Arms races and interracial encounters
After YouTubing VH1′s The Pickup Artist (a contest reality show where guys learn how to pick up girls), something struck me about how the bar and nightclub scene so thoroughly devastated the East Asian contestant. Sure, every guy gets rejection anxiety and experiences rejection, including the occasional antarctic stare and turn-away response that the Asian guy received. But he looked like he was about to commit suicide, which he ended up doing symbolically by electing himself to be kicked off the show. You see the same stewing-in-rage pattern among Angry Asian Male websites, where they barely contain their bitterness about how White females show no interest in them. * Why is it that Asian guys seem to experience shell-shock in the bar and nightclub scene?
The answer may lie in the arms race between the sexes, whereby males become better and better at showing off or charming and seducing females, which makes females evolve higher standards for the showing-off trait or greater skepticism and iciness when they sense they’re being hit on. It’s clear that this arms race has escalated much farther in sub-Saharan Africa and other places of similar latitude, compared to more extreme latitudes (although latitude is not the primary cause — probably pathogen load, ease of female farming, and so on, that correlate with it). So, when an Asian male is dropped into the lion’s den of the Western bar and nightclub scene, he is not dealing with a merely unfamiliar group of females — a large proportion of Europeans and Latin Americans — but one that has evolved to defeat a far tougher opponent than he.
If European, Latin American, and African females have evolved levels of skepticism and strategies for rejecting an unwelcome suitor that reflect the levels of male seduction skill in their own populations, then when they use these against the far less threatening Asian male, he will perceive it not as a woman’s natural self-defense, but as malicious overkill, as though a first-world superpower dropped bombs on a hunter-gatherer tribe that had picked off some of its members with crude arrows. **
Because there has been very little contact — cultural or genetic — between Europe, East Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, and the Americas for most of the time after these groups went their own way, it is not surprising that this pattern is pervasive when they meet for the first time. A well known example is the devastation of American groups when European colonists introduced pathogens that were not just unfamiliar but the outcome of thousands of years of arms-race evolution against the human immune system. Similarly, Europeans never managed to colonize sub-Saharan Africa: they dropped like flies in the even harsher pathogen-load areas there. There is no reason to expect the pattern would not show up in social arms races.
Steve Sailer has collected data on who marries who interracially: African male with White female is far more common than White male with African female. While plenty of causes have been given — for example, dark skin is more attractive on males than on females — I don’t know of anyone mentioning the seduction arms race. African males would have an easier time charming over White females than African females, other things equal, since Whites are more naive to high-level seduction skills. *** Conversely, White males are underprepared in the charm department to evade the African female’s more sensitive bullshit-detector, and their show-off skills are unlikely to meet her higher standards (in dancing ability, for example).
In general, it appears that females will date males of other groups if the latter are higher in seduction skills, and so males will date females of other groups if the latter are more naive to seduction than same-group females. I don’t claim this accounts for all of the variation, since it would suggest East Asian female with African male would be the most common pattern — but this datum is a thorn in the side of all other explanations too, such as differing levels of masculinity and femininity between groups.
* The rant linked to contains the following:
“I’d be willing to bet that you could scan entire racks of trashy romances at your local supermarket and not find a single one that depicts an Asian man seducing and romancing a white woman.”
Well, the novelists have to keep the plot somewhat believable, and they have to supply a real rather than non-existent demand. The stereotype, probably true, is that East Asians are more pragmatic, tough-minded, and call-it-like-it-is compared to the more idealistic Europeans. But this example shows that the male contest for mates can fog up anyone’s clear mind.
** Finnish males may also count here as honorary East Asians.
*** Maybe not so true for Italian females — any female who’s been to Rome or Staten Island knows how relentless Italian males are.
Labels: babes and hunks, interracial
Interesting. But I would add that adaptation to a monogamous religion/culture also reduces male seduction skills, not just the physical environmental factors.
** Finnish males may also count here as honorary East Asians.
LOL.
Interesting. But I would add that adaptation to a monogamous religion/culture also reduces male seduction skills, not just the physical environmental factors.
This is true, but I think that this phenomenon and a monogomous culture both derive from the same genetic tendencies. It is also worth noting that black guys tend to have the least amount of anxiety about approaching strange females and they tend to get over rejections the quickest. As usual, white guys tend to fall somewhere in between the two.
It is also worth noting that black guys tend to have the least amount of anxiety about approaching strange females and they tend to get over rejections the quickest.
right. getting all depressed about being rejected is totally irrational if you want to maximize your play. it’s a waste of time.
I can’t understand your evaluation of black men. Those that I’ve met in the Finnish bar scene have all been scared wimps. Finns are introverted and have trouble initiating interactions, but we’re also direct and assertive (especially towards people who try to initiate interactions…). People from, uh, more talkative and friendly cultures (or gene pools) are easily fried in Finnish bars. Blacks seem to be the most effeminate of all races, always touchy and weepy about their hurt feelings and Finnish “racism” and “coldness” (ie. the way we act towards everyone).
East Asians are the opposite of Finns, far less shy (eg. they’ll totally creep out Finns with their much lower need for personal space – one of my favourite pranks to pull on guests back from the country is to take them into an Asian store and watch them quake in fear in a crowd of tiny Asian women) and far less assertive. Obviously, they’d be destroyed in the bars (but I never see any…).
Practically everyone has an advantage over Finns at dance clubs, of course.
It was all a long time ago, but I found it best just to stand around and let the girls approach me. I could cope with most of them, except the ones who said things like “I’m Leo, what’s your sign?” Those I’d flee.
Surely, preference for masculinity must be a factor here.
