PDA

View Full Version : Dark skin consumes more energy, fair skin evolved to save energy for other organs (?)



Tomenable
28-06-16, 12:49
An interesting new theory:

Dark skin provides better protection against things such as microbes, sun, or water loss, but consumes more energy - energy that could otherwise be used for development of other organs (such as for example brain, perhaps?):

http://phys.org/news/2016-06-paper-current-gain-loss-heavy.html

Athiudisc
28-06-16, 15:31
I think fairness amongst modern Eurasians has been arrived at mostly through sexual selection, honestly.

Greying Wanderer
28-06-16, 17:02
An interesting new theory:

Dark skin provides better protection against things such as microbes, sun, or water loss, but consumes more energy - energy that could otherwise be used for development of other organs (such as for example brain, perhaps?):

http://phys.org/news/2016-06-paper-current-gain-loss-heavy.html

or warmth?

Angela
28-06-16, 18:39
Why do people so often assume that their own sexual preferences are universal?

davef
28-06-16, 20:32
Why do people so often assume that their own sexual preferences are universal?

Or preferences in general. I liked the ewoks in episode 6....smart little guys. They took down big towering walkers using nothing but ropes and logs...

Seriously though, we need evidence to confirm white skin was a common sexual preference.

Athiudisc
28-06-16, 22:10
Why do people so often assume that their own sexual preferences are universal?

Why do you assume this is the case? I neither proffered my own preference nor suggested anything "universal." That aside, it's hardly a novel idea.

Angela
29-06-16, 02:14
Why do you assume this is the case? I neither proffered my own preference nor suggested anything "universal." That aside, it's hardly a novel idea.

I was just musing and asking a question, Athiudisc. It wasn't an accusation of any kind. I obviously wasn't clear enough.

I just think "sexual selection" is a theory some researchers throw out when they don't really know the cause for a change of phenotype. These researchers also rarely define what they mean by it, and yes, I think there's a certain assumption that attractiveness is not relative, but rather that "European style fairness" has some sort of absolute worth. It's ironic in a time where people pride themselves on not believing in absolutes.

As I've said before, I do think certain characteristics are rather hard-wired to be considered attractive because they signal health in both partners, perhaps strength in men, and fertility in women. So, thick, shiny hair, clear skin, lustrous eyes, a certain body type, a certain regularity of feature will be considered sexually attractive.

It doesn't seem to me that a certain hair and eye color and skin color are in that category. "Ethnic" groups tend, I think, to prize their own coloring. There are a lot of "fables" that show that like the Native American stories about how they were left in the oven the exact right amount of time, or from writings from the Greeks, for example, where they congratulate themselves that they're not as dark as the Ethiopians or as "fair" as the Scythians.

That does change if an elite group with a different phenotype takes control of an area, imo. Humans being humans, that "elite" phenotype will very shortly become the preferred, more sexually attractive one. So, I would indeed think that males with the power to choose based on appearance might favor women with this "elite" phenotype. Men being men, however, they obviously spread their favors more widely, or that phenotype wouldn't spread downwards to the lower orders. Perhaps if the society was very patriarchal there weren't enough women with the right phenotypes for males who had more than one mate . Women never had any ability to choose on any basis, far less this one.

I guess you could say that within these parameters "sexual selection" may indeed have had some effect, although hardly to the degree that it used to be proposed. The other factors, such as latitude, diet, and migration have more effect, I think, but that's just my speculation.

There's an interesting work of fiction by John Hersey called "White Lotus" which explores this idea in the context of a Chinese take over of the west. There's soon a large plastic surgery industry to give women "Asian" eyes and flatter noses.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1495461.White_Lotus

LeBrok
29-06-16, 02:29
Why do you assume this is the case? I neither proffered my own preference nor suggested anything "universal." That aside, it's hardly a novel idea.
I'm with Angela on this one. It is easier to assume that sexual preference fallows natural selection. Other words, whatever is healthier, more energy efficient, fitting environment better, survives easier than others will become sexually attractive, for the people of this tribe/race. It might be not be well defined at the moment in Europe, because we are a mixture of 3 major populations (farmers/HGs) which could have had different sexual preferences. Now different sexual preferences wanders around in population like our phenotypes. On top of it this genetic memory of sexual selection is often muffled by learned preferences, which follow fashion in society.

holderlin
29-06-16, 06:38
Lol

Yes, this is true. When I get a tan I feel lethargic and slow. I'm also irritable and more prone to violent outbursts.

Maleth
29-06-16, 12:01
I think fairness amongst modern Eurasians has been arrived at mostly through sexual selection, honestly.

It works both ways....and I have seen it many a time.

https://pairedlife.com/dating/talldarkandhandsome

Maleth
29-06-16, 12:03
Lol

Yes, this is true. When I get a tan I feel lethargic and slow. I'm also irritable and more prone to violent outbursts.

seems like you never saw an angry red head :grin:

Athiudisc
29-06-16, 15:48
I obviously wasn't clear enough.

No, I think I just misunderstood. :embarassed:

Angela
29-06-16, 16:07
It works both ways....and I have seen it many a time.

https://pairedlife.com/dating/talldarkandhandsome

Goodness! I have to say that if I were a man I'd be even more insecure after reading this than I was before! :) In real life, thankfully, very few people are "perfect", and there's usually someone for everyone.

Tomenable
29-06-16, 16:11
Statistics from various dating websites usually show the opposite - women of every race more often respond to White men than to Black men. So I don't think that the article cited by Maleth is accurate. It is probably just part of the same anti-white agenda as the recent "Mix yourself, protect yourself" AIDES campaign, which tries to encourage Swedish women to date "German" men:

https://redice.tv/a/i/c/16/06/AIDES%20degeneracy%201.jpg

LeBrok
29-06-16, 16:46
Statistics from various dating websites usually show the opposite - women of every race more often respond to White men than to Black men. So I don't think that the article cited by Maleth is accurate. It is probably just part of the same anti-white agenda as the recent "Mix yourself, protect yourself" AIDES campaign, which tries to encourage Swedish women to date "German" men:

To be pro black or pro any colour doesn't need to be anti white, right? Liking white or black doesn't need to be mutually exclusive feeling, never mind invoking dislike or fear.


I'm not sure why authors of this study have difficulty admitting that white skin was a product of both functions, better vitamin D production and energy saving? More beneficial functions the strongest the selection. All good.

Minty
29-06-16, 17:02
Statistics from various dating websites usually show the opposite - women of every race more often respond to White men than to Black men. So I don't think that the article cited by Maleth is accurate. It is probably just part of the same anti-white agenda as the recent "Mix yourself, protect yourself" AIDES campaign, which tries to encourage Swedish women to date "German" men:

https://redice.tv/a/i/c/16/06/AIDES%20degeneracy%201.jpg

That is because most black men are poor, plus most scammers are from Nigeria or other African countries pretending to be white.

Angela
29-06-16, 17:05
Statistics from various dating websites usually show the opposite - women of every race more often respond to White men than to Black men. So I don't think that the article cited by Maleth is accurate. It is probably just part of the same anti-white agenda as the recent "Mix yourself, protect yourself" AIDES campaign, which tries to encourage Swedish women to date "German" men:

https://redice.tv/a/i/c/16/06/AIDES%20degeneracy%201.jpg

Internet dating sites are hardly a scientific sample. Plus, there are all sorts of societal reasons for women preferring not to date black men.

Also, you clearly didn't read the article, Tomenable. It had nothing to do with Africans. It was all in a European context. "Tall, dark, and handsome" in that context means this:

http://theredlist.com/media/database/muses/icon/cinematic_men/1950/gregory_peck/06-gregory-peck-theredlist.jpg

http://www.bestmoviesbyfarr.com/static-assets/images/articles/2015/02/gregorypeckcolor.jpeg

The above picture of Gregory Peck is aptly titled "American Dream".

The article was not about these men although they too are "tall, dark, and handsome".

http://linapps.s3.amazonaws.com/linapps/photomojo/lintvnews.com/photos/2012/01/g1897-black-history-month-oscar-winners/39712-denzel-washington-1990-f7cfe.jpg

http://blogs.psychcentral.com/life-goals/files/2014/12/shemar-moore-handsome.jpg

Anyone who thinks Shemar Moore isn't handsome needs to have his or her head examined, imo! :)

As for him, I don't know if he's tall but it certainly wouldn't matter to me...he's gorgeous in my book:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/05/56/43/0556433250e6bfcbd7d6a233dce8b736.jpg

Maleth
29-06-16, 17:54
Statistics from various dating websites usually show the opposite - women of every race more often respond to White men than to Black men. So I don't think that the article cited by Maleth is accurate. It is probably just part of the same anti-white agenda as the recent "Mix yourself, protect yourself" AIDES campaign, which tries to encourage Swedish women to date "German" men:



tall dark and handsome is something you hear very much in this case the UK. Not everything in this world has to be seen in the eyes of propaganda (!) some people are just natural. I have noticed time and time again in my experience men attracted to blond and pale women and women attracted to dark men. Its more then just an isolated experience. Probably the opposite is true as well. Dark women prefer fairer looking guys. Not always the case but a common occurrence.

Once we also had an interesting thread of ancient depictions of often Men are portrait as dark and women pale. and anyway Dark does not mean black skin but maybe tanned or swarthy with black hair and brown eyes. (as i found that Angela just said :) )

davef
29-06-16, 17:59
While its possible paler skin was a common preference, it could also be that people had better access to vitamin d rich foods so darker skin wasn't necessary and was eliminated thus saving energy that would've been wasted. That energy was then used to provide for the family and the individual.
Now the caveat in this case is that the energy may have instead gone towards vitamin d digestion instead, so there's not much of a gain in that aspect.

Maleth
29-06-16, 18:09
thankfully, very few people are "perfect", and there's usually someone for everyone.

I believe that too. Even in extreme circumstances. Its amazing actually

holderlin
30-06-16, 03:35
seems like you never saw an angry red head :grin:

Not really. Honestly red headed women have always been the "coolest" girl friends of mine, meaning they had very agreeable personalities. Probably has nothing to do with anything other than me growing up around mostly white people in the NW of the US. Redhead was coincidental, and yet it doesn't feel to have been coincidental. All of them were super smart too.

holderlin
30-06-16, 03:36
Is there really propaganda urging Swedish Women to bone German black men? wtf

holderlin
30-06-16, 03:37
That's funny

holderlin
30-06-16, 03:38
Because there's probably Swedish women who buy into it

holderlin
30-06-16, 03:44
There is a preference for fairer features in by and large C'mon. I was just watching this thing on Gypsies in Bulgaria where the young virgin girls go to marriage markets were guys from other families bid on them and they were saying that the women always try to make their features as fair as possible to get the better family to like them. This is just one example, but it's hard to doubt this for most of the world, especially poor nations. But this is a recent social conditioning from the dominance of the Anglo West. White has meant power, influence and security for centuries now.

Dov
30-06-16, 04:26
An average, males in any populations darker (skin and hair) than women. Also adults in any population darker than children.
Fairness is clearly associated with femininity and infantilism, while the dark - with masculinity.

Perhaps, European fairness is a product of male sexual selection. Although it is hard to believe, but how do we know the some Y haplo to make a lot of offspring from various women.

On the other hand, we know examples of female sexual selection on children's characteristics. Large cranial in comparison with the face of modern humans. In primates, it is a sign of infantile children, and far from masculinity.
7824

Angela
30-06-16, 04:37
I agree with LeBrok that this may just be another part of the puzzle, not that it invalidates other factors.

""Work in our lab has shown that darkly pigmented skin (http://phys.org/tags/skin/) has far better function, including a better barrier to water loss, stronger cohesion, and better antimicrobial defense, and we began to ponder the possible evolutionary significance of that," said Peter Elias, MD, professor of dermatology. Elias co-authored the new paper, published in the June 21, 2016 online issue of the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, with his wife and frequent research collaborator Mary L. Williams, MD, clinical professor of dermatology at UCSF.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-06-paper-current-gain-loss-heavy.html#jCp"


I'm tempted to buy into this just based on my own experiences; it's not very scientific, I know. :)

Years ago I went to Caneel Bay in the Virgin Islands. It billed itself as a "natural" location. Beware of ads like that. Even in the off season you paid a fortune for a little bungalow that sat right on the beach: no tv, no phone, etc. You barely saw any other guests. We thought maybe there were lots of honeymooners, and, who knows, maybe some people hiding out! When we went looking for some dance music at the main building, to discover they only had it on Saturdays, one of the waiters told us the resort was for the newly wed or the nearly dead. We were neither. First thing the brochure didn't tell us.

Anyway, another thing they didn't have was spraying for bugs, although we knew that. I just didn't know what that might mean. We spent almost our whole first night on lounge chairs and blankets right on our own stretch of beach, practically in the water. Sounds idyllic, right? Well, when I woke up in the morning I had about a thousand bites from sand fleas on my legs. By the next day they were infected. I had to take the resort motor launch to the main island to see a doctor, who gave me a massive shot of penicillin. (That's another thing we hadn't realized: no doctor on the whole island where we were staying.) He also bestowed the benefit of his vast experience on me: he told me it was always the people who looked like a bottle of milk who got bitten multiple times and then got an infection. The tropics were not for people like me. Now that they also didn't put on the brochures!

In addition to the anti-microbial properties of dark skin, I think there is some truth to the fact that dark skinned people don't lose as much water. It's always the pink or dead white skinned types who wind up with sun stroke. It only gets worse the older you get too.

So, as I said, they may be onto something here.

Dov
30-06-16, 05:10
Statistics from various dating websites usually show the opposite - women of every race more often respond to White men than to Black men.
Also, if this statistics are true, black women are even less popular. They are the most unpopular. This is not surprising, the black color far from of femininity and infantilism. But there are and other reasons in all these cases.

Minty
30-06-16, 05:56
Also, if this statistics are true, black women are even less popular. They are the most unpopular. This is not surprising, the black color far from of femininity and infantilism. But there are and other reasons in all these cases.

I think this is quite true. This is even the case in Asia where men tend to prefer fair skinned women, if you take a look at the media in Asia, there are virtually no dark skinned women portrayed as a sex symbols, by contrast there is a few men who are tanned that are quite popular.

In less developed nations, the poor generally have to work outdoors (like a farm, for example) and therefore develop darker skin. The wealthy in these countries, work indoors at 'desk jobs' and do not develop 'dark' skin. Darker skin symbolizes being poor.

Conversely, in western countries a tan means that you have disposable income to take vacations into sunny climates or have free time away from a desk job to lay on the beach and get a tan. A tan symbolizes wealth.

This also explains the social phenomena in Asian countries like China and Japan where women carry umbrellas on sunny days. Similarly, in India, getting tanned makes someone less valuable for marriage.

davef
30-06-16, 06:05
To me, its not so much the skin color as it is the shape of the nose, the eyes, torso, etc (I'm keeping it PG) which determines physical attractiveness. I've seen my share of gorgeous and dark Iranian and Indian women.

Minty
30-06-16, 06:08
To me, its not so much the skin color as it is the shape of the nose, the eyes, torso, etc (I'm keeping it PG) which determines physical attractiveness. I've seen my share of gorgeous and dark Iranian and Indian women.

This is a wonderful message for Asian women of dark complexion, go for white men. They like "chocolates"!

Dov
30-06-16, 07:24
I think this is quite true. This is even the case in Asia where men tend to prefer fair skinned women, if you take a look at the media in Asia, there are virtually no dark skinned women portrayed as a sex symbols, by contrast there is a few men who are tanned that are quite popular.

In less developed nations, the poor generally have to work outdoors (like a farm, for example) and therefore develop darker skin. The wealthy in these countries, work indoors at 'desk jobs' and do not develop 'dark' skin. Darker skin symbolizes being poor.

Conversely, in western countries a tan means that you have disposable income to take vacations into sunny climates or have free time away from a desk job to lay on the beach and get a tan. A tan symbolizes wealth.

This also explains the social phenomena in Asian countries like China and Japan where women carry umbrellas on sunny days. Similarly, in India, getting tanned makes someone less valuable for marriage.

Yes, there is also cultural and social aspects. And it certainly changed in centuries. In Russia 150 years ago, a big belly was considered a sign of wealth, as well as probably the "good genes", that can stock up fat in case of crop failure. Now, in the era of the grocery abundance, thick body is associated with unhealthy lifestyle and "bad genes".

