27 thoughts on “conspicuously negroid features”

1. “Not sure why that caused me intense irritation, but it did.” Perhaps you have such a deep aversion for all things negroid that this becomes a natural reaction for you.

2. ha!

3. Perhaps because the science behind the negroid, caucasoid, and mongoloid labels is dubious? I thought these terms fell out of favor among well-informed people years ago.

4. Why would anyone have an aversion to the term negroid characteristics? There are Asian characteristics aren’t there. There are Caucasian characteristics. I am half Nigerian and half European and it doesn’t bother me in the slightest when a black person is identified that way. Tiff Jones looks like a black woman but there is obviously something worrisome going on beneath her skin. Sad really.

5. To Odile and Lois…it seems like you are both projecting your issues onto Tiff.

   Particularly you, Odile. I’ve noticed that in most of your comments there is bitterness toward biracial people.

   She doesn’t have an aversion to anything African. The term “Negroid” is outdated.

   Maybe that’s the problem, wouldn’t you say?

6. I was upset at “negroed “also ,And they said she was ugly what a very rude rasict insult to her and her King husband .Shes very pretty and if they knew history they should also know Henry was mixed blood also Henry the first was full black .No one looked at race untill the natzi party and the Jim crow era whitewashed our black birth right world .

7. Queen elizabeth dad is black ,the queen mother was married to a mixed white black king who looked tan 🙂 I found a picture of him http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2131714/Queen-Elizabeth-born-artificial-insemination-Lady-Colin-Campbell-claims-pure-fiction.html

8. This is an old article and a ridiculous subject. Debra Willison you obviously need to learn your history. As a historian I can tell that Henry I, for starters, was not a black man. Queen Charlotte was known for not being very pretty and that has nothing to do with her background. Just because someone is royal does not mean they have to be attractive as we have seen throughout history. This has nothing to do with herself or her husband nor is an insult to either. She just wasn’t pretty! As far as the article you have posted, you didn’t even read it. The Queen Mum was the queen consort to King George, the grandson of Queen Victoria who was also not a black man. The article is clearly stating that the Queen Mum was artificially inseminated. This is also a ludicrous article. Queen Charlotte yes displayed larger lips in her portraits. She was also related to the Austrian Hapsburgs and this is a birth defect with them having intermarried so many times. Just like the Spanish Hapsburgs have enormous chins because of intermarrying. So what are you all looking at her nose? Ever stop to think she just had large nostrils? I have full large lips and that doesn’t make me black not to mention I also have larger eyes as well. This started because Queen Charlotte may or may not have been related to a branch of the Portuguese Royal family that may or may not have been black. Not to mention she was something like 5 generations apart and 9 times removed from this person. OMG, I am so sick of the race issue in the country. GET A CLUE PEOPLE!

9. Two-and-half years ago I self-published Mulatto Queen: England’s Black Queen. The mulatto in question is of course Queen Charlotte, consort to England’s King George III. My story was an attempt to show how a mulatto wound up the wife of the most powerful monarch of the time (1761). When I first heard of this story, my first question was, “How is it her Negroid features weren’t immediately seen and her wedding to the King of England called off?”

   You’ll have to read the book to find that out — but the evidence she was mulatto is so compelling that as I began encountering it, I could not help but wonder why no one had written a book — fiction or non-fiction — about this amazing woman.

   The evidence Charlotte was half-black is all over the internet. At the top of the list is a description of her made by her grandson-in-law’s physician, Baron Stockmar:

   “Small and crooked, with a true Mulatto face.”
   –Baron Christian Stockmar, MD
   http://tinyurl.com/27ryc3b

   Please note two things about this quote: first, the word true; Second, the capital M. Clearly, Stockmar meant to idiot-proof his meaning — that is, to let the world know for all posterity Queen Victoria’ grandmother was half black.

