The racial divide, and who is really crossing it

Despite the intelligent and highly eloquent defence recently presented here by Frank Ellis, I have to admit that I was very ambivalent as to the value of  LSE professor Dr Satoshi Kanazawa's controversial research, published earlier this year, into race and attractiveness, and his purported findings that black women were generally found less attractive than women from other racial groups.  

Whereas I am a passionate believer in free speech, (as evidenced by the extraordinary length of time I continued to tolerate one particular commentator at this blog) as well as the freedom of academic research, and was outraged by the attacks on Kanazawa and the calls for his dismissal, I failed to see the point of this research and what it had actually achieved.

Research into behavioural issues and the propensities of certain races towards violent crime or irresponsibility in matters of sexual health have merit, as they can be addressed and they inform debate on vital topics such as immigration, justice, health care and, of course the decisions people make in order to protect themselves. 

However, research which establishes that one group is less desirable than another seems to me to be rather pointless, after all what can be done with these finding which could be of benefit to anyone?

I suppose, if it were allowed any official credibility, the research could act as a counterbalance to all the contrary research which claims to find that non-whites have a superior ability to whites in in various areas, (such as the bizarre insistence that running is the most skilful of  all Olympic sports on account  of the fact that blacks are generally rather good at running) however, beyond its “tit for tat” application, and with all due respect to Dr. Kanazawa, what merit there is to his research in this respect continues to escape me.

However, I was reminded of the explosion of outrage which greeted the decision by Psychology Today to publish Dr Kanazawa's findings back in May (since cringingly withdrawn) when I read an article on the American black network site “News One” which declared that there were only '3 “Good” black men for every 100 black women' .  The article bemoaned the fact that only around 3% of black men met the criteria which would make them a suitable prospect as a romantic partner for black women.  The remaining 97% failed to make the grade for a variety of reasons including lack of education or success and the fact that so many were either in prison, between periods of incarceration, or had fathered a number of children by other woman.

Another significant group of black men were viewed as unsuitable by black women on account of the fact that they are either exclusively or primarily attracted to white women.

In fact the number of black men who effectively reject their own race in favour of white women is becoming a matter of some concern and resentment within the black community in America and is also causing  some negative comment amongst the black community in Britain.  If one looks at the figures what is happening is quite significant, but not in the way which the media, with its determination to undermine and mock white men, would have us believe.

The  common claim within the media and popular culture is that the number of interracial relationships indicates that white women find black men sexually attractive, however, that claim ignores the racial demographic as it still stands in the west, and the sizes of the respective ethnic groups in Western nations. In fact the figures actually reveal something very different than that which the media would like to have us believe.

In America, 8.5% of black men are married to white women, however, given that black males account for around 6% of the US population, whereas white women make up almost 38%, the far less widely publicised statistic is that less than 1% of white women are married to black men.  This is a relatively insignificant number, especially considering the amount of propaganda which white women are subjected to.  (in fact according to Wikipedia, who are, if anything, likely to exaggerate the figure, only 2.1% of white women are in any form of mixed race marriage, slightly less than white men at 2.3% - this is not the picture we see on TV is it?)

Statistically, it is black men, not white women, who are most enthusiastically spurning their own.  So why is this happening? 

There is no need to ask why the white woman involved do it, with the exception of a few committed liberal multiculturalists, the vast majority tend to be of the type which would sleep with anything provided it has a pulse or a battery, and in any event, as a percentage of their demographic, they are actually relatively insignificant.     

It is when one asks why black men are crossing the racial divide in statistically far more significant numbers that the answer becomes less favourable to the advocates or racial integration, and, sadly, somewhat unflattering to black women.

Popular mythology would have us believe that white women are rushing to embrace multiculturalism, however, in fact only a very small group are doing so, a truer picture is that an embarrassingly large number of black men are rejecting their own race.

Whatever one may think of  Satoshi Kanazawa's much condemned research paper, it would seem that by their politically incorrect actions many black men are adding credibility to the most controversial aspects of his findings.
 
It is also encouraging to know that the situation is not quite as depressing, for white people, as it sometimes appears.

