethnicity, and identity is an extremely complicated subject in this country, as with the rest of Latin America. Being able to concede they're folks that most certainly go out their way to deny that lineage/ancestry doesn't change the condescending, and once again, antagonistic tone some of these articles have regarding Latin Americans and their (lack of) acknowledgment of African ancestry. Your comment about White Latin Americans of multiple nationalities including people of mixed ancestry in their percentages/estimates is also false because many of them do not, as seen in many Wikipedia pages and those who are usually okay with engorging/inflating the number people of people with Black/African ancestry are resistant to doing the same with those of White/European ancestry. Ironically enough, "Regla del Sacar" and "Gracias al Sacar" can be used to do exactly that, booster up the number of Whites or those of European ancestry. I don't buy your excuse of leaving the article the way it is because of confusion with the inhabitants of Dominica. There exists this sense of entitlement among outsiders, specifically those who are ethnocentric about (their) Black ancestry, that feel the need to "correct" racial categorizations and identities by simply implementing the American One drop rule. Basically, fighting fire with fire or in other words, combating Eurocentrism and White Supremacy with more ethnocriticism. I guess it stems from the "discovery" (or realization) the racism and color bias that exist in Latin America and the consequences of the Casta system and Spain's imperialism and colonialism in general, therefore, Hispanics/Latinos/Latin Americans must accept this equally sickening, archaic, outdated view of race, in order to make amends for the mistreatment of of Black/nowhite people in the Americas since the conquest and because allegedly, American society says somebody with 1/8 Black ancestry is automatically Black or because it fits the P.C. worldview of African Americans and makes them and others with that mentality feel better about themselves. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kzp1990 (talk • contribs) 22:53, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article protected[edit]

This article has been temporarily semiprotected due to persistent unsourced content changes from multiple IPs over the past few weeks. Zad68 18:38, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Illegal Haitians[edit]

Illegal Haitian immigrants are NOT counted in the country's statistics. DR has a huge Haitian population, over half of which are illegal. This is fact, look it up. So, counting the native black population and Haitians (both naturalized and illegal) together, statistically DR would be somewhat "blacker" than just 18%. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spreadofknowledge (talk • contribs) 17:02, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All people are counted in the population census regardless of their legal status. Just in the 2010 Census there were registered 311,969 Haitians, when there were just about 11,000 with legal status; a Social Sciences textbook issued in 2009 by the General Archive of the Nation claimed that blacks were 30% of the population but no official report has been given. ★ Nacho ★ Mailbox ★ 07:26, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Prefix "Afro-"[edit]

Inhakito, please do not move pages before a discussion first. In the U.S., these groups refer to themselves as "Afro-Latino;" which has many sources for it. You can make a mention where it says (or Black Dominican or Spanish: Negro Dominicano etc.). All of these Latin groups follow the same pattern, the Dominican is no different. Remember, this is an English Wikipedia and Afro simply denotes being black. Savvyjack23 (talk) 19:56, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In the United States they may refer to themselves as "Afro-Latino", but NOT IN the Dominican Republic, and this article is about an ethnic group IN the Dominican Republic, NOT IN the United States. ★ Nacho ★ Mailbox ★ 06:59, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Inhakito/ ★ Nacho ★ , are you sure about that? See: [1] [2] [3]

And all these other sub-articles about Afro-Latin American:

So these are all wrong too? I disagree, and that warrants a discussion. I didn't create those pages so I am sure, others can chime in on this as well. I understand what you are saying about how there isn't a "Euro-" etc. and because of that this shouldn't be "Afro either;" maybe you are right but there are a few problems. "Euro" implies that the group came only from Europe which would discount the "Levantines" who are from the middle east and Asia whereas "white" can include all of these groups into one. However, it isn't so much the same with Afro, as this group strictly stems from African slave descendants, and I cannot possibly see where else during these last hundred of years. The only predominately black group I can think of that probably would not consitute as being "Afro-" in a sense, would be the native Aborigines from Australia as they have inhabited that land probably as for as long as existence. Savvyjack23 (talk) 05:31, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Inhakito, on 31 May 2013 User:Isinbill, disagreed with Black Dominican by saying, ""Therefore the article should be called "Afro Dominican (Dominican Republic)", not "black Dominican," a title which neither even distinguishes between black Dominicans from the Dominican Republic and the Black Dominican that live in Dominica, a title that makes me think that this is wrong."" Your edits lately have been very uncharacteristic. You have been around for a while, I should not have to tell you that you should consult the talk or move discussion page as the consensus may not agree with your changes. I have mentioned sources that comply with "Afro". Savvyjack23 (talk) 03:33, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Dominican Republic people of African descent[edit]