   When the quote was posted in a forum several people replied Stockmar was only trying to say Queen Charlotte was ugly; that is, “mulatto” was a term for ugly during her day. But in my research the usage I found was identical to its meaning today: a person of white and black parentage. The word “mulatto” is of Latin origin and seems to have taken the original meaning as early as 1593. Consider:

   Origin of MULATTO:
   Spanish mulato, from mulo mule, from Latin mulus
   First Known Use: 1593

   A mule, of course, is a hybrid, a cross between a horse and donkey. The Latin word for mule is “mulus” and from that we can see how some enterprising Spanish-speaker used it to mean a cross between the white race and black race — mulatto. Below is a painting made by a South American painter in 1780 graphically showing usage of the word, literally spelling it out:

   In other words, all available evidence shows Stockmar meant exactly what we mean when he used the mulatto in his memoir. Stockmar was born in 1787 and died in 1863. He arrived at the English court in 1816 two years before Queen Charlotte (by then Queen Mother) died. As Physician-in-Ordinary to her granddaughter, Princess Charlotte, and grand-son-law, Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, he was considered part of the royal family. His memoir, in fact, describes taking meals with the huge brood (Queen Charlotte and King George had 13 children who survived).

   Therefore, we can only conclude that when Stockmar described Queen Charlotte as “a true Mulatto” he most surely meant she had Negroid features.

   Stockmar went on to become a respected diplomat and confidant of Queen Victoria, Charlotte’s granddaughter. We have several letters from Queen Victoria discussing political matters with him. Stockmar was not only a physician, but one who while serving as a doctor during the Napoleonic wars, set up a military hospital in which wounded from both sides were treated. The man was no wastrel given to inexact descriptions; in fact, we could hardly expect there existed anyone better qualified than he to describe Charlotte’s features.

   As to context, his description was part of a dozen others describing members of the royal household. In each of these descriptions we see the same sober, frank, and exacting language as in Charlotte’s description:

   The Regent: ‘Very stout, though of a fine figure; distinguished manners; does not talk half as much as his brothers; speaks tolerably good French. He ate and drank a good deal at dinner. His brown scratch wig not particularly becoming.’

   The Duke of York: the eldest of the Regent’s brothers. ‘Tall, with immense embonpoint, and not proportionately strong legs; he holds himself in such a way that one is always afraid he will tumble over backwards; very bald, and not a very intelligent face: one can see that eating, drinking, and sensual pleasure, are everything to him. Spoke a good deal of French, with a bad accent.’

   The Queen Mother (Charlotte, wife of George III.): ‘Small and crooked, with a true Mulatto face.’

   Memoirs of Baron Stockmar VOL. I. E pp. 50

   Another argument offered against Charlotte being a true mulatto is that that no one else said she was, and that all the paintings of her show a decidedly Caucasian-looking woman. Not so! The fact is, there are many references to her mulatto looks in literature and many paintings and mezzotints that support Stockmar’s description. (see below)

   Several of these were made before Stockmar was born. In fact, with a good number of these paintings we have two versions of Charlotte: one in which she appears to be completely Caucasian; the other in which she possesses obvious Negroid features.

   Finally, some mention should be made of the flood of bad reviews this book received during late September/early October of last year. Besides the five one-star reviews, an astounding 118 negative votes were cast; an extraordinarily high number in light of the fact the book had been on Amazon for two years without a single bad review or vote. These votes and reviews are fraudulent — we even know the name of the white racist who orchestrated the attack — R.W. Peace is an avowed racist whose attacks on blacks and Asians is nothing new: http://marchingwithcaesar.blogspot.com/

   In fact, his virulent reaction to the prospect of an English Royal Family of African descent was expected. In the weeks leading up to the publication of the book articles about it brought the racists out of the woodwork in a similar fashion. What wasn’t expected, however, was Amazon’s do-nothing attitude about the attack. Check out the dates of the one-star reviews, you’ll see they all occurred in less than a two week period. Now, by themselves one-star reviews won’t kill a book. But one-star reviews pushed to the top of the page by a flood of supporting votes is another matter. In this case it was 118 votes all made in the same two-week period.