BBC ‘East Enders’ Lies. Cultural Marxism and Black / White Sexual Relations

The multi coloured Jackson family from Eastenders

By Tim Haydon

The BBC soap ‘East Enders’ deliberately propagates lies about the frequency of white / black sexual relations and the general tension-free wonderfulness of the multicultural, multiracial ‘community’ that is Albert Square.

It does this in order to further the BBC’s Marxist agenda of racial obliteration of the white British. But perhaps unwittingly or because of the social setting of ‘East Enders’ it correctly focuses that on the whole those whites who do pair with blacks tend to be lower class women. This article attempts to answer the questions:-

(1) Why is it on the whole white working class women but not white women from higher social groups who to a limited extent pair with black men?

(2) Why don’t white men pair with black women to the same degree?

How the BBC propagandises its Marxist Agenda

The BBC continues its drive to expunge the British from the face of the earth. This agenda can be seen in action through the BBC drive to eliminate British and specifically English identity through miscegenation. Here is an analysis of the racial character of the ’love interest‘of just one family, that of Bianca in ‘East Enders’ (No doubt your writer will be corrected on the details if necessary):-

Bianca: Bianca has a mixed race son, Morgan.

Carol : (Bianca’s mum) – Married a black man Alan Jackson and had a mixed race son, Billy. Carol has shared a black boyfriend (Connor) with Bianca’s adopted daughter, the perennial victim

Whitney: Shared a black boyfriend with Carol (see above).

Thus three generations of this one English BBC TV family have had or are having sexual relationships with blacks. (The concentration on blacks arises from the Cultural Marxist position that as historically the most primitive and most ‘oppressed’ of races, the negro most requires to be shown as on the same socio-economic level as the ‘oppressing’ whites).

Some major points arise: although the East Enders’ depiction of reality is grossly perverted through the deliberate, ridiculous exaggeration of the frequency of mixed–race liaisons which is a device for encouraging them, there is a certain amount of truth in it:-

1) Black/ White Liaisons do indeed happen.
Given racial genetic interests and fitness theory (see eg ; Frank Salter ‘On Genetic Interests’ ) and human assortative mating revealed by facial resemblance (‘Computer simulations suggested that sex among genetically complex organisms requires mate choice strategies for its evolutionary maintenance, to reduce excessive genetic variance produced by out-crossing) why do these inter–racial liaisons occur at all?

The answer must be that racial preference / fitness etc are tendencies only which can be overridden by other tendencies given the right circumstances. Much academic work needs to be done on this subject (in the present political climate this is unlikely to be a priority in the academy) but here are a few tentative suggestions:-

a) BBC and other propaganda for miscegenation (such as the numerous depictions of mixed – race couples in Advertisements, the attack on white history in our schools and the parallel celebration of other races /cultures) must be having an effect on some individuals. Indeed given the intensity of this propaganda, it is perhaps remarkable that there is not more miscegenation than there is.

b) Popular ‘culture’ is now in large part a celebration of black or black-derived music. The star status of black or mixed race entertainers encourages miscegenation. During the run of the X-Factor the BBC and some elements of the print media publicised the assertion that because of the success of mixed race contestants, ‘mixed race’ was now fashionable. (Can you imagine the BBC at any time suggesting that it was fashionable to be white?).

2) Black/ White liaisons tend to happen at the level of society depicted by East Enders.

It is a fact that the white females who pair with blacks tend to be lower class. You can see evidence of this outside schools, most shopping malls and elsewhere where single mums congregate with their mixed –race offspring, often having a fag –at public expense. Why is this?

Lower Class Individuals are more influenced by Black – Based Popular Culture

a) One reason must be that individuals at this level of society tend to be more influenced by black-based popular culture and political-class indoctrination than those at higher levels.

We look for Mates in the same IQ levels as Ourselves

b) Connected with a) above, it is known that as a general rule we tend to look for our partners in the same intelligence levels as ourselves. Blacks in Britain have an average IQ of 86 (almost exactly the same as Blacks in the USA) (Richard Lynn: The Global Bell Curve p88).