I'm curious TonyStarks, John Pack Lambert, Osplace, Benkenobi18, Carlossuarez46, as to why you all agreed to delete this category (See log: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_February_9) on February of 2013? When categories like these (below) exist:

  • Category:American people of African descent
  • Category:Caribbean people of African descent
  • Category:French people of African descent
  • Category:English people of African descent
  • Category:Brazilian people of African descent
  • Category:German people of African descent
  • Category:British people of African descent
  • Category:Spanish people of African descent
  • Category:European people of African descent (How on earth did this make the cut?)
  • Category:Japanese people of African descent
  • Category:American people of South African descent
  • Category:Russian people of African descent
  • Category:Canadian people of African descent
  • Category:Belgian people of African descent
  • Category:Polish people of African descent
  • Category:Jamaican people of African descent
  • Category:Haitian people of African descent
  • Category:Swedish people of African descent
  • Category:Finnish people of African descent
  • Category:Australian people of African descent
  • Category:Greek people of African descent
  • Category:Chinese people of African descent
  • Category:Turkish people of African descent
  • Category:Norwegian people of African descent
  • Category:Latin American people of African descent (Or this?)
  • Category:Uruguayan people of African descent
  • Category:New Zealand people of African descent
  • Category:Dutch people of African descent
  • Category:Puerto Rican people of African descent
  • Category:Cuban people of African descent
  • Category:Danish people of African descent
  • Category:Ecuadorian people of African descent
  • Category:Scottish people of African descent
  • Category:Italian people of African descent
  • Category:Panamanian people of African descent
  • Category:Israeli people of African descent
  • Category:Trinidad and Tobago people of African descent
  • Category:Chilean people of African descent
  • Category:Mexican people of African descent
  • Category:Peruvian people of African descent
  • Category:Asian people of African descent (How?)
  • Category:Irish people of African descent
  • Category:Grenadian people of African descent
  • Category:Ukrainian people of African descent
  • Category:Romanian people of African descent
  • Category:Colombian people of African descent
  • Category:Guadeloupean people of African descent
  • Category:Honduran people of African descent
  • Category:Filipino people of African descent
  • Category:Welsh people of African descent
  • Category:Austrian people of African descent
  • Category:Hong Kong people of African descent
  • Category:Swiss people of African descent