This thread has some of the best stuff ever. BTW why was that utterly hilarious sarcasm by some Finn called Pekka deleted?
Regarding “pickup artists”, don’t you guys train for this stuff in America outside some silly seminar??? When I was a teenager and the clubs had just opened to us, the guys who had trouble with rejection anxiety did their own “training”, like going out to compete on who can get the most violent rejection or the most bitch slaps and so on. (Not me, though, I’ve never had a fear of rejection, or a normal fear of anything, for that matter. My big problem has been my assholiness and the training to get rid of that is going out to get beaten up by other males.)
African (and, presumably, African-American) females have high bullshit detectors? That is a load of, well, bullshit. Black neighborhoods all over America are chock-full of black women who’ve been pumped and dumped by black men, left with nothing but bad memories and illegitimate children.
Peter, no offense, but you’re not allowed to comment anymore in this thread until you re-read your comment and say why it’s wrong, based on what I’ve written in the post.
African (and, presumably, African-American) females have high bullshit detectors? That is a load of, well, bullshit. Black neighborhoods all over America are chock-full of black women who’ve been pumped and dumped by black men, left with nothing but bad memories and illegitimate children.
that ignores the fact that it’s predominantly black men who impregnate black women. if in fact bf’s have high bs detectors, bm would have developed weapons against it. i’m still not inclined to believe this is the final answer however b/c it doesn’t explain why af/bm couplings are not more prevalent. sure they exist, but no where near to the extent that af/wm couplings exist. to date, i’ve still heard of no single explanation that can account for the observations.
I’ve gone to some of these pick-up seminars. It was worthwhile to a degree. However, the stuff they don’t tell you is alluded to in this excellent post.
Ability to pick-up chicks is not just about having ‘game.’ The pick-up artists who run the seminars would like you to believe that it is- so you keep buying more and more of their stuff that supposedly improves your ‘game.’ Better ‘game’ helps, but it is only one of many factors that affects your worth among females. The ‘pick-up’ artists who run the seminars hate people admitting a lot of these factors are simply congenital- and cannot be made (nature vs nurture, so to speak)!
I see awesome pick-up artists, like Roissy, as being a confluence of various factors:
race, height, looks, money (or the appearance of money), IQ and ‘game’/personality.
If Roissy were a short S/E Asian male he’d probably get some chicks. But he’d get nowhere near the amount or the consistent quality of chicks he gets now.
Agnostic, can we get a link to the PUA on youtube?
Cite sources: it’s science!!!
Peter, in a word, “amazing.” Good stuff.
A few things:
I’ve thought a lot about the black/white male/female pairing and I think it comes down to a few things which I’d like to get your opinion on, guys. First off, I would say that with regard to the asian guy thing, the fact is that asian men are the worst looking guys, objectively. They tend to be small as well and on average are worse athletically which means they probably are less adept to fluidity of movement and smoothness in many other physical ways.
I happen to be a caucasian (mediterranean/germanic hybrid) who likes darker skinned women more than lighter or paler. I like all women, but I find myself more entertaining the darker skinned ones, which include blacks. I’ve always thought that the reason why there are more black guy/white girl pairs is two fold:
a) There are more white women and the man makes the initial move compared to the converse,
which is complicated by b) blacks have an identity that is far different [stronger] and groups are protective of their women. Seriously, people aren’t even sure what “white” is (are you anglo? italian? serb? russian? spanish?) while “black” in America is pretty well defined.
Also, ghetto blacks don’t get most white women, rich/educated ones do, whereas because of the low comparative numbers of blacks, their women are even harder to find that aren’t a total class and education chasm for the white guy.
That’s why I’m looking for a mulatto. Hehe. I think this makes a lot of sense. What do you guys think?
Brilliant analysis!
The same pattern can be observed on other features among different populations. It seems Rushton pattern everywhere.
I’m not trying to stir anything up. However, I would simply suggest that one possible reason that BFs are in less interracial relationships than other groups is that -possibly- other groups’s men actually desire them less.
This is not at all perfect evidence but if you look at top female porn stars, there is very little black representation. I realize that not every guy watches porn, but it is interesting to note this nonetheless:
http://www.porn-star.com/top100-2007t.html
One exception to the rule, white female physicians have quite high marriage rate with East Asian males. Obviously white female doctors might be different `ethnic group’ from hot-working-class girls, which have different standard for male attraction.
The youngest daughter of Al Gore is medical student who married to Chinese.
http://www.celebspin.com/al-gores-daughter-sarah-gets-married/
If you work in medical system, you will know.
The ‘pick-up’ artists who run the seminars hate people admitting a lot of these factors are simply congenital- and cannot be made (nature vs nurture, so to speak)!
I’m going to write a post sometime soon about this — the nature of “free, unsolicited advice,” surely incorporating the example of pickup artist advisors.
can we get a link to the PUA on youtube?
Last time I did this for an entire TV series that’s been uploaded, the person’s account was closed. I think YT must have a way of detecting uploaders that way. Just search for “the pickup artist” (in quotes), and click on the guy’s channel whose videos have Episode X part Y in the title.
East Asian woman look like adolescent western females, which are attractive to western guys.Where as the adolescent east Asian male is not attractive to western females.Could penis size also be a factor?
I meant western adolescent looking East Asian male
IC, were you referring to my post? I’m not familiar with Rushton …
Also, I am a physician. I buy completely what AG is saying. Female physicians are a siphoned sector of society (5 times fast?) … they are a in an extremely abnormal place that is the furthest from classical/traditional place of a woman. Let me see here:
1) A-type personality to be in medicine in 1st place
2) Don’t finish school for a LONG time, with loans to pay back.