   The book has been on Amazon for 29 months (as of this writing). For 23 months it did not receive one bad review or vote. For it to suddenly receive five one-star reviews and 118 votes in less than two weeks, is evidence of an organized attack — nothing else explains it.

   And then there’s the content of the one-star votes — malicious, angry, hateful. This alone should have prompted Amazon to remove them. A review saying, “This is the worst book ever — complete garbage!” is hardly a review. That’s hate, which is an emotion Amazon’s own guidelines prohibits in reviews.

   And yet when I contacted Amazon with these facts they did nothing. Despite the fact that the book has 10 five-star reviews, the five bogus one-star reviews are what new customers see. That’s because the bogus votes push the bogus reviews to the top of the page. Worse still, it places these bogus reviews under the headline “Most Helpful.” And if that isn’t enough, it pulls quotes from them, quotes such as “This book was awful! ”

   In other words, it wasn’t the hooligans hurting my book – it was Amazon’s insane review presentation system.

   Amazon explains all this as its policy of being scrupulously honest about customer reviews. But embedded in this policy is the premise that all reviews and votes are scrupulously honest — that malicious attacks on books don’t happen.

   Indeed, this was the pro-forma response I received from all my emails — “Our IT staff has checked our campaign vote algorithm and detected no abnormal activity on your book detail page.”

   This pretty much explains the wall of malicious reviews that greeted you when you first came to this page — hate and incompetence.

   And here I’ll stop …

   My saving grace are the sample chapters; they’re free and customers have read them, seen the quality of writing was excellent and ignored the bogus reviews. Sales are now solid and look to stay that way. Because of Amazon’s incompetently managed vote system the bogus reviews will remain at the top of the page no matter how many tens of five-star reviews this book receives, but I’ve given up trying to convince Amazon of how their nutty system is misleading customers.

   References in Literature:

   “She was undoubtedly a plain young girl with a large mouth, with a rather swarthy complexion and, her nostrils spreading wide, with something of the appearance of a mulatto.”
   George III A Personal History
   by Christopher Hibbert 2000
   http://tinyurl.com/2fxrg9q
   ——————————
   J.A. Rogers Writes:
   From Crisis Magazine Feb 1940
   “her portrait by Ramsay in the National Gallery shows her to be decidedly Negroid. I have a copy bought in London which I have been showing to both colored and white persons without saying who she was and they invariably take her for a colored woman…”
   http://tinyurl.com/33erylq
   ———————————————-
   The Princess Royal Geoffrey Wakeford
   page 110 “her mulatto looks”
   http://tinyurl.com/2bhf9re
   ——————————
   “The jewels lit up her (queen Charlotte) fine, broad features, echoes of her mulatto ancestry…”
   The Love Stones, by Tobias Hill
   novel 2003
   http://tinyurl.com/383s6rk
   ———————————-
   In an article in the Sunday Telegraph, 3/10/99, reporting Dr Steve Jones geneticist calculation that ‘one in five British people has a direct black ancestor’, it is stated that the explanation for Queen Charlotte’s ‘mulatto’ appearance is that …
   http://tinyurl.com/2ax4h6o
   http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/steve-jones/
   ——————————————–
   The last of the cocked hats: James Monroe & the Virginia dynasty:
   “the small, mulatto-faced Queen Charlotte, whose wide-slit mouth was reminiscent of the rigid demarcation line she set between virtue and vice…”
   University of Oklahoma Press, 1945 Arthur Styron
   http://tinyurl.com/3ak9v4z
   ———————————–
   William Haig Miller, James Macaulay, William Stevens – 1873 – Full view:
   The Queen Mother (Charlotte, wife of George III.) “Small and crooked, with a true mulatto face.” (An old playgoer reports that when George m appeared in a theatre without the Queen, the gallery used to call out, ‘ ‘ George, where’s Pug^ …
   http://tinyurl.com/3akke5n
   ——————————–
   Posthumous memoirs of Karoline Bauer: from the German, Volume 2
   By Karoline Bauer 1884
   http://tinyurl.com/2bmoj89
   ———————————————–
   ——————————
   The Princess Royal Geoffrey Wakefordpage 110 “her mulatto looks”http://tinyurl.com/2bhf9re
   ——————————
   Parson Austen’s daughter Collins, 1967 http://tinyurl.com/39gltop
   ——————