...etc, etc. There are over 100 of these categories. So why stop at the Dominican Republic? If you are going to discuss to delete one, you might as well advocate towards deleting them all. I agree with you TonyStarks that these categories should really be done on a "national" basis (your example was Dominican Republic people of Chinese descent), however that has clearly not been the case, which is why I am utterly baffled by the agreement to delete this category while there is such an abundance. John Pack Lambert having 84% of the population mixed or not of African descent is entirely irrelevant. The case and point is that there is an African descent presence (hence this very article Afro-Dominican) and a small entirely white (without African influence) presence on the island as well. Benkenobi18, the New World (the western hemisphere) is relatively young, so much so, that before computers existed we were still easily able to identity someone's ancestry (unlike today, you were either white, black, mixed or native). Remember that these islands (the United States included) were originally inhabited by natives, therefore we all came from somewhere. (descent-wise, ancestry-wise) (When we talk about ancestry in general, its usually in regards to generations and generations in. Descent is usually used for what's most recent (synonymous with parentage. We do not call our grandparents ancestors do we?). Carlossuarez46, the reason why the DR does not specifically document this is because of tension ties with its neighbor. Even though Columbus eradicated the Taino almost to its entirety, the Dominican Republic government deemed necessary to try to exclude the term mulatto with mestizo instead, wanting nothing to do with dark skin people as much as they could. However, before this government came to be, there was the Captaincy General of Santo Domingo and did the Spanish document such a thing? You are darn right they did. In other words, I have credible sources to support such a category. (Example: Francisco del Rosario Sanchez, mixed of African/Spanish descent, one of the founding fathers of the nation; its blatant in the texts I have found on him) I also believe the Dominican Republic should have a third article, not solely Afro or White, being mixed is distinct as you descent from both. The one-drop (a dubious rule) doesn't apply to these countries. (See Mixed-race Brazilian, Mulatto Haitian or pardo and mulatto) In any case, I tend to agree that African descent and European descent should go. It's far too vague, but the fact that a country like Argentina having an African descent category and the Dominican Republic doesn't is laughable and quite frankly, blows my mind. Savvyjack23 (talk) 10:12, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 May 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) Calidum T|C 06:05, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Afro-Dominican (Dominican Republic) → Black (Dominican Republic) – #1 "Black" is the correct translation for Negro, not "Afro-"; #2 Redundancy in using Dominican twice ★ Nacho ★ (Talk page) ★ 23:43, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Red Slash this does not work due to the use of "dominican" by both the Dominican Republic and Dominica. GregKaye 05:22, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Greg, did you know that there are over 100 times as many people living in the Dominican Republic as in Dominica? Over 100. I think we have a primary topic. Red Slash 18:28, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Red Slash I did not know that. Here are results in books:
"Black Dominicans" gets to "Page 27 of 270 results"
"Afro-Dominicans" gets to "Page 17 of 164 results"
GregKaye 19:31, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would be fine with any naturally disambiguated title--Blacks in the Dominican Republic, etc. But someone (can't remember who right now...) has been trying to get articles like "Pakistani people" to "Pakistanis", and I wouldn't mind the continuation of that here. Red Slash 22:08, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think that sounds good and perhaps a move can also be made of Blacks (Canada) → Blacks in Canada as per Blacks in France and Blacks in Liverpool. GregKaye 01:53, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and comment, for almost the same reasons I gave in Talk:White Dominican (Dominican Republic). Black what? A Dominican Republic is not a "Black," but the country may have black "people." (For example: Let's say "Black" was the name of a town someplace, you can create Black (town), or a band whose name is Black; Black (band)). The brackets also simply specify the difference between the Dominican Republic and Dominica, which doesn't make it "redundant" because you do not read the words in the brackets as a part of the name itself. However, where my view differs from White Dominican (Dominican Republic) is that I can sort of see why the "Afro-" should be dropped and Black should be included. (For example: I think African American should be changed to Black American simply because in culture how much African are Americans today? We all come from Africa, even Europeans from the beginning of time). However, many might strongly disagree with me, which can make this move subjective as well. It is well documented of the "Afro-Latino" and its derivatives (Afro-Cuban, Afro-Puerto Rican, as well as Afro-Dominican in English speaking societies.) I would like this to happen to all the Latin-articles, not just this one, but that proposes a big challenge. It isn't so much that the Dominican Republic doesn't use the word "Afro-," the truth is, NONE of these countries really use the term. They ALL use negro, (some countries moreno etc. for "black").
I also disagree with the "s" inclusion at the end of the word. In short, more articles eliminate this "s" usage. It is a term, that explains a demographic, not the other way around. Similar articles reflect that. If you are including the "s" for the sake of not sharing the name "Dominican" because of the dislike for the usage of brackets [(Dominican Republic)], I would strongly advise against it. Please see: Talk:White Dominican (Dominican Republic) for further reasoning.
  • Oppose, as the proposed title does not make it clear that the article is about an ethnic group, or even about people at all. Also oppose counter-proposal. Dominicans is a disambiguation page, as "Dominicans" are also monks or people from Dominica. If "Dominicans" is unclear, "Black Dominicans" would also be unclear. Egsan Bacon (talk) 03:38, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Savvyjack23 my proposal was for Blacks (Dominican Republic).
Egsan Bacon on what basis would you want Wikipedia to retain the title: Afro-Dominican (Dominican Republic)?
Nacho, I certainly support any move from the current title that gives a reflection on the way that ethnicity is described in the real world of the Dominican Republic. GregKaye 05:00, 20 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Horrible sentence[edit]

"That idea of black inferiority compared to the white was assumed by the whites and, because of their proslavery and, sometimes aggressive behavior with blacks, eventually would also be assumed by them, into believing, also, that their European culture was superior to the cultures from Africa and subjecting them to same (although many Afro-Dominican were able to maintain his cultures)."

someone fix this sentence, its crap — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.11.103 (talk) 14:07, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Afro-Dominicans (Dominican Republic). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:54, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Checked Confirmed as correct. Thanks, Cyberbot II. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:16, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Galleries, pictures, etc.[edit]