3) Don’t have time to seek out many others or be seen by others outside of schooling/residency (goes wih 2)
4) Tend not to be that good looking, on average
5) Along with #1, driven to achieve which is more competitive, generally causing potential angst in a classic male/female scenario (thus have to be with someone with equal intelligence/bread winning capacity)
Just throwing it out there
To Amazing, I am refering Rushton Phillips. Read his work, and you know…
My mistake, I mean J. Philippe Rushton.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Philippe_Rushton
Find love with instint—low IQ way or animal way.
Find love with logics—-High IQ way.
thinking about this further, i think agnostic’s generalization is still too broad. he says that asian guys experience shell shock from the bar/nightclub scene. but from personal experience, i know many young east asians love the club scene. in urban centers, clubs realize this and some promote different nights for different crowds. friday nights for blacks and saturday nights for asians, or vice versa. it isn’t uncommon to enter a hip club and see 80-95% of the patrons are asian. when asians dominate a club i don’t see as many wm as i might otherwise expect w/ such a gathering of af. they prolly aren’t comfortable being in the minority or (as has also been observed) are told they aren’t especially welcome by the am in the club.
i’m not arguing that this gives am much confidence/success w/ wf. just that asians, including am, are not afraid of clubbing as an activity. east asians are not all boring calculators.
I suspect that black women may not have “bull-shit detectors” that are stronger than other females’, so much as “coolness requirements”.
Too much conjecture and not enough facts in this post; the thesis presented is unverifiable and unfalsifiable.
There are exactly 2 facts presented in this whole piece: The anecdotal story of a single reality show contestant, and Sailer’s theory body fat theory, which instead of supporting the ‘seduction skill’ thesis, actually offers an alternative explanation to why there is a racial dating gap.
There is a claim that white women are more naive than black men. No evidence. There is a claim that black men are more charming. Again no evidence.
I’m not sure about the ‘Arms Race’ metaphor either, which seems to imply that men have been more charming and women less gullible over time, say compared to 100 or 1000 or 10000 years ago. Again no evidence.
Wrapping up one’s prejudices with scientific babble really does evolutionary psychology a disservice.
Regarding the black female/asian male thing, I think there may be several contributing factors:
Lower likelihood of interaction between the two, Asian prejudice against blacks, and the simple fact that 95% of black women simply refuse to date non black men. I’ve read this statistic somewhere before, and I’ve had black women that I asked essentially confirm it. It is even common for (many) black women to make a big stink about black men who date white women. There is often significant social pressure from black women against blacks dating non blacks.
Interesting qualifier for Italian guys, something to do with more pathogen load on the peninsula? at least until mussolini sorted it out.
I think guys evolved the game. It’s highly probable that males have evolved this circuitry, but our rational brains get in the way and come out with beta crap. For example, remember when you were a kid and there was a girl you liked – you’d treat her like crap, fight with her etc, it just seemed like the natural thing to do. I really think the game is hardwired into us, but our rational brain considers things like that ‘irrational’, ‘surely it doesn’t make sense to treat a girl with contempt if you like her’, and so we go with the neocortex and ignore our heart. I mean, if the game worked even a very small percentage of the time (negs etc), and it must have even accounting for the evolution of approach anxiety or the fact that your mate choice was largely controlled by parents, then over thousands of years it would’ve been selected for and would predominate in the male population. It sure as hell makes a lot more sense than some of the other things believed by some to have been selected for (religion).
And in fact, I used to treat women I liked with mild contempt, and they were more into me as a result. But then when I got older and genuinely started dating I abandoned all that and started using my brain, rationalising ways to attract women – ie, being really nice to them, buying them drinks etc, which never worked. Reading a book by Roosh V called ‘Bang’, the first game book I read, felt not so much like the discovery of a new and novel knowledge, but the rediscovery of old and natural wisdom long buried, a kind of renaissance
Peter — I’m serious, no more in this thread. You criticize the post as though it said something about the absolute level of detecting bullshit in a particular group, rather than the relative ranking of different groups in detecting bullshit. And you also don’t get the arms race logic — as someone else already mentioned, this metaphor predicts that African guys can dupe African girls. The real counterexample would be if Whites or Asians could easily seduce African females and have lots of kids by them, etc.
Wongba — Yes, I’m referring just to how East Asian males do when hitting on European or Latin American women, not when they have a night to themselves or when they make up 85% of the club patrons. And when I say, “the Asian guy,” it’s implicit that I’m referring to an average.
Danny — Sailer’s data support my hypothesis, as they do many other hypotheses. There is rarely one cause to rule them all. As for claims without evidence — if you don’t already know that African-American guys are better at charming and showing off compared to East Asian-Americans or the average White American, you are a poor observer of the world around you and will never make a good scientist. The same goes for whether or not the arms race between the sexes ground to a halt 10,000 or 40,000 years ago.
I’ll take this back if you are from Maine or somewhere where you might not have had good first-hand evidence under your eyes while growing up, as far as the trivial claims in the post are concerned. To anyone who’s grown up and lived in an ethnically diverse area, this is pretty standard knowledge.
Re: Innate bullshit detectors.
A good way to test would be to see what percent of white/mother black father children are illegitimate vs. what percent of black mother/black father children are illegitimate. If agnostic is right, more mixed children will be raised only by the mother.
Being male I can’t speak to what women find attractive beyond the obvious. I can report that the reaction to a bad pickup play differs between white women and black women. Uninterested white women will pretend to have to go to the bathroom or that they have an emergency to attend to in some other room. Uninterested black women will say “oh hell no” or “b*tch please”, or some such very blunt remark.