This level of IQ is mirrored in those white women who pair with blacks. The lower class have on average the lowest level of IQ among whites. This fact ought to be readily accepted since it accords with everyday common-sense observation. It was accepted in many University Psychology Departments in pre-PC days as a result of the studies but thanks to ideology and not to empirical observation it is now treated in much the same way that evidence for the low inherited average IQs of blacks is. Bruce Charlton, a Newcastle University evolutionary psychiatrist, was met with hostility from the usual suspects when he made this point in connection with working class entrance to the better universities in 2008.

Mating with Individuals in the same socio-economic Class as Ourselves

urthermore, people tend to mate with partners who are of the same socio-economic class (When the partnership is a committed one, women tend to ‘marry up’, or used to, but many of these inter-racial liaisons are not likely to be committed to the point of marriage). As Charlton indicated, notwithstanding the attacks on it, IQ, which measures intelligence and is 50% heritable very accurately predicts real-life success. ‘‘ ‘The Bell Curve’ showed that IQ predicts success in education, jobs and training. Low IQ predicts child abuse, crime and delinquency, health, accident proneness, having a child out of wedlock, getting a divorce after 5 years’ marriage and even smoking during pregnancy.’’ (J Philippe Rushton: ‘Race Evolution and Behaviour’ (Abridged Edition P48).

Foreign born Afro –Caribbean males who work in London have the lowest socio-economic status as measured by the International Index (ISIE). They score 37 with white males scoring 47.4. (South Asians score 46.6 and Chinese 45.6). (Overall in the UK, whites earned an average of £332 in 2001. For blacks it was £225 while for Pakistanis and Bangladeshis (ie moslems) it was £182. The Chinese had average weekly earnings of £342 in 1995). ( Richard Lynn: The Global Bell Curve P101/ 102).

The Low Physical Attractiveness of Lower Class white Women

Another factor which might enter into the equation is the fact that as studies have shown, we tend to mate with those whom we consider to be on the same level of physical attractiveness as ourselves. It will be remembered from above that we also tend to mate with individuals in the same intelligence levels as ourselves. A recent study by Dr Satoshi Kanazawa of the London School of Economics, (Report Daily Telegraph 17 Jan 2011) shows that the best looking among us have an IQ 12.4 points higher than the less attractive. This seems to help confirm your writer’s admittedly personal observation that low-IQ underclass white women tend also to come low down on the scale of attractiveness.

It seems likely then that matching low IQs, social status and physical unattractiveness are reasons why these females rather than more attractive white women higher up the socio-economic scale are the more likely to mate with blacks, who to this English male eye at least, are (generally speaking) physically very ugly. The better –looking ones are those with a lot of white blood. That your writer should think this is of course ethnic preference and linked aesthetic conditioning talking rather than any objective standard of attractiveness.

3) Black /White couples do usually comprise a black Man and a white Female

Admittedly from personal observation, as ‘East Enders’ and advertisements show, mixed –race couples do tend to comprise a black (negro) male and white female. The ratio of such pairings to the whole seems to be as high as 75% - 90%. This imbalance is quite remarkable. What is the reason for this phenomenon? There is clearly limited space for what requires a major study, but here are a few suggestions:-

More black Men than Women?

One reason for it could be that there are simply more available black males than black females around. But even if true, that would not be enough to explain the huge imbalance as it does nothing on its own to explain why white females would want to pair with these blacks when there are enough white men.

Black Men find white Women more attractive than black Women?

It could be argued of course that black men find white women more attractive than their own black women. However, while It may be the case that in a mainly white society, white standards of beauty influence blacks, it seems unlikely that black men brought up among blacks with mainly black standards of physical attractiveness for women and taking into account ethnic preference would consider white women in general more attractive than their own women - quite the contrary.

The ‘Trophy’ Syndrome?

There is though the ‘trophy‘ syndrome in black /white pairings. The women involved are often blonds, even when bleached – ie as white as possible. White women, belonging to the majority, dominant racial group are seen as prizes which confirm their racial ‘equality’ and as visible sign of achievement for black men. The ‘trophy’ syndrome is instantly recognisable among successful blacks such as Trevor Phillips and Obama’s Father and celebrities such as Chris Eubank and Ashley Cole who have all sported attractive white women as partners.