I am removing pictures of people in this article for the same reasons explained in a similar article. For the arguments, please, refer to this link. In addition to the arguments presented in the other article's Talk Page, I would reassert, for matters of this article in particular, that since race is not a biological reality, which can be "seen" by phenotypes, placing a picture of young males with a dark skin in this article, would not prove they are afro-Dominicans. As explained in the other page, problems with sourcing the picture are the main reason for deleting it. If you have a different view, please, refer them here, in this section of the article's Talk Page, before trying to revert my changes. Caballero/Historiador ⎌ 20:44, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Considering the arguments against the galleries, I think we should limit the names in the "Notable" section to self-defined Afro-Dominicans. More than a racial concept, this is a socio-political label that should be self-embraced before we can use it on anybody. For example, people like Blas R. Jiménez who wrote,
"I have decided to write of myself as Afro-Dominican, recognizing that I make history, not in a capricious manner or in circumstances I have chosen on my own, but in this reality of having been born and existing within the Dominican cultural code. I am carrying the traditions of bygone generations and they oppress my brain like a nightmare. The grandparents of the grandparents are chasing me, and I can hear, at a distance, the sound of the slave driver’s whip." (my trans)
Afrodominicano por elección, negro por nacimiento, 2008
Though reality is more complex, the title is telling. Any thought? Thanks Caballero/Historiador ⎌ 08:22, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Essentially, you're describing the intricate arguments expressed about the POV nature of galleries and, indeed, who constitutes a notable member of an ethnic group which drove the RfC on the use of galleries of notables in the infobox... and lead to the elimination of said infobox galleries. The majority of regular, experienced Wikipedians expressed a disdain for show-offery (aren't we the most amazing ethnic group, superior in every way to every other ethnic group!). Not only do lengthy lists trivialise members of that ethnic group who are reliably sourced as having identified themselves as being members of the group, it serves to misinform reader. Does a notable person who is a mixture of multiple ethnicities who happens to have one great-grandmother who was half this or that ethnic group actually have any understanding of, or put any stock in this genetic fact as having any impact on their identity or importance of this aspect of their identity? Unless they have expressed that they consider it to be an important factor defining them, it is merely a dry, by-the-by fact. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 04:22, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's exactly my point. If we do not come up with a distinctive criterion, soon the list would grow to a disproportionate size and will make this category inconsequential. Caballero/Historiador ⎌ 00:21, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Afro-Dominicans (Dominican Republic). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:04, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This page needs to be locked or have some type of Protective status ![edit]

This page needs to be locked or have a protected status, so that only certified users can edit. There is too much Afrocentric vandalism going on in this page.

Afro-Dominican population is very underestimated[edit]

I am Dominican myself, and I can say for a fact that the Black Dominican population is definitely more than 15%, I would say its about at least 25% of the population. So, Latinobaro american definitely has it right at 26% or more. I can also see that there is a good amount of eurocentricism in some of the uinformation on the article that needs some fixing.

this artcle right there etimates the Dominican population at 60% mulatto, 35% black, and 5% white which i think is definitely accurate

https://books.google.com/books?id=nan3oIDq42wC&pg=PA50&lpg=PA50&dq=dominican+republic+60%25+mulatto+35%25+black+5%25+white&source=bl&ots=8Si5VZvhmh&sig=ACfU3U3HAx-pktvnS0mLghHLtCtOEzU8Ag&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiAmNGFodHxAhWnkmoFHeHJANwQ6AF6BAgeEAM#v=onepage&q=dominican%20republic%2060%25%20mulatto%2035%25%20black%205%25%20white&f=false

Dangling ref[edit]

I have located a dangling ref and hidden it, replacing each with a citation needed tag. This has been done because we have a reference pointing to a sources that is not recorded in the article. Please feel free to contact me if you need assistance fixing this. - Aussie Article Writer (talk)

New Information[edit]

I thought it would be a good idea to add more regarding the culture and the effect of colorism on Afro-Dominicans on this page; Afro-Dominican figures should also get their own pages as well. Feel free to check out my user page for some context. -BryantPol (talk) 03:22, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Whitefying[edit]

A lot of users on here are really trying to whitefy the Dominican population from what it is in reality I'v noticed. Majority of Dominican self classifications have shown most Dominican estimates to be roughly around 60-65% mixed, 25-30% black, 10% white

also, this study shows that the Dominican population genetically is more african than european - 49% SSA African, 39% European, 8% west asian/north african, and 4% native https://www.diariolibre.com/actualidad/ciencia/el-dominicano-tiene-un-49-de-adn-africano-y-un-39-europeo-NE4251429

also in 23andme's predict my ancestry puts the average dominican based on all 23andme dominican users at 60% SSA African, 35% european (includes some north african), 5% native https://you.23andme.com/public/predict-my-ancestry?path=30 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.61.106.70 (talk) 01:32, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AFRO-DOMINICAN[edit]

While the dominican republic is filled by the vast variety of races, afrodencendence is the mayority among the island. Due to the Cast System, which is still at practice, many prefer to disown their african roots, even if the physical, atnic, gastronomy and cultural demonstrate otherwise. 2600:8805:8A94:8A00:7665:652B:7E28:CE2C (talk) 02:16, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Afro-Dominicans&oldid=1198141690"