The common white response will leave the white pickup artist with enough ego to maybe try a few more times elsewhere. The black response will leave the white pickup artist heading out the door in minutes (seconds, if the lady’s 6 ft 3 male companion is around).
As for whether black women or white women are statistically more amenable to pickup lines from nerdy white men, I’ll leave to the statisticians…
by the way, every guy should buy this book, even if you have a girlfriend, the knowledge is invaluable. i can’t believe how much of my life i wasted reading history and philosophy without knowing the basic principles of social dynamics.
Agnostic -
Why are you so defensive? I don’t happen to agree with your theory, that scarcely merits such a response from you.
The real counterexample would be if Whites or Asians could easily seduce African females and have lots of kids by them, etc.
For that counterexample to be tested white or Asian men would have to try to seduce black women in appreciable numbers. For whatever reason or reasons, that doesn’t really happen.
I don’t think black, white, and Asian women have different levels of bullshit detection (and especially not in that direction), I think they have different average criteria for attraction.
Black women are more seduced by short term mating criteria (masculinity, athleticism, creativity), Asian women are more seduced by long term mating criteria (femininity, agreeableness, earnings) with white women in between. Robert Trivers and others have shown this using female facial choice experiments in Jamaica, Britain, and Japan. The latter two prefer more feminized male faces, associated with relationship commitment. This is likely genetic.
Cold environments where females had less self-sufficiency created a female demand for good dads, parasitic environments where females had more self-sufficiency created a demand for good genes.
(By the way, Finn reproductive biology suggests they are actually more like the latter! Far closer to Africans than Asians. Finns have the largest balls/healthiest loads in Europe (Danes the smallest/worst) and – Beware! – they will impregnate your women-folk.)
The latter two prefer more feminized male faces, associated with relationship commitment. This is likely genetic.
why do you think most of the difference is due to genetics? i have been reading about shifts in preference toward a more muscular physique in place like taiwan within the past generation (convergence toward the western ideal).
Zeeb, I’m a norm of reaction man. ;)
I have argued that female self-suffciency will/has culturally altered their preferences in the same way. But I’m talking about the population differences, not the exact levels. Black, white, and Asian women in a number of different cultures have all gone through this developed world female sufficiency shift, and, if anything, it has amplified the population differences. (e.g. Swedish monogamy has persisted in a different form since the sexual revolution, while even middle class African-American families have changed enormously in a different direction)
And while the reasons can’t be seen in the physiology of the women, just the behavior, it can be seen in the physiology of the genetically matched men. (which serves as a historical record of female choice) At the level of physiology nongenetic explanations are more doubtful.
i have been reading about shifts in preference toward a more muscular physique in place like taiwan
This shift also seems to be recorded in Hollywood leading men through the 20th century. In the first half men seemingly had unassuming average bodies and very ‘adult’ faces (Clark Gable, Humphrey Bogart), then a transition stage (Marlon Brando, James Dean), and by the late 20th century we have almost the opposite: cut, masculine physiques, with almost boy-like heads on top (Pitt, DiCaprio)
Interesting that facial preferences have not seemingly shifted to more masculine choices.
Did Pitt’s ‘good dad’ face tell the truth? :)
To add to what Jason says, you can expect social actors to try to change the environment to suit them.
It seems pretty clear that in Western nations women have shifted things in their favor by getting the state to expropriate the results of male economic behavior to ensure that more women can raise children with less uncertainty.
However, there still seems to be some sort of bimodal distribution, with some women realizing that going into partnership with a good provider will provide them with long-term reproductive success benefits.
I wonder whether it is facultative or genetic?
Zeeb, I’m a norm of reaction man. ;)
i understand the norm of reaction, that’s what i’m asking if you think most of the between population difference is due to variation in genes. i’d like to see a post on this. i’ve generally gotten more skeptical of genetic explanations as explaining most of the difference (not all) the closer i’ve looked at these issues. and you’re eliding massive differences in ‘female self-sufficiency’ across even european nations as similar in other ways as germany and sweden (the difference is labor force participation is one of the most stark contrasts between the former GDR and FDR). there’s a lot of enviro noise. that doesn’t mean there isn’t a genetic difference in predisposition, there probably is, but the enormous variations over time and space suggest that the biological signal is in a sea of social and cultural parameters.
And while the reasons can’t be seen in the physiology of the women, just the behavior, it can be seen in the physiology of the genetically matched men. (which serves as a historical record of female choice)
that’s not all it serves a record of. i don’t know of any cultures where women prefer short dudes, but there are obvious exogenous ecological factors where shortness is preferred (smaller, lower caloric intake needs, etc.). speaking of which, a lot of the asians-are-pussies is really short-dudes-are-pussies i think in the US of A. it isn’t just height, but if an asian dude is taller and more muscular it goes against the femme/nerd stereotype.
finally, re: pathogens. we have a human group extant which didn’t start getting exposed to the eurasian pathogen ecosystem until around 1500. even before that it seems that because of the lack of domestics and lower pop densities their pathogen load was lower than eurasia at similar stages of civilization. so let’s look at native americans or native american derived populations. if you want to take these evolutionary models seriously let’s make some inferences about how mestizo culture should be.
(though if it doesn’t fit expectations one can make inferences about selection coefficients)
also, gene-environment correlation and gene-environment interaction also prolly play a big role in these trends. what eo wilson would term the ‘multiplier effect’ i think.
Peter says :
…
For that counterexample to be tested white or Asian men would have to try to seduce black women in appreciable numbers. For whatever reason or reasons, that doesn’t really happen.
