Book review of “Breeding between the Lines” by Alon Ziv

This is a book review of “Breeding between the lines: Why interracial people are healthier and more attractive,” by Alon Ziv, 184 pp., Barricade Books, 2006, ISBN: 1569803064. My preliminary impression that the book most likely doesn’t have decent data in it is confirmed.

The book is written for a lay readership, and with the main text occupying about 160 pages, it can be read within a few hours.

Sloppy work: errors and omissions

Alon Ziv appears to have been working on the main idea of the book for a couple of years, but his book is full of sloppiness and naïve arguments, which is curious given the apparent time he has spent perusing the literature and also that he appears to have an adequate background in the biological sciences. I will provide some illustrative examples.

Ziv provides a primer on evolution that includes statements such as:

Asexual people are like slow Cheetahs – they die out.
We have evolved to avoid incest; incestuous individuals had inferior offspring and died out.

Well, asexual people die out every generation, but nothing seems to prevent some from being born every generation. For instance, in a national probability British sample of over 18,000 people, roughly 1% of people assessed reported that they were asexual, i.e., had no sexual interest in either men or women[1].

Similarly, whereas most people abhor incest, let alone indulge in it, some people continue to harbor incestuous fantasies and engage in incestuous sex[2-4].

There are numerous examples of evolutionary maladaptive characteristics that persist in small numbers in the population, but Ziv ignores this.

Ziv argues that our bodies are designed to have bilateral symmetry, i.e., we are designed to be perfectly symmetrical. This is incorrect. There is both a random and a non-random component to bilateral asymmetry, and it is the random component that is not part of biological design. The magnitude and direction (left or right side greater) of the random component fluctuates between individuals and hence this component is designated as fluctuating asymmetry. Throughout the book, whenever Ziv cites the literature on symmetry and especially when he extols the virtue of greater bilateral symmetry as in corresponding to better health and greater attractiveness, he is actually referring to the literature on fluctuating asymmetry, and the correct statement is that a lower level of fluctuating asymmetry, rather than greater symmetry, is correlated with somewhat better health and greater attractiveness. For instance, fluctuating asymmetry rather than directional asymmetry is a correlate of attractiveness of faces[5].

Ziv claims that heterozygosity for sickle cell anemia makes the carrier resistant to malaria, but this is not true; what happens is that the severity of malarial infection is reduced in these individuals, which increases the probability of survival should an infection occur.

Ziv acknowledges that races exist, but then cites pathetic sources to support this assertion: the approval of the drug BiDil for blacks by the FDA and a comment on Cavalli-Sforza’s book by Steve Sailer! No serious scientist, aware of the nature of race denial, would cite such poor sources. One needs to cite molecular[6-8] and skeletal evidence[9, 10] in conjunction with standard phylogeographic criteria for race assignment in order to make the case for races among humans. Ziv even says that “since race is really a continuum, there is no ideal way to define or document it.” Well, there is clinal variation with respect to individual characteristics, even a group of neutral DNA markers, and a race denial argument specifically denies racial reality because of human clinal variation[11], but race is characterized by a cluster of variables, and the existence of racial clusters has been shown in spite of clinal variation of DNA markers[6].

Ziv reports that in spite of changing fashions, the optimal waist-to-hip ratio of 0.7 in women, according to the research of D. Singh, has not changed; it has remained in the 0.68-0.72 range for Miss Americas and Playboy centerfolds. Well, waist-to-hip ratio in Miss Americas and Playboy centerfolds has increased from the mid- to late-20th century[12]; these women have become more masculine. During the early years of Playboy, waist-to-hip ratios were less than 0.7, on average. Additionally, there is nothing universal about the 0.7 figure: men in some black[13] and Native American[14, 15] populations prefer women with higher front-on waist-to-hip ratios than white men.

Ziv claims that more lopsided individuals (less symmetrical) are more likely to respond aggressively when provoked, but it is not difficult to come up with some papers where more symmetrical people turned out to be more physically aggressive[16, 17]. The latter is merely one example of Ziv omitting the literature that does not support his case.

Ziv is so sold onto the notion of hybrid vigor that he tries to see some in even ill-fated interspecies crosses. For instance, Ziv writes that a mule (horse mother, donkey father) may display some hybrid vigor because it has more stamina and more load-carrying capacity than horses! Hybrid vigor is inferred when the offspring are overall better than their parents, but mules are sterile. Ziv also cites the example of attempts to breed sheep and goats, which are typically unsuccessful, but he describes an example of a success that may have displayed some hybrid vigor as it grew faster than regular sheep or goat offspring, and was so oversexed that it frequently attempted to mount both sheep and goats. The poor animal had to be castrated to reign in his amorous pursuits, but faster growth and the oversexed nature could easily be a manifestation of abnormal development rather than hybrid vigor.

Ziv mentions inbreeding depression and hybrid vigor but fails to mention outbreeding depression. For the uninitiated, depression here refers to the offspring being overall worse than the parents and vigor refers to the offspring being overall better than the parents. There are plenty of examples of race mixing leading to outbreeding depression in various species[18-31].

Several claims in the book are not cited. For instance, Ziv reports a study where underweight newborn babies were more likely to be homozygous (less genetically diverse), but does not cite the reference. Given the small size of the book, it would not have hurt Ziv to add twenty additional pages of references.

Ziv reports that studies show that whites are the least likely to accept intermarriage, which is far from true. Jews, Muslims, Hindus and many other groups are easily much less accepting of intermarriage than whites are. Ben Tillman has previously brought to my attention that the oft-quoted 50% outmarriage rate for American Jews is an exaggeration, and it has been pointed out that even if this figure were taken at face value, it indicates a notable resistance to outmarriage among Jews given their small numbers in the U.S.; see this comment for details. Additionally, when Jews outmarry, most of the time it is with whites rather than with blacks or East Asians. Israel does not allow marriage between Jews and non-Jews, just as Muslims are forbidden to marry non-Muslims. On a related note, Ziv cites anti-miscegenation laws in some U.S. states decades ago, but fails to mention, let alone condemn Israel’s existing laws prohibiting marriage between Jews and non-Jews. In multiracial societies with a significant white presence, whites tend to disproportionately occupy the upper classes, and whereas the appreciation of the physical appearance of a number of populations is mostly limited to within the respective populations, white looks are appreciated by a substantial number of people in most populations. In other words, being white is disproportionately associated with higher status. Therefore, one observes that among non-white groups that generally oppose intermarriage, when they accept intermarriage, it is usually if the spouse is white or a higher status race, but they display marked animosity if the spouse is an other-race non-white of lower racial status. On the other hand, when whites intermarry, they almost always marry someone coming from a lower-status race. Non-blacks generally perceive blacks to be the lowest status race in terms of both looks and socioeconomic status, i.e., the willingness of a large number of blacks to outmarry should not be surprising, and it is obvious that one cannot argue for a naturally high willingness to outmarry among blacks given that there are not a whole lot of non-black races of lower socioeconomic and looks status than blacks. When black women object to black men marrying non-blacks, it is has less to do with objection to outmarriage per se than with the fact that so many black men are in prison or jobless/criminal that their already-low partner prospects are reduced by outmarrying black men. In short, Ziv is grossly mistaken about whites being the least likely to accept intermarriage.

Other problems with Ziv’s book should be seen in light of his main thesis.

Main thesis

Ziv’s main thesis is simple. He argues that more symmetrical people are more attractive, healthier and more heterozygous (more genetically diverse). He then points out that since race mixing increases heterozygosity, it leads to more attractive and healthier people. Let us examine this argument.

Hybrid vigor

Ziv addresses an example of hybrid vigor involving mixing some races of corn, and notes that “the disadvantage of hybridization is that you have to re-create the hybrid seed every generation.” Why doesn’t Ziv elaborate on this? Here is why. Let there be a gene that exists in two versions, A and a; each individual has two copies of this gene. Therefore, an individual could be AA, aa or Aa. Let the beneficial genotype be Aa. If one crosses AA with aa, all first generation hybrids will be Aa. If the first generation hybrids breed among themselves at random, the ratio AA:Aa:aa = 1:2:1, i.e., the desired genotype is present among only half the second generation hybrids. It is for this reason that corn farmers would maintain the original parental stocks and cross them to obtain hybrid vigor, but not allow the hybrids to reproduce among themselves. Obviously, among humans this is not applicable. The example considered here is a single-gene case, but if hybrid vigor is applicable to interracial breeding among humans with respect to multiple genes, then it should be clear that it will be drastically reduced among second and subsequent generation hybrids.