Maleth
30-06-16, 07:56
Not really. Honestly red headed women have always been the "coolest" girl friends of mine, meaning they had very agreeable personalities. Probably has nothing to do with anything other than me growing up around mostly white people in the NW of the US. Redhead was coincidental, and yet it doesn't feel to have been coincidental. All of them were super smart too.

If you never seen an aggressive (both verbally and physical) blond or redhead then we must be living in two different planets.

Just for some Humor :)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeXiWbCMEiE

Coriolan
30-06-16, 08:54
If fairer skin wastes less energy, does that mean that fairer people can potentially work harder? Is it what we see without leaving racial divides? Do fairer skinned Botswanans work harder than darker Congolese? Do Koreans work harder than Indonesians? Do Poles work harder than Greeks? Do North Italians work harder than South Italians? I am not asking if they are more intelligent or efficient or successful. Just if they seem to have more energy available for work.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

LeBrok
30-06-16, 16:31
If fairer skin wastes less energy, does that mean that fairer people can potentially work harder? Is it what we see without leaving racial divides? Do fairer skinned Botswanans work harder than darker Congolese? Do Koreans work harder than Indonesians? Do Poles work harder than Greeks? Do North Italians work harder than South Italians? I am not asking if they are more intelligent or efficient or successful. Just if they seem to have more energy available for work.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698) I doubt that energy savings in skin are big enough to compensate for calories needed for hard work. If anything the climatic "sweet spot" might explain it better. Farming communities of Europe and Northern Europe in particular had to be extra busy to survive long winter and work fast through short summer. In hotter parts of the world working hard might lead to heat exhaustion.
Actually I find Chinese, Koreans and Japanese to be on top of workaholics list. They are also the farmers of moderate climatic zone.

Angela
30-06-16, 17:10
I doubt that energy savings in skin are big enough to compensate for calories needed for hard work. If anything the climatic "sweet spot" might explain it better. Farming communities of Europe and Northern Europe in particular had to be extra busy to survive long winter and work fast through short summer. In hotter parts of the world working hard might lead to heat exhaustion.
Actually I find Chinese, Koreans and Japanese to be on top of workaholics list. They are also the farmers of moderate climatic zone.

Totally agree.

The siesta served a very real purpose in the past. You couldn't do hard work outside for a good six months of the year during the hottest, sunniest parts of the day from 12 to 3. That was certainly the case in Liguria, which has a Mediterranean climate. Of course, the farmers had to make up for it by rising when it was still dark and then doing inside work far into the night. Still, while further inland they might be housebound for parts of the winter, in these places with a Mediterranean climate you could grow crops at least twice a year, so there wasn't much of an off season.

You can see the effect of climate on "northern European" descended people in parts of the U.S. like Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi etc., which are very "Anglo" states. They're stereotyped as being slow moving and slow talking, but there's a reason for it. In Florida for more than six months a year walking from your air conditioned condo to your air conditioned car can leave you exhausted and drenched in sweat. I don't know how people could bear it before those modern conveniences, much less work outdoors in it.

That's one of the reasons that they imported slaves from Africa to work in the sugar cane, cotton, and tobacco fields. They tried using indentured servants from Europe and Indians, but they died at an alarming rate. The African slaves didn't. They were not only acculturated to climates like that, but, if this study is correct, their phenotype made them more suited to it.

davef
01-07-16, 16:02
Interesting that Africans were sold as slaves due to their ability to withstand the heat. I never knew that! Irish were commonly sold as slaves as well I think but since they're north euros they're adapted to colder climates and probably died en masse in the heat.

holderlin
01-07-16, 17:18
Interesting that Africans were sold as slaves due to their ability to withstand the heat. I never knew that! Irish were commonly sold as slaves as well I think but since they're north euros they're adapted to colder climates and probably died en masse in the heat.

Interesting fact likely unrelated to skin pigmentation. When they were building the railroads in America it was a standard practice to include a certain number of Irish in every work crew because they were very good fighters when encountering hostile Native Americans.

I always thought that was pretty awesome, especially if you're Irish.

MOESAN
01-07-16, 17:30
sexual selection exist in precise time and place and class, not always on the same direction, according to ethnies, but the selection is not acting the same over the full pop, so the results are very uneasy to calculate concerning future of pops.
class and sex: serious studies prove women have as a mean a little bit fairer skin than mean males of the same group (what is not the case for hair and eyes; and yet, the most of women has fairer skin on visage, not always on the whole body): if the group is heterogenous even if not too much, what is the more general case, the upper class men marry the fairest women: sexual attractivity here, but with an impact upon social classes; but the global result is uncertain: in ancient times, rulers classes mate with more than a female and pass more DNA than others in a group; yes here we could see fairer skins densify with time IF THE RULERS MEN WERE NOT OF A CONQUERANT DARKER TYPE! in this last case, the effect of fair women is nulled by the effect of darker men! In today times, the higher social classes give birth to less children than the lower classes: so the fairer women has less posterity than the lower class women! opposite effect at the global scale of pop. The final result could be a more sensitive "racial" selection when the pops were already very heterogenous.
I spoke above of theorical cases: in already well crossed pops, the sexual selection can be followed by a "racial" one.
And according to time and place too, modes evolve: in Middle Ages, the nobility was less exposed to sun than the peasants, by instance; fairness of skin was associated to social level: but her there was no genetic clear effect for the most; the mesologic action (way of life) was enough to segregate for the most. In the 1950s the success of Californian symbole in Europe worshipped the tanned skins sign of health, sportive and agreeable life. The genetic impact here is surely as slight than in the precedent case.
And as said someones here (thanks!) sexual "canons" can oppose men and women: prized dark men - not too dark nevertheless, in racist America! - and fair women; here too artifices can reduce at a very small scale the genetic imput.
To conlude, it is almost impossible to estimate true genetic imput of these kinds of selection at a global scale, even if in some precise social class cases we see it has some imput.

Minty
03-07-16, 15:34
Neanderthals, who ranged from Western Europe to Central Asia, probably had the same distribution of skin color as modern humans, including fair skin and freckles. Fair skin is an advantage at northern latitudes because it is more efficient at generating vitamin D from weak sunlight. Freckles are clusters of cells that overproduce melanin granules; they are triggered by exposure to sunlight and are most noticeable on pale skin. BNC2 is one of several skin color genes and it influences saturation of skin color and freckling. It is a Neanderthal gene and is found in Eurasian populations, most commonly in Europeans (70% have at least one copy of the Neanderthal version).

According to this ppl with light skin got that from neanderthal genomes, so I am thinking whether this has anything to do with preferences of mate selection...

It seems like European descent ppl tend to have a fondness for dark skin women, where as Asian ppl don't.

Recent research suggests, people in China, Japan and other East Asian countries have about 20 percent more Neanderthal DNA than do Europeans. It is now scientifically irrefutable fact that the "human species" has been found to contain a substantial quantity of DNA (at least 20%) from other hominid populations not classified as Homo sapien; such as Neanderthal, Denisovan, African archaic, Homo erectus, and now possibly even "Hobbit" (Homo floresiensis).

If not given drugs to prevent infant death, the pregnant body of a rhesus negative mother will attack, try to reject, and even kill her own offspring if it is by a rhesus positive man.

The Domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris) is a sub-species of the gray wolf (Canis lupus), and they produce hybrids.

There are numerous other examples of where two separate species (for example with different numbers of chromosomes) can also produce viable offspring, yet are considered separate species. That said, humanity has been shown to be, genetically speaking, a hybrid species that did not all share the same hunter-gatherer ancestry in Africa.This means humans are not all the same race, out of Africa theory is debunked!

7828




1. African DNA found in Yorkshireman

In 2007 the Daily Mail ran a report on John Revis, a Yorkshireman who was so blond and blue-eyed when he was younger that he thought he was directly descended from Viking or Anglo-Saxon stock. However, when his DNA was analysed as part of a wider study linking the male Y-chromosome to northern surnames, he was found to be haplogroup A1.

John RevisA1 is very rare and highly specific to west Africa. John Revis shared this genetic match with 7 other northern Englishmen with the surname Revis. He had traced his direct paternal line back to the mid-1700s and found his ancestors where mostly bakers from the north of England; there was nothing in his family history to suggest recent African origins. However, his DNA presented the first genetic evidence of Africans living among ‘indigenous’ British people.Africans were first recorded as being present in northern England 1,800 years ago, when they formed a contingent of the Roman garrisons defending Hadrian’s Wall against raids by Scottish tribes. Much later in the 16th and 17th centuries the slave trade also brought an influx of Africans to the British Isles, and by the late 18th century there were around 10,000 black people living in Britain. Some former slaves rose quite high in society.

It is possible that John Revis descends directly from the north African clans that comprised a small part of the armies of Roman Britain from 43 – 410 AD, but the Roman occupation left only a tiny genetic footprint on the modern English population and it is thought more likely that the source of his African DNA is a slave from West Africa.

The contributor of the A1 chromosome to the Revis surname may not be its founder. He may have been a first-generation immigrant African, or a European-looking man carrying the A1 Y-chromosome introduced into England some time earlier. It could have been many generations earlier, with descendants of earlier lineages now extinct, or not yet tested.

Could ppl with African genes that look white find dark women more attractive than ppl who don't? I am thinking that the preferences might not be just cultural but it is embedded in your genes.

Maleth
03-07-16, 16:54
It seems like European descent ppl tend to have a fondness for dark skin women, where as Asian ppl don't.

That is a generic statement. That can hold true for maybe central and Northern Europeans men but not so much in the south of Europe. Also seem to be the case the other way round.

Angela
03-07-16, 17:21
Minty;483081]Neanderthals, who ranged from Western Europe to Central Asia, probably had the same distribution of skin color as modern humans, including fair skin and freckles. Fair skin is an advantage at northern latitudes because it is more efficient at generating vitamin D from weak sunlight. Freckles are clusters of cells that overproduce melanin granules; they are triggered by exposure to sunlight and are most noticeable on pale skin. BNC2 is one of several skin color genes and it influences saturation of skin color and freckling. It is a Neanderthal gene and is found in Eurasian populations, most commonly in Europeans (70% have at least one copy of the Neanderthal version).


Europeans did not get their major effect de-pigmentation genes from Neanderthals. There's been a lot of research on the subject of pigmentation, and a lot of discussion of it on this thread in the last year or two.

This is just one of them:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32273-Recent-Natural-Selection-in-British-populations?highlight=de-pigmentation+snpshttp://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32273-Recent-Natural-Selection-in-British-populations?highlight=de-pigmentation+snps


It seems like European descent ppl tend to have a fondness for dark skin women, where as Asian ppl don't.


That's patently not true for a lot of Europeans.


Recent research suggests, people in China, Japan and other East Asian countries have about 20 percent more Neanderthal DNA than do Europeans. It is now scientifically irrefutable fact that the "human species" has been found to contain a substantial quantity of DNA (at least 20%) from other hominid populations not classified as Homo sapien; such as Neanderthal, Denisovan, African archaic, Homo erectus, and now possibly even "Hobbit" (Homo floresiensis).

We know. There are numerous threads on the various papers on the subject published within the last year or so. You can use the search engine to find them.



Could ppl with African genes that look white find dark women more attractive than ppl who don't? I am thinking that the preferences might not be just cultural but it is embedded in your genes.


Seriously?

vcovaci
03-07-16, 18:10
An interesting new theory:

Dark skin provides better protection against things such as microbes, sun, or water loss, but consumes more energy - energy that could otherwise be used for development of other organs (such as for example brain, perhaps?)




Quite plausible. The idea that light skin evolved to promote vitamin D synthesis at northern latitudes seems to me less and less probable. If it would be so then why people of African origin tend to have higher bone density compared to Caucasians even when living in Europe or North America? It's known that vtiamin D plays a crucial role in bone health and development (through promoting calcium absorption), isn't it? We can't get it in decent quantities from our usual food, unless we eat regularly a lot of oceanic fish.

LeBrok
03-07-16, 22:02
Quite plausible. The idea that light skin evolved to promote vitamin D synthesis at northern latitudes seems to me less and less probable. If it would be so then why people of African origin tend to have higher bone density compared to Caucasians even when living in Europe or North America? It's known that vtiamin D plays a crucial role in bone health and development (through promoting calcium absorption), isn't it? We can't get it in decent quantities from our usual food, unless we eat regularly a lot of oceanic fish.So how do we get most of D3 we need?

Angela
04-07-16, 01:00
In terms of African Americans I assume you're referring to this study?

"Among the nearly 1,200 black adults in his study, the average total vitamin D level was just shy of 16 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL), versus almost 26 ng/mL among 900 white adults.
In general, levels below 20 ng/mL are considered a vitamin D deficiency."

Yet, "on balance, black and white adults had similar levels of "bioavailable" vitamin D -- the kind that their bodies can actually use."

Differences in certain gene variants between SSAs and Europeans seem to explain it:

"Thadhani's team looked at study participants' levels of vitamin D-binding protein, which basically locks up the vitamin, away from body cells' use. It turned out that blacks also had lower levels of vitamin D-binding protein. So on balance, black and white adults had similar levels of "bioavailable" vitamin D -- the kind that their bodies can actually use.

Thadhani said that gene variations appeared to explain most of the difference in people's levels of the vitamin D-binding protein. Most blacks adults carried a gene variant linked to lower levels of the protein, while fewer than half of whites did."

However, given how many modern food products, including not only milk but also cereals and breads, are enriched with Vitamin D, I don't know how much looking at the Vitamin D levels of Africans living in higher latitudes can tell us.

I think modern humans are doing a lot in terms of insulating themselves from evolution caused by natural selection.

vcovaci
04-07-16, 09:47
Why there would be this difference in the levels of vitamin D-binding protein? Why would most black adults carry this gene variant?

bicicleur
04-07-16, 10:20
In terms of African Americans I assume you're referring to this study?

"Among the nearly 1,200 black adults in his study, the average total vitamin D level was just shy of 16 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL), versus almost 26 ng/mL among 900 white adults.
In general, levels below 20 ng/mL are considered a vitamin D deficiency."

Yet, "on balance, black and white adults had similar levels of "bioavailable" vitamin D -- the kind that their bodies can actually use."

Differences in certain gene variants between SSAs and Europeans seem to explain it:

"Thadhani's team looked at study participants' levels of vitamin D-binding protein, which basically locks up the vitamin, away from body cells' use. It turned out that blacks also had lower levels of vitamin D-binding protein. So on balance, black and white adults had similar levels of "bioavailable" vitamin D -- the kind that their bodies can actually use.

Thadhani said that gene variations appeared to explain most of the difference in people's levels of the vitamin D-binding protein. Most blacks adults carried a gene variant linked to lower levels of the protein, while fewer than half of whites did."

However, given how many modern food products, including not only milk but also cereals and breads, are enriched with Vitamin D, I don't know how much looking at the Vitamin D levels of Africans living in higher latitudes can tell us.

I think modern humans are doing a lot in terms of insulating themselves from evolution caused by natural selection.

it seems like blacks and whites have a different history of natural selection which produced a different strategy for acquiring 'bioavailable' vitamine D
it might be that a balanced diet for whites is not a balanced diet for blacks and vice versa

Minty
04-07-16, 11:23
Europeans did not get their major effect de-pigmentation genes from Neanderthals. There's been a lot of research on the subject of pigmentation, and a lot of discussion of it on this thread in the last year or two.

This is just one of them:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32273-Recent-Natural-Selection-in-British-populations?highlight=de-pigmentation+snpshttp://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32273-Recent-Natural-Selection-in-British-populations?highlight=de-pigmentation+snps

I am still reading, there are a lot to read.




That's patently not true for a lot of Europeans.

I tend to find there are many mixed children with dark complexions when I go shopping in Auchan (French hypermarket). In Asia, very little people would consider interbreeding with Africans, and many prefer light skinned women.