___
It’d be really interesting to have a european (or other non northamerican ) perspective on this. Is black/white interracial dating as lopsided in europe as it is in the usa ? Are bm/wf couples much much more prevalent than wm/bf couples in the UK, France or Germany ?
og,marriage#United_Kingdom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interracial_
According to the UK 2001 census [22], Black British males were around 50% more likely than black females to marry outside their race, whereas British Chinese women (30%) were twice as likely as their male counterparts (15%) to marry someone from a different ethnic group. Among British Asians, males were twice as likely to to have an inter-ethnic marriage than their female counterparts.
asian = south asian, half of whom are muslim and would probably happily kill any sisters who marry a non-muslim ;-) in the USA south asians have no sex bias in outmarriage.
(people need to correct for sex biased migration for the UK i bet though, i assume that immigrant populations had more males than females)
Speaking of 2d:4d ratios and testosterone levels, it’s interesting that the most reliable evidence around seems to suggest that Asian men have significantly higher levels of testosterone than white men. This certainly contradicts the idea that Asian men are effiminate due to low testosterone.
This is a huge study by UCLA (N >1,000, P
Anyone have any idea what kind of dude Native American gals tend to prefer? Or what kind of “game” Native American guys have?
Anyone have any idea what kind of dude Native American gals tend to prefer? Or what kind of “game” Native American guys have?
coyote said….
Jujuby says:
Speaking of 2d:4d ratios and testosterone levels, it’s interesting that the most reliable evidence around seems to suggest that Asian men have significantly higher levels of testosterone than white men. This certainly contradicts the idea that Asian men are effiminate due to low testosterone.
However, the abstract says:
After adjustment for age and Quetelet’s index, the levels of total and bioavailable testosterone were highest in Asian-Americans, intermediate in African-Americans, and lowest in whites. However, the DHT:testosterone ratio was highest in African-Americans, intermediate in whites, and lowest in Asian-Americans, corresponding to the respective incidence rates in these groups and providing indirect evidence for ethnic differences in 5alpha-reductase enzyme activity.
razib,
marriage#Black_and_White :
from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interracial_
… Yet, African American men are 2.5 times more likely to be married to European American women than African American women to European American men….
So in the UK , black women are about 2/3rd as likely as black men to be involved with a white.
In the usa, black women are only 2/5th as likely as black men to be involved with a white.
i understand the norm of reaction, that’s what i’m asking if you think most of the between population difference is due to variation in genes.
What I mean is that female mate choice is highly facultative, and their sexuality plastic, so the differences between women in different contexts could swamp slight bio-psychological parameters. But, e.g. within nations when conditions are similarly fair for individuals, we see group diffs, so probably a lot of that is genetic. (for different within group choices at least)
and you’re eliding massive differences in ‘female self-sufficiency’ across even european nations as similar in other ways as germany and sweden (the difference is labor force participation is one of the most stark contrasts between the former GDR and FDR).
The changing tastes of women increasingly in the labor force was a theory I had, but not one I had seen data to support. The movie observation above doesn’t suggest facial preferences are changing in the predicted direction, and that is what the evo psych researchers used to test mating preference.
I hope I don’t come across as eliding. I think such contextual differences could be very large, but I also think that is compatible with significant b-w-a diffs.
so let’s look at native americans or native american derived populations. if you want to take these evolutionary models seriously let’s make some inferences about how mestizo culture should be.
D Buss and B Low have done some separate cross-cultural analyses based on pathogen theory. North Am and South Am seem to have different local pathogen threats, and it seems to distinguish them on some cultural parameters, like polygny which are associated with the biological differences above.
So in the UK , black women are about 2/3rd as likely as black men to be involved with a white.
In the usa, black women are only 2/5th as likely as black men to be involved with a white.
the basal rate of outmarriage of blacks is way higher anyway. there’s less residential segregation, etc. the sex differences are probably being saturated by the fact that outmarriage is pretty much as common as inmarriage, while in the USA is around an order of magnitude difference (i believe more black men outmarry than inmarry).
But, e.g. within nations when conditions are similarly fair for individuals, we see group diffs, so probably a lot of that is genetic.
right. is buss et. al. all we have on that? has anyone studied japanese americans? they would be the best case. i don’t deny there’s differences, there are a prior reasons to assume there are such differences. but you seemed to be implying that most of the differences extant across societies were due to genetic variation.
So in the UK , black women are about 2/3rd as likely as black men to be involved with a white.
In the usa, black women are only 2/5th as likely as black men to be involved with a white.
In Brazil it’s similar, but even smaller.
it’s interesting that the most reliable evidence around seems to suggest that Asian men have significantly higher levels of testosterone than white men. This certainly contradicts the idea that Asian men are effiminate due to low testosterone.
Even if this is correct, digit ratio, testes size, sperm quality, androgen receptors, specific genetic diffs and other related evidence converge on less evolutionary male sexual competition for the East Asians.
testes size, sperm quality
1) are testes size scaled to body size?
2) sperm quality = viscosity? (the plug effect?) or a host of things like motility.
Even if this is correct, digit ratio, testes size, sperm quality, androgen receptors, specific genetic diffs and other related evidence converge on less evolutionary male sexual competition for the East Asians.
a comparison of male and female effec. population would give some perspective. just look at Y and mtDNA (assuming mtDNA is neutral).
are testes size scaled to body size?
“Differences in body size make only a slight contribution to these values”
sperm quality = viscosity? (the plug effect?) or a host of things like motility
The latter, a whole mess of things (motility, sperm count, normal sperm, Sertoli cell function, etc).
i followed the links on sperm quality and related papers (e.g., the chinese). there’s probably something to what you’re saying, but there’s a lot of within region variation probably due to environmental parameters (see the china paper and differences between rural/urban, provinces, etc.). also, as an evolutionary point i’m pretty skeptical that such big differences are due to the same factors that drive it in common chimpanzees. you know the extent to which chimps make sure to screw females during estrous one after another. the analogous effect is way attenuated in humans, even taking into account paternity issues.