Ziv offers the following examples of hybrid vigor among humans.

He cites the tale of mutineers on the HMS Bounty (1789) settling on Pitcairn Island and mating with the local women. The half British-half Tahitian children, according to Ziv, grew up to be 2.5 inches taller than the British and the Tahitians. It is difficult to determine the reliability of this report.
Ziv reports a study, where Khasi girls in northeast India (basically East Asian types) were shorter than girls born to Khasi women that had mated with immigrant Muslim men (less Asiatic)[32], as an example of hybrid vigor, but this study did not assess the height of the parents and reported that the neighboring Muslims were a taller people. Therefore, how can one be sure that this is an example of hybrid vigor? If Khasi women breed with taller men, they are bound to produce taller children.
Ziv cites an UCLA study by Jay Phelan that showed mixed-race individuals to be more symmetrical (less fluctuating asymmetry) than individuals that were classified into only one of the following groups: white, East Asian, black, Native American or Hispanic (total sample size was 99). This find is reportedly highly significant; the probability that it is a chance find being less than 0.007%. The 25 least symmetrical individuals were uniracial whereas 7 of the 8 most symmetrical individuals were multiracial/mixed race. The participants also apparently had their pictures taken and evaluated for physical attractiveness, and the mixed-race individuals were rated as better looking. Curiously, this study does not appear to have been published, though it was featured in a UCLA report dating to November 04, 2002. Ziv’s citation mentions personal communication. Four years is more than enough time for research to be published. Has this study not been published because of its poor quality? Jay Phelan is co-author of the book “Mean Genes,” and he also wrote the forward to Ziv’s book. Phelan harbors the same idea as Ziv as far as the supposed benefits of race mixing go.

Ziv provides supportive evidence by citing examples of hybrid vigor resulting from crossing inbred strains of animals such as mice, and also cites studies from Swiss[33] and Polish[34] villages where children born of parents from different villages were taller, heavier and larger-chested compared to children born of parents from the same village, though the Swiss study actually compared the Swiss sample with their relatives that had outmarried in California.

The Swiss and polish studies are not about hybrid vigor, but Ziv extrapolates from these studies that the outcome of race mixing will be even better, assuming that the higher the heterozygosity, the better it is, apparently because more diverse genes mean more diverse gene products, which should cover an individual over a broader range of the environment. The latter reasoning appears sound, but then why is outbreeding depression observed in a number of cases? Has Ziv never heard of co-adapted gene complexes, which are disrupted by hybridization? Has Ziv never heard of the concept of genetic architecture in cardiovascular disease, whereby it is not always an allele (one of several versions of a gene) per se that is associated with disease, but the allele in a given environmental and genetic background[35-37]? For instance, a haplotype that slightly increases the odds of a heart attack among American whites is found in smaller numbers among American blacks, who have gotten it from whites, but it confers a 3-fold larger risk in black Americans[38]. Similarly, an allele that confers protection against diabetes among whites does no such thing among south Asians[39].

The paper on the Khasi, which Ziv has presumably read given that he cited it, mentions an Israeli study that attempted to infer the effect of intermarriage, between Jewish groups that had immigrated to Israel from different parts of the world, on the longitudinal growth of children. Five mixed groups were analyzed: two of these were similar to a parental group, one showed some evidence for enhanced growth, and two groups showed some detrimental effects of mixing[40]. I suspect that the null and detrimental finds in this study prompted Ziv to not cite it.

It should be noted that rats and mice are commonly used lab animals, and it is necessary that the differences among the experimental and control groups be attributed to the experimental protocol rather than genetic variation between the groups. Therefore, rats/mice used in a typical experiment come from a highly inbred line, and it should not be surprising that crossing two highly inbred and closely related races results in reduced overall fluctuating asymmetry, but human races, especially those existing in large numbers, are nowhere as inbred as lab rats/mice are. In a study were wild mice were made to inbreed, the overall fluctuating asymmetry of the inbred mice was not greater than that of the outbred group, even though these two groups had different fitness under seminatural conditions[41], but Ziv has not mentioned this study at all. This study is merely one of several that have shown fluctuating asymmetry to be a poor indicator of developmental stability.

Some studies have shown little to no relationship between fluctuating asymmetry and heterozygoisty[42-44], whereas some have even shown fluctuating asymmetry to increase beyond a certain level of heterozygosity[45, 46], i.e., outbreeding depression. In a meta-analysis of 118 datasets published in 41 studies[47], the effect size correlation between fluctuating asymmetry and heterozygoisty was r = -0.09 (SE=0.03), a low effect size correlation, but the interesting data is in the following figure, namely a non-significant trend toward a weak positive effect size correlation in endotherms (animals that maintain a constant internal body temperature), i.e., a non-significant trend for greater heterozygosity in endotherms to correspond to somewhat less symmetrical individuals. To interpret effect size correlation (ES): small ES (less than 0.15), medium/moderate ES (0.15 < ES < 0.33), large ES (greater than 0.33).

Fluctuating asymmetry and heterozygosity in ectotherms and endotherms.

In this meta-analysis, heterozygoisty accounted for one percent of the variation in developmental stability assessed via how symmetrical the individuals were, and even for ectotherms the variance accounted for was only 2% (r=−0.23 ± 0.09)[47]. If Ziv did proper research, he could not possibly have missed this meta-analysis, but he apparently does not cite this because he wants to convey that more heterozygosity equals better symmetry, which translates to more attractiveness and better health, all of which mean that miscegenation for the purposes of increasing heterozygoisty can only be positive with respect to physical and mental development.

Mating preferences

Ziv notes that evolution should shape people to breed in ways that are the most beneficial, yet laments that people generally tend to breed within their races, which is apparently not the best strategy as far as the benefits of heterozygoisty go: more attractive and healthier people. One of the reasons for people mostly seeking partners within their race is that people seek partners in accordance with an internal blueprint, but the good news for Ziv is that this internal blue print can be altered with sufficient exposure to people of other races. He cites the example of snow geese: the white ones breed with whites and the blue ones breed with other blue geese. However, when white geese are raised by blue geese, they prefer blue geese and blue geese raised by white geese prefer white geese. Snow geese of any variety show no preference for white or blue geese if they are exposed to both since birth. Therefore, Ziv extrapolates that humans exposed to multiple races since birth, which will be a reality with mass immigration of multiple races into the West, will not show a specific preference for their own race. This is another non sequitur. More complex human brains are not as susceptible to imprinting as bid brains are. In multiracial societies, non-whites tend to have a preference for facial features closer to that of the white average, but it is uncommon for whites to prefer non-white facial features.

Health

Ziv offers no direct evidence for improved health among mixed-race individuals, and ignores evidence for an across-the-board increase in health problems among mixed-race individuals in a large, representative sample of U.S. adolescents[48]. I have previously addressed this study by J. Richard Udry; the most likely reason for the worsened health of the mixed-race individuals is increased odds of the disruption of the autonomic nervous system, resulting from race mixing.

A study involving undergraduate students at San Francisco State University and the University of Hawaii at Hilo revealed that mixed-race individuals (basically white-Asian mixes) had worse health than whites or Asians[49]; read the paper.

A newer study that assessed substance use and violent behaviors among 2,082 students in Seattle public middle schools has reported mixed-race individuals being worse on these counts, after controlling for differences in socioeconomic status[50]; read the paper. This study also assessed ethnic identity and perceived discrimination to evaluate the extent to which they were related to the problem behaviors. However, a positive ethnic identity was protective on some counts only, and was associated with an increased likelihood of the participants having ever threatened to beat someone up. Perceived discrimination was associated with increased likelihood of problem behaviors on some counts only, but it cannot be assumed that discriminatory experiences were responsible for the problem behaviors since problematic behaviors on the part of individuals would invite discrimination.

Clinical samples have shown higher rates of mental and behavioral problems among mixed-race individuals[51, 52]. There have been few studies showing mixed-race individuals to be comparable to single-race individuals: a study from Hawaii reported no differences with respect to personality variables[53] and another study reported no differences with respect to quality of parent and adolescent relationship[54]. A few years before Udry[48] published the health data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), Cooney and Radina[55] published some of this data, and reported multiracial individuals to be worse than uniracial individuals on less than half the school performance, behavioral and psychological dimensions assessed, but a more thorough analysis by Udry shows multiracial individuals to be worse on most measures, including health. Except for the Seattle middle schools study[50], which was likely published after Ziv submitted his final manuscript for publication, Ziv couldn’t possibly have failed to come across the others showing worse health among mixed-race individuals, but he pretends as if these studies don’t exist.