When I typed Europeans marrying blacks or Asians instead of getting Europe's stats I am getting America's stats so here they are:

Marriage Patterns for Six Largest
Asian American Ethnic Groups (2010)
(Updated Nov. 2011)
Asian Indians
All Spouses USR + USR or FR USR + USR Only
Men
Asian Indian 92.5 76.9 62.4
Other Asian 1.5 4.2 4.5
White 4.3 13.3 25.6
Black 0.3 0.9 0.7
Hispanic/Latino 0.8 2.5 3.5
Multiracial & All Others 0.6 2.1 3.4
Population Size (x1000) 701.6 62.1 32.1

Women
Asian Indian 92.9 70.6 52.0
Other Asian 0.9 1.9 2.9
White 4.7 22.6 37.8
Black 0.5 1.8 2.8
Hispanic/Latino 0.4 1.4 2.1
Multiracial & All Others 0.7 1.7 2.4
Population Size (x1000) 691.6 68.3 39.2

Chinese
Men
Chinese 88.8 63.9 53.6
Other Asian 4.8 12.9 14.8
White 5.2 19.2 26.5
Black 0.1 0.1 0.2
Hispanic/Latino 0.7 2.1 2.6
Multiracial & All Others 0.5 1.7 2.3
Population Size (x1000) 707.0 140.8 96.8

Women
Chinese 79.9 52.4 46.1
Other Asian 3.5 9.9 10.4
White 14.5 31.9 37.7
Black 0.3 0.7 0.7
Hispanic/Latino 0.9 2.8 2.8
Multiracial & All Others 0.8 2.3 2.4
Population Size (x1000) 777.9 138.5 112.6

Filipinos
Men
Filipino 85.1 54.2 42.1
Other Asian 2.6 7.1 7.9
White 7.9 24.0 31.8
Black 0.2 1.0 1.4
Hispanic/Latino 2.8 9.0 11.0
Multiracial & All Others 1.4 4.7 5.8
Population Size (x1000) 440.8 99.2 71.3

Women
Filipino 61.6 36.7 29.1
Other Asian 2.6 6.2 6.4
White 27.0 37.2 42.7
Black 2.6 4.0 4.4
Hispanic/Latino 3.7 8.1 8.5
Multiracial & All Others 2.6 7.8 8.9
Population Size (x1000) 608.7 121.0 102.2

Japanese
All Spouses USR + USR or FR USR + USR Only
Men
Japanese 62.8 54.5 53.8
Other Asian 11.5 14.2 12.2
White 18.8 22.8 25.1
Blacks 0.2 0.3 0.3
Hispanic/Latino 3.3 3.8 3.6
Multiracial & All Others 3.5 4.5 4.9
Population Size (x1000) 151.1 104.7 91.2

Women
Japanese 44.4 48.9 49.3
Other Asian 8.0 12.2 11.0
White 38.1 29.4 29.9
Black 2.1 0.7 0.8
Hispanic/Latino 3.2 3.7 3.9
Multiracial & All Others 4.1 5.1 5.2
Population Size (x1000) 212.6 104.3 99.7

Koreans
Men
Korean 90.4 61.1 44.8
Other Asian 2.9 10.4 13.0
White 5.3 23.1 34.6
Black 0.2 0.8 1.2
Hispanic/Latino 0.9 3.7 5.3
Multiracial & All Others 0.4 0.7 1.1
Population Size (x1000) 265.4 47.8 30.2

Women
Korean 68.1 35.4 24.1
Other Asian 3.6 9.2 9.8
White 24.4 48.4 57.7
Black 1.4 1.6 1.9
Hispanic/Latino 1.3 2.7 3.3
Multiracial & All Others 1.2 2.7 3.3
Population Size (x1000) 351.5 72.6 58.4

Vietnamese
Men
Vietnamese 92.6 71.0 59.0
Other Asian 3.4 11.9 13.7
White 2.8 13.1 21.9
Black 0.0 0.2 0.4
Hispanic/Latino 0.5 2.6 3.3
Multiracial & All Others 0.6 1.3 1.6
Population Size (x1000) 299.7 44.9 26.8

Women
Vietnamese 84.6 56.3 40.6
Other Asian 4.2 11.1 12.2
White 9.4 28.7 41.3
Black 0.2 0.5 0.5
Hispanic/Latino 0.9 2.9 4.5
Multiracial & All Others 0.7 0.5 0.8
Population Size (x1000) 323.6 54.4 35.0

USR = U.S.-Raised (1.5 generation or higher)
FR = Foreign-Raised (1st generation)
"USR + USR or FR" = Spouse 1 is USR while Spouse 2 can be USR or FR
"USR + USR Only" = Both spouses are USR
Methodology used to tabulate these statistics

As you can see the rates of Asians marrying blacks are very very low.

When I type in French, I get stats from France but not the rest of Europe, even I typed Europeans not French...

Aujourd'hui, ils sont 27% à repousser l'idée d'une union avec une personne d'origine arabe, 21% pour un Africain et 14% pour les Asiatiques, selon les chiffres d'un récent sondage Ifop pour l'hebdomadaire La Vie….

http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/2010/01/21/01016-20100121ARTFIG00021-pourquoi-la-france-compte-27-de-mariages-mixtes-.php

27% marrying Arabs (some Arabs are dark), 21% marrying African and 14% marrying Asians (some Asians are dark), that is a lot!!!

7829

11.9 percent for black and white couple. That is not a lot, but much more than Asians marrying blacks. I don't live in the states but I tend to see a lot of white men with dark skinned women, but when I say dark skinned, they are not necessary black. 14.4 % for Asian white couple, but they don't specified what sorts of Asians, some Asians can be very dark like the ones shown in the pictures below, and by contrast some Asians can be very light.

Dark Asians marrying white men I found online.

7830

7831



We know. There are numerous threads on the various papers on the subject published within the last year or so. You can use the search engine to find them.

I am still reading them, too many things to read.




Seriously?

A lot of the reasons that people suggested are to do with culture. However, culture is created by humans, where do these ideas and preferences come from? I am thinking could it be innate? I have a friend who is very fond of the sun and brown skinned women. He has dated half blacks, half white, and many dark skinned Thai women, and he find dark skinned Indian women very attractive. He is French, so aside from that half black half white women from the Caribbeans ( French overseas departments), that has linguistic and cultural link with the French, the rest have no cultural or linguistic ties with the French.

Every time he goes to Thailand for vacation, he would proudly showed off how cool it is to get sunshine and to swim in the pool and go scuba diving in the seas, and how much he hates winter. Of course there are also the ladies, brown ladies, that he is so fond of. By contrast, Asian ppl would try to stay away from the sun as much as possible, and prefer light skinned ladies.



In fact, I think their beauty standards are not so different from those from China, Korea or Japan.

elghund
04-07-16, 16:07
Why do you assume this is the case? I neither proffered my own preference nor suggested anything "universal." That aside, it's hardly a novel idea.

Touche!

I think it's pretty reasonable idea. Bird feathers and fish scales have both been subject to sexual selective forces. Why not human skin? Presumably though, light skin does help prevent Vitamin D deficiency in higher latitudes. But then again, light skin emerged in the Middle East, where climes were warm and there was plenty of sunshine year round.

Angela
04-07-16, 19:58
I am still reading, there are a lot to read.





I tend to find there are many mixed children with dark complexions when I go shopping in Auchan (French hypermarket). In Asia, very little people would consider interbreeding with Africans, and many prefer light skinned women.

When I typed Europeans marrying blacks or Asians instead of getting Europe's stats I am getting America's stats so here they are:

Marriage Patterns for Six Largest
Asian American Ethnic Groups (2010)
(Updated Nov. 2011)
Asian Indians
All Spouses USR + USR or FR USR + USR Only
Men
Asian Indian 92.5 76.9 62.4
Other Asian 1.5 4.2 4.5
White 4.3 13.3 25.6
Black 0.3 0.9 0.7
Hispanic/Latino 0.8 2.5 3.5
Multiracial & All Others 0.6 2.1 3.4
Population Size (x1000) 701.6 62.1 32.1

Women
Asian Indian 92.9 70.6 52.0
Other Asian 0.9 1.9 2.9
White 4.7 22.6 37.8
Black 0.5 1.8 2.8
Hispanic/Latino 0.4 1.4 2.1
Multiracial & All Others 0.7 1.7 2.4
Population Size (x1000) 691.6 68.3 39.2

Chinese
Men
Chinese 88.8 63.9 53.6
Other Asian 4.8 12.9 14.8
White 5.2 19.2 26.5
Black 0.1 0.1 0.2
Hispanic/Latino 0.7 2.1 2.6
Multiracial & All Others 0.5 1.7 2.3
Population Size (x1000) 707.0 140.8 96.8

Women
Chinese 79.9 52.4 46.1
Other Asian 3.5 9.9 10.4
White 14.5 31.9 37.7
Black 0.3 0.7 0.7
Hispanic/Latino 0.9 2.8 2.8
Multiracial & All Others 0.8 2.3 2.4
Population Size (x1000) 777.9 138.5 112.6

Filipinos
Men
Filipino 85.1 54.2 42.1
Other Asian 2.6 7.1 7.9
White 7.9 24.0 31.8
Black 0.2 1.0 1.4
Hispanic/Latino 2.8 9.0 11.0
Multiracial & All Others 1.4 4.7 5.8
Population Size (x1000) 440.8 99.2 71.3

Women
Filipino 61.6 36.7 29.1
Other Asian 2.6 6.2 6.4
White 27.0 37.2 42.7
Black 2.6 4.0 4.4
Hispanic/Latino 3.7 8.1 8.5
Multiracial & All Others 2.6 7.8 8.9
Population Size (x1000) 608.7 121.0 102.2

Japanese
All Spouses USR + USR or FR USR + USR Only
Men
Japanese 62.8 54.5 53.8
Other Asian 11.5 14.2 12.2
White 18.8 22.8 25.1
Blacks 0.2 0.3 0.3
Hispanic/Latino 3.3 3.8 3.6
Multiracial & All Others 3.5 4.5 4.9
Population Size (x1000) 151.1 104.7 91.2

Women
Japanese 44.4 48.9 49.3
Other Asian 8.0 12.2 11.0
White 38.1 29.4 29.9
Black 2.1 0.7 0.8
Hispanic/Latino 3.2 3.7 3.9
Multiracial & All Others 4.1 5.1 5.2
Population Size (x1000) 212.6 104.3 99.7

Koreans
Men
Korean 90.4 61.1 44.8
Other Asian 2.9 10.4 13.0
White 5.3 23.1 34.6
Black 0.2 0.8 1.2
Hispanic/Latino 0.9 3.7 5.3
Multiracial & All Others 0.4 0.7 1.1
Population Size (x1000) 265.4 47.8 30.2

Women
Korean 68.1 35.4 24.1
Other Asian 3.6 9.2 9.8
White 24.4 48.4 57.7
Black 1.4 1.6 1.9
Hispanic/Latino 1.3 2.7 3.3
Multiracial & All Others 1.2 2.7 3.3
Population Size (x1000) 351.5 72.6 58.4

Vietnamese
Men
Vietnamese 92.6 71.0 59.0
Other Asian 3.4 11.9 13.7
White 2.8 13.1 21.9
Black 0.0 0.2 0.4
Hispanic/Latino 0.5 2.6 3.3
Multiracial & All Others 0.6 1.3 1.6
Population Size (x1000) 299.7 44.9 26.8

Women
Vietnamese 84.6 56.3 40.6
Other Asian 4.2 11.1 12.2
White 9.4 28.7 41.3
Black 0.2 0.5 0.5
Hispanic/Latino 0.9 2.9 4.5
Multiracial & All Others 0.7 0.5 0.8
Population Size (x1000) 323.6 54.4 35.0

USR = U.S.-Raised (1.5 generation or higher)
FR = Foreign-Raised (1st generation)
"USR + USR or FR" = Spouse 1 is USR while Spouse 2 can be USR or FR
"USR + USR Only" = Both spouses are USR
Methodology used to tabulate these statistics

As you can see the rates of Asians marrying blacks are very very low.

When I type in French, I get stats from France but not the rest of Europe, even I typed Europeans not French...

Aujourd'hui, ils sont 27% à repousser l'idée d'une union avec une personne d'origine arabe, 21% pour un Africain et 14% pour les Asiatiques, selon les chiffres d'un récent sondage Ifop pour l'hebdomadaire La Vie….

http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/2010/01/21/01016-20100121ARTFIG00021-pourquoi-la-france-compte-27-de-mariages-mixtes-.php

27% marrying Arabs (some Arabs are dark), 21% marrying African and 14% marrying Asians (some Asians are dark), that is a lot!!!

7829

11.9 percent for black and white couple. That is not a lot, but much more than Asians marrying blacks. I don't live in the states but I tend to see a lot of white men with dark skinned women, but when I say dark skinned, they are not necessary black. 14.4 % for Asian white couple, but they don't specified what sorts of Asians, some Asians can be very dark like the ones shown in the pictures below, and by contrast some Asians can be very light.

Dark Asians marrying white men I found online.

7830

7831




I am still reading them, too many things to read.





A lot of the reasons that people suggested are to do with culture. However, culture is created by humans, where do these ideas and preferences come from? I am thinking could it be innate? I have a friend who is very fond of the sun and brown skinned women. He has dated half blacks, half white, and many dark skinned Thai women, and he find dark skinned Indian women very attractive. He is French, so aside from that half black half white women from the Caribbeans ( French overseas departments), that has linguistic and cultural link with the French, the rest have no cultural or linguistic ties with the French.

Every time he goes to Thailand for vacation, he would proudly showed off how cool it is to get sunshine and to swim in the pool and go scuba diving in the seas, and how much he hates winter. Of course there are also the ladies, brown ladies, that he is so fond of. By contrast, Asian ppl would try to stay away from the sun as much as possible, and prefer light skinned ladies.



In fact, I think their beauty standards are not so different from those from China, Korea or Japan.

Minty, you might want to review some of the posts upthread which discussed which "traits" are probably "hard-wired" in terms of attractiveness, most having to do with pro-creation in one form or another. Skin color preferences, from what I can see, are not hard-wired; they are the product of cultural inculcation. It probably starts with whatever is the dominant phenotype of the elite in a certain culture, the association with wealth, status and power then plays a part in it.

The East Asian countries are far more homogeneous genetically than are Europeans. There are papers that show all East Asians are as related to each other as first cousins in Europe. So, European descent people start out with a much greater variety of phenotypes among them. We're more open to seeing different phenotypes as attractive. Added to that, we have experienced migration flows from other parts of the world. All of that leads to a greater open-mindedness about what phenotypes are "attractive". That doesn't mean that European descent people all or even as a majority think that "dark skinned" people are more attractive. There are a lot of men who prefer pale skinned blue eyed blondes. That's one reason so many women dye their hair. There's a big difference between those two statements.

Also, and I mean no offense here, East Asian countries were for a long time "closed off" from the rest of the world, and I think some of that mind set remains. There are those who think these countries are much more "racist" than the west, not only with regard to blacks, but also with regard to "Caucasian", although that may be changing. Look at how the children of GIs and East Asian women were treated after World War II.

Each culture develops its own standards over time. While a male preference for young and therefore fertile women is probably universal, it sometimes seems to me that certain East Asian cultures sexualize very young looking women in ways that in the west would lean toward pedophilia.

Likewise, Europe and predominantly European descent countries have developed over time a broader definition of what constitutes "beauty".
So, I know a lot of men who think J Lo is beautiful. I don't think that means they prefer it to any other look. Variety is the spice of life, as they say.

http://www.eonline.com/eol_images/Entire_Site/2014724/rs_634x1024-140824174217-634.JLO-jmd-082414.jpgThe fact remains, however, that even in the U.S. marriage between "whites" and "blacks", while increasing in the last decades, is still very much a minority occurrence, although a lot of the avoidance involves social factors like poverty, education, etc.

LeBrok
05-07-16, 03:42
Touche!

I think it's pretty reasonable idea. Bird feathers and fish scales have both been subject to sexual selective forces. Why not human skin? Presumably though, light skin does help prevent Vitamin D deficiency in higher latitudes. But then again, light skin emerged in the Middle East, where climes were warm and there was plenty of sunshine year round.
What are these? Can you explain?

Angela
05-07-16, 04:05
Why there would be this difference in the levels of vitamin D-binding protein? Why would most black adults carry this gene variant?

If I understood it correctly, the levels of vitamin D binding protein are "lower" in black people. It's Europeans who have high levels of this vitamin D-binding protein. There was a sentence in the article to the effect that Europeans evolved to bind the Vitamin D away for "later" use. It didn't go into the mechanisms for how it would "later" be retrieved, but the idea might be that since there's so much sunshine in Africa, the people there didn't need to store it.