Should you guys make a distinction between East Africans and West Africans? Most blacks here are East Africans and they’re rather far from being charmers. They also seem to look short and skinny (compared to young Finns).
BTW, in countries where distant foreigners are a new thing, most intermarriages do not happen because of charm talents of the foreigners, they happen because people travel to those countries to look for spouses (ie. desperate old fat people with no game hope that their money will make the difference in a poor country). Males go for Latin Americans, Eastern Europeans and East Asians, women for Mediterraneans and sometimes Africans. That’s very obvious from the international marriage stats.
Should you guys make a distinction between East Africans and West Africans? Most blacks here are East Africans and they’re rather far from being charmers. They also seem to look short and skinny (compared to young Finns).
the physical differences do exist. that being said, the bantu expansion into east africa from the environs of eastern nigeria dates to the past 3,000 years. though some of the nilotic groups would not be included in that (there is no doubt some admixture). a lot of the stuff on androgen suggests recent selection from what i’ve heard, so the stereotypical “african” suite of traits might be recent (and might not include groups like the khoisan or pygmies).
BTW, in countries where distant foreigners are a new thing, most intermarriages do not happen because of charm talents of the foreigners, they happen because people travel to those countries to look for spouses (ie. desperate old fat people with no game hope that their money will make the difference in a poor country). Males go for Latin Americans, Eastern Europeans and East Asians, women for Mediterraneans and sometimes Africans. That’s very obvious from the international marriage stats.
It happens a lot in America too, at least among men, even though foreigners are hardly a new thing. There’s the mail-order bride industry, although recent federal law has significantly restricted it, “sex tours” of Thailand, and so on.
AIUI, most American men who seek foreign brides do so not because they have few other options, but because they think American women are too “uppity” and would rather have traditional foreign women.
AIUI, most American men who seek foreign brides do so not because they have few other options, but because they think American women are too “uppity” and would rather have traditional foreign women.
If the chickens won’t lay eggs…
jaakkeli, razib,
When I took African History studies, my professor Maina wa Kinyatti – a Kikuyu from Kenya – was yellowish brown in complexion, with a wide face and high cheekbones – closer to looking like Nelson Mandela than Wesley Snipes in other words. He was also lightly built and skinny, and about 5′ 10″.
He had to tell the mostly African-American class that he was actually a full blooded African and typical of his people in Kenya – as most of them assumed he was mixed race.
While I don’t have state on BM/WF vs WM/BF mating here in the Netherlands, based on personal observation I estimate that it resembles the British ratios more than the American ones.
I suspect that negative social consequences faced by those who mate outside their own group (especially against BFs dating WMs) plays a more important role in the US in ‘deterring’ BF/WF interracial pairings (BF being criticized or ridiculed by their peers). This would affect WF much less, as their social environment would often be hesitant to express their opinion for fear of being called ‘racist’.
As Britain and continental Europe have had different (and much later) experiences with the presence of signifant numbers of nonwhites (no history slavery in the mother country, no Jim Crow, no segregation etc.) the social consequences are different here.
Note that black American female celebs rarely if ever date or marry a non-black (Alicia Keys, Beyonce, Halle Berry, Vanessa Williams etc) even if they have interacted much with whites (e.g. Nathalie Cole who grew up in a predominantly black environment but married a black guy).
If they did, my guess would be they would face a lot of criticism from blacks. By contrast nobody says a word when Heidi Klum marries Seal.
By contrast, it is not at all uncommon for black female celebs in the Netherlands to date or marry a white guy (e.g. soul/r&b singer Edislia Rombley with white musician/producer Tjeerd Oosterhuis and black model/actress Jasmine Sendar with white health spa manager Rutger Fahrner), with no racial comments whatsoever heard in the media.
Not so sure about Britain, but Mel B (Scary Spice) for instance has dated both black and white guys.
sorry, that’s
Nathalie Cole who grew up in a predominantly WHITE environment but married a black guy
While I don’t have state on BM/WF vs WM/BF mating here in the Netherlands, based on personal observation I estimate that it resembles the British ratios more than the American ones.
Thanks, these kinds of cross-cultural observations are welcome. If any gnxp readers in other countries ever come across cross-cultural behavior stats or papers that are not in English, please email me!
I suspect that negative social consequences faced by those who mate outside their own group (especially against BFs dating WMs) plays a more important role in the US in ‘deterring’ BF/WF interracial pairings (BF being criticized or ridiculed by their peers).
I’ve seen no evidence to support peer pressure; the reason given by black women is they just aren’t attracted or comfortable. I think the cultural distance between whites and blacks is a lot larger in the US than elsewhere, and black ethnic identity stronger, which is why the BF/WM gap is bigger here (and smallest in Brazil with weak black identity and smaller cultural diffs).
Note that black American female celebs rarely if ever date or marry a non-black (Alicia Keys, Beyonce, Halle Berry, Vanessa Williams etc)
Seems true, but Berry is 9 months pregnant from a white boyfriend!
I live in Queens, New York – which is supposed to be the most diverse place in the US.
In my apartment building out of 48 apartments, there are 4 interracial couples that I know of:
Three are East Asian guys (I presume Chinese in all cases) with White American gals.
One is a German guy (Hamburger) with Black Jamaican gal.
BTW, my brother – who is blonde/blue freckle faced Irishman – lives in Dublin with his Brazilian mulatto girlfriend of 4 years.