   George the Third
   Stanley Edward Ayling – 1972 – 510 pages – Snippet view
   patience when news of the death of the Duchess of Mecklenburg- Strelitz,Charlotte’s mother, arrived only four days … Her colouring was dark, and some discovered a hint of the mulatto in her looks.
   http://tinyurl.com/29j9k9r
   “She was undoubtedly a plain young girl with a large mouth, with a rather swarthy complexion and, her nostrils spreading wide, with something of the appearance of a mulatto.”
   George III A Personal Historyby Christopher Hibbert 2000http://tinyurl.com/2fxrg9q

10. Hmm…there are certain features that many “black” people have which are classified as “Negroid” features, but that isn’t an insult unless one makes it so.

    Dark skin, kinky hair, wide noses, full lips, certain body types are NOT ugly. And these features might be most commonly found among people of African descent but they aren’t exclusive to people of African descent. Some Southeast Asians are VERY dark-skinned. Some “white” Jewish and Italian people have very coarse, kinky hair. Some Black people (those without any significant admixture) might be dark in complexion but have thin lips and narrow, pointy noses. This is why racial classifications are so confusing and ridiculous.

11. I am so sick of this topic. First of all, who defines what is and is not black or white. Certainly black people don’ t in fact, some of the darkest people on earth have been classified as not black, now how did that happen? I think it is time for non whites to write their own history and define ourselves and am tired of being defined by the western mind set.

12. Also notice, the English dictionary (written by “WHITES”) has no definition for overprivileged. Now I wonder why that is and I wonder why history books in America start off with black folks on slave ships. Just saying.

13. My challenge to white people, go get a DNA test.

14. Miscegenation is a crime against all races which by the way, are a known fact. DNA predicts race end of story. You left wing scumbags can argue your “race is a social construct” all you like but the scientific facts are there for all to see. It is simple, we whites do not want to live or associate with blacks or mulattos. Never! We did not ask for mixed societies and the day is fast approaching when we take matters into our own hands. We will prevail – never mind the jew doing his dirty work behind the scenes trying to get rid of us, he too will be finished. Have fun people, because the days of snorting and grunting at the trough are few. You will pay for all the rapes, murders and other crimes that blacks, asians and muslims have committed against white people. Those traitorous whites who have encouraged this to happen will swing from trees along with their pets. Mark my words – it is coming.

15. I am 59% African, 34% European and 7% Asian (DNA tested through 23andMe) and descendant of the House of Charlemagne. According to DNA and God, we all migrated (our were shipped) from the Motherland Africa (new flash America…), we are all imported, the only people who are Native are the Indians.

