Talk:Capoid

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Physical anthropology

The first paragraph of this article seems to indicate that physical anthropologists, as a group, recognize racial classification (particularly the of the -oid variety). According to this statement by the AAPA (statement on race), no such recognition is evident (two extracts follow: "Pure races, in the sense of genetically homogenous populations, do not exist in the human species today, nor is there any evidence that they have ever existed in the past." "The geographic pattern of genetic variation within this array is complex, and presents no major discontinuity. Humanity cannot be classified into discrete geographic categories with absolute boundaries.") Unless contradictory evidence can be cited for this claim that physical anthropologists recognize this racial classification, I will change the wording.--Ove 23:12, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] language change

I do not think this article reflects the controversial nature of this racial classification, nor does it compare with the complexity of the other -oid articles (as difficult as they are in themselves). If there are no comments in the next few days, I will delete most of this text and replace it with something more in line with the other articles. --Ove 17:49, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bantu Migrations

Isn't the Capoid presence in East Africa refering more specifically to Ethiopia and the Horn (i.e. fossils from the Awash river Valley and modern Afar Region)? If so, this would make the Bantu migration portion of the sentence incorrect. Yom 05:10, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I believe there are remnant "proto-Khoikhoi" populations in the African Great Lakes area, and I suppose there are other indicators that point to a historic Capoid presence in all of Eastern and Southern Africa before the Bantu, Arab, Malay and European migrations into the region. // Big Adamsky BA's talk page 08:46, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh okay, that clears things up, then. As a side point though, Arab migrations (or Yemeni, rather) are no longer though to have occured in East Africa. Yom 09:13, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
>remnant "proto-Khoikhoi" populations
Yes, Hadza and Sandawe are mentioned in the article.--JWB 23:39, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

What about the ever controversial and mysterious North Africa? There have no doubt been accounts of there being there as well as in Europe. If you want to tell a little, tell it al.--71.235.94.254 06:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] One of two within the Negroid race?

Negroid does not mean Africoid. Negroid, is an outdated derogatory term to classify human beings. Negroid, or Negro, means black race or black. Caucasoid means those originating from the Caucasus. "Mongoloid" are those originating from Mongolia. Negroid makes no sense in present day. Is there any such continent or place called Negrous, or Negro that would continue to justify this term? The Negroid classification was to make the "negros" a sub-race (sub-species) of human beings, which is FAR from the truth and SCIENCE. Therefore the beginning sentence is misinforming the public, and continuing the stereotype that Negroid is something like the "missing link" between apes and humans. ~Jeeny (talk) 04:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

  • The terms Caucasoid and Mongoloid do not have anything to do with origin, but with physical morphology. Caucasoid simply means something that looks like a Caucasian (in the "true" sense of the word, someone from the Caucasus region in the Near East), Mongoloid simply means something that looks like a Mongolian. That's also why people with Down's syndrome were called "Mongoloids" in the past, not because they were believed to have originated in Mongolia, but because they looked like people from Mongolia.

-Do you realize how stupid what you just said was? You are saying the term negroid is justified because it looks negro. Well firstly no one calls anyone that in todays world. Secondly you claim that Cauacasoid has nothing to do with "orgins" yet you say "Caucasoid simply means something that looks like a Caucasian" is caucasian not an orgins? Evn if it is not there is a geographical caucaus and mongolia there is no geographical negrolia or negraus. The term should be streamlined with the other two to reflect a region and africoid sounds dam good to me. The word negroid is defunct —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ihba (talkcontribs) 07:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Likewise, the term "Humanoid" does not mean that something is "from" humans, but that it looks morphologically similar to humans.

Therefore Negroid simply means something like: similar to "black", as in black people.

Check the meanings of the suffixes "oid" and "id" if you for some reason lack faith in my claims. Funkynusayri 12:07, 14 November 2007 (UTC)