Posted on 06/23/2015 10:12:10 AM PDT by nickcarraway
Verda Byrd, who was adopted by black parents as a child, finds out 70 years later that she is white.
Verda Byrd recently found out after seven decades of living as a black woman that she was born to white parents.
Although some may view Byrd's situation as vaguely similar to that of Rachel Dolezal's recent outing as white by her parents after several years of her passing as black, Byrd is vehement that her case is not the same and she gets in twist every time the former NAACP leader's name is mentioned, KHOU reports.
"She lied about her race," Byrd said. "I didn't lie about my race because I didn't know."
Byrd was born in 1942 to people she described as white transients. Her biological father, Earl Beagle, walked out on his family. Then Daisy Beagle, her birth mother, had five children to feed as a single mom. After she fell 30 feet to the ground in a trolley accident, the state of Missouri took the children, considering the mother unable to care for them.
That's how little Jeanette Beagle came to be adopted by a well-off black family from Newton, Kan.: Ray and Edwinna Wagner changed the child's name to Verda, the news station notes, and there began Byrd's life as a black person. She was raised as a light-skinned black kid, the Wagners' only child, living in comfort on Ray's salary as a railroad porter.
(Excerpt) Read more at theroot.com ...
Combined PING! and DANG!
Are breeds of dogs analogous to human “races” from a DNA standpoint?
[After she fell 30 feet to the ground in a trolley accident]
Wait, what?
No.
From an overpass, perhaps?
Dolezal’s rejection of her skin color is a microagression against those of us who accept their skin color.
Why would those dang racist government employees and KKK supporters in jim crow Missouri give a “white” child to a black family to raise???
Could it be that many people even then were quite capable of overlooking race and independently evaluate a persons character, financial position and family?
Okay... I’ll be the first to post this and I’m not writing this to be rude. However, did you look at this woman’s picture? Am I the only one who thinks, “yes.. she does look biracial?” I will bet dollars to donuts that during her time period (birth in the 40’s) that the adoption agency looked at her and decided she was either part black or appeared black and chose a black family.
In the 1940s it was unusual for black couples to be allowed to adopt white children.
That’s about the only way it makes any sense.
Hate to bring it up, but at the time it was only possible to be positive about the race of the mother. The race of the biological father could be only asserted, not proven.
If she wants to, she can have genetic analysis done and find out for sure. Quite a large percentage of white people who do the test find out they have some African ancestry.
Thank you for not flaming me about being a jerk! You are right... they could really only prove who the Mom was. I truly think they had a child.. determined race may be in question and found her a home. At that time, I am sure it was unheard of for a white family to adopt a black child or the other way around. Sounds to me like they did the best they could for a child needing a home.
I rather doubt a black family could adopt a white baby back in the 1940s. From her pic, she has black characteristics such as dark skin and a wide nose. Mama's baby and daddy's maybe could be why the legal father walked out on them.
Frankly, she looks like she has black in her lineage. that’s the real reason she was adopted out to a black family.
Where was that picture taken?
Looks like Chicago to me but that’s just a WAG.
Possibly NJ.
To be totally accurate, note that the State of Missouri removed Daisy’s children after her accident; but it was a black couple from Newton, KS who adopted the little girl.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.