16. When “White People” set sail to the New world, overwhelmingly they encountered very dark skin people in fact in some of Christopher Columbus’s logs he says that the people were as “Black as the Devil”. “White people” love changing history to fit there point of view and I don’ t blame them, with the overwhelming amount of “Booty” they acquired from looting other cultures in every single way possible that continues to this day (Rothschild family is worth about 100 Trillion Dollars and I am sure it did not come from clean living, hard work, and pulling themselves up from their bootstraps). “White Race” is a misnomer, they invented this idea during the transatlantic slave trade and this was well documented by so called “white people”. No wonder their forefathers would kill slaves that were caught reading or educating themselves because they knew that we would be able to read about their folly in the future and what animals do you know of that can read anything? (We were once considered three fifths of a human once by “White People”) The same “White people” who not only enslaved so called Africans (We are named after the white Roman general Africanus) by the millions but also murdered by the Millions by “White People” and any other people of color they encountered on their “Discovery” of the new world and this murder continues to this very day. The same “White people” who even killed their own “White People” by the millions well documented by “White People”. The same “White people” who manufacture weapons of mass destruction, the same “White people” who invented nuclear weapons and cannot even pronounce the word nuclear properly and are the only humans (If you can call them that) that used those weapons on other human beings. The same “White People” who were so filthy dirty nasty that until the 1900’s (Well documented by “White people”) would ground up the corpses of my ancestors (Ancient Egyptian Mummies) to make Mummia or magic mummy powder and turned that into a tincture and even consumed each other. The same “White People” who were so full of disease from not taking baths and would cover up themselves with clothing and perfume to hide the smell of their dirty nasty funky asses until Black moors came and taught “White People” how to bath, how to read and write , and were responsible for their renascence period. The same “White People” that were so nasty, that not only could the Natives of every place “White people” landed with their dirty ass funky sailing ships could smell “White People” from miles away but all “White People” had to do was breath on the Natives and they died by the millions and in some cases became extinct!! Now tell me, why is that not taught in your history books but “White People” teach that everyone else especially Black people are inferior to “White people” and that we were only slaves and everyone else who is not “White” are also subhuman and lesser then “White People”? “White people” have in less then 100 years brought us to the point of no return in terms of destruction and disharmony on this planet. “White people” have discovered in their “White people” Science that Black people from so called Africa have overwhelmingly zero I repeat zero Neanderthal DNA and are considered to be Homosapiens, the taxonomic binomial name of the contemporary human species which should explain why “White People” are so destructive and aggressive. You Knuckle dragging, Neanderthal, cave dwelling troglodytes are only part modern human which makes you and your kind subhuman and yes because your forefathers raped our women and some of us willingly mixed with you we also unfortunately carry some of that DNA but fortunately black is dominant by nature which would describe the genius of MLK because he knew as well as “White People” that black and white or anything else mixed with black meant more black people. LOL. The same “White People” who cannot make up their minds of what “White People” really means. Are “white People” Caucasian, Nordic, Aryan? “White People cannot make up their minds of what “White” is and since their numbers are declining now they want to put Hispanics and some Middle Easterners that were once once considered not “White” under the “White” Umbrella. “White people” hate “White People” too, don’t believe me, look at what is happening in the Ukraine and Europe in general since the EU started and look at some of the comments on You tube that “White People” make about other “White People” Even though I am Alkebulanian (so called African we are named after the “White’ Roman general Africanus) Native American, West Indian, Eastern European, and Scottish, Black being a dominant trait, no one has ever mistaken me from anything but black and even though it has and continues to be a challenge for the past 46 years in this black mans body, right about now, I would not wanna be “White People”

17. This is such a bullshit blog – unbelievable. There never has been a Mulatto Queen in Europe.
    I know that black peeps dream about it day and night but sorry you´ve been lied to.
    There were and probably are black kings and queenas in Africa – yes!
    White people have nothing to do with Africa, Africa is not the start of civilization. I don´t care which white hating bullshit historian will come up with fairytales about Africa as the motherland of all civilizations. Africa is the motherland of black people for sure but white people come from different areas.
    Black and white people have nothing in common – they are differnt breeds. And the stupid American term Caucasian is wrong too. People whose forefathers come from the Caucasus area are Caucasians. All other white people have nothing to do with this region since their forefathers come from Sweden, Norway, UK etc.
    Not every “African American” comes from Africa. One just has to use this politically correct word since everthing else is considered racist and forbidden.
    Black people should be proud of being black and do their own thing. White people have always done their own thing and they want it to continue to be so.
    Africa is a huge continent with tons of possibllities, lots of fertile land so why don´t you all get on your feet and build a strong country? Become independent and stop whining and blaming others.
    Mandela has freed Africans so now all Africans are free to do what they want. But the questions is do the Africans want to move their asses and get on with rebuilding their country?
    It seems they prefer running to Europe into the arms of the much hated white peeps. NO human with a brain can understand such a behaviour. Why would you run to someone you don´t like?
    Probably since you expect others to move their asses for you.