India is a cesspool of race mixing, but East Indians have some of the highest if not the highest prevalence of cardiovascular disease, the metabolic syndrome, diabetes, insulin resistance, hyperinsulinemia, central obesity, dyslipidemias such as lower high-density lipoprotein or increased low density lipoprotein or higher triglyceride levels, increased thrombotic tendency as in increased plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 and decreased tissue plasminogen activator levels, and low birth weights[56-63], in addition to a weak musculo-skeletal build[64-67]. It is remarkable how often I have seen slenderly built south Asian males with a tendency to pack on excess body fat, especially in the abdominal region. The prevalence of cardiovascular disease among mixed-race groups such as south Asians, blacks and Hispanics in the U.S. is 2- to 3-fold higher compared to that among whites[68]. Whereas a number of the papers cited within this paragraph have been published in 2006, they are documenting data that have been well-known for years. Why has Ziv not cited such data?

Athleticism/Sporting ability

Ziv cites a study about more heterozygous oysters being better able to utilize oxygen under stress, and then notes that the implications for human athletics are staggering! Talk about non sequiturs! In a human study, overall body symmetry was unrelated to lung capacity and maximal oxygen utilization[69], i.e., the more symmetrical individuals, which Ziv would describe as more heterozygous, were not better off with respect to the physiological capacities addressed. Another study reported that elite athletes were not more symmetrical than sub-elite athletes[70]. Now, there are studies showing skilled athletes being more symmetrical than non-athletes (see review in Tomkinson et al.[70]), but the relationship is weak, and by not citing negative finds, Ziv is trying to convey that the relationship is so strong that interracial mating to increase heterozygosity is highly recommended.

The only example of a mixed race great athlete that Ziv cites is Tiger Woods, but if I recall correctly, then Tiger Woods had severe myopia, which had to be surgically corrected. If my recollection is correct, then without modern technology, if Tiger Woods had to live as a hunter-gatherer, he would quickly become prey, and he would also be a pretty useless fighter.

In the 1970s, there were several American blacks playing the PGA tour, but in spite of an increase in the popularity of golf and the greater participation of American blacks, currently, Tiger Woods is the only part-black person playing the PGA tour; see more.

There have been some great mixed-race athletes, e.g., Jim Thorpe and Daley Thompson, but the Decathlon is mostly dominated by whites, just as most Olympic sports are. In addressing race, Ziv addresses whether some races are better at some things than others, and says that this is an issue that he doesn’t want to focus on, but he points the interested reader to Jon Entine’s book, “Taboo: Why black athletes dominate sports and why we are afraid to talk about it.” This book alleges the racial athletic superiority of blacks, but Entine is as clueless as Steve Sailer on this topic. Blacks only dominate a few sports. West African blacks do not dominate sports such as weightlifting, powerlifting, martial arts, strong man competitions or freestyle fighting, where their alleged superior speed and strength should give them an advantage. Presently, all four heavyweight boxing titles are held by whites. Castefootball.us also features plenty of evidence about anti-white discrimination in American team sports such as football and basketball, showing that the heavy black overrepresentation in these sports is not entirely merit-based. All-white teams from Europe have been learning the game of basketball, and in recent years have defeated all-black teams from the U.S. on several occasions. Things are bound to get more interesting.

When it comes to thousands of years of race mixing between multiple races, it would be hard to beat India, yet East Indians are undoubtedly among the worst if not the worst athletes in the world.

Attractiveness

In a meta-analysis of correlates of facial beauty by Gillian Rhodes[71], the effect size correlations (ES) were: average facial features (0.52 ± 0.41; 95% CI = 0.42-0.61; weighted ES = 0.54), symmetry (0.25 ± 0.34; 95% CI = 0.16-0.33; weighted ES = 0.23) and femininity (0.64 ± 0.39; 95% CI = 0.51-0.74; weighted ES = 0.61). The data are reported as effect size correlation (ES) ± standard deviation; the interval that one would be 95% confident the actual ES lies in the general population; ES weighted by the number of faces examined.

Ziv’s argument that mixed-race individuals are more attractive is based on the assumption that greater heterozygosity equals more symmetry, which equals greater attractiveness, but there are at least two much more powerful correlates of facial beauty that Ziv ignores.

The only study that Ziv cites in favor of mixed-race individuals being more symmetrical is Jay Phelan’s study, which remains unpublished four years after its completion. We have already seen that the relationship between heterozygoisty and symmetry (thereby developmental stability) is very weak.

What about average facial features? As I mentioned previously, Ziv should read about craniofacial morphology in mixed-race individuals, white-Native American mixes to be more precise, and note that canonical variates analysis revealed a canonical root, explaining 36% of the variance, that made the mestizos deviate from shape variables in between whites and Native Americans[72]. 52% of the 52 shape variables deviated from the mathematical average shape of the parent races, and here is the money shot[72]:

Finally, it is interesting that the distances that could not be assigned to a particular developmental pattern appeared to introduce ‘‘noise’’ and blur the effects of cranial integration.

The developmental patterns talked about above are mathematical averaging based upon the expectation from quantitative genetics, i.e., additive genetic variation, and morphological integration of different parts of the skull, whereby different parts of the skull effectively behave like a single unit, i.e., a change in one part corresponds to changes in other associated parts. Note the term “interesting;” this term is an euphemism for some loss of morphological integration in the skull resulting from race mixing, i.e., some solid evidence that yes indeed, races exist among humans, and also that humans races—at least the two considered and by extrapolating from genetic distances and skull shape comparisons, any combination of races—are sufficiently distant so as to result in disruptions of co-adapted gene complexes and subsequent increased odds of anomalous outcomes in mixed offspring, which is confirmed by the health data addressed above.

Morphological integration is an important concept. Whereas one may not appreciate the facial features of another race, one will be able to pick out the better looking among another race, and these better looking people will have some kind of harmony between various parts of their face, but this harmony is more likely to be lost as a result of race mixing compared to same-race breeding. For instance, I previously commented on the malformed appearance of the deranged model Heidi Klum’s mulatto baby.

Deranged white model Heidi Klum with Negro Seal.

Deranged Heidi Klum with malformed mulatto baby; Henry Guenther Ademola Dashtu Samuel.

Some would point out that neonates are not exactly cute, but Henry Guenther Ademola Dashtu Samuel, the son of Heidi Klum and Seal, clearly looks like something is wrong with him. The malformed mulatto neonate has grown into a retarded-looking malformed toddler; contrast his features with the beauty of the white child Heidi Klum had previously. I have seen black babies that are a lot better looking.

Deranged Heidi Klum's children with Negro Seal.

Actual shape variables are important, too. From the perspective of whites, non-white admixture can only diminish the attractiveness of the descendents of whites: make noses broader, make the middle portion of the face flatter (absorption of East Asians, Native Americans, Eskimo-Siberians, khoi-San people, some central African populations), make faces broader (absorption of East Asians, most black African populations, Native Americans, Eskimo-Siberians), make jaws more protruding (especially if blacks, Melanesians and Australian aborigines are involved), make faces larger (absorption of most non-white populations), decrease height (absorption of many non-white populations, especially for northern Europeans), make limbs smaller relative to height (absorption of East Asians, Eskimo-Siberians, Native Americans), increase the frequency of hooked noses (absorption of Middle Eastern populations such as Jews), weaken musculo-skeletal build (absorption of non-whites in general except West Africans and Polynesians), etc.

In addition, non-whites possess more primitive facial features, and some of them disproportionately persist when they mate with whites. For instance, a study from Hawaii reported the persistence of the broad face/massive cheekbones of East Asians among Asian-white hybrids[73]. In addition, flared nostrils, broader noses and more protruding jaws also tend to persist.

What about femininity? No citations are needed for the less feminine physiques of East Asian and physically similar women. Black women, in spite of their larger breasts and more protrusive buttocks, are unable to look as feminine as white women as a result of their greater muscularity, higher front-on waist-to-hip ratios and facial features. White women look more feminine, and I would refer the reader to a previous, currently active, thread on Nordic beauty, where I have put up numerous comparisons; I still have to respond to several comments there, and my replies will feature more comparisons, but posting this review first is more important. Rhodes’ meta-analysis makes it clear that femininity is a much more powerful correlate of beauty in women compared to symmetry, yet Ziv ignores femininity.

I expected to see Ziv cite Gillian Rhodes’ study about the greater rated attractiveness and perceived health of Asian-white hybrids[74], but Ziv hasn’t cited it, and it may have come out too late for Ziv to cite it. I have previously critiqued this study. In short, the whites in this study were unattractive, and the assumption of the authors that race mixing will average the facial features of the parents is not true[72].