Richard Sharpe said:
However, the abstract says:…
And your point being? Not “however.” Try to read the whole study. You can access it for free using the pubmed site I gave. Anyway, my whole post before being cutoff by the software for using the greater/less than carrot signs was this:
Speaking of 2d:4d ratios and testosterone levels, it’s interesting that the most reliable evidence around seems to suggest that Asian men have significantly higher levels of testosterone than white men. This certainly contradicts the idea that Asian men are effiminate due to low testosterone.
This is a huge study by UCLA (N greater than 1,000, P-value less than 0.01 compafred with caucasian men). Asian men where found to have the highest levels of bound testosterone, and more importantly for masculinization, free and bio-available t. Black men were found to be inbetween Asian and white men.
Interestingly too, Japanese men had the highest overall concentrations of DHT, the “other” potent angrogenic hormone. Chinese men where found to have the highest overall free and bio-available testoterone with DHT levels conmparable to caucasian men and below black and Japanese men.
After adjustment for age and Quetelet’s index, the levels of total and bioavailable testosterone were highest in Asian-Americans, intermediate in African-Americans, and lowest in whites.
Asian men also have the highest 2D:4D digit ratios evidencing the same conclusion.
However, there was also evidence that mean 2D:4D varied across ethnic groups with higher ratios for Whites, Non-Chinese Asians, and Mid-Easterners and lower ratios in Chinese and Black samples. There were significant differences in 2D:4D across sexual orientation groups but these were confined to men. Male homosexuals and bisexuals had higher mean 2D:4D (suggesting exposure to lower prenatal T) than heterosexuals.
Other less direct correlates of androgenic activity are the instances of obesity and testicular dysgenesis syndrome (TDS) within a population. Asian men show less instances compared to white men in these two areas suggesting also higher angrogenic activity, and likely higher anti-estrogenic activity, as well as well.
Asian men also have the highest [sic] 2D:4D digit ratios
No, just the Chinese Asians in that study. The sampling in that study (Internet self-report) is questionable, and a better study of Han Chinese did show significantly higher finger ratios than whites. This has supposedly been shown for Koreans too, but the data is unpublished. (And the masculine ratio of black populations is well established)
Jason -
You point out that the black/white cultural difference is greater in America than elsewhere, and if black ethnic identity is stronger, and for this reason WM/BF marriages and relationship are uncommon. I can’t quite understand why cultural gaps and ethnic identities would cause a gender gap in interracial marriages. Are black women more attuned to cultural differences and more ethnically conscious than black men?
I’ve heard, strictly anecdotally, that part of the reason why black women seldom date or marry white men is that they simply don’t find white men very attractive.
I can’t quite understand why cultural gaps and ethnic identities would cause a gender gap in interracial marriages. Are black women more attuned to cultural differences and more ethnically conscious than black men?
Yes. Because race-based mate choices are almost entirely due to women. (likely used, in part, as a proxy for cultural similarity)
part of the reason why black women seldom date or marry white men is that they simply don’t find white men very attractive.
Right and there is probably biology there as suggested above (skin color alone would affect this), but the relative ratio differs across countries, which is what I was speaking to there.
I must say that the lack of attraction has more to do with cultural norms than physical appearance. I think sometimes we’re afraid of rejection because we don’t fit the standard of beauty, our hair is different etc. I should add that we’re not so bad at presenting ourselves as being aggressive or and the culture gap makes the proper feedback tricky.
Thanks Jason,
I would like to see more of these 2d:4D ratios with bigger population sizes, etc. The study I sited was questionable due to sample being self-reports. However, it seems that your study was only done on children and the caucasian population was only of Berbers. I guess the jurry is still out.
Also, Jason, don’t want to belabor this point but if you look at the whole study it did not say that the Han male children had higher 2D:4D ratios than the Berber male children. It said that Hans had the highest ratios for both female and male at 0.954. Berbers were at 0.950. Now, if you look at the figures for male children, Han males are at 0.940 while Berber males at 0.945, a lower figure.
However, I did some number crunching and found this. The t-value for the difference between the means for the Berber and Han male children were much too low to be statistically significant (it was less than 1. It should be over around 1.7 to get a p-value equal or under 0.05). So while the Han male children did have a lower 2D:4D ratio, it wasn’t significant and could have been due to a type-1 error. The differences between the male Berber children and the Jamaican male children, OTOH, is statistically significant with a p-value less than 0.01 (and likewise when Jamaican male children was compared with Han male children).
Since I had to drudgingly compute these figures using my hand calculator, if someone has SAS or minitab and knows how to run ANOVA, they can check my figures themselves rather easily.
Jujuby,you said ‘Asian men also have the highest 2D:4D digit ratios evidencing the same conclusion.’
I think you meant asian men have the lowest 2D:4D ratio? And isn’t 2D:4D ratio only indicative of prenatal T? The study you linked to showed that Chinese had the lowest 2D:4D ratio.
Conversely, White males are underprepared in the charm department to evade the African female’s more sensitive bullshit-detector, and their show-off skills are unlikely to meet her higher standards (in dancing ability, for example).
Hilarious! Reminds me of the democratic debate when Obama was asked whether Bill Clinton was the first black president. Obama responds by saying: “I’d have to evaluate his dancing ability.”
Cognition,
Yes, I meant that they had the lowest ratios.
part of the reason why black women seldom date or marry white men is that they simply don’t find white men very attractive.
I’m surprised that anyone would find this strange. As this board consistently points out, whites are intermediate between blacks and asians and generally closer to white. So if it’s easy to understand why white women are not physically attracted to asian women, why isn’t it just as easy to understand why black women are not physically attracted to white men. Of course, the latter rule should be moderated by the fact that western black women live in a white world, but it should be strong enough to ensure that there should be some gap between their relationships with white men and their men’s relationships with white women.