Bicicleur:it seems like blacks and whites have a different history of natural selection which produced a different strategy for acquiring 'bioavailable' vitamine D
it might be that a balanced diet for whites is not a balanced diet for blacks and vice versa

I think some of this is finally dawning on the medical community. The "European" diet also isn't good for Native Americans. I know that there's a lot of talk about the fact that medications are metabolized differently depending on ancestry as well, and that new models have to be created that don't just test "Europeans".

vcovaci
05-07-16, 08:47
If I understood it correctly, the levels of vitamin D binding protein are "lower" in black people. It's Europeans who have high levels of this vitamin D-binding protein. There was a sentence in the article to the effect that Europeans evolved to bind the Vitamin D away for "later" use. It didn't go into the mechanisms for how it would "later" be retrieved, but the idea might be that since there's so much sunshine in Africa, the people there didn't need to store it.

Okay, but actually things are a little bit more complex. On one hand the D-binding protein (DBP) does indeed seem to store vitamin D for later use. On the other, this DBP may not be the only way the compound is preserved in our bodies.

All fat-soluble vitamins can be stored in the fatty tissues of your body if you get more than you need, unlike water-soluble vitamins, which wash out in urine. Excess vitamin D accumulates in the fat and liver, providing you with a vitamin D source to draw on if your stores run low.

Source: Does Vitamin D accumulate in Your System? (sfgate)

vcovaci
05-07-16, 09:04
Could these two be complementary mechanisms?

MOESAN
08-07-16, 14:37
It's for the most a cultural an varying result: some "politically correct" complex is arising in Europe. It's "cool" to marry stangers, other "races" people, today It was not the case a few years ago. And the consumer pracrices of today people as well in sexuality as on other grounds with short life unions seems promoting new criteria for mating. Even children are no more the bigger matter. Their future feelings are not taken in account. Plus the notion of group s fading out in most modern societies. The "racism" in mating is more the fact of societies stayed closer to ancient times, it can evolve, whatever we like or dislike. But the exotic side of the matter exists since a long time: but in older times a man found normal mating with a lot of women of other lands (for the most in colonies, and considered as touristic company pets) BUT not to marry them! Concerning morals it could make debate but...

MOESAN
08-07-16, 14:47
Okay, but actually things are a little bit more complex. On one hand the D-binding protein (DBP) does indeed seem to store vitamin D for later use. On the other, this DBP may not be the only way the compound is preserved in our bodies.

All fat-soluble vitamins can be stored in the fatty tissues of your body if you get more than you need, unlike water-soluble vitamins, which wash out in urine. Excess vitamin D accumulates in the fat and liver, providing you with a vitamin D source to draw on if your stores run low.

Source: Does Vitamin D accumulate in Your System? (sfgate)

In some way we all agree here: different genomes (so different combinations of interactive genes) can react with different answers to metabolic needs or problems. In high latitude regions, the depigmentation response could have been the only one to carence risks for vitD FOR POPS WITH A CERTAIN DNA BACKGROUND, not for others with different backgrounds and "weapons". The mutation(s) prospered there and not elsewhere. But on another side, depigmentation could be a phenomenon not linked only to vitD needs but also to an other unkown pressure. It would be useful to know if chromsomes statistically exchange their segments by pure hazard or if some segments tend to stay unchanged more often than others.

Tomenable
09-07-16, 09:28
Pleiotropy is defined as the production by a single gene of two or more apparently unrelated effects:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleiotropy

Maybe pigmentation genes also produce other effects - and that's what was selected for or against?

vcovaci
09-07-16, 14:18
In some way we all agree here: different genomes (so different combinations of interactive genes) can react with different answers to metabolic needs or problems. In high latitude regions, the depigmentation response could have been the only one to carence risks for vitD FOR POPS WITH A CERTAIN DNA BACKGROUND, not for others with different backgrounds and "weapons". The mutation(s) prospered there and not elsewhere. But on another side, depigmentation could be a phenomenon not linked only to vitD needs but also to an other unkown pressure. It would be useful to know if chromsomes statistically exchange their segments by pure hazard or if some segments tend to stay unchanged more often than others.

It's not only through certain favourable genetic mutations that organisms can adapt. Epigenetics (the switching of genes on and off under environmental pressure) could play a role in regulating pigmentation.

I've found this medical study, entitled Individuals with Exceptional Longevity Manifest a Delayed Association between Vitamin D Insufficiency and Cognitive Impairment, and it is quite interesting. Check it out:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4055513/

So this vitamin is indeed crucial to our health afterwards.

Petros Houhoulis
04-08-16, 04:18
I was just musing and asking a question, Athiudisc. It wasn't an accusation of any kind. I obviously wasn't clear enough.

I just think "sexual selection" is a theory some researchers throw out when they don't really know the cause for a change of phenotype. These researchers also rarely define what they mean by it, and yes, I think there's a certain assumption that attractiveness is not relative, but rather that "European style fairness" has some sort of absolute worth. It's ironic in a time where people pride themselves on not believing in absolutes.


Why does it have to be "European"? How do you know that the "genes of beauty" that you allude to, developed first in Europe or Asia, for example?


As I've said before, I do think certain characteristics are rather hard-wired to be considered attractive because they signal health in both partners, perhaps strength in men, and fertility in women. So, thick, shiny hair, clear skin, lustrous eyes, a certain body type, a certain regularity of feature will be considered sexually attractive.

It doesn't seem to me that a certain hair and eye color and skin color are in that category. "Ethnic" groups tend, I think, to prize their own coloring. There are a lot of "fables" that show that like the Native American stories about how they were left in the oven the exact right amount of time, or from writings from the Greeks, for example, where they congratulate themselves that they're not as dark as the Ethiopians or as "fair" as the Scythians.

What did the Greeks congratulate again?

https://books.google.gr/books?id=9Z6vCGbf66YC&pg=PA154&lpg=PA154&dq=rome+prostitutes+red+yellow+hair&source=bl&ots=YL56xWp8le&sig=SCJ1pT3eA6IWBH2pzErITBCKGKc&hl=el&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi8z7bIi6bOAhVIBsAKHe2LDQYQ6AEILTAC#v=on epage&q=rome%20prostitutes%20red%20yellow%20hair&f=false

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phryne#Life


Phryne's real name was Mnēsarétē (Μνησαρέτη, "commemorating virtue"), but owing to her yellowish complexion she was called Phrýnē ("toad (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toad)").[1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phryne#cite_note-plutarch1-1) This was a nickname frequently given to other courtesans and prostitutes as well.[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phryne#cite_note-havelock1-2)

Needless to say, the number of Scythian/Thracian hetairae in Ancient Greece is as much suspicious as the number of famous Athenians of northern origins...

The funny thing is watching the Romans prefer black hair until they realize that people could actually have blonde or red hair!

https://books.google.gr/books?id=In6nCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT112&lpg=PT112&dq=ovid+red+blonde&source=bl&ots=a1lqVQbY4Q&sig=eeSVbtCYwrvwrOCO4rKwWwNp268&hl=el&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjduLHOjKbOAhUCM8AKHUE9BfMQ6AEIJTAB#v=on epage&q=ovid%20red%20blonde&f=false


That does change if an elite group with a different phenotype takes control of an area, imo. Humans being humans, that "elite" phenotype will very shortly become the preferred, more sexually attractive one.

That correlates suspiciously with the general trend that whiter people tend to conquer darker people (Indo-Europeans -> Mediterraneans & Dravidians, Manchu -> Chinese, Mongols -> Chinese & Indians & Persians, Chinese -> Indo-Chinese, Europeans -> virtually everyone) and just doesn't quite work with the Muslims because the Muslim fashion trend is... hiding womens' faces, eh?

I guess this association of elite groups' phenotype with popularity surely explains why Finnish girls were the most popular slaves in the markets of Crimea eh? Not to mention the Ottoman slave raid in that obscure place called Iceland... By contrast the blacks of Africa made the most popular slaves for labor not only in the American continent, but among Muslims bordering East Africa too...


So, I would indeed think that males with the power to choose based on appearance might favor women with this "elite" phenotype. Men being men, however, they obviously spread their favors more widely, or that phenotype wouldn't spread downwards to the lower orders.

The second sentence makes far more sense than the first one. Men are biologically programmed to impregnate as many women as possible. Only civilization saves us from the horrors of masculinity on the loose.


Perhaps if the society was very patriarchal there weren't enough women with the right phenotypes for males who had more than one mate . Women never had any ability to choose on any basis, far less this one.

Women rarely care about the physical appearance of their husbands (their lovers being another story altogether). What they prize the most is resources, and they prefer a husband who shall provide them with enough provisions for themselves and their children. Thus they do choose, but upon an entirely different basis. Other factors include smell and other stuff, presumably because smell has some relation with the immune system. Looks appear to be somewhere in the bottom of the stack, except when women are in the menstrual cycle, but as I wrote, their lovers are another category altogether.


I guess you could say that within these parameters "sexual selection" may indeed have had some effect, although hardly to the degree that it used to be proposed. The other factors, such as latitude, diet, and migration have more effect, I think, but that's just my speculation.

Those factors you mention could apply more to survival rates than sexual selection. People with little capacity to store fat or others with little ability to remain agile in excessive sunlight would have a hard time to survive in certain climates respectively, irrespectively if were they were among someones' sexual preferences.


There's an interesting work of fiction by John Hersey called "White Lotus" which explores this idea in the context of a Chinese take over of the west. There's soon a large plastic surgery industry to give women "Asian" eyes and flatter noses.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1495461.White_Lotus

There is an interesting attempt to confuse works of fiction with facts here... I haven't seen many whites trying to look as black in post-colonial Africa.


That is because most black men are poor, plus most scammers are from Nigeria or other African countries pretending to be white.

Why do most black men tend to be poor? Who would be more dependent upon stacking provisions? A man in Africa surrounded by abundant game and fruit, or a man in Siberia who would think it hard to move out of his hut 3 out of 4 seasons in the pre-modern era?


There is a preference for fairer features in by and large C'mon. I was just watching this thing on Gypsies in Bulgaria where the young virgin girls go to marriage markets were guys from other families bid on them and they were saying that the women always try to make their features as fair as possible to get the better family to like them. This is just one example, but it's hard to doubt this for most of the world, especially poor nations. But this is a recent social conditioning from the dominance of the Anglo West. White has meant power, influence and security for centuries now.

The Gypsies' customs descend from the caste system applied to them by the IndoEuropeans in India, since they are, in all probability, descendants of Dalits, they might actually constitute the longest culturally oppressed group by whites!


An average, males in any populations darker (skin and hair) than women. Also adults in any population darker than children.
Fairness is clearly associated with femininity and infantilism, while the dark - with masculinity.

Perhaps the best explanation of why men prefer whiter women instinctively: They consider them to be younger, and thus more fertile!


Perhaps, European fairness is a product of male sexual selection. Although it is hard to believe, but how do we know the some Y haplo to make a lot of offspring from various women.

European - as well as otherwise - fairness is primarily a result of the "survival of the fittest" theory of Charles Darwin. Can't explain otherwise why latitude is closely correlated to pigmentation, irrespectively of race (white or yellow)


On the other hand, we know examples of female sexual selection on children's characteristics. Large cranial in comparison with the face of modern humans. In primates, it is a sign of infantile children, and far from masculinity.
7824

Cranial cavity is somewhat related to intelligence. If women make a preference to wide cranials, then they prefer smarter children - which are evidently more prone to survival. Interesting idea!


I agree with LeBrok that this may just be another part of the puzzle, not that it invalidates other factors.

""Work in our lab has shown that darkly pigmented skin (http://phys.org/tags/skin/) has far better function, including a better barrier to water loss, stronger cohesion, and better antimicrobial defense, and we began to ponder the possible evolutionary significance of that," said Peter Elias, MD, professor of dermatology. Elias co-authored the new paper, published in the June 21, 2016 online issue of the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, with his wife and frequent research collaborator Mary L. Williams, MD, clinical professor of dermatology at UCSF.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-06-paper-current-gain-loss-heavy.html#jCp"

Yeah, black people have features which are valuable for the equator, but less so for other climate regions. Water loss does not seem to be a problem in Scandinavia, it would appear to be more of a blessing there, if anything! Better antimicrobial defense is equally irrelevant, when did you last read about something akin to ebola or zika in colder climates. Early Europeans were so filthy they barely bothered to wash at all! The Japanese thought of them as barbarians because of their filth, and Theophanu caused something of a scandal (to them) because she dared to use utensils and insist at bathing on a daily basis! Even today the barbarians insist at eating raw meat, something only comparable to the Japanese' consumption of raw fish. Hygiene is not part of the "white" genes or original "white" culture, because it was never essential.


I'm tempted to buy into this just based on my own experiences; it's not very scientific, I know. :)

Years ago I went to Caneel Bay in the Virgin Islands. It billed itself as a "natural" location. Beware of ads like that. Even in the off season you paid a fortune for a little bungalow that sat right on the beach: no tv, no phone, etc.

It was a natural location. Perhaps you misunderstood the meaning of the world "natural"... BTW which Virgin islands do you refer to, the British or the American? I've been to both, and I remember them to be great locations both.


You barely saw any other guests. We thought maybe there were lots of honeymooners, and, who knows, maybe some people hiding out!

If you ever found a group of people intentionally hiding during their vacation, it would be a world first. Although some fools do descend upon casinos and forget the time and day they are living...


When we went looking for some dance music at the main building, to discover they only had it on Saturdays, one of the waiters told us the resort was for the newly wed or the nearly dead. We were neither. First thing the brochure didn't tell us.

I assume by now that the waiter made his best effort to turn you off, making his life less complicated in the process. The nearly dead pay better after all, as everybody in the tourist industry knows...


Anyway, another thing they didn't have was spraying for bugs, although we knew that. I just didn't know what that might mean.

Yes, life was a bit harder before the internet. Nowadays you can find customer reviews for everything from tourist resorts to hookers...


We spent almost our whole first night on lounge chairs and blankets right on our own stretch of beach, practically in the water. Sounds idyllic, right? Well, when I woke up in the morning I had about a thousand bites from sand fleas on my legs.

I still can't figure out whether you were stupid or simply impervious to pain. Were you drunk that night? Most people do sense being bitten by insects...


By the next day they were infected. I had to take the resort motor launch to the main island to see a doctor, who gave me a massive shot of penicillin. (That's another thing we hadn't realized: no doctor on the whole island where we were staying.)

Stop right there ma'am, your hyper-nationalism is flashing red flags all over my brain by now: You refused to buy any protection for bugs, as if you expected to find some factory in the Virgin Islands producing anything, even bug sprays, now you complain because isolated islands don't have enough doctors, as if that is economically feasible. I take great offense of your disregard of small Mediterranean-style islands because of purely economic reasons!


He also bestowed the benefit of his vast experience on me: he told me it was always the people who looked like a bottle of milk who got bitten multiple times and then got an infection. The tropics were not for people like me. Now that they also didn't put on the brochures!

No, they certainly didn't put it in the brochure, because they assumed you'd have read Charles' Darwin theory of the "survival of the fittest". Of course white people have less resistance to insect bites since their genetic urheimat is devoid of such little creatures! Alternatively, of course, you could assume that preference for fair skin extends beyond the human race after all. Whatever makes your day... Even if you the idea to return back to the vicinity of the polar bears where your ancestors came from is acceptable, if you think so!


In addition to the anti-microbial properties of dark skin, I think there is some truth to the fact that dark skinned people don't lose as much water. It's always the pink or dead white skinned types who wind up with sun stroke. It only gets worse the older you get too.

So, as I said, they may be onto something here.

Not something we wouldn't suspect by empirical evidence some thousand of years now...


Also, if this statistics are true, black women are even less popular. They are the most unpopular. This is not surprising, the black color far from of femininity and infantilism. But there are and other reasons in all these cases.

It turns out there are people on the internet who make a living by pointing out why black women are less popular, for all sorts of reasons...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOk3Dpv0MaU


I think this is quite true. This is even the case in Asia where men tend to prefer fair skinned women, if you take a look at the media in Asia, there are virtually no dark skinned women portrayed as a sex symbols, by contrast there is a few men who are tanned that are quite popular.

In less developed nations, the poor generally have to work outdoors (like a farm, for example) and therefore develop darker skin. The wealthy in these countries, work indoors at 'desk jobs' and do not develop 'dark' skin. Darker skin symbolizes being poor.