Intelligence

Ziv cites a study from Hawaii where white-Japanese hybrid children outperformed white or Japanese children on 13 of 15 cognitive tests (e.g., 0.30 S.D. on a version of the Raven’s progressive matrices and 0.22 S.D. on the PMA Vocabulary Test), in spite of no significant socioeconomic differences between the groups[75]. The confound here is assortative mating for IQ, i.e., it cannot be assumed that the whites and Japanese that bred together came from a random sample of their respective racial groups. Udry studied a large, random population of U.S. adolescents, but as the following table from his paper shows[48], the GPA (grade point average) and verbal IQ of the mixed-race individuals were in between those of the individuals belonging to their parental racial groups, i.e., no hybrid vigor was observed.

National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health) data on GPA and verbal IQ of mixed race and single race individuals.

One possible example of hybrid vigor with respect to IQ, from the perspective of black Africans, suggested by Arthur Jensen, is that American blacks have an IQ of 85, 15 points or 1 S.D. higher than that of their black African counterparts, even though white admixture among them averages 10-20%. However, if we assume that the black African average IQ would be a few points higher if malnutrition/undernutrition were eliminated, then given that there is a positive correlation between health and IQ, it is reasonable to suppose that Africans bound for slavery in the U.S. were among the healthier ones, and given the harsh conditions of transport, healthier still individuals made it to the U.S. Therefore, the IQ potential of the arrivals could be around 80, and white admixture may only have raised IQ by 5 points or so instead of 15 points, which would not necessitate positing hybrid vigor from the perspective of black Africans, but the validity of this proposal is unclear, and in any case, at present, the 85 IQ of American blacks is not proof of hybrid vigor from the perspective of black Africans.

Ziv cites a paper by Mingroni[76], which proposes heterosis as possibly partially accounting for the Lynn-Flynn effect, i.e., the secular worldwide rise in IQ scores documented in the 20th century. Mingroni’s argument is reasonable. Throughout the period of this secular trend, the heritability of IQ has remained very high, which is not easy to account for if one assumes that environmental factors are involved, and Mingroni cites papers that have critiqued the implausibility of a model proposed by Dickens and Flynn that has argued for a large effect of the environment on IQ. However, the heterosis proposed by Mingroni postulates increased mixing of people from neighboring villages, which is not hybridization (mixing of different breeds), and it does not follow, as Ziv assumes, that the greater the outbreeding, the better it will be. In addition, data from Spain show that the bulk of the Lynn-Flynn effect over a 30-year period was accounted for by gains mostly in the lower half of the bell curve, with very little change in the 99th percentile and spectacular gains in the first percentile[77]; see the gain in raw scores. Therefore, improved nutrition is certainly accounting for a good deal of the Lynn-Flynn effect. Mingroni also cites secular increases in high-heritability factors such as height, head circumference, myopia, autism, asthma and possibly ADHD. If greater outbreeding, though still mostly within racial groups, is partly responsible for the Lynn-Flynn effect and also increases in abnormalities such as myopia and asthma, then general heterosis is not implicated.

The three highest IQ groups are: U.S./U.K. Ashkenazim diaspora (IQ = 110[78, 79]), northeast Asians (IQ = 105) and northern Europeans (IQ = 100). Northeast Asians and northern Europeans have very little other-race admixture. Jews are more heterogeneous, but the most plausible explanation for the Ashkenazim IQ advantage is that under selection pressures for higher IQ, a high level of inbreeding among them accumulated several deleterious alleles that have the side effect of increasing IQ[80]. Therefore, the brightest groups certainly didn’t get that way by large-scale outbreeding. In addition, notwithstanding the northeast Asian IQ advantage over northern Europeans, especially with respect to math ability, whites are heavily overrepresented, in spite of their smaller numbers, among Nobel Prize winners, Field Medalists, annual international ACM software coding college competitions and the most brilliant inventors/innovators. Therefore average IQ is only part of the story, and there is no reason to believe that a white-northeast Asian hybrid population will produce as many intellectually outstanding people per capita as present-day northern Europeans do.

Ziv hilariously writes, “Once true interracial marriage becomes commonplace, I think we will see an even bigger boost in the physical and mental development of future generations.” Really? If the U.S./U.K. Ashkenazim diaspora, northeast Asians and northern Europeans were to mass-absorb the likes of Bushmen (IQ = 54), Australian aborigines (IQ = 62), black Africans in general (IQ = 67) or south Asians (IQ = 82) (see Lynn[81]), would one expect a boost in mental development from the perspective of the high IQ groups?

Another useful consideration is as follows. Assume that there are no deleterious effects of race mixing. From a strictly IQ perspective, if a white man with an IQ of 100 had to choose between a white woman and a Bangladeshi woman, both with an IQ of 130, which would be the better choice? If additive genetics accounted for all the variation in IQ between individuals, one would expect the offspring of the union in consideration to have an IQ around 115, but about 40% of the IQ variation between individuals is accounted for by additive genetics, i.e., the white man can expect an IQ boost that is 40% of 15 points, i.e., 6 points. Therefore, the offspring will have a range of IQ centering around 106. Now, given white and Bangladeshi average IQs of 100 and low 80s, respectively, a 130-IQ Bangladeshi is much more of an outlier for her race than a 130-IQ white is. In other words, the contribution of additive genetics from the Bangladeshi woman would result in a probable IQ of the hybrid offspring leaning toward the lower range of the distribution centering around 106 compared to the white woman. As noted above, deleterious alleles are implicated in the Ashkenazim IQ advantage[80], and it has been documented that people with very high IQs tend to have an above average incidence of myopia and atopic disorders (related to autonomic nervous system disruption) such as asthma and allergies[82]. Therefore, the odds that abnormal genetics/developmental events are implicated in the 130-IQ of the Bangladeshi woman are greater. In other words, the better choice is clearly the white woman. Hence, even if one assumes no harm resulting from race mixing, from a strictly IQ perspective, a white person is better off breeding with a white than a member of the dark races with the same IQ as a prospective white partner. If deleterious alleles are mostly responsible for the Ashkenazim IQ advantage, then it is not worth it for whites to breed with the Ashkenazim. Additionally, northeast Asians are know to have lower verbal IQs than whites, and from an IQ perspective, no racial benefits from absorbing them are apparent given that notwithstanding their math advantage, when it comes to manifesting math prowess at the highest levels (e.g., work deserving of the Field Medal), northeast Asians, in spite of their much greater numbers, are far behind whites.

Conclusions

Ziv makes a very weak case, and has undoubtedly omitted inconvenient data. Giving the process of manuscript submission to final publication about an year’s time, Ziv should easily have come across the citations in this review that were published/put online prior to mid-2005. The evidence that he has ignored makes the opposite case. None of the heavily mixed populations --mestizos/mulattos in south America, Middle Eastern/North African people, south Asians, southeast Asians or central Asians -- are known for great health, vigor, attractiveness or high intelligence. I will speculate on Ziv’s motives below, but the implications of his work should be briefly addressed. From the perspectives of kinship and ethnic genetic interests (EGI), both of which Ziv ignores, Ziv’s ideas are horrible; see comments by “On Holliday” here and a fuller discussion of EGI here. In the biological sciences, there is consensus that living organisms be preserved at the level of kinds, i.e. races and higher order levels of taxonomy, unless one is looking at a virus/microorganism that is deadly for humans. Only if conservation efforts are threatened by inbreeding depression will there be a recommendation to mix races or species (in plants) to preserve broad taxonomical groups, and Ziv’s message will normally be treated with contempt in a non-human context. The concept of ethnic genetic interests basically argues that one’s race is worth preserving because it is one’s own, not because there is any special value to it. However, it is also worthwhile to consider the value of things to determine what is and what isn’t worthy of preservation, and white physical appearance and the ability of northern Europeans to produce the highest number of intellectually outstanding people per capita in the absence of having accumulated deleterious alleles, like the Ashkenazim have, is of sufficient value to be at least preserved if not enhanced, and speaking of enhancement, this will come about by evolution within whites; absorbing non-whites will result in devolution. Ziv’s recommendations will be especially disastrous for whites from an aesthetics and intelligence standpoint if many white people are persuaded by his arguments.

What has motivated Alon Ziv?

