MovieChat Forums > Heather Locklear Discussion > So what about her miniscule, non-white g...

So what about her miniscule, non-white genes

posted 8 years ago by jeffyoung1
4 replies | jump to latest

Is it a big deal that actress Locklear has some miniscule amount of African and American Indian genes?

In the darker parts of United States history, it was. But not today.
One hundred years ago, that kind of personal information could be used to blackmail a white person in the United States, or else ruin their social standing and reputations. For the younger Americans who don't know the darker bigoted past of our country, it was a big deal back then, in the 19th century and for the first half of the 20th century. In the earlier 19th century, that kind of information could have been used to ruin a person like Heather Locklear and perhaps consign her to a lifetime of being a high-class prostitute in one of the fancier boudoir bordellos of New Orleans.

In 2016, that kind of information is like, 'yeah, so?' For non-white, non-Americans, this is puzzling to them. If it looks like a white person it is a white person. The added knowledge the white person has non-white genes would probably pass over their heads incomprehensibly. Heather Locklear was about as Anglo-Saxon/Germanic/Nordic as they look and come.

I understand some people asking why Locklear only divulged this information in 2014 and not back in the 1980s when she was climbing the Hollywood acting ladder. You'd have to ask her. I can only speculate. Maybe there is some long-lasting social stigma or, was, at the time. Maybe she didn't want that kind of public distraction or discussion about her.

All I can say is, no matter who you are, you had better come to terms with who you are and accept it. Christianity (including Judaism and Islam) believe that in Heaven, you will look as you do in mortal life. There is no reincarnation into a different or better-looking human being belief. There are no plastic surgeons in Heaven nor will God entertain any weirdo requests from new Heaven arrivals to change their looks and ethnicities. Sure, we'd all like to look like 30-year old, 6'1" versions of George Clooney or Robert Redford, or even the 25-year old version of Heather Locklear, but it 'ain't (sic) going to happen. Accept it.

[–] Teefar 8 years ago

Im not obsessed about race, so I could give a damn.

[–] HarveyManfredSinJohn 8 years ago

I totally agree.

I also doubt she has Native American/African genes, because that would mean her cousin, Marla Maples, has those same genes (since she is related to Locklear's father), and thus Donald J. Trump, who is as racist as you can get, would have a partially Native American/African child (i.e. Tiffany Trump) and that would be unimaginable.

Plus, like you say 'Heather Locklear was (is?) about as Anglo-Saxon/Germanic/Nordic as they look and come', and the same applies to Marla Maples, and thus it's highly unlikely that Locklear has any Native American, far less African, blood.

Let's face it, she's a WASP/Poster Girl for Aryanism.

[–] metaspheres 8 years ago

"Aryanism"? Hate to break it to you, but "Aryan" and "Aryanism" has nothing to do with being Germanic or Nordic, let alone blonde hair and blue eyes. That was a total myth invented by Arthur de Gobineau and elaborated further by Houston Stewart Chamberlain, and later co-opted by the Nazis for their genocidal pogroms. It's amazing how such myths refuse to die or be corrected, as with the situation concerning the swastika, which also was co-opted by the Nazis based on false ideas invented in the late 19th century.

The only legitimate meaning of "Aryan" and "Aryanism" is in reference to the languages and cultures of the historic Indo-Iranian peoples, and the nationalist movements associated with those peoples. For their part, the only peoples who have ever used the term "Aryan" in the ethnic sense are the Iranian-speaking peoples, in particular the ancient Persians and Medes, to distinguish themselves from their Semitic and Turkic neighbours. In Iran today the term "Aryan" is still used in the same sense, purely as an endonym.

In contrast, Indo-Aryan peoples of the Indian subcontinent have always used it in religious terms to distinguish between Vedic (Aryan) and non-Vedic (non-Aryan) traditions.

The irony is that today all of this info is available at the touch of a button, and yet the false clams and myths continue to persist in the Western mind.

Plus, the idea of a "pure" race is total and utter bollocks, as has been conclusively proven by population genetics and the extensive genetic mappings by pioneers like Cavalli-Sforza. So the claim that Locklear or anyone is somehow more "Germanic" or "Nordic" looking (totally meaningless, since "Germanic" and "Nordic" refer to particularl languages and cultures, not biological races or legitimately existing human genetic phenotypes) is ridiculously absurd and laughable. Do a genetic test on Locklear and as with most Mayflower-type multigenerational Americans she probably has considerable African and/or Native American admixture. The average Northern European, regardless of appearance, has admixture with various non-European, in particular Mongol peoples. Again, population genetics has proven all of this beyond a shadow of a doubt. Look it up.

There is no purity and never has been. Hard science is a tough thing to dispute, but there it is.

[–] muchmeow 7 years ago

That reminds me of SHOWBOAT.