18. WOW, you are seriously out of touch with reality.

19. Queen Charlotte may well not have been the first English queen to have African ancestry. That distinction may have gone to Philippa of Hainault. There’s no true image of her, as she’s often portrayed as blonde, but there are verbal descriptions of her that might fit. Also, some think her eldest son Edward’s nickname of “The Black Prince” may have been more about the color of his armor.

20. Interesting post. I hadn’t heard of Queen Charlotte at all until recently, since history education was pretty superficial or boring when I was growing up. At least it seemed that way, compared with what I’ve learned through independent study more recently.

    But to those who keep insisting that race is an invalid social construct, and that terms like “Negroid” and “Black” or “Caucasian” went out of fashion a long time ago: I would be careful about throwing around the insulting names that you have in your responses. Whether we like it or not, there are differences (not points of superiority or inferiority) among diverse groups of people, and only truly enlightened people can look at those differences, acknowledge them and be unbothered by them. There are many “social constructs,” like marriage and family, which are very healthy for society and promote our protection and well-being, so even if race is reduced to a mere social invention, it still doesn’t render it invalid, a useless social artifact, or an inherently evil device to perpetuate ignorance and oppression. Aside from all of that, we don’t relate to each other on the microscopic levels where post-racial scientists say that we are all the same. The very eyes that we use to observe sunrises, flowers or the encroachment of a predator are the ones used to observe the noses, lips and hair textures of the different races. To ignore the obvious commonalities among various groups of people who stuck together to deal with their climates for purposes of survival seems unnecessary.

    And it is also very amusing to watch people downplay independent observations of Queen Charlotte’s phenotypically Black characteristics by saying they are not “exclusively Black.” Of course wide nostrils, coarser hair, wide lips and a browner skin tone are not exclusively Black or mulatto, but when one person embodies all of those characteristics, and said person is believed to be a direct descendant of a member of a Black family … at a certain point an educated guess can be made about her racial background.

    People can continue to bury their heads in the sand on race if they like. Enlightenment is not for everyone, especially those who were not meant to advance mankind’s understanding of himself (I’m just being efficient with my phrasing. Feminists, calm down), or be remembered by history. We lose nothing if they fling their hands up in the air about “all this racial shit,” and stomp out the room. Important work remains to be done, and it’s just as well that we drop the dead weight of people who are not up to the task.

21. People won’t stop worshiping Negros while bashing Whites. The anti-White propaganda needs to stop!

22. This revisionist blog is hilarious!

    This is the only photo of one of Queen Charlotte’s and King George III’s children. Where are those so called mulatto features? Did they just magically disappear? Queen Charlotte must have been one extremely pale mulatto.

    Princess Mary, Duchess of Gloucester and Edinburgh (25 April 1776 – 30 April 1857) was the 11th child and 4th daughter of King George III of the United Kingdom.

    She married her first cousin, Prince William Frederick, Duke of Gloucester and Edinburgh, when both were 40, and was his widow in later life. In her last years, her niece, Victoria, was on the throne as the fourth monarch during Mary’s life, after her father and two of her brothers. Princess Mary was the longest-lived (at 81 years) and last survivor of George III’s fifteen children; of those fifteen issue, thirteen lived to adulthood. She was also the only one of George III’s children to be photographed. She died on 30 April 1857 at Gloucester House, London.