Attempting to critique an argument by questioning the motives of the author is bad practice, and is specifically known as deconstruction, but I have provided plenty of criticism, and do not intend this section to be a form of criticism. Rather, given the destructive nature of Ziv’s thesis, it is of some interest to question what could have prompted a man with an apparently adequate background in the biological sciences, and one who appears to have spent years reading relevant studies, to present very selective evidence in favor of his arguments and ignore a large body of evidence making the opposite case.

Ziv tells us that his book is not an instruction manual, i.e., he is not telling us to pick a spouse based on racial criteria. He also notes that he doesn’t need to instruct people to seek interracial unions because they are inevitable. He tells the reader to “get ready for a mixed race explosion.” He writes that “interracial marriage is the future, not because it should be, but simply because it is.” And, as to why it is going to be this way, it is because of continued immigration of people of various races into the U.S. as well as other Western nations, and people’s altered mating preferences in accordance with the snow geese example.

Well then, why write a book extolling the virtues of race mixing if it is going to happen on a large scale no matter what Ziv or other people say? The answer is surely not that Ziv merely decided to document what is going to happen in the future, as should be obvious from the tone of the book and Ziv’s very selective citations. The answer is easy to figure out. Ziv laments that although Gary, Indiana (U.S.A.) has 430,000 whites and 120,000 blacks, blacks and whites are highly segregated in this city; he even calls this depressing! It appears that race mixing in the U.S. is not occurring on a scale that would please Ziv, and he has decided to help accelerate it. Ziv writes, “For the modern world, it would be far better to seek out the most genetically distinct mate possible.” He tells us that “the higher one’s heterozygosity is, the better it is,” and then tells us that the combination that would yield the highest heterozygosity would be the combination of a black African with a non-African, a Bantu-Eskimo mating yielding the highest heterozygosity of all interracial matings, according to the research of Cavalli-Sforza. Ziv is quick to add that he is not advocating a race of Bantu-Eskimo supermen, but greater heterozygoisty has its benefits.

One factor that could have motivated Ziv to write this book is that he genuinely subscribes to his thesis and is so enthusiastic about the virtues of race mixing that he has skipped evidence to the contrary, believing that the weight of the evidence in the long run will eventually vindicate him. Another possibility is that Ziv is motivated by malice, a feeling that I cannot shake off.

It would be interesting to learn about the racial background(s) of the women that Ziv has dated and who he ultimately has children with; if she turns out to be non-Jewish and non-white, I can see myself giving Ziv the benefit of the doubt and believe that his book reflects his genuine conviction about the benefits of race mixing, but if this woman is Jewish or white, then my suspicion that Ziv is motivated by malice would be strengthened. Ziv lives in Los Angeles and should have no problems finding a willing black, Asian or Hispanic woman. However, if I had to bet, I would wager that Ziv would prefer a Nordic white for a breeding partner. Ziv doesn’t tell us about the kind of women he likes, but he describes his first love, a classmate, Leslie, in seventh grade. The only thing he tells us about her physical appearance is that she had honey blonde hair, and his description makes it obvious that he was enamored by her blondeness. Of course, if Ziv mated with Leslie, his offspring would not have honey blond hair anymore than if she mated with any non-white, but Ziv does not address this kind of loss resulting from race mixing.