One attraction for the white women involved with black celebrities; wealth and reflected celebrity or public exposure, is obvious. The attraction for the majority of white women pairing with blacks remains to be explained.
(There is a curious reverse flow with a few white celebrities such as Jon Snow the TV presenter and the Historian Niall Ferguson marrying black women (In the same socio-economic class). Here, one suspects at least part of the attraction for the men involved is the highly public confirmation their marriages give to their left-liberal, right-on credentials which is useful to them in their careers).

A suggested Explanation:

What white Men find attractive in Women

One explanation could be that men and women have different priorities when selecting mates. Yes, IQ and socio-economic class is very important but so too is physical attractiveness. But what constitutes physical attractiveness?

For men, it boils down to the signals which announce a woman as healthy, fertile and ready to mate. Hence the cosmetics women don: the eternal search for youth –enhancing potions; slimming regimes which define the hip /waist ratios which signal child bearing properties, the blusher, lipstick and so on which mimic sexual readiness, all of which accentuate these factors. European men can read the signals very easily in women of their own race, but it is more difficult in women of other races, especially those racially farthest apart from ourselves such as negroes.

White Male Standards of Female Beauty

Then there are standards of beauty, strongly linked to the sexual signals mentioned above which go hand in hand with ethnic preference and fitness.

There are pure blood black woman who are very striking and attractive up to a point. But beautiful, or even very pretty? Your writer has never seen a black woman who fitted this description. The (by white standards) coke –like hair, the large and coarse features, the thick and (to him) repellently everted lips, the proportions of the body, and yes; the sheer blackness and coarseness of the skin, so at variance with the delicacy and fragility, the blushing, pink- and white fineness of an ‘English Rose,’ the standard of English female beauty, all militate against it.

There are plenty of mixed –race women who can be described as pretty, but even then, Like Naomi Campbell, they would be prettier still although perhaps less striking to European eyes if they had more white blood in them.

This is not ‘racism,’ meaning a bigoted attitude born of sheer prejudice towards other races. It is a function of racial genetic preference / fitness which does not deny that Chinese and Japanese women, especially those from the North with small, delicate features far removed from the ape, slender limbs, fine complexions and skins whiter than most Europeans, can be very pretty and extremely attractive physically.

So too can women of other races such as the paler, slim and doll-like Indians and South -East Asians. Like their men, some light-skinned Afghan women can be very handsome with their strong, high cheek - boned features, normally covered up by moslem drapings.

White Female Standards of Male Attractiveness

For women in differing degrees ( apparently more so than men for women), what constitutes physical attractiveness need not be what is handsome only or even at all but what is male, including personality. (Phil Mitchell is no oil –painting). This is probably the case throughout the social spectrum. At the lower end of the social scale however, thanks to the other factors touched on above, white female affinity for pure maleness of over looks and ethnic preference / fitness can come to the fore so far as blacks are concerned. According to J Philippe Rushton,

‘the races differ in testosterone level which helps to explain men’s behavior’….While levels even up somewhat in older men, ‘ In a study of university students, Black Americans had 10% to 15% higher levels than White students …..Testosterone acts as a ’master switch’. It affects things like self-concept, aggression, altruism, crime and sexuality, not just in men but in women too. Testosterone also controls things like muscle mass and the deepening of the voice in teenage years’ (Race and Evolution p40).

Black Male Sexuality is More So

Blacks are sexually active at an earlier age than Whites and have sex more frequently than they do. Their male sexual apparatus is larger (although according to John Baker (Race) it is no larger when engorged).

Whites in turn are higher up the scales than Orientals. The same hierarchy is found in sexual permissiveness, thinking about sex, and even in levels of sex guilt.

What has been said above surely goes a long way to explaining the phenomenon of the white lower class female / black male imbalance. There is much that remains to be said about the pairings between other racial groups, or the absence of them. But this essay is already long enough and that exploration will have to wait until a later date.