    Early Life:

    Princess Mary was born, on 25 April 1776, at Buckingham Palace, London. Her father was the reigning British monarch, George III. Her mother was Queen Charlotte, the daughter of Charles, reigning Duke of Mecklenburg-Strelitz.

    Mary was christened on 19 May 1776, in the Great Council Chamber at St. James’s Palace, by Frederick Cornwallis, The Archbishop of Canterbury. Her godparents were:

    Landgrave Frederick of Hesse-Cassel (her first cousin once-removed, for whom The Earl of Hertford, Lord Chamberlain stood proxy)

    The Duchess of Saxe-Gotha-Altenburg (wife of her first cousin once-removed, for whom The Duchess of Argyll, Lady of the Bedchamber to The Queen, was proxy)

    Princess Charles of Mecklenburg-Strelitz (her third cousin once-removed, for whom The Dowager Countess of Effingham, Lady of the Bedchamber to The Queen, stood proxy).

    According to author and historian Flora Fraser, Mary was considered to be the most beautiful daughter of George III. Mary danced a minuet for the first time in public at the age of sixteen in June 1791, during a court ball given for the king’s birthday. In the spring of 1792 she officially debuted at court. Around 1796 Mary fell in love with the Dutch Prince Frederick, while he and his family lived in exile in London. Frederik was a son of William V, Prince of Orange, the Dutch stadholder, and younger brother to the future King William I of the Netherlands. However Frederik and Mary never wed because George III stipulated that her elder sisters should marry first. In 1799 Prince Frederik died of an infection while serving in the army, and Mary was allowed to go into official mourning.

    Mary’s youngest sister and beloved companion Princess Amelia called her “Mama’s tool” because of her obedient nature. Amelia’s premature death in 1810 devastated her sister, who had nursed her devotedly during her painful illness.

    

    1856 daguerreotype of Princess Mary (seated far right). Sitting to her left are Queen Victoria and Princess Alice. Standing is the Prince of Wales (later King Edward VII). Daguerreotype by Antoine Claudet

23. Sigh….it was detailed of why her portraits were so light. Because obviously some was in denial, like now, of her origin and color. I can understand some people don’t want to believe where their origins came from but that’s okay, Mother Africa is the birthplace of human life, even the scientists know that. American history also didn’t start with the slave ships for the ill informed.

24. What was it that upset you so? The word “Negroid”? If so, what word is not terribly upsetting? I think “Caucasian” sounds silly but whatever.
    I was returning to London last year from New York, and a very loud child was asking her Mum question after question, could she see Big Ben, can we knock over London Bridge, where do the African Americans live….
    Her Mum said that the, I kid you not, African Americans of England lived (blah blah blah I remember nothing after this) There really is a point of being so politically correct or actually just trying to be nice where it gets a little nuts. I have heard other Americans refer to black people as “African American” in my country before, I just thought they were stoned.
    I can’t keep up, I will just ask people and keep trying my best- but grief that was silly. I wonder if that family went to Africa, would they say “where do the African Africans live?”

    I am really curious about the cereal boxes too. Or I just need a nap.

25. Nu GeVe Neteru
    100% agreed
    All this evidence laid out by the author and these people don’t want to know the truth and refuse to except the truth. This world is beyond any help, only God can rid the world of these devils & their sick twisted actions.

26. Why are some people, mostly Afrocentric are calling that Queen Black?? She’s of Mixed race, most likely a Quadroon, but not a Negro/Black. Alot of Blacks in America are always trying to claim other racial groups accomplishments by embracing White Supremacy in the one drop slave master rule which is no longer. This is low self worth and crab mentality! If anything she is just a White eoman with a little Black blood, the European is dominant in her!

27. @ Vail. You are so right with calling non Black Americans, African American. It’s rather insulting! You don’t call an Irishman a Englishman or Russian or call a Jamaican a Trinidadian or Afro American!! We have our own culture, experience, norms and beliefs! It’s utter stupidity to call all Black persons African Americans!!