Citations

Bogaert AF. Asexuality: prevalence and associated factors in a national probability sample. J Sex Res. Aug 2004;41(3):279-287.
Alikasifoglu M, Erginoz E, Ercan O, Albayrak-Kaymak D, Uysal O, Ilter O. Sexual abuse among female high school students in Istanbul, Turkey. Child Abuse Negl. Mar 2006;30(3):247-255.
Crowley MS, Seery BL. Exploring the multiplicity of childhood sexual abuse with a focus on polyincestuous contexts of abuse. J Child Sex Abus. 2001;10(4):91-110.
Kim HS, Kim HS. Incestuous experience among Korean adolescents: prevalence, family problems, perceived family dynamics, and psychological characteristics. Public Health Nurs. Nov-Dec 2005;22(6):472-482.
Simmons LW, Rhodes G, Peters M, Koehler N. Are human preferences for facial symmetry focused on signals of developmental instability? Behav Ecol. 2004;15(5):864-871.
Rosenberg NA, Mahajan S, Ramachandran S, Zhao C, Pritchard JK, Feldman MW. Clines, clusters, and the effect of study design on the inference of human population structure. PLoS Genet. Dec 2005;1(6):e70.
Rosenberg NA, Pritchard JK, Weber JL, et al. Genetic structure of human populations. Science. Dec 20 2002;298(5602):2381-2385.
Nei M, Roychoudhury AK. Evolutionary relationships of human populations on a global scale. Mol Biol Evol. Sep 1993;10(5):927-943.
Hennessy RJ, Stringer CB. Geometric morphometric study of the regional variation of modern human craniofacial form. Am J Phys Anthropol. Jan 2002;117(1):37-48.
Li YY, Brace CL, Gao QA, Tracer DP. Dimensions of face in Asia in the perspective of geography and prehistory. Am J Phys Anthropol. Jul 1991;85(3):269-279.
Serre D, Paabo S. Evidence for gradients of human genetic diversity within and among continents. Genome Res. Sep 2004;14(9):1679-1685.
Freese J, Meland S. Seven tenths incorrect: heterogeneity and change in the waist-to-hip ratios of Playboy centerfold models and Miss America pageant winners. J Sex Res. May 2002;39(2):133-138.
Marlowe FW, Wetsman A. Preferred waist-to-hip ratio and ecology. Personal Individ Diff. 2001;30(3):481-489.
Sugiyama L. Is beauty in the context-sensitive adaptations of the beholder? Shiwiar use of waist-to-hip ratio in assessments of female mate value. Evol Hum Behav. 2004;25(1):51-62.
Yu DW, Shepard GH, Jr. Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Nature. Nov 26 1998;396(6709):321-322.
Furlow B, Gangestad SW, Armijo-Prewitt T. Developmental stability and human violence. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. Jan 7 1998;265(1390):1-6.
Manning JT, Wood D. Fluctuating asymmetry and aggression in boys. Hum Nature. 1998;9:53-65.
Aspi J. Inbreeding and outbreeding depression in male courtship song characters in Drosophila montana. Heredity. Mar 2000;84 ( Pt 3):273-282.
Galloway LF, Etterson JR. Population differentiation and hybrid success in Campanula americana: geography and genome size. J Evol Biol. Jan 2005;18(1):81-89.
Heiser DA, Shaw RG. The fitness effects of outcrossing in Calylophus serrulatus, a permanent translocation heterozygote. Evolution Int J Org Evolution. Jan 2006;60(1):64-76.
Henry PY, Pradel R, Jarne P. Environment-dependent inbreeding depression in a hermaphroditic freshwater snail. J Evol Biol. Nov 2003;16(6):1211-1222.
LeBas NR. Mate choice, genetic incompatibility, and outbreeding in the ornate dragon lizard, Ctenophorus ornatus. Evolution Int J Org Evolution. Feb 2002;56(2):371-377.
Miller LM, Close T, Kapuscinski AR. Lower fitness of hatchery and hybrid rainbow trout compared to naturalized populations in Lake Superior tributaries. Mol Ecol. Nov 2004;13(11):3379-3388.
Montalvo AM, Ellstrand NC. Nonlocal transplantation and outbreeding depression in the subshrub Lotus scoparius (Fabaceae). Am J Bot. Feb 2001;88(2):258-269.
Neff BD. Stabilizing selection on genomic divergence in a wild fish population. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. Feb 24 2004;101(8):2381-2385.
Parisod C, Trippi C, Galland N. Genetic variability and founder effect in the pitcher plant Sarracenia purpurea (Sarraceniaceae) in populations introduced into Switzerland: from inbreeding to invasion. Ann Bot (Lond). Jan 2005;95(2):277-286.
Peer K, Taborsky M. Outbreeding depression, but no inbreeding depression in haplodiploid Ambrosia beetles with regular sibling mating. Evolution Int J Org Evolution. Feb 2005;59(2):317-323.
Quilichini A, Debussche M, Thompson JD. Evidence for local outbreeding depression in the Mediterranean island endemic Anchusa crispa Viv. (Boraginaceae). Heredity. Aug 2001;87(Pt 2):190-197.
Shpak M. The role of deleterious mutations in allopatric speciation. Evolution Int J Org Evolution. Jul 2005;59(7):1389-1399.
Waser NM, Price MV, Shaw RG. Outbreeding depression varies among cohorts of Ipomopsis aggregata planted in nature. Evolution Int J Org Evolution. Apr 2000;54(2):485-491.
Willi Y, Van Buskirk J. Genomic compatibility occurs over a wide range of parental genetic similarity in an outcrossing plant. Proc Biol Sci. Jul 7 2005;272(1570):1333-1338.
Khongsdier R, Mukherjee N. Effects of heterosis on growth in height and its segments: a cross-sectional study of the Khasi girls in Northeast India. Ann Hum Biol. Sep-Oct 2003;30(5):605-621.
Hulse FS. Exogamy and heterosis. Year Phys Anthropol. 1957;9:240-257.
Wolanski N, Jarosz E, Pyzuk M. Heterosis in man: growth in offspring and distance between parents' birthplaces. Soc Biol. Mar 1970;17(1):1-16.
Hegele RA. Genetic prediction of atherosclerosis: lessons from studies in native Canadian populations. Clin Chim Acta. Aug 1999;286(1-2):47-61.
Hegele RA, Ban MR, Carrington CV, Ramdath DD. Allele frequencies for candidate genes in atherosclerosis and diabetes among Trinidadian neonates. Hum Biol. Aug 2001;73(4):525-531.
North KE, MacCluer JW, Williams JT, et al. Evidence for distinct genetic effects on obesity and lipid-related CVD risk factors in diabetic compared to nondiabetic American Indians: the Strong Heart Family Study. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. Mar-Apr 2003;19(2):140-147.
Helgadottir A, Manolescu A, Helgason A, et al. A variant of the gene encoding leukotriene A4 hydrolase confers ethnicity-specific risk of myocardial infarction. Nat Genet. Jan 2006;38(1):68-74.
Radha V, Vimaleswaran KS, Babu HN, et al. Role of genetic polymorphism peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-gamma2 Pro12Ala on ethnic susceptibility to diabetes in South-Asian and Caucasian subjects: Evidence for heterogeneity. Diabetes Care. May 2006;29(5):1046-1051.
Livshits G, Otremski I, Kobyliansky E. Longitudinal growth of infants in families of "mixed" and "non-mixed" ethnic origin in Israel. Hum Biol. Dec 1987;59(6):933-949.
Leamy LJ, Meagher S, Taylor S, Carroll L, Potts WK. Size and fluctuating asymmetry of morphometric characters in mice: their associations with inbreeding and t-haplotype. Evolution Int J Org Evolution. Nov 11 2001;55(11):2333-2341.
Beacham TD. Developmental stability, heterozygosity, and genetic analysis of morphological variation in pink salmon (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha). Can J Zool. 1991;69(2):274-278.
Clarke GM, Oldroyd BP. The genetic basis of developmental stability in Apis mellifera. II. Relationships between character size, asymmetry and single-locus heterozygosity Genetica. 1996;97(2):211-224.
Vollestad LA, Hindar K. Developmental stability and environmental stress in Salmo salar (Atlantic salmon). Heredity. Feb 1997;78 ( Pt 2):215-222.
Thornhill R, Moller AP. Developmental stability, disease and medicine. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. Nov 1997;72(4):497-548.
Livshits G, Kobyliansky E. Lerner's concept of developmental homeostasis and the problem of heterozygosity level in natural populations. Heredity. Dec 1985;55 ( Pt 3):341-353.
Vollestad LA, Hindar K, Moller AP. A meta-analysis of fluctuating asymmetry in relation to heterozygosity. Heredity. Aug 1999;83 ( Pt 2):206-218.
Udry JR, Li RM, Hendrickson-Smith J. Health and behavior risks of adolescents with mixed-race identity. Am J Public Health. Nov 2003;93(11):1865-1870.
Vandervoort DJ, Divers PP, Aojido C. Psychosocial correlates of health status among Asians, Caucasians, and multiracial subjects. Current Psychology: Developmental, Learning, Personality, Social. 2000;19(2):120-128.
Choi Y, Harachi TW, Gillmore MR, Catalano RF. Are multiracial adolescents at greater risk? Comparisons of rates, patterns, and correlates of substance use and violence between monoracial and multiracial adolescents. Am J Orthopsychiatry. Jan 2006;76(1):86-97.
Gibbs JT. Identity and marginality: issues in the treatment of biracial adolescents. Am J Orthopsychiatry. Apr 1987;57(2):265-278.
Gibbs JT, Moskowitz-Sweet G. Clinical and cultural issues in the treatment of biracial and bicultural adolescents. Families in Society. 1991;72:479-591.
Johnson R, Nagoshi C. The adjustment of offspring of withingroup and interracial/intercultural marriages: A comparison of personality factor scores. J Marriage Family. 1986;48:279-284.
Radina ME, Cooney TM. Relationship quality between multiracial adolescents and their biological parents. Am J Orthopsychiatry. Oct 2000;70(4):445-454.
Cooney TM, Radina ME. Adjustment problems in adolescence: are multiracial children at risk? Am J Orthopsychiatry. Oct 2000;70(4):433-444.
Barnett AH, Dixon AN, Bellary S, et al. Type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular risk in the UK south Asian community. Diabetologia. Oct 2006;49(10):2234-2246.
Forouhi NG, Sattar N, Tillin T, McKeigue PM, Chaturvedi N. Do known risk factors explain the higher coronary heart disease mortality in South Asian compared with European men? Prospective follow-up of the Southall and Brent studies, UK. Diabetologia. Sep 14 2006.
Gupta M, Brister S. Is South Asian ethnicity an independent cardiovascular risk factor? Can J Cardiol. Mar 1 2006;22(3):193-197.
Smith J, Cianflone K, Al-Amri M, Sniderman A. Body composition and the apoB/apoA-I ratio in migrant Asian Indians and white Caucasians in Canada. Clin Sci (Lond). Sep 2006;111(3):201-207.
Bedi US, Singh S, Syed A, Aryafar H, Arora R. Coronary artery disease in South Asians: an emerging risk group. Cardiol Rev. Mar-Apr 2006;14(2):74-80.
Tewari S, Kumar S, Kapoor A, et al. Premature coronary artery disease in North India: an angiography study of 1971 patients. Indian Heart J. Jul-Aug 2005;57(4):311-318.
Davey G, Ramachandran A, Snehalatha C, Hitman GA, McKeigue PM. Familial aggregation of central obesity in Southern Indians. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. Nov 2000;24(11):1523-1527.
Potts J, Simmons D. Sex and ethnic group differences in fat distribution in young United Kingdom South Asians and Europids. J Clin Epidemiol. Aug 1994;47(8):837-841.
Dudeja V, Misra A, Pandey RM, Devina G, Kumar G, Vikram NK. BMI does not accurately predict overweight in Asian Indians in northern India. Br J Nutr. Jul 2001;86(1):105-112.
Misra A, Pandey RM, Sinha S, Guleria R, Sridhar V, Dudeja V. Receiver operating characteristics curve analysis of body fat & body mass index in dyslipidaemic Asian Indians. Indian J Med Res. Apr 2003;117:170-179.
Vikram NK, Misra A, Pandey RM, et al. Anthropometry and body composition in northern Asian Indian patients with type 2 diabetes: receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis of body mass index with percentage body fat as standard. Diabetes Nutr Metab. Feb 2003;16(1):32-40.
Nanan DJ. The obesity pandemic--implications for Pakistan. J Pak Med Assoc. Aug 2002;52(8):342-346.
Singh V, Deedwania P. Dyslipidemia in special populations: Asian Indians, African Americans, and Hispanics. Curr Atheroscler Rep. Jan 2006;8(1):32-40.
Tomkinson GR, Olds TS. Physiological correlates of bilateral symmetry in humans. Int J Sports Med. Nov 2000;21(8):545-550.
Tomkinson GR, Popovic N, Martin M. Bilateral symmetry and the competitive standard attained in elite and sub-elite sport. J Sports Sci. Mar 2003;21(3):201-211.
Rhodes G. The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annu Rev Psychol. 2006;57:199-226.
Martinez-Abadias N, Gonzalez-Jose R, Gonzalez-Martin A, et al. Phenotypic evolution of human craniofacial morphology after admixture: a geometric morphometrics approach. Am J Phys Anthropol. Mar 2006;129(3):387-398.
Chung CS, Runck DW, Bilben SE, Kau MC. Effects of interracial crosses on cephalometric measurements. Am J Phys Anthropol. Apr 1986;69(4):465-472.
Rhodes G, Lee K, Palermo R, et al. Attractiveness of own-race, other-race, and mixed-race faces. Perception. 2005;34(3):319-340.
Nagoshi CT, Johnson RC. The ubiquity of g. Personal Individ Diff. 1986;7(2):201-207.
Mingroni MA. The secular rise in IQ: giving heterosis a closer look. Intelligence. 2004;32(1):65-83.
Colom R, Lluis-Font JM, Andres-Pueyo A. The generational intelligence gains are caused by decreasing variance in the lower half of the distribution: Supporting evidence for the nutrition hypothesis. Intelligence. 2005;33:83-91.
Lynn R. The intelligence of American Jews. Personal Individ Diff. 2004;36(1):201-207.
Lynn R, Longley D. On the high intelligence and cognitive achievements of Jews in Britain. Intelligence. 2006;Epub (ahead of print).
Cochran G, Hardy J, Harpending H. Natural history of Ashkenazi intelligence. J Biosoc Sci. Sep 2006;38(5):659-693.
Lynn R. Race differences in intelligence : an evolutionary analysis. Augusta, GA: Washington Summit Publishers; 2006.
Benbow CP. Physiological correlates of extreme intellectual precocity. Neuropsychologia. 1986;24(5):719-725.