A developing Class Structure based on Race

Suffice it to say that, as elsewhere the world, what seems to be developing very slowly but spurred on by the BBC and its marxist like is a class system in Britain structured on racial lines with whites and orientals at the top; south asians and mixed–race individuals mostly in the middle and those with the most negro blood at the bottom. In short, the complete antithesis of the racially and culturally egalitarian, multiracial nirvana envisaged by the leftists who are engineering it all.

As Robert Burns put it;
‘The best-laid schemes o’ mice an’ men
Gang aft agley….’

Eugenics 2010

As regular readers of my blog will be aware, I have a weakness for American cop shows, despite the, diversity quota approved, parallel universe of evil white criminals and honest, law abiding, black victims in which they are set. We all have our own foibles and vices and late evenings will often find me, my Albion knight and a bottle of Shiraz in front of of the TV watching the mindless pap that is CSI, Law and Order or the ludicrous twaddle the Mentalist.

As a result, last weekend I watched an episode of NBC's Law and Order entitled “Birthright”.

I don't know how far we are behind America, but this was part of series 16 with Police Officers Green and Fontana rather than Lupo and Bernard who I understand are this season's black and white detectives.

Whatever the series. anyone who is a regular viewer of Law and Order will be aware that each episode follows a set formula, a crime is committed and is investigated for the first part of the show by mixed race detectives from the New York Police department under the control of the sturdy and black authority figure Lt. Anita Van Buren. After Lt. Van Buren's boys have made their arrest the action moves on to the court case where the accused perpetrator is prosecuted by the indescribably irritating Jack McCoy (Sam Waterston) and the relevant season's interchangeable foxy chick.

Invariably as the show develops some social issue is addressed from a resolutely politically correct standpoint.

However. “Birthright” did not initially appear to be following the usual pattern. What first struck me was that it actually portrayed black people as criminals, committing crimes and actually killing people without some white person pulling the strings. Admittedly the victims were also black rather than white, but this was still revolutionary stuff for NBC.

Of course, the revolution only lasted for the first five minutes of the show, after which we were swiftly jerked back into more familiar territory when the real, and predictably white, villainess made her appearance.

A black female murder suspect died in police custody and the autopsy revealed that she has been sterilised, at which point the story jumped swiftly from, instantly forgotten, black crime to more standard white fascism.

It turned out that a white nurse had been secretly sterilising black women to prevent them from producing unwanted babies. In the eyes of irritating Jack, the latest foxy chick and the Manhattan DA (played bizarrely by US Senator Fred Thompson who appears on screen for about 48 seconds each week saying something profound and politically correct – and on the strength of which tried to stand for president) this was nothing short of eugenics, as practised by the Nazis and an unmitigated evil.

I forget whether the nurse was found guilty or acquitted, I had rather lost interest by that point, and, in any even, it hardly mattered she had already been cast as the irredeemably vile disciple of a morally indefensible doctrine.

It is interesting how often the subject of eugenics pops up in movies, from Gregory Peck's snarling Meggele creating various teenaged Hitler clones, all suitably obnoxious and played by the subsequently unemployable Jeremy Black, in the 1978 movie “The Boys from Brazil” to the futuristic designer babies of “Gattaca”.

In movies, literature and popular culture, eugenics is an easily identifiable symbol of an evil and discredited ideology, and in so far as history is concerned, any hint of a flirtation with that ideology, whether true or not, is guaranteed to destroy the reputation of any historical figure.

The media and Hollywood delight in portraying a belief in eugenics as malevolent and without merit. Which is odd, given that Hollywood and the media are amongst the most fanatical protagonists of modern eugenics.

Eugenics, after all is the study and practice of selective breeding when applied to humans, with the aim of improving the species or changing human genetic qualities. To actively seek to change the racial characteristics of a people for the sake of a political aim is eugenics, irrespective of whether it is achieved by petri-dish or by propaganda.