Conversely, in western countries a tan means that you have disposable income to take vacations into sunny climates or have free time away from a desk job to lay on the beach and get a tan. A tan symbolizes wealth.

This also explains the social phenomena in Asian countries like China and Japan where women carry umbrellas on sunny days. Similarly, in India, getting tanned makes someone less valuable for marriage.


To me, its not so much the skin color as it is the shape of the nose, the eyes, torso, etc (I'm keeping it PG) which determines physical attractiveness. I've seen my share of gorgeous and dark Iranian and Indian women.

In some cases, it just doesn't help at all...

http://static2.fjcdn.com/comments/I%20am%20the%20Niggest%20_58eaf8d54d668119935fbe1e 3088dfee.png

http://chimpmania.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=121254&d=1452830481&thumb=1


Yes, there is also cultural and social aspects. And it certainly changed in centuries. In Russia 150 years ago, a big belly was considered a sign of wealth, as well as probably the "good genes", that can stock up fat in case of crop failure. Now, in the era of the grocery abundance, thick body is associated with unhealthy lifestyle and "bad genes".

Same in Greece at that timeframe. My jaw dropped when I read once that fat hookers were actually prized back then!


If fairer skin wastes less energy, does that mean that fairer people can potentially work harder? Is it what we see without leaving racial divides? Do fairer skinned Botswanans work harder than darker Congolese? Do Koreans work harder than Indonesians? Do Poles work harder than Greeks? Do North Italians work harder than South Italians? I am not asking if they are more intelligent or efficient or successful. Just if they seem to have more energy available for work.

Sent from my LG-D620 using Eupedia Forum mobile app (http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=89698)

Ehhm, actually not. Whiter people would be quickly exhausted in warmer climates. Work itself doesn't necessarily make a people wealthier (or "nobody became rich by working" as the adage suggests). Whiter people tend to be wealthier because they are better organized as a society, or more civilized. Black people seem to have more endurance, and they tend to exercise harder either empirically or by making a casual connection between simple yet intensive sports champions' race. Hell, they even celebrate with more intensity than whites!


Totally agree.

The siesta served a very real purpose in the past. You couldn't do hard work outside for a good six months of the year during the hottest, sunniest parts of the day from 12 to 3. That was certainly the case in Liguria, which has a Mediterranean climate. Of course, the farmers had to make up for it by rising when it was still dark and then doing inside work far into the night. Still, while further inland they might be housebound for parts of the winter, in these places with a Mediterranean climate you could grow crops at least twice a year, so there wasn't much of an off season.

You can see the effect of climate on "northern European" descended people in parts of the U.S. like Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi etc., which are very "Anglo" states. They're stereotyped as being slow moving and slow talking, but there's a reason for it. In Florida for more than six months a year walking from your air conditioned condo to your air conditioned car can leave you exhausted and drenched in sweat. I don't know how people could bear it before those modern conveniences, much less work outdoors in it.

That's one of the reasons that they imported slaves from Africa to work in the sugar cane, cotton, and tobacco fields. They tried using indentured servants from Europe and Indians, but they died at an alarming rate. The African slaves didn't. They were not only acculturated to climates like that, but, if this study is correct, their phenotype made them more suited to it.

The Indians tended to be free spirited by culture and chose death from slavery, don't forget that they did cultivate several crops in Aztec and Inca territory, perhaps with as much intensity as blacks did. In any case they were dying in an alarming rate when exposed to "white" germs, so they were unfit anyway. Nevertheless, the indigenous people In Brazil even manufactured the soil they were using for agriculture! Whites died mostly due to tropical diseases in tropical climates.


Neanderthals, who ranged from Western Europe to Central Asia, probably had the same distribution of skin color as modern humans, including fair skin and freckles. Fair skin is an advantage at northern latitudes because it is more efficient at generating vitamin D from weak sunlight. Freckles are clusters of cells that overproduce melanin granules; they are triggered by exposure to sunlight and are most noticeable on pale skin. BNC2 is one of several skin color genes and it influences saturation of skin color and freckling. It is a Neanderthal gene and is found in Eurasian populations, most commonly in Europeans (70% have at least one copy of the Neanderthal version).

According to this ppl with light skin got that from neanderthal genomes, so I am thinking whether this has anything to do with preferences of mate selection...

Men would prefer any woman who wold be willing (or unwilling) to mate with them, at least in pre-historic societies. All that changed rapidly with the institution of marriage and other aspects of civilization.


It seems like European descent ppl tend to have a fondness for dark skin women, where as Asian ppl don't.

Not necessarily for their looks though. Black women can be prized for things white women wouldn't even think!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGBbln8SV8E

Yet, somehow, the whitey stepped on with their cultural appropriation tactics, and now twerking is a criminal offense when done by black women! Are they going to ban blacks from jazz and soul some day too?


Recent research suggests, people in China, Japan and other East Asian countries have about 20 percent more Neanderthal DNA than do Europeans. It is now scientifically irrefutable fact that the "human species" has been found to contain a substantial quantity of DNA (at least 20%) from other hominid populations not classified as Homo sapien; such as Neanderthal, Denisovan, African archaic, Homo erectus, and now possibly even "Hobbit" (Homo floresiensis).

If not given drugs to prevent infant death, the pregnant body of a rhesus negative mother will attack, try to reject, and even kill her own offspring if it is by a rhesus positive man.

The Domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris) is a sub-species of the gray wolf (Canis lupus), and they produce hybrids.

There are numerous other examples of where two separate species (for example with different numbers of chromosomes) can also produce viable offspring, yet are considered separate species. That said, humanity has been shown to be, genetically speaking, a hybrid species that did not all share the same hunter-gatherer ancestry in Africa.This means humans are not all the same race, out of Africa theory is debunked!

Ehhm, that would be reasonable if it could be proven that all the other sub-species did not originate in Africa. The trouble with your reasoning is that you don't just miss a link, you miss entire sections of the chain...


7828




1. African DNA found in Yorkshireman

In 2007 the Daily Mail ran a report on John Revis, a Yorkshireman who was so blond and blue-eyed when he was younger that he thought he was directly descended from Viking or Anglo-Saxon stock. However, when his DNA was analysed as part of a wider study linking the male Y-chromosome to northern surnames, he was found to be haplogroup A1.

John RevisA1 is very rare and highly specific to west Africa. John Revis shared this genetic match with 7 other northern Englishmen with the surname Revis. He had traced his direct paternal line back to the mid-1700s and found his ancestors where mostly bakers from the north of England; there was nothing in his family history to suggest recent African origins. However, his DNA presented the first genetic evidence of Africans living among ‘indigenous’ British people.Africans were first recorded as being present in northern England 1,800 years ago, when they formed a contingent of the Roman garrisons defending Hadrian’s Wall against raids by Scottish tribes. Much later in the 16th and 17th centuries the slave trade also brought an influx of Africans to the British Isles, and by the late 18th century there were around 10,000 black people living in Britain. Some former slaves rose quite high in society.

It is possible that John Revis descends directly from the north African clans that comprised a small part of the armies of Roman Britain from 43 – 410 AD, but the Roman occupation left only a tiny genetic footprint on the modern English population and it is thought more likely that the source of his African DNA is a slave from West Africa.

The contributor of the A1 chromosome to the Revis surname may not be its founder. He may have been a first-generation immigrant African, or a European-looking man carrying the A1 Y-chromosome introduced into England some time earlier. It could have been many generations earlier, with descendants of earlier lineages now extinct, or not yet tested.

Could ppl with African genes that look white find dark women more attractive than ppl who don't? I am thinking that the preferences might not be just cultural but it is embedded in your genes.

John Revis is just the proof that external human characteristics define a rather small part of human DNA, and nothing more. You haven't even established that he likes black chicks!


That is a generic statement. That can hold true for maybe central and Northern Europeans men but not so much in the south of Europe. Also seem to be the case the other way round.

It doesn't hold true even for central and northern Europeans. Racial mixing remains a rarity even after a significant number of migrants have landed in central and north Europe.


Minty, you might want to review some of the posts upthread which discussed which "traits" are probably "hard-wired" in terms of attractiveness, most having to do with pro-creation in one form or another. Skin color preferences, from what I can see, are not hard-wired; they are the product of cultural inculcation. It probably starts with whatever is the dominant phenotype of the elite in a certain culture, the association with wealth, status and power then plays a part in it.

In light of what evidence? Virtue signalling doesn't work anymore Angela.


The East Asian countries are far more homogeneous genetically than are Europeans. There are papers that show all East Asians are as related to each other as first cousins in Europe.

...And yet the East Asians are not plagued by recessive genetic diseases like their Pakistani next door neighbors... Did you actually find Nietzsches' "ubermensch" on the East Asians or is that a casual joke of yours? What about the Oceanians and Amerindians who are even more homogeneous than the East Asians???


So, European descent people start out with a much greater variety of phenotypes among them. We're more open to seeing different phenotypes as attractive.

Is this supposed to be an argument in favor of a cultural impact upon sexual preferences, or an argument of genetic impact upon sexual preferences? Because it certainly looks the latter if sexual preferences are depended upon phenotypes! How do you twist everything so much, honestly!


Added to that, we have experienced migration flows from other parts of the world. All of that leads to a greater open-mindedness about what phenotypes are "attractive". That doesn't mean that European descent people all or even as a majority think that "dark skinned" people are more attractive. There are a lot of men who prefer pale skinned blue eyed blondes. That's one reason so many women dye their hair. There's a big difference between those two statements.

If you tried to be a little bit more specific, you would rank right next to the legendary Martin van Buren, who was asked once "Senator, in what direction does the sun rise each morning to receive the reply "My good fellow, I have been told that the general idea is that the sun rises in the east, but since I do not rise until after sunrise I would not know the correct response". The names "north, south, east and west" conventional names and not scientific axioms after all, if the Australians decided tomorrow that they are on top of the world, and we are at the bottom, as they do with their maps, who would prevent them from proclaiming that the sun rises in the west and sets at the east after all???

https://aidancookedesign.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/australian-world-map.jpg


Also, and I mean no offense here, East Asian countries were for a long time "closed off" from the rest of the world, and I think some of that mind set remains. There are those who think these countries are much more "racist" than the west, not only with regard to blacks, but also with regard to "Caucasian", although that may be changing. Look at how the children of GIs and East Asian women were treated after World War II.

Yes, they are more "closed off" and "more racist" indeed, or rather they have never been either involved in the trade of peoples of other races (at least extensively) or infected by some politically correct ideology. Besides, you'll never find something like that advertisement with a white man as an antagonist:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1294641/Racist-Chinese-detergent-ad-turns-black-man-clean-asian.html


Each culture develops its own standards over time. While a male preference for young and therefore fertile women is probably universal, it sometimes seems to me that certain East Asian cultures sexualize very young looking women in ways that in the west would lean toward pedophilia.

It doesn't lean towards paedophilia, it is paedophilia (http://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/18/world/asia/japan-manga-anime-pornography/), Mrs Van Buren! How much does it take to realize that South East Asia is the global center of prostitution, especially the underage type? Philippines in particular are swamped by cybersex with minors, and in many cases the toddlers are not harmed to the point of showing any aversion to the practice, but instead defend their relatives who put them in front of the cameras! If they are not getting traumatized, they shall make a case that cyber-pedophilia is not much different from Japanese underage sex cartoons, sooner or later, and your brain shall get a serious shock about it...


Likewise, Europe and predominantly European descent countries have developed over time a broader definition of what constitutes "beauty".
So, I know a lot of men who think J Lo is beautiful. I don't think that means they prefer it to any other look. Variety is the spice of life, as they say.

http://www.eonline.com/eol_images/Entire_Site/2014724/rs_634x1024-140824174217-634.JLO-jmd-082414.jpgThe fact remains, however, that even in the U.S. marriage between "whites" and "blacks", while increasing in the last decades, is still very much a minority occurrence, although a lot of the avoidance involves social factors like poverty, education, etc.

...And most importantly the possibility of the black man running away from his marital obligations, especially the raising of children. TJSotomayor might be blaming black women and black womens' frizzy hair for all the evils of this world, but I can't stop thinking that the African man could easily procreate while abandoning his child to the hands of his/her mother, while the Siberian man would most certainly receive the Darwin award if he even left his own child for a single day in the blizzard...

Wanderlust
04-08-16, 08:14
Whiter people tend to be wealthier because they are better organized as a society, or more civilized.

lol If being "civilized" includes conquering, looting, pillaging, extorting, raping, slaughtering, enslaving and subjugating in a more "organized" way, then yes, that is why Whiter people are wealthier.


Not necessarily for their looks though. Black women can be prized for things white women wouldn't even think!

lol The same applies for White women, I'm afraid. "White" women, particularly Northern Europeans, are "prized" the world over for their purported "open" (read: loose) and "open-minded" (read: kinky) sexuality. In the Middle East, there are those who believe that White women are ripe for "fun" and "experimentation," but not fit to marry. And in the US, for example, there is this culturally pervasive perception amongst non-whites that white women have a proclivity towards fellatio and other acts that "respectable" Black, Latino and Asian women shy away from.


Virtue signalling doesn't work anymore Angela....

Are you one of those people who negate the effects of environment and socialization in favor of genes? I certainly hope not because both matter and both influence the other.

Having said that, it is no secret (or at least it shouldn't be to anyone with even a remote acquaintance with social/cultural anthropology), that all over the world, no matter the nationality, ethnicity or race, those who sit at the apex of power usually wield the most social and cultural influence--their likeness, norms, values, customs and traditions become idealized and aspirational, particularly to those seeking to integrate and advance in society. It is also no secret that socialization and enculturation begin as early as the nurse placing blue booties on the feet of baby boys and pink booties on baby girls while referring to them as he or she.

Pre-Western Imperialism and Colonialism, much of Asia, including the Far East (China, Japan, Korea) and the South East (India, Pakistan, etc...), already had a social/cultural affinity for lightness/whiteness because it was linked to labor/economic status--those who were poorer and worked out in the sun usually developed darker, "burnt" skin; those who were wealthy could afford to remain indoors, shielded from the sun. The later socio-cultural dominance by fair skinned Westerners factored "neatly" into their already deeply entrenched beliefs and views about skin color as it relates to the social hierarchy and "white/light" hegemony.

The fact of the matter is that lighter-skinned, "fairness" oriented, Asians, Europeans and their descendents have, at one point or another, achieved partial, significant and/or near complete (cultural-social-financial) dominance over every continent and people--should I run them all down for you? Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, the Americas and even Antarctica--Europeans have been the most successful in this regard. And even when European imperialism and colonialism came to an end, its social and cultural remnants were still felt to varying degrees in every land they had touched. Even if there was some innate human proclivity towards "fairness" to varying degrees (particularly as it relates to males seeking female mates), environment and socialization have most certainly played a crucial part in aggressively and passive-aggressively entrenching notions of white/light superiority and desirability.


Is this supposed to be an argument in favor of a cultural impact upon sexual preferences, or an argument of genetic impact upon sexual preferences?

Again, why can't it be both? And that doesn't even mean that they contribute equal influence.

Maleth
04-08-16, 08:39
http://cdn.eupedia.com/forum/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Maleth http://cdn.eupedia.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?p=483097#post483097)
That is a generic statement. That can hold true for maybe central and Northern Europeans men but not so much in the south of Europe. Also seem to be the case the other way round.




It doesn't hold true even for central and northern Europeans. Racial mixing remains a rarity even after a significant number of migrants have landed in central and north Europe.



"Scientists looking into attractiveness in men and women suggest that men of all races are subconsciously attracted to fairer-skinned women, while women are more drawn to dark-complexioned men."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/men-women-the-secrets-of-skin-colour-796610.html

Petros Houhoulis
04-08-16, 11:19
lol If being "civilized" includes conquering, looting, pillaging, extorting, raping, slaughtering, enslaving and subjugating in a more "organized" way, then yes, that is why Whiter people are wealthier.

That too, but be aware that the worst transgressor in history was Genghis Khan. Not that he should be excluded from the gang, he might have been "yellow" but his Mongols are most definitely whiter than 75% of whites, and since the coldest environment forces people to get more organized or perish, he is definitely the product of the same process. I simply object to the idea that a general notion of a white race instead of the byproduct of the one of the harshest environments on earth is being used to describe those people.


lol The same applies for White women, I'm afraid. "White" women, particularly Northern Europeans, are "prized" the world over for their purported "open" (read: loose) and "open-minded" (read: kinky) sexuality.