Posted by J Richards on Saturday, October 14, 2006 at 04:06 AM in Anthropology, Books, Ethnicity and Ethnic Genetic Interests, Genetics & Human Bio-Diversity, IQ and Heredity, Psychology, Race realism, That Question Again
Comments (268) | Tell a friend

Comments:

Page 3 of 3 pages « FirstP < 1 2 3

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 22, 2008, 01:16 PM | #

campaign-against-drugs slogan

Posted by a Finn on November 22, 2008, 03:43 PM | #

Addition to Barbiplease. Recent reports indicate that Flynn effect has stopped, maybe even reversed. If you thought that Flynn effect would lead to egalitarian results in IQ tests, you are wrong.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on November 22, 2008, 05:55 PM | #

Any readers whom Barbi through her misunderstandings has managed to confuse in regard to what constitutes harmful inbreeding and what doesn’t may find this MR.com entry a helpful antidote:

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/kinship_and_fertility/

Posted by Desmond Jones on November 22, 2008, 10:59 PM | #

The deCODE study only reports an increased number of children born to third-cousin marriages vs. the number of children born to unrelated couples in Iceland. This suggests that inbreeding promotes higher fertility or birth rates at best. How healthy are these children compared to other children born to unrelated couples in Iceland, or compared to biracial or multiracial children, who are thought to be healthier than monoracial children due to their heterosity?

Actually, the study tells us more.

For women born between 1925 and 1949, with mates related at the degree of third cousins, the average number of children and grandchildren were 3.27 and 6.64, compared with 2.45 and 4.86 for those with mates who were eighth cousins, or more distantly related.

It is unlikely that high rates of morbidity and possibly mortality appearing in third cousin marriages would result in a higher number of grandchildren. The study tells us that these offspring are healthy because their fertility rates are higher in the second generation.

Posted by rudiger on November 29, 2008, 01:11 AM | #

tiger woods is mixed race and id he the next kate moss not a chance the racists who propogate mixed race as superior are fucked in the head compare Mr Wodds to a Calvin Klein model and any swedish male and see who is prettier. Ever seen the indian kid with two heads that’s down to the mixed race thing copies of genes and if that starts banging your woman then you know somethings wrong. watch bodyshock,extraordinary people,search bbc i-player or channel 4 for the special children people series kids with two heads and shit makes you glad to be whiite or uniracial.

Posted by IHaveBiracialHair on December 02, 2008, 12:05 AM | #

In reference to your article, I don’t know about newborn babies, but this kid…

http://celebritybabies.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/07/15/heidi_klum_070715_11_cbb.jpg

looks pretty cute.

So does this one.

http://www.babygeartoday.com/wp-content/2008/06/babygeartodaycom-heidi-klum-and-johan.jpg

Posted by IHaveBiracialHair on December 18, 2008, 01:08 AM | #

tiger woods is mixed race and id he the next kate moss not a chance

Well, Kate Moss is a model....and Tiger Woods is a golf player. So it’s pretty safe to say that Tiger Woods is not the next Kate Moss, nor is he trying to be. And though I realize Kate Moss’s actual physical beauty isn’t the point of your argument, I’ve never seen her as particularly attractive. But that’s just me.
(http://www.welt.de/multimedia/archive/00557/kate_moss_smile_BM__557169g.jpg)

[I assumed “id” meant “is."]

the racists who propogate mixed race as superior are fucked in the head compare Mr Wodds to a Calvin Klein model and any swedish male and see who is prettier.

Ignoring the two unnecessary direct insults, what you’re saying is a matter of opinion. (Remember, you’re still comparing a golf player to a model.) By the way, are Swedish males somehow superior to any other kind of males? Like French or Dutch for instance? Just curious.

Ever seen the indian kid with two heads that’s down to the mixed race thing copies of genes and if that starts banging your woman then you know somethings wrong. watch bodyshock,extraordinary people,search bbc i-player or channel 4 for the special children people series kids with two heads and shit makes you glad to be whiite or uniracial.

I just googled a two headed Indian baby and the one I found ( http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=4549608&page=1 ) was from a small rural village in India. Inbreeding results in inferior genetics, and according to Alon Ziv, a lot of inbreeding occurs in..............small villages! The article says nothing about this child being of mixed race, unless you’ve got an article referring to a different kid I should know about.

It seems like you’re indirectly saying that Indian people somehow have inferior genes. Well, first of all, people of all races are still people, and I doubt they’d like you referring to any one of them as “that,” even if they are “banging your woman,” as you so eloquently put it.

I don’t know where you got the idea that the people on these shows you’re talking about are either not white or multiracial. Basically, I’m guessing (though it’s hard to make out) that you’re saying minorities and mixed race people breed “inferior” offspring, but white people never do.

I won’t even start on that. Use your head for a minute, and you’ll see how little sense your whole post makes. Everyone else should too.

Posted by Kapil on April 16, 2009, 05:24 PM | #

Interesting discussion. It’s difficult to agree with everything in this article even though I understand where your concern lies. In my observation, race-mixing between Whites and upper-caste Indians does not create ugly-looking, deformed individuals such as shown here. On the contrary, some of the most attractive individuals in the Glamour world happen to fall in this category: Lisa Ray (Indian father/Polish mother), Norah Jones (Indian father/American mother), Indira Varma of Kama Sutra fame (Indian father/Swiss mother), Dia Mirza (German Father/Indian mother), Katrina Kaif (Indian Father/British mother), Rohit Bal -hell he’s blonde-blue eyes (Indian Father/White mother). Also, almost all these individuals have above par IQs and are very successful in life. In fact, none of the Indian-White mixes I met in my own life seemed to be unpopular or unsuccessful in any way; they happen to be high-achievers and extremely talented. These people kinda get the best of both genes in all possible ways. So, your hypothesis clearly doesn’t apply in this case.

Also, upper caste Indian-White mixes have similar medical formations for example, identical bone marrow structure. All this established the fact that Indians are also racially Caucasian although varying in colour from dark brown to olive-skinned and even light-skinned. There’s very little genetic difference between a light-skinned Indian and an olive-skinned one. They mostly come from the same parents!

In summary, any race-mix between high-caste Indians and Whites turns out to be way better than what you’d get from something like White/Negro or even Eurasians (e.g. White/Japanese). You can say this is my own inherent bias but I’d say it’s more about how genetics works. Just because you don’t like race-mixing means nothing as long as you accept that the phenomena of hybrid vigour is not falsehood. Even in plants and animal kingdom, many cross-mixing experiments have led to excellent results that are right there before. Wolf-dogs such as Alsatians, several varieties of cotton and potato -they’ve all been created by what you’d call “interracial mixing”.

Some forms of mixing are good. Some are bad.

Posted by indians on May 04, 2009, 11:05 AM | #

Posted by Kapil on April 16, 2009, 05:24 PM | #

All this established the fact that Indians are also racially Caucasian although varying in colour from dark brown to olive-skinned and even light-skinned. There’s very little genetic difference between a light-skinned Indian and an olive-skinned one. They mostly come from the same parents!

Indians are not racially caucasions!

Posted by indians on May 04, 2009, 11:20 AM | #

Posted by indians on May 04, 2009, 11:05 AM | #

Posted by Kapil on April 16, 2009, 05:24 PM | #

India is a large country with people of different racial heritage and not all indians share the same heritage/ancestory/race as is evident from the variance in there apperance so to say indians are caucasions as if the whole of india is caucasion is nonsense and i dont know what indians you are talking about but the majority look indian to me the only indians who look anything but indian to me are the muslim kashmiris from whoose appearance it is evident they are of a different racial stock who by the way as far as Im concerned from the ones i have seen are also simply heavenly beautifull, deadly beauty.