Assuming the cause for the difference is a masculinity gap, one would postulate that the more masculine caucasians (dark-haired, less slight build and more showy personalities eg mediterraneans, irish and jews) should be more successful with black women, and interestingly, at least in the popular media, it appears to be the case.
http://www.mixedfolks.com
See how many of the mixed people with black mothers have italian/jewish fathers
Another postulation would be that the less masculine blacks (ethiopians, kenyans etc) should have a much narrower or even reversed gap, and anecdotally, I hear that east african women are more likely to marry white than their men
“razib
So in the UK , black women are about 2/3rd as likely as black men to be involved with a white.
In the usa, black women are only 2/5th as likely as black men to be involved with a white.
the basal rate of outmarriage of blacks is way higher anyway. there’s less residential segregation, etc. the sex differences are probably being saturated by the fact that outmarriage is pretty much as common as inmarriage, while in the USA is around an order of magnitude difference (i believe more black men outmarry than inmarry).
But, e.g. within nations when conditions are similarly fair for individuals, we see group diffs, so probably a lot of that is genetic.”
Since most blacks don’t marry each other or anyone else, it might be better to look at birth rates, if we actually could get data on the race of parents.
Syarikat :
Halle Berry is pregnant by a white super model.
As this board consistently points out, whites are intermediate between blacks and asians and generally closer to white.
No, that should be “as many on this board consistently assume, since some people just like patterns that make the world really simple”. It simply isn’t true for many traits constantly assumed to be relevant to attraction here. For example, locally, using Finns for “whites” (I don’t have good observations on American whites), it’s obvious that
- We are taller than blacks who are taller than Asians (and blacks are closer to us than Asians). This is the one physical trait that everyone really agrees to boost male attractiveness and in it blacks are intermediate and closer to whites than to Asians.
- Blacks are darker than Asians who are darker than us (duh)
- It’s hard to decide on the locals/blacks comparison, but clearly Caucasoids in general are hairier than blacks who are hairier than Asians (northern Europeans are less hairy than most Caucasoids)
- We are waaaay more introverted than Asians who are more introverted than blacks (but that’s just Finns…)
(The last one, even though a psychological trait, is also something you can probe just with eyeballing – just watch crowds and groups and see how much personal space people assume. It gets very obvious. Dunno if it’s entirely genetic, of course.)
what jaakeli said. there is obviously a lot to rushton’s rule, but people should be careful about how traits are sampled. hairness, whites -> blacks -> east asians. sexual dimorphism? old physical anthropology texts would say whites -> blacks -> asians. also, some of the stuff that rushton claims about twinning is now likely explicable in terms of heightened values for those who drink a lot of milk or eat a lot of meat. that might explain the much higher twinning rates of northern europeans vs. southern europeans. in biology there’s a reason that “rules” and “laws” are not appealed to very much.
It simply isn’t true for many traits constantly assumed to be relevant to attraction here.
Using Finns as an example is silly. Finns are a subgroup of whites, and most of the blacks in Finland, as you said are east african, also a subgroup. On the other hand, in the US, most whites are a closer reflection of the white average, and blacks in the US are the same (keep in mind that most blacks on the planet are of west african extraction – brazil and nigeria alone ensure this is the case)
So, in that case:
height – rushton is right
muscularity- rushton is right
deep voice – rushton is right
Manly face i.e. lack of neoteny – again rushton is right
hairiness-just so you know, most non-white women aren’t attracted to hairy men and dont consider this trait to be relevant to attraction
Since most blacks don’t marry each other or anyone else …..i>
Untrue. Blacks in Africa marry in higher percentages and almost exclusively to each other. Also, in the US, even though it is true that fewer blacks marry than other races, when they do, they are significantly more likely to marry each other than other minority groups. In the US only 9% of married black men and 5% of married black women marry non blacks. So even though, people in the US always seem to point to the proclivity of black men to marry out, they are actually the group of minority men least likely to marry out. So why does popular wisdom differ from fact? Well, most of us live in a caucasian majority country meaning that popular wisdom usually reflects caucasian insecurities. White men generally do not mind when asian men marry their women; they get access to more asian women anyway and are not threatened by them. This is exactly the reverse in the case of black men.
height – rushton is right
Blatantly wrong. Americans black men are (slightly) shorter than American white men. Heights in West Africa tend to be even lower.
Black women, on the other hand, tend to be as tall as or slightly than white women. That seems to be the pattern with many traits — less sexual dimorphism among blacks.
deep voice – rushton is right
Wrong.
muscularity- rushton is right
This one is actually true, at least in America. Black men have slightly more LBM (the difference is larger between black and white women). However, blacks have lower muscles quality (force produced per volume of muscle).
Manly face i.e. lack of neoteny – again rushton is right
I suppose, if you define “manly” as snub-nosed, thick-lipped, and bulbous forehead-ed.
height – rushton is right
Blatantly wrong. Americans black men are (slightly) shorter than American white men. Heights in West Africa tend to be even lower.
Black women, on the other hand, tend to be as tall as or slightly than white women. That seems to be the pattern with many traits — less sexual dimorphism among blacks.
deep voice – rushton is right
Wrong.
muscularity- rushton is right
This one is actually true, at least in America. Black men have slightly more LBM (the difference is larger between black and white women). However, blacks have lower muscles quality (force produced per volume of muscle).
Manly face i.e. lack of neoteny – again rushton is right
I suppose, if you define “manly” as snub-nosed, thick-lipped, and bulbous forehead-ed.