Are they? Because darker women are generally hotter in temper - just like darker men - than women. Whiter women are generally colder, but "easier" mostly because of recent cultural developments. Medieval European standards were placing a very high standard on womens' honor and Christianity was not a very sexually liberating religion. If you compare tv shows by country, you shall notice that Latin Americans are way more obsessed with women and their assets as well as their occasional wardrobe "malfunctions" than Northern European women. When was the last time you saw a tv show like this in Sweden?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNgFrZX4ffw

Latinas have many things to teach you about dancing, and music in general.


In the Middle East, there are those who believe that White women are ripe for "fun" and "experimentation," but not fit to marry.

If we start discussing what Middle Eastern men "think", pretty soon we'll establish that they think with their lower head 90% of the time. Those folks revel in family ties and consanguinity for some peculiar reason, they are more likely to marry their first cousin than the prettiest woman in the world, just to maintain their "family links"!!!

Maybe an Arab could help you unravel the "mystery" of Arab sexual mores:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/14/opinion/sunday/the-sexual-misery-of-the-arab-world.html?_r=1


And in the US, for example, there is this culturally pervasive perception amongst non-whites that white women have a proclivity towards fellatio and other acts that "respectable" Black, Latino and Asian women shy away from.

Respectable black women? Those same black women who end up single mothers 75% of the time? You've seen Latino women on the above show, you can tune on the internet and see a few hundred such Latin tv shows where objectification of women is as much frequent as snow in Sweden. Asian women could be quite different by culture. Japanese women are even more objectified as they live in an ultra-patriarchist society, although they are not exactly hot. Philippinos are almost sex toys, Chinese women vary immensely according to latitude:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbiIu_EzuWk


Are you one of those people who negate the effects of environment and socialization in favor of genes? I certainly hope not because both matter and both influence the other.

I don't think that the phrase "virtue signalling" makes a reference to either genes or environment, but yes, I agree with your statement. Genes and environment play the most important role, and the one drives the other.


Having said that, it is no secret (or at least it shouldn't be to anyone with even a remote acquaintance with social/cultural anthropology), that all over the world, no matter the nationality, ethnicity or race, those who sit at the apex of power usually wield the most social and cultural influence--their likeness, norms, values, customs and traditions become idealized and aspirational, particularly to those seeking to integrate and advance in society.

I don't think that the Chinese ever saw the Mongols as anything but barbarians, until they overthrew them. The Greeks did never quite aspire to become Muslim either, during 4~5 centuries of oppression. So I shall disagree with your statement, might does not always awe people, especially those well established.


It is also no secret that socialization and enculturation begin as early as the nurse placing blue booties on the feet of baby boys and pink booties on baby girls while referring to them as he or she.

It does but fails to make an impact. You won't succeed to turn a strait male baby into gay or female by putting pink booties on him, or to turn a straight female into a lesbian or boy just by putting blue booties on her.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97dBxYGGUGk


Pre-Western Imperialism and Colonialism, much of Asia, including the Far East (China, Japan, Korea) and the South East (India, Pakistan, etc...), already had a social/cultural affinity for lightness/whiteness because it was linked to labor/economic status--those who were poorer and worked out in the sun usually developed darker, "burnt" skin; those who were wealthy could afford to remain indoors, shielded from the sun. The later socio-cultural dominance by fair skinned Westerners factored "neatly" into their already deeply entrenched beliefs and views about skin color as it relates to the social hierarchy and "white/light" hegemony.

The fact of the matter is that lighter-skinned, "fairness" oriented, Asians, Europeans and their descendents have, at one point or another, achieved partial, significant and/or near complete (cultural-social-financial) dominance over every continent and people--should I run them all down for you? Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, the Americas and even Antarctica--Europeans have been the most successful in this regard. And even when European imperialism and colonialism came to an end, its social and cultural remnants were still felt to varying degrees in every land they had touched. Even if there was some innate human proclivity towards "fairness" to varying degrees (particularly as it relates to males seeking female mates), environment and socialization have most certainly played a crucial part in aggressively and passive-aggressively entrenching notions of white/light superiority and desirability.

Ultimately you stop short of suggesting that whiter people are more desire because they always end up at the top of the global hierarchy. This simple fact could have passed into genetics as well, although I prefer simpler explanations.


Again, why can't it be both? And that doesn't even mean that they contribute equal influence.

No, culture can change rapidly over a short period of time, even within a generation. Genes and environment tend to change much slower, although epigenetics stands somewhere in the middle.

Petros Houhoulis
04-08-16, 13:35
"Scientists looking into attractiveness in men and women suggest that men of all races are subconsciously attracted to fairer-skinned women, while women are more drawn to dark-complexioned men."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/men-women-the-secrets-of-skin-colour-796610.html

This study is way too specific to Canada. I sincerely doubt that Tanzanian women would seek "mystery, villainy and danger", because they have already been dealt that and they aren't happy about it:

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2016/07/tales-child-bride-father-sold-12-cows-160711100933281.html


FEATURES (http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/)HUMAN RIGHTS (http://www.aljazeera.com/topics/categories/human_rights.html)12 JULY 2016

Tales of a child bride: 'My father sold me for 12 cows'

When she was 12, Grace was abducted and then raped and beaten every day for 11 months.
http://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/profile/mritems/images/site/DefaultAvatar.jpg (http://www.aljazeera.com/profile/marc-ellison.html)by

Marc Ellison (http://www.aljazeera.com/profile/marc-ellison.html)



http://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/Images/2016/7/11/903a7762633941a0b22df748465cfc45_18.jpg (http://interactive.aljazeera.com/aje/2016/cash-cows-girls-sold-brides/index.html#1)







So common are the practices of abduction, rape and forced marriage of girls in northern Tanzania that a single word is used to encapsulate them all: kupura. It is a word used by people from the Sukuma tribe to describe the snatching of girls in broad daylight as they walk to school; a three-syllabled euphemism that downplays their long-term physical and sexual abuse.
And yet here in the region of Shinyanga, the practice of kupura is validated by the oft-recited motto of Sukuma men: alcohol, meat and vagina.
"This slogan is in their blood and a way of life," says Revocatus Itendelebanya. "These are the three things they feel entitled to as men."
Itendelebanya, the legal and gender officer for the local NGO, Agape, (https://envaya.org/aacp)says this sense of entitlement, in what is a perennially patriarchal society, also explains why passers-by don't intervene when they witness an abduction.
"When a Sukuma man is attracted to a girl he will start asking people where she lives, and what her routine is," explains Itendelebanya.
"Once he finds out these details he might wait for her near the borehole - or whatever he thinks is the best place to get that girl - and then grab her."
Kupura is so prevalent in the region that when a girl disappears, her parents will suspect what has happened. But rather than calling the police, they will seek the man out not to rescue their child, but to negotiate the dowry - or bride price - in cattle.
Cash cows
For daughters are sadly seen as a short-term investment for poor, rural households - cash cows that can boost a family's financial position at the expense of a girl's schooling and wellbeing.
Such is the value placed on a girl's head that Itendelebanya says parents will take their daughters to a witch-doctor if they are not attracting any suitors.


http://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/Images/2016/7/11/a657406a13e046df8d5ea3aef57d0554_18.jpg


Grace was abducted after she refused to marry the older man to whom her father sold her [Marc Ellison/Al Jazeera]




The ensuing samba ritual involves cutting cruciform nicks into the girl's chest and hands with a razor to not only help cleanse her of her bad luck, but to make her more attractive to older men.
And if ever there was a poster child to highlight the pernicious effects of child marriage, it's Grace Masanja.
"Bitterness still fills my heart when I look at them," she says, pointing at the cows grazing at the rear of her family's compound. For Grace they are a daily reminder of how she was treated like cattle, a commodity to be bought and sold.
"But given what I went through, I sometimes wish I had been born a cow," she whispers.
Her father had bartered a dozen cattle for his daughter but, despite daily beatings with sticks and her father's belt, she still refused to marry the older man.
But a deal had been made; a dowry had been paid.
And so it was that Grace was abducted on motorbike by her betrothed early one morning - all with the complicity of her father.
That night, and every day for the next 11 months, she was raped and beaten.
She was only 12.
"That day felt like the end of everything," Grace recalls, glancing again at the cattle.
A country of contradictions
When it comes to child marriage, Tanzania was until very recently a country of contradictions.
The 1971 Marriage Act set the minimum age of marriage for girls at 15 with parental consent - but a girl of 14 could wed where judicial approval was given.
And while the 2009 Child Act did not expressly outlaw child marriage, it did define a child as a person under the age of 18, stating that a parent should "protect the child from neglect, discrimination, violence, abuse, exposure to physical and moral hazards and oppression".
READ MORE: Child Marriage in Bangladesh (http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/101east/2016/01/young-wed-child-marriage-bangladesh-160111134944655.html)
This contradictory legal Venn diagram was further obfuscated by the Local Customary Law of 1963, which allowed Tanzania's many ethnic groups to adhere to their customs and traditions.
The Tanzanian government had long made noises about a constitutional review process to address these conflicting laws, but last year's presidential election campaign, in addition to a lack of consensus in community surveys, had served to stall any political momentum on the issue.
Only in July 2016 did the government finally ban child marriage outright - but will it actually make a difference?
Female genital mutilation was outlawed in Tanzania in 1998, and yet a 2010 government survey found that in remote parts of the Mara region, more than 40 percent of girls and women had been cut.
While it is true that Tanzania does not rank among the countries with the highest rates of child marriage, with four out of 10 girls being married before their 18th birthdays, it seems to be a problem that is not going away.
And this national average masks more disturbing regional trends in the vast East African country.
In the Shinyanga region, more than 59 percent of girls like Grace - some of them as young as nine - are forced into child marriages.
Police corruption
Itendelebanya believes that the actual figure is concealed by the remoteness of many rural communities, as well as widespread reports of corrupt police and court officials burying cases in return for bribes by family members.
The legal and gender officer says there have been cases of police being paid to ignore some early marriages in villages, to lose crucial evidence, and to even help forge the incriminating birth certificates of child brides.
"Police entertain corruption because they benefit from it," claims Itendelebanya. "And police see NGOs like Agape as preventing the flow of money into their pockets."
But Superintendent Pili Simon Misungwi, who heads the gender desk at the Shinyanga district police station, dismisses any claims of wrongdoing by her staff.
In 2008, the Tanzanian government requested that every police station have such a specialist unit, with trained personnel who could handle cases of gender-based violence and child abuse across the country.
"I can't deny that corruption does exist because it's mostly done in private," she says. "But I also can't say that 100 percent of all cases are delayed because of corruption."
"For example, the poverty-stricken parents of a victim may accept financial compensation from the perpetrator's family, which would lead to the adjournment of a case."
Misungwi says it's also not uncommon for a child bride's parents to scupper investigations.
"A girl's parents may be offered two, three or five cows by the husband's family to derail the case," she says. "And because life is hard for these people, they often take the money.
"The police may think the family is cooperating with them, but then when the time comes to testify they tell us the girl is sick, in another village, or even dead."


http://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/mbdresplarge/mritems/Images/2016/7/11/b5615f7a68484528bcf508b11599fbea_18.jpg


[Marc Ellison/Al Jazeera]




Misungwi stresses that her officers were hired because of their high moral standing, and then provided with the necessary training.
"And we provide people with a confidential environment where they can have a one-on-one conversation in private rooms where others cannot listen," she adds.
But what the superintendent says, and what actually happens in her absence, appear to be two different things.
Before Misungwi arrives at the station, a young mother sits in the main office as she tells a police officer about the regular sexual assaults she endures at the hands of her husband - the private rooms sit empty.
The officer takes no notes, his attention not on the mother, but on the Nigerian soap opera blasting from the television set in the corner of the room.
Other staff members sit nearby, staring into space, periodically checking their phones for text messages.
Meanwhile incidents related to child marriage have doubled over the past two years.
When staff compile a list of these they do not use the Swahili terms, instead opting for the English equivalents, to mitigate the shocking nature of the crimes.
Kubaka is replaced with rape, kulawiti is replaced with sodomy, kumpa mimba mwanafunzi is replaced with child pregnancy.
And Misungwi says it is the lack of police resources, rather than corruption, that has contributed to the prevalence of child marriage in the region.
"When the government is giving budgets to ministries like Home Affairs, they don't have a separate pot of money for the police gender desk," she says.
As a result, her unit has to rely on using one of the station's three vehicles to reach remote villages where child marriages have been reported to them - but these are often already being used for routine police business.
"And the witnesses may live very far in the villages and can't afford to come to town to do a follow-up interview," says Misungwi. "As a result we often can't reach a conclusion on a case."
The curious case of Agnes Dotto
"There can be no secrets in the villages." So says Paulo Kuyi, who is fighting the ground war against child marriage in the nearby town of Muchambi.
The 53-year-old activist acts as a primitive early warning system for the NGO Agape, which in turn tips off the local police force.
Last September, it was the sudden appearance of 16 cows in a family's compound that triggered alarm bells for Kuyi. And he knew the poor family had a 13-year-old daughter, Agnes Dotto.
"When a dowry has been paid a feast is arranged before the wedding," Kuyi explains. "The family now has cows coming into their clan and they want to celebrate and invite other villagers."
Ten days later, thanks to Kuyi's regular updates by phone, police and Agape staff raided the wedding ceremony.
READ MORE: 'Child marriage is real: it almost happened to me' (http://www.aljazeera.com/blogs/asia/2016/01/child-marriage-real-happened-160112092849686.html)
The husband-to-be was arrested and taken to the local police station in Maganzo, where he should have remained until his case went to trial.
The next day the man walked free; neither he nor Agnes has been seen since.
Kuyi says that he saw a Maganzo police officer leaving a late-night meeting with village leaders.
"These leaders were paid by Agnes' parents to help arrange the marriage," he claims. "It was because of that complicity they paid a police officer to release the perpetrator."
These are the "meanders" - as Itendelebanya euphemistically calls them - that child marriage cases take on their way to the courts.
Three months on, the police tell the legal officer that they are no closer to finding Agnes or the man.
Assistant Superintendent Meshack Sumuni says the village leaders and the girl's parents have refused to cooperate.
"And we don't have the resources to be more proactive in our investigations," he says. "The Tanzanian government provides no specific budget for gender-desk teams, which means we often rely on NGOs for assistance."
The lack of police resources is felt even more keenly here than in Shinyanga.
Roads are regularly washed out in the rainy season, the unit has no dedicated car pool of its own, and their office is bereft of furniture or computer equipment and has a leaking roof, which in the past has led to important legal documents being damaged.
"So the gender desk staff feel like they have been given this role as a punishment," says Sumuni. "So this in turn affects their motivation to chase down reports of child marriage and related cases of abuse."
Back in the village, where there can be no secrets, it is common knowledge that Kuyi is the one reporting cases of child marriage to the police.
Resentful of the potential loss of income that marrying off their daughters can generate, villagers have threatened to lock the activist in his hut and burn it down.
Kuyi says that he doesn't care; he is an old man and he has nothing left to fear.
But what worries him are what advances in technology mean for future child marriages going undetected by him.
He has heard rumours that a dowry has already been paid for Agnes' sister - but by mobile money transfer, and not cattle.
This shift from the traditional, physical form of payment means Kuyi can no longer be visually tipped off about an impending marriage.
"Many other activists are now reluctant to report cases to the police," Kuyi says. "They've been intimidated by death threats, or demoralised when they see only a few cases actually go to court."
Picking up the pieces
Only through death has Grace Masanja clawed back something resembling a life.
After physically and sexually abusing her for 11 months, her husband was killed in a motorbike accident.
Grace, now 13, was filled not with joy, but sorrow.
The man who had raped and beaten her for the better part of a year was dead - but she now has a child to take care of, and no income.


http://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/Images/2016/7/11/a964f1b8a518468789374a59f370542d_18.jpg


After 11 months of committing daily rapes and beatings, Grace's husband died in a motorbike accident [Marc Ellison/Al Jazeera]




Grace and her child Mathias are at her family's home, where she and her father live out an uneasy truce.
After hearing an announcement on the radio, she applied to enrol on one of Agape's vocational skills courses. Each year, the organisation provides dozens of girls with an opportunity to learn a trade so that they can become breadwinners in their own right.


http://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/mbdresplarge/mritems/Images/2016/7/11/b33e7d4f5385497abc52d5a6e70947c6_18.jpg


Grace is now taking vocational classes [Marc Ellison/Al Jazeera]




The majority of the girls opt for tailoring classes, but others want to take the courses in welding and electrical engineering - professions that challenge the patriarchal and gendered stereotypes so ingrained in Tanzania's communities.
It is also hoped that the lure of this additional income will lessen the short-term appeal of a dowry to parents.
Grace's father, Kurwa Masanja, says that he now regrets what he did to his daughter.
"It was Sukuma tradition that forced me to have Grace married when she finished primary school," says Kurwa. "When she came back I apologised, and I hope now that we can slowly become father and daughter again.
"I cannot repeat this mistake because when Grace came back, she told us what had happened to her."
But Grace has her doubts, and fears for her four-year-old sister Birha.
"My father has only six of the cows left from my dowry," she says. "He sold the others to build a second home."
"What do you think he will do when the others have gone, and he is poor again?"
This research was conducted with the support of the 'International Development Reporting Fellowship' (http://www.akfc.ca/en/get-involved/reporting-fellowship), a joint programme of the Aga Khan Foundation Canada and the Canadian Association of Journalists.
Source: Al Jazeera

As you can see, the weird impact of civilization is that it makes people seek for more danger, instead of less danger, due to boredom. That can explain some very weird recent cultural traits like the popularity of rap music among whites!