Where exactly is the difference between the goal of creating a mono-race and that of creating a master race? I submit to you that there is none. Yet it is those who are so ready to decry the master race creating eugenicists of the 1930's who are the primary mono-race engineering fanatics of our age

When, for instance, France's President Sarcozy demanded last year that the French people should intermarry with other races he became in effect Monsieur Eugenics.

Television presenter Andrew Marr may look like a harmless goofy Doofus with his Shrek like ears and amphibian features but he is no friend of his native people. When he stated that widespread and vigorous miscegenation was the best answer for the British people
he was advocating selective inter-breeding as such he was advocating eugenics.

Day after day we are beset with propaganda promoting the joys of interracial sex, especially the tedious stereotype of the black man and the white tart, which I have addressed here before.

Much of it is crude and obnoxious. I, for one, will never buy a bed from “Dreams”after watching all those adverts showing mixed race couple in bed together exchanging jewelry and lustful glances. (I hope others will join me in that boycott.)

However, Dreams adverts are only slightly more offensive than all the other inter-racial sex promotions which are deliberately pumped into our lives day after day, and a lot of it is more subtle.

Mixed race couples are presented as role models to our children. Does anyone really believe that a woman, such as Cheryl Cole, who's tiny chin and huge forehead make her resemble nothing so much as a praying mantis, would have reached such an elevated celebrity status had she not jumped into bed with a black football player and thus become the nation's sweetheart?

Klum and Seal's White trash wedding

Why is it always the likes of Heidi Klum who are wheeled out to climb all over her black husband, seemingly frantic to the point of psychosis to prove how sexy she finds him, if not as more of the same mixed race marketing? (Klum's motives and prejudices were rather exposed when she and Seal decided upon a “white trash” theme to their wedding, and I suspect that there is some white man in her past whom she is desperate to hurt)

It is not just the media, Hollywood movies and commercial advertising which constantly thrust a fake mixed race ideal down the throat of an impressionable public. Walk into any local government office, branch of the health service or educational facility, pick up a leaflet and in nine out of ten a mixed race couple will beam out at you, whilst the child model of choice will be the interbred product of such a union.

Within our schools the proselytising is unremitting, as a female teenager in the 1980's I can testify that, even back then, the pressure to sleep with a black or brown man just to prove you were not racist was intense, and I am sure that it is now ten times worse. I personally did not capitulate, but there were many who did, and I don't think it was always by choice.

The pressure did not only come from black and brown students, sleeping with a member of a different race was presented, by those tasked with guiding our minds, as an act of free thinking rebellion, whereas, in fact, it was the new conformity.

Anyone who fails to appreciate that interracial sex is being actively encouraged by the establishment, by politicians, by the media and by those educating our children is deluding themselves. That it is happening is undeniable and it is happening for a political purpose.

Were I to be charitable I would suggest that those advocating mass inter-breeding share the demented belief that by genetically engineering a huge homogeneous mono-race we will irradiate conflict, others might suggest that their motives are far less benevolent and that they are fully aware of the disaster they are inciting.

World history shows how flawed is the belief a racial melting pot will end conflict. Look to Northern Ireland, to Rwanda, to Kenya, to the seething hatred between Middle Eastern factions, indeed to World War II and you can see that removing race from the equation does not remove conflict.

However, it was ever the mark of the political zealot to ignore reality in favour of an ideological dream.

If you were to mention eugenics to the average man or woman in the street today, most will think of the Nazis or maybe white supremacists, the better informed might refer to the social theories propounded in the 1930, and maybe mention Margaret Sanger, Marie Stopes, H.G. Wells or George Bernhard Shaw and other long dead supporters of a long discredited science. Few, if any, will speak of it as something impacting on their own lives today.

However, the active promotion of selective breeding in order to achieve a political and racial outcome is alive and well today, and now, in 2010, it assails us on all sides. The proponents of 21st Century eugenics are the most powerful pressure groups of our age. They seek to change us biologically and ethnically. Their aims are no longer achieved in the laboratory but through the tools of the propagandist and the might of the state, and, so far, their success has been phenomenal.

We are living now through the second age of eugenics but this time the damage will be far less easy to repair.

__________________

Mixed race couples

The celebrity image

And the reality

Further news story