Naturally, women of all species are doing their best to avoid danger, or even venturing too far away from home. Men are engaged in dangerous tasks ranging from exploration to violent crime to war.

Wanderlust
04-08-16, 14:57
Whiter women are generally colder, but "easier" mostly because of recent cultural developments. Medieval European standards were placing a very high standard on womens' honor and Christianity was not a very sexually liberating religion. If you compare tv shows by country, you shall notice that Latin Americans are way more obsessed with women and their assets as well as their occasional wardrobe "malfunctions" than Northern European women. When was the last time you saw a tv show like this in Sweden?

Yes, the emboldened part of your comment is what I was referring to regarding Northern European women. But since the 1960s, the somewhat flighty, sexually adventurous, big breasted, platinum blonde Swede with a penchant for nudity has been etched into the cultural zeitgeist of the world...

*Ahem* ANITA EKBERG R.I.P. *Ahem*

http://i68.tinypic.com/2wpma1h.jpg

Because of this stereotype, along with being widely perceived as ultra-independent, almost militaristic feminists hellbent on being just as "liberated" as men are, Scandinavian/Northern European women have been desirable to those seeking a no-frills, "good time"--of course, the actual truth is far more nuanced and complex. The modern Scandinavian woman may be more "open" to the possibility of casual trysts, knowing that it is her right to use her body when/as she sees fit, but she is not hyper-sexualized. However, the stereotype of the ditzy, promiscuous, nudist blonde with a silly, rise-and-fall accent persists throughout the world.


If we start discussing what Middle Eastern men "think", pretty soon we'll establish that they think with their lower head 90% of the time.

I think this applies to a lot of men--some are just socialized to mask, hide or repress it better. Swedish guys may not check out women as they walk by or make cat calls or randomly approach them on the street or at a club (unless ultra-intoxicated lol) but that doesn't mean they don't want to. It's just that we have been raised to respect not only a woman's right to space and privacy but all people's right to space and privacy.


Respectable black women? Those same black women who end up single mothers 75% of the time?

This was offensively rendered in an intellectually lazy way. For one, I was referring to those Black, Latin and Asian women who see themselves as "respectable." I was not saying that they all are--all White women certainly aren't for that matter, either. Secondly, who decides what's respectable or not? Thirdly, that 72% figure only refers to children born to women who are not married but includes both fathers who still live in the household and fathers who still have regular contact with their children. And guess what? Sweden, one of the most advanced countries in Europe and the world, with one of the highest quality of life indexes, leads Europe in couples who live together but are unmarried. Another fact: In 2013, 54.4 percent of the children were born to an unmarried mother, compared to the EU average of roughly 40 percent. My point? Let's not impugn the "respectability" of people as if to imply that their life choices are innately flawed. In the case of black women, there are several factors not having to do with promiscuity (like the mass incarceration of black men, restricted access to birth control, avoiding marriage altogether--which is a national trend) that contribute to the high rate of children born out of wedlock and living in single parent homes.


You've seen Latino women on the above show, you can tune on the internet and see a few hundred such Latin tv shows where objectification of women is as much frequent as snow in Sweden. Asian women could be quite different by culture. Japanese women are even more objectified as they live in an ultra-patriarchist society, although they are not exactly hot. Philippinos are almost sex toys, Chinese women vary immensely according to latitude:

Again, you missed my point. I was talking about minority women in the US who see themselves as "respectable," as far as their value systems, and therefore, would see white women as "less respectable" because of their stereotypical proclivity towards unconventional sex--which I didn't say was a fact, but was a stereotype. Furthermore, different cultures have different ideas of what constitutes "respectability"--what may be normal for some, may be found to be objectionable by others, and vice versa.


I don't think that the phrase "virtue signalling" makes a reference to either genes or environment,

It seemed to me (please correct me if I'm wrong) that you were implying that relegating skin color preference to "cultural inculcation" versus "hardwired genetic drive/imperative" was somehow an attempt by some--let me guess, the "politically correct left"--to coerce people into some higher (but 'unnatural') state of moral consciousness that eschews biases based on skin color. I agree with Angela and don't think that she was being "politically correct"; therefore, my comment was primarily concerned with showing that there is a strong socio-cultural precedent for the (seemingly) worldwide affinity for white/lightness.


I don't think that the Chinese ever saw the Mongols as anything but barbarians, until they overthrew them. The Greeks did never quite aspire to become Muslim either, during 4~5 centuries of oppression. So I shall disagree with your statement, might does not always awe people, especially those well established.It does but fails to make an impact. You won't succeed to turn a strait male baby into gay or female by putting pink booties on him, or to turn a straight female into a lesbian or boy just by putting blue booties on her.

1.) Even before the Qin Dynasty (the first Chinese Dynasty), way before the Mongols invaded, commoners who worked out in the fields were referred to as "black headed ones." The Chinese have been associating whiteness with wealth and darkness with poverty before the Mongols, did so during their stay, and most certainly continued after they left.

2.) I did say that, particularly, those seeking to integrate and advance are the ones who usually adapt and conform; I didn't say that all do, or willingly, at least. I agree that the colonized don't always love their colonizers--quite the opposite, at least initially. But some form of Stockholm Syndrome eventually takes root, where the victimized eventually begin to care for and protect their victimizers. And even if the colonizers are never fully embraced, that doesn't mean that society does not or will not orient towards them and their ways. In degrees large and small, there will be some acquiescence amongst the subjugated.

3.) Who said anything about turning babies gay or straight? My point was that from an early age, society molds and forms who we become, and even if that runs at odds with any genetic inclinations! Speaking of sexuality or gender, there are people who live horribly unhappy, unfulfilled, repressed lives just because they fear going against their dominant socialization. That crazy, self-loathing bastard in Orlando who killed all of those gay people perfectly exemplifies this--he was indoctrinated, in part, to be a vicious homophobe regardless of his sexual inclination towards men.


Ultimately you stop short of suggesting that whiter people are more desire because they always end up at the top of the global hierarchy. This simple fact could have passed into genetics as well, although I prefer simpler explanations.

Wrong--sheer luck and opportunity have been the bulk of white people's success. In every group, there will always be a few innovators who think outside the box and do things that catapults the whole group forward. As people began leaving Africa, they kept encountering environments and circumstances, over thousands of years, that forced them to adapt and innovate. Cue "Guns, Germs and Steel" and voila--world conquerors. A universal, hardwired genetic affinity for "whiteness" seems ridiculous and arbitrary in the grand scheme of things. I'm blonde, blue, and white as can be and I sure as hell don't have it! :laughing:

Angela
04-08-16, 16:51
Petros Houhoulis;486388]Why does it have to be "European"? How do you know that the "genes of beauty" that you allude to, developed first in Europe or Asia, for example?What did the Greeks congratulate again?

It has absolutely nothing to do with where certain phenotypes may have appeared. It has to do with the fact that the researchers are usually from Europe and assume that phenotypes currently more common in Europe are the most attractive in an absolute sense.



https://books.google.gr/books?id=9Z6vCGbf66YC&pg=PA154&lpg=PA154&dq=rome+prostitutes+red+yellow+hair&source=bl&ots=YL56xWp8le&sig=SCJ1pT3eA6IWBH2pzErITBCKGKc&hl=el&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi8z7bIi6bOAhVIBsAKHe2LDQYQ6AEILTAC#v=on epage&q=rome%20prostitutes%20red%20yellow%20hair&f=false

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phryne#Life

I'm not going to bother going to the sources that contradict some of this, or put it into perspective. There's a limit to how much of my time I'm willing to waste. I would just say that if the people of Greece did indeed prize blonde hair more than the dark hair which the majority of them possessed, then as now, this is perhaps a rather perfect example of what happens when an invading group which, as is psychologically healthy, prizes its own phenotype, makes that phenotype a symbol of upper caste status, and then eventually the autocthonous population comes to adopt that as the standard, and comes to dislike their own previously prized looks. It's actually quite sad when you think about it.



The funny thing is watching the Romans prefer black hair until they realize that people could actually have blonde or red hair!

https://books.google.gr/books?id=In6nCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT112&lpg=PT112&dq=ovid+red+blonde&source=bl&ots=a1lqVQbY4Q&sig=eeSVbtCYwrvwrOCO4rKwWwNp268&hl=el&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjduLHOjKbOAhUCM8AKHUE9BfMQ6AEIJTAB#v=on epage&q=ovid%20red%20blonde&f=false

Oh, please. There were always fair haired people among the Romans, and not necessarily because of any "Indo-Europeans". One of the first examples of fair haired, fair skinned, blue eyed people is in a Neolithic farmer context. Don't you people from crashed anthrofora sites ever read genetics papers?



That correlates suspiciously with the general trend that whiter people tend to conquer darker people (Indo-Europeans -> Mediterraneans & Dravidians, Manchu -> Chinese, Mongols -> Chinese & Indians & Persians, Chinese -> Indo-Chinese, Europeans -> virtually everyone) and just doesn't quite work with the Muslims because the Muslim fashion trend is... hiding womens' faces, eh?

Again, please read some genetics papers. Where ever did you get the idea that the "Indo-Europeans" were all or even mostly "fair" in a modern European context, or were always fairer than the people they conquered? The Yamnaya had pigmentation like Anatolian farmers, and the Catacomb people were slightly darker yet, darker than any modern Europeans. Did you forget that? The Mongols were a bit fairer than the Han, but you don't find the Chinese panting to claim descent from them, like some Europeans. Indeed, they rather like the fact that they overthrew them. They seem to recognize the obvious, which is that in human history the pattern seems to be that we struggle to form a civilization, then the civilized core weakens for various reasons and the barbarians at the periphery invade, destroy all or most of what has been created, and the struggle to regain what has been lost has to start all over again. We waste so much time. I'm like the Chinese; I value civilization, and so I think it's a great pity that these less civilized herders perhaps helped bring down "Old Europe". Oh, and the, by comparison, less civilized pastoralists are not always lighter. Have you forgotten about the Semitic conquests of the more northern Middle East, or the later Arab invasions there, or the Moors conquering Spain, or, well, you get the pictures?


[QUOTE]I guess this association of elite groups' phenotype with popularity surely explains why Finnish girls were the most popular slaves in the markets of Crimea eh? Not to mention the Ottoman slave raid in that obscure place called Iceland... By contrast the blacks of Africa made the most popular slaves for labor not only in the American continent, but among Muslims bordering East Africa too...The second sentence makes far more sense than the first one. Men are biologically programmed to impregnate as many women as possible. Only civilization saves us from the horrors of masculinity on the loose.Women rarely care about the physical appearance of their husbands (their lovers being another story altogether). What they prize the most is resources, and they prefer a husband who shall provide them with enough provisions for themselves and their children. Thus they do choose, but upon an entirely different basis. Other factors include smell and other stuff, presumably because smell has some relation with the immune system. Looks appear to be somewhere in the bottom of the stack, except when women are in the menstrual cycle, but as I wrote, their lovers are another category altogether.Those factors you mention could apply more to survival rates than sexual selection. People with little capacity to store fat or others with little ability to remain agile in excessive sunlight would have a hard time to survive in certain climates respectively, irrespectively if were they were among someones' sexual preferences.

My goodness, you people love that example, don't you? You don't equally love the example of the "Circassian" women who were the most prized of all and who were definitely not blondes, but West Asian. ,

Honestly, I'm often at a loss as to why certain people find certain "looks" attractive. There may be something to the idea that blonde hair, in particular, but perhaps also fair skin, are associated with "youthfulness". Given how many men are insecure about their sexuality, sexual prowess, really, it makes sense that there is a preference for a look that is associated with youth, inexperience, etc. After all, a virgin, and even more so a really young virgin, can't make any odious comparisons, or demands which can't be met, can she? By the time they figure out what's what, they can be traded for a younger model. Of course, if she's very large boned and towers over him it might rather destroy the illusion, but who knows. My experience has been rather different. I spent a good part of my married life coloring my naturally chestnut colored hair black and scrunching it madly to get it to curl because that's the look my husband preferred. There's a lot of men who agree with him, or "Latina" actresses and southern European actresses wouldn't be so popular, would they? Not long ago, wasn't Monica Bellucci considered the most beautiful woman in the world? What about Jessica Alba and Sofia Vergara, or if we're talking about SSA admixed people Halle Berry? Those kinds of "contests" are ridiculous, of course; there's lots of beautiful people in the world, and they come in lots of different varieties, but just saying.

Circassian women:
http://image.slidesharecdn.com/caucasus-101015130502-phpapp01/95/russia-and-the-caucasus-in-the-19th-century-47-728.jpg?cb=1287148144

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Circassian_girl.jpg

Monica Bellucci in her prime:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFbIZNdFIYQ

In case you missed it over in Athens, the current "hottest" couple in America is Sofia Vergara and Joe Manganiello. The highest paid male model in the world for years was David Gandy. Or maybe you missed it because they're over 30. You're not fooling me, you know, with your IP in Greece; you're Greek like I'm Japanese. You sound like the typical young American who dabbles with racist groups.

I realize you probably know nothing of advertising, but I do, given I misspent two years working in that industry before I thought better of it. This is what moves products off the shelves the most as far as men are concerned. Do you think they leave their choice of models to chance?
https://www.google.com/search?q=David+Gandy+in+Blue&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjGtduL96fOAhWq6oMKHWIfCcAQsAQIHQ&biw=780&bih=376#imgrc=xXxhBDtIRUjbeM%3A





There is an interesting attempt to confuse works of fiction with facts here... I haven't seen many whites trying to look as black in post-colonial Africa.

What? I'm talking about the psychological effects of being invaded, conquered, and subjugated for hundreds if not thousands of years.



Why do most black men tend to be poor? Who would be more dependent upon stacking provisions? A man in Africa surrounded by abundant game and fruit, or a man in Siberia who would think it hard to move out of his hut 3 out of 4 seasons in the pre-modern era?

Did you miss geography class? Most African soils, particularly the ones that used to be rain forest, are very thin and lacking in the proper nutrients for crops, and a lot of Africa is also either desert or subject to periodic terrible droughts which lead to recurring famines. Africa also has very few rivers for such a large continent, which are important not only for irrigation but for trade. The climate is also not conducive to high yield agriculture, which is a prerequisite for "civilization". Most of the major civilizations of the world developed in the temperate zones for a reason. Please take a look at a map of climate worldwide and landscape as well. Honestly, what is happening to the American education system?
http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/use/?cid=nrcs142p2_054024

http://www.geography.learnontheinternet.co.uk/images/worldclimate.gif (http://www.geography.learnontheinternet.co.uk/images/worldclimate.gif)



The Gypsies' customs descend from the caste system applied to them by the IndoEuropeans in India, since they are, in all probability, descendants of Dalits, they might actually constitute the longest culturally oppressed group by whites!

And the point is???



Perhaps the best explanation of why men prefer whiter women instinctively: They consider them to be younger, and thus more fertile!European - as well as otherwise - fairness is primarily a result of the "survival of the fittest" theory of Charles Darwin. Can't explain otherwise why latitude is closely correlated to pigmentation, irrespectively of race (white or yellow)

Do you know what a search engine is? Do you know how to use one? If yes, please avail yourself of ours. There are dozens and dozens of papers on the correlation of solar radiation and skin pigmentation. Please read them.
http://anthro.palomar.edu/adapt/images/map_of_skin_color_distribution.gif


Cranial cavity is somewhat related to intelligence. If women make a preference to wide cranials, then they prefer smarter children - which are evidently more prone to survival. Interesting idea!

Off topic.


Yeah, black people have features which are valuable for the equator, but less so for other climate regions. Water loss does not seem to be a problem in Scandinavia, it would appear to be more of a blessing there, if anything! Better antimicrobial defense is equally irrelevant, when did you last read about something akin to ebola or zika in colder climates. Early Europeans were so filthy they barely bothered to wash at all! The Japanese thought of them as barbarians because of their filth, and Theophanu caused something of a scandal (to them) because she dared to use utensils and insist at bathing on a daily basis! Even today the barbarians insist at eating raw meat, something only comparable to the Japanese' consumption of raw fish. Hygiene is not part of the "white" genes or original "white" culture, because it was never essential.[I][FONT=Verdana]It was a natural location. Perhaps you misunderstood the meaning of the world "natural"... BTW which Virgin islands do you refer to, the British or the American? I've been to both, and I remember them to be great locations both.If you ever found a group of people intentionally hiding during their vacation, it would be a world first. Although some fools do descend upon casinos and forget the time and day they are living...I assume by now that the waiter made his best effort to turn you off, making his life less complicated in the process. The nearly dead pay better after all, as everybody in the tourist industry knows...[FONT=Verdana]Yes, life was a bit harder before the internet. Nowadays you can find customer reviews for everything from tourist resorts to hookers...I still can't figure out whether you were stupid or simply impervious to pain. Were you drunk that night? Most people do sense being bitten by insects...Stop right there ma'am, your hyper-nationalism is flashing red flags all over my brain by now: You refused to buy any protection for bugs, as if you expected to find some factory in the Virgin Islands producing anything, even bug sprays, now you complain because isolated islands don't have enough doctors, as if that is economically feasible. I take great offense of your disregard of small Mediterranean-style islands because of purely economic reasons!No, they certainly didn't put it in the brochure, because they assumed you'd have read Charles' Darwin theory of the "survival of the fittest". Of course white people have less resistance to insect bites since their genetic urheimat is devoid of such little creatures! Alternatively, of course, you could assume that preference for fair skin extends beyond the human race after all. Whatever makes your day... Even if you the idea to return back to the vicinity of the polar bears where your ancestors came from is acceptable, if you think so!

Not something we wouldn't suspect by empirical evidence some thousand of years now...




So jumbled and off topic there's no point in responding. Oh, insulting as well.



It turns out there are people on the internet who make a living by pointing out why black women are less popular, for all sorts of reasons...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOk3Dpv0MaU

Friends of yours, no doubt.



In some cases, it just doesn't help at all...

http://static2.fjcdn.com/comments/I%20am%20the%20Niggest%20_58eaf8d54d668119935fbe1e 3088dfee.png

If you're going to post a picture of a Sub-Saharan African man, it's rather unfair to post this poor, unattractive one don't you think?

How about him? Or Djimon Hounsou? They may not be my type, but who could call them ugly?The musculature they're able to attain rather easily is quite impressive. How do you compare?
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/d5/61/98/d5619826d9972af873e0c40064325ce7.jpg

http://www3.pictures.zimbio.com/bg/Djimon+Hounsou+Calvin+Klein+25+Years+Underwear+vad aO9bKOf9l.jpg



Same in Greece at that time frame. My jaw dropped when I read once that fat hookers were actually prized back then!

Is this the Marvel comedy school of history? Fashions in body type change, just like other things. I'd hardly call the women of the classical Greek statues "fat". Now, if you were talking about Rubens, you'd have a point, but hey, maybe that's what the women of his place and time looked like in their maturity and he liked it. My husband would have moved to a separate room, but to each his own.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Rubens_Venus_at_a_Mirror_c1615.jpg

OK, I've had enough. The rest is just devolving into scattered, illogical, even more unsupported speculation and rehashed old stereotypes, when it isn't totally off topic.

Martin Van Buren, huh? Yes, indeed, I'm sure they spend a lot of time on Martin Van Buren in Greek schools. Are you even out of high school yet?

Angela
04-08-16, 17:44
@ Petros
You've received an infraction for some of what was in that post, btw, and if you continue to insult people or make wildly provocative comments, you'll get another one.

Perhaps you might want to post only when not under the "influence".

As for me, I'm never under the "influence", and no one has ever accused me of being stupid, or if they did, they lived to regret it.

Before there was so much available on the internet I did occasionally make a mistake in choosing resorts. That particular one was one of the "Rock resorts"; it's Caneel Bay in the American Virgin Islands. I also didn't realize that for me personally it's important when in the tropics to spray every inch of my body with products containing pesticides, like NEET. You live and learn, thank goodness, or most of us do.

I see that they're now marketing to a different group, installing a "kid's program". I guess there weren't enough of the "newly wed and the nearly dead" to keep it full. :)They still don't serve dinner after 8 or so, however, so it's not exactly "jumping" at night.
https://www.tripadvisor.com/Hotel_Review-g147413-d147592-Reviews-Caneel_Bay_Resort-Caneel_Bay_St_John_U_S_Virgin_Islands.html#REVIEWS

I do feel sorry that you've never been so in the throes of passion that you can't imagine two people being so besotted with each other, in the early stages I will admit, that they barely leave their hotel rooms for a week at a time. If you don't adopt the "white people don't bathe" scenario you proposed, work out at the gym, work on a nice smile, and develop some "game" etc., it may yet happen.

Caneel Bay might then work out for you, or somewhere like Las Brisas in Acapulco. I haven't been there since my kids were born, but it used to be wonderful: totally private pool outside your door filled with fresh hibiscus flowers every morning...another place where you don't have to leave your room for a week. :) Everything was pink: complimentary jeeps, stripe down the middle of the roads, towels, you name it. Cheesy,but I didn't mind it at the time.
http://www.hotelroomsearch.net/im/hotels/mx/las-brisas-acapulco-15.jpg

Maleth
04-08-16, 20:12
This study is way too specific to Canada. I sincerely doubt that Tanzanian women would seek "mystery, villainy and danger", because they have already been dealt that and they aren't happy about it:

Petros you turned something scientific into something heavy and political. We were discussing innocent sexual attraction without the complications. You are going to global extremes from heavy pigmentation to total depigmentation which is not the case. Yes the article I posted is not 100% correct because apparently it seems that very fair guys seem also to be naturally attracted to darker womens (which could also mean Mediterranean type of women and not necessarily Nigerian or Congo where your mind uncontrollably can lead you. When one has lived in places with multi ethnicities in safe environments without some cultural conditioning, its amazing the type of attractions (even extreme) one would come across. Anyhow been on these boards long enough and came across these discussions many times that sometimes I feel its just recycled material.

davef
05-08-16, 07:03
Petros you turned something scientific into something heavy and political. We were discussing innocent sexual attraction without the complications. You are going to global extremes from heavy pigmentation to total depigmentation which is not the case. Yes the article I posted is not 100% correct because apparently it seems that very fair guys seem also to be naturally attracted to darker womens (which could also mean Mediterranean type of women and not necessarily Nigerian or Congo where your mind uncontrollably can lead you. When one has lived in places with multi ethnicities in safe environments without some cultural conditioning, its amazing the type of attractions (even extreme) one would come across. Anyhow been on these boards long enough and came across these discussions many times that sometimes I feel its just recycled material.

Maleth, I've been on this board for 1.5 months and already this is getting tiring. I've seen plenty of full blooded south italian Americans who got my attention and I'll happily sleep and cuddle with a nice full blooded maltese girl. I don't care about how much WHG they score in some DNA test.

Maleth
05-08-16, 08:24
Maleth, I've been on this board for 1.5 months and already this is getting tiring. I've seen plenty of full blooded south italian Americans who got my attention and I'll happily sleep and cuddle with a nice full blooded maltese girl. I don't care about how much WHG they score in some DNA test.

Feels like walking on water ;) :)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J7O5BGqPDk

Maciamo
05-08-16, 08:52
I tend to find there are many mixed children with dark complexions when I go shopping in Auchan (French hypermarket). In Asia, very little people would consider interbreeding with Africans, and many prefer light skinned women.

When I typed Europeans marrying blacks or Asians instead of getting Europe's stats I am getting America's stats so here they are:
...

Here are some more clearly presented statistics.

Interracial marriages in the US from the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/01/29/us/20110130mixedrace.html?_r=0)

https://static01.nyt.com/packages/images/newsgraphics/2011/0130-mixed-race/0130-nat-mixed.png



What we see here is that:

- Both White and Black men marry 3x more frequently Asian women than the other way round.
- Black men also marry Native American women 3x more frequently than the reverse, but there is no such discrepancy between Whites and Native Americans.
- Black men are twice more likely to marry White women than the other way round.
- Whites are the most likely to marry within their racial group (95% of marriages) and Native Americans the least (only 44% prefer their own kind).
- Native Americans marry Whites as often as other Native Americans, and there is no gender bias.

These trends appear to be similar in the UK, but the gender bias is less pronounced than in the US, especially for Blacks. In other words, Black Americans are considerably more likely to marry outside their racial group than Black Britons.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-z-XwoOW2ztw/TzWDmum3LcI/AAAAAAAAEeg/iSI8MRTuxZY/s1600/journal.pone.0031703.t001+(1).png


The interracial marriage statistics for France (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariages_mixtes_en_France) are more revealing as they give the detail by nationality. The data can be misleading though as some French nationals are naturalised immigrants.

We see here that the gender asymmetry can vary tremendously depending on the country of origin of the Blacks and Asians. For example, only Black men from Congo, Central Africa, Guinea, Togo, Senegal, Mauritania marry French women in greater number than the other way round. In some cases there is relative symmetry between genders (Benin, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Chad). For a few countries, it is actually French men who tend to marry mostly African women, including those from Cameroon, Gabon, Somalia and Madagascar (who have heavy Indonesian admixture).

For Asians countries, we see a clear rift between East and West. West and South Asian men (e.g. from Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan, India) marry French women from 2 to 7 times more often than the other way round (the highest gender biases are for Turkey and Pakistan). But when it comes to East Asia, the trend is reversed, with French men marrying 3 to 14 times more East Asian women than the opposite (the higher gender bias is for Japan, with 309 Japanese women marrying French men, but only 22 Japanese men marrying French women).


Marriages between French people and foreigners represent about 15% of all marriages in France. However 28% of international marriages were with other Europeans or people of European descent, and nearly 50% with other Caucasians (mostly North Africans, but also Middle Easterners). Marriages with East or South Asians represented only 6% of international marriages (0.9% of all marriages) while those with Sub-Saharan Africans made up 16.5% of international marriages (2.5% of total).

The United Kingdom Census 2011 (https://www.ons.gov.uk/census/2011census) found that 10% of were either married or living with someone from a different ethnic group.

Angela
05-08-16, 14:56
Thanks, Maciamo.

Some of this has to do with access, perhaps? By that I mean that more intermarriage is going to be with North Africans in France than in other places because there are a lot of them, but also there's going to be a gender bias because North African women may still be more guarded and/or married off?

Just speaking for the U.S. now, those statistics are for marriage, yes? Young white women here might have an affair with an African American man, but marriage is another issue. Also, marriage as a whole is not necessarily something that young people want, particularly the less "conservative" young people, the ones who would be more willing to break the color line. Just by observation it seems as if the number of cross-race relationships in the U.S. is higher than 5%.

Angela
05-08-16, 16:24
Maleth, I've been on this board for 1.5 months and already this is getting tiring. I've seen plenty of full blooded south italian Americans who got my attention and I'll happily sleep and cuddle with a nice full blooded maltese girl. I don't care about how much WHG they score in some DNA test.

Make sure to wear the ketchup smeared black tee shirt and brown cargo pants and blast the music you've been posting on the "What Am I Listening To" thread from your phone, and lovely Maltese girls like the one in Maleth's video will dump their hotties in a flash and drop at your feet.

bicicleur
05-08-16, 17:12
Make sure to wear the ketchup smeared black tee shirt and brown cargo pants and blast the music you've been posting on the "What Am I Listening To" thread from your phone, and lovely Maltese girls like the one in Maleth's video will dump their hotties in a flash and drop at your feet.

If I had known that's all it takes ..

Maleth
05-08-16, 17:43
Thanks, Maciamo.

Some of this has to do with access, perhaps? By that I mean that more intermarriage is going to be with North Africans in France than in other places because there are a lot of them, but also there's going to be a gender bias because North African women may still be more guarded and/or married off?

Also I am not sure what methodology for these Censuses are used. Second and third generation North Africans examples would be considered as French, like the second and third generation Indians in UK would be British who would through cultural reasons still marry their own, but would look like a Brit example getting married to an Indian.


Just speaking for the U.S. now, those statistics are for marriage, yes? Young white women here might have an affair with an African American man, but marriage is another issue. Also, marriage as a whole is not necessarily something that young people want, particularly the less "conservative" young people, the ones who would be more willing to break the color line. Just by observation it seems as if the number of cross-race relationships in the U.S. is higher than 5%.

Cohabitation has increased dramatically also, so I believe they would not be taken into account in these type of charts

http://family-studies.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/fig-1-europe-union-dissolution.png

Maciamo
05-08-16, 22:44
Thanks, Maciamo.

Some of this has to do with access, perhaps? By that I mean that more intermarriage is going to be with North Africans in France than in other places because there are a lot of them, but also there's going to be a gender bias because North African women may still be more guarded and/or married off?

Just speaking for the U.S. now, those statistics are for marriage, yes? Young white women here might have an affair with an African American man, but marriage is another issue. Also, marriage as a whole is not necessarily something that young people want, particularly the less "conservative" young people, the ones who would be more willing to break the color line. Just by observation it seems as if the number of cross-race relationships in the U.S. is higher than 5%.

I forgot to mention that the French data based on nationality can be misleading because some French nationals are in fact naturalised immigrants. I suspect that a lot of the "international" marriages between French citizens and Maghrebins in particular are actually between ethnic Maghrebins. The French press likes to report that marriage is one of the ways Maghrebins can obtain a permanent visa to France, and so those that have already been naturalised are encouraged to marry people from their village/town of origin in Morocco or Algeria to legally bring them to France.

Alan
06-08-16, 04:29
We had this already I think, there is absolutely no way that you can sexually select for a certain trait within a number of milions that fast, even with help of founder effect/Bottle neck.

Don't you think it is too much of a coincidence that fair pigmentation is especially common in one part of the world, a part where all three main factors are given.

Genetics, environment, agricultural diet. Think about it, those with the same (very similar) set of genes and the same diet look very similar with simply variation of skin color from slightly darker in countries with higher UV radiation in the South to very light pigmentation in countries of the North with lower UV radiation. You see the exact same freakn trend in East Asia too with the only difference that their set of genes effect their pigmentation in slightly different way. Japanese are lighter pigmented than Thai.

Was there also sexual selection? Remember we have too many seperate cases of very light pigmentation throughout Eurasia that we can claim they only happened once and than there was sexual selection. This is unlikely.

davef
10-08-16, 08:04
Make sure to wear the ketchup smeared black tee shirt and brown cargo pants and blast the music you've been posting on the "What Am I Listening To" thread from your phone, and lovely Maltese girls like the one in Maleth's video will dump their hotties in a flash and drop at your feet.
Ha! Perhaps I should not show my father's side as often. My mom had a 99 average in high school whereas my dad whacked a beehive with a bat, pushed the principals car onto the train tracks, and other escapades. He was dumped by a real prize bc his idea of a date was a trip to a local hot dog stand, and he once embarrassed himself at another date by ordering lobster and drinking out of the butter cup ( he thought it was juice). He did well in sports. I won't mention any more of his escapades.

He said my mother straightened him out and now he's in real estate.

Happily ever after.