Posted by DoesnotMatter on May 30, 2009, 07:58 AM | #

Offspring are supposed to be genetically different than their parents. In a recent study Women preffered the smells of men that had the most different immune system than their own which proves that we are programmed to choose a partner most different than ourselves to reproduce because (like alon ziv said) the children are more likely to be healthier. The Heidi klum and Seal example i think was an unfair comparison because usually mixed kids are attractive if they have attractive parents from different races. If they have ugly parents from different races than ofcoarse that will belittle the likelyness of an attractive offspring. But Seal is not attractive and Heidi Klum’s daughter(who is full whitte) is not very attractive either. The point being is that two “attractive parents” from different races have a higher chance of producing a healthier prettier offspring than two “attractive parents” from the same race(ofcoarse there are always exceptions). Usually good looking pure raced kids are produced randomely from sometimes ugly parents and attractive people make ugly kids...Why? Maybe Alon does have a point and larger genepools do have a large effect. Here’s some examples. Look it up. The beautiful Demi Moore and Handsome Bruce Willis make a hideous Rumer Willis. Gross. But Why? They are both attractive. And what about Goldie Hawn daughter. Yes Kate Hudson. She’s nice but Ugly(not extremely). What about John travolta and his model wife? He was also unlucky. I could go on and on throughout the list of beautiful celebs making ugly babies but im sure you get the point.

Posted by Guessedworker on May 30, 2009, 08:13 AM | #

DoesnotMatter,

The smell test was replicated in a TV programme by Prof Winstin, as I recall. The point was that we are evolved to choose a mate with as different an immune package from ourselves so as to better combat the dangers from disease inherent in our particular environment of evolutionary adaptiveness. It would be no use for Scandinavians to develop immunity to diseases confronting aboriginals in Australia. The smell test revealed something that functions within-tribe only.

Most people seem not to like the smell of genetically distant races, btw.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on May 30, 2009, 11:37 AM | #

DoesNotMatter and EA Steve are examples of the kind of retard you get when you have an anyone-can-comment policy, but the good thinkers you also get more than make up for the assholes, so I agree with GW there’s something to be said for not screening all comments. But someone like EA Steve really pushes the limits on that reasoning, I admit.

Posted by John on July 24, 2009, 02:29 AM | #

Thanks for exposing another white-hating Jewish extremist, posing as a good, science-loving, realist.

Posted by John on July 24, 2009, 02:38 AM | #

I will note, that as far as inbreeding is concerned, the Amish seem to have a lot of unattractive, heavy, odd-looking people.....and I am pretty sure this is due to inbreeding between too small of a gene pool. That is the problem of having a closed community that is too small to breed with non-relatives. However, white nations do not have such a problem, and should keep out non-whites......no immigration of non-white...period. The author, by the way, totally leaves out, from what I can tell from the review of his book, all of the strife (crime, violence, etc.) associated with blacks. Why? Really, why would any sensible white breed with a person on a much lower rung of the cultural ladder?! It is cultural genocide.

Posted by Janice Ma on July 27, 2009, 03:55 PM | #

This is one of the most racist articles I’ve ever seen. I real doubt very much that Heidi Klum is ‘deranged’. How dare you make such slanderous comments about someone you don’t even know? You’re probably judging her husband’s face by the fact that he had a disease which destroyed part of it. Thanks for being so kind! The baby had a couple of bad picture days. I’ve seen recent pictures of him. He looks much cuter now. And by the way, how cute are you?

Hybrid vigor does work. I can testify to that. My family has married out for 6 generations. We are English, German, Jewish, Scots, Native American, Chinese and Dutch (that’s counting in my grandkids). We have relatives who are black, Japanese and Mexican. We’re healthy, smart and with the addition of my husband’s Chinese genes I’ve added beauty to the family (I considered us just slightly above average in looks before that).

My youngest granddaughter is the best. Broad-shouldered, blond haired, pale gold skin: she looks like a viking queen. She is drop dead gorgeous. People stop and stare. Also she’s a straight A student. This is hybrid vigor. And I forgot to mention my daughter, also beautiful (but definitely not a Viking queen-small), a child prodigy, Ph.D. in Bio-Physics and an MD. She’s a practicing Radiologist, possibly the best in the state. Her favorite subject was quantum mechanics, she can write. sing, paint, too many talents, only one her, not enough time. So, finding the politics of scientific research unpleasant, she went into private practice.

You revealed your real motivations in your description of Heidi Klum and her child. That was so distasteful. It revealed your true racist agenda.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 27, 2009, 04:26 PM | #

That’s all very nice about your own mixed marriage and mixed-race offspring, Mrs. Ma (if I understand, you’re a white woman married to a Chinaman) — your family sounds lovely, but if you don’t mind we’d like to keep the white-race-as-a-whole the way it is and not blend it too much with other races (Oriental, Negro, etc.). We don’t want it to go out of existence, which is what it would do if everyone did as you have done. Obviously you have to defend mixed race people because your offspring are that way, and although we don’t mind isolated instances of it, we don’t think doing it on a large-scale (large-scale race-mixing of whites) is ideal. Furthermore, you probably know very well that when we talk about “interracial” we are not talking about blends of English, German, Scots, and Dutch (and I would add Jew there as being OK, though others wouldn’t), so you were being disingenuous in listing those as ways in which your family has “married out” over the generations — you were playing dumb — order to blur the important distinction we are trying to draw. In doing so you only weaken your own argument.

Many of us wouldn’t make a point of paying attention to isolated instances of race-mixing were it not for the fact that aggressive promotion of unlimited race-mixing of white people is now government policy throughout the Eurosphere: I wouldn’t mind swimming in a pool filled with water plus a drop of ink, but I wouldn’t want to swim in one filled with ink plus a drop of water — if you grasp the difference, ma’am.

Posted by Darren on July 27, 2009, 08:12 PM | #

Hybrid vigor does work. I can testify to that.

How do you know that is an example of hybrid vigor though? I can point out many examples of racially pure white families that are incredibly successful, good-looking, and etc. I could just as well say that their success is attributable to racial purity as you claim that yours is based on miscegenation.

I can also say with confidence that the offspring of black-white relationships have actually, on average, lower IQ than the white parent.

On the other hand, the results of East Asian - white relationships would tend to have higher IQ as compared to the white parent due to the higher average IQ of East Asians, but that has nothing to do with hybrid vigor.

It revealed your true racist agenda.

You have revealed your genocidal agenda through your post. What is your response to my charge?

Posted by Janice Ma on July 29, 2009, 04:44 PM | #

Scooby reveals his true racist agenda by referring to my husband as a ‘Chinaman’. This is a term that is traditionally used in a derogatory manner. People who truly have any kind of real argument to put forward do not have to resort to these types of measures. So pathetic. I wonder how your ‘white’ family would stack up to my ‘this that and the other’ family. I didn’t get to the rest of them yet. I have Japanese, Mexican and black relatives also. We have doctors, scientists and my late father-in-law was an industrialist and senator in Taiwan (and no, he was not one of those one sees on tv having fights). The truth is though there is no argument to justify liking inbreeding. It sooner or later leads to recessive genes displaying themselves.

Another thing--I read one website where another idiot had seen one family where one mixed kid was not beautiful. Give me a break! I have seen hundreds of mixed kids, kids that are one half, kids that are one forth, like my granddaughters. It does continue to have effects. I know it because, being only a bit over average looking, there is no way I would have such beautiful kids and grandkids otherwise. I’m amazed every time I look at them.

The mixed phenomena, from my own perspective, appears to be happening mainly among two groups, the poor and the very educated. Most of those whom I have known have been of the latter group. Most have been Asian/white mixes. Most of the black/white and Mexican/white and Mexican/black have been from the former group. I’ve watched the children of both groups. Environment makes such a difference. The ones from the poor group tend to be good, smart students, etc. till about the age of 12 and then the bad environment usually gets them.

Our society abandons its children and then blames them when they get in trouble. What are we doing to ourselves, to our mixed and our unmixed?

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on July 29, 2009, 05:21 PM | #

Scooby reveals his true racist agenda by referring to my husband as a ‘Chinaman’. This is a term that is traditionally used in a derogatory manner. People who truly have any kind of real argument to put forward do not have to resort to these types of measures. So pathetic. I wonder how your ‘white’ family would stack up to my ‘this that and the other’ family. I didn’t get to the rest of them yet. I have Japanese, Mexican and black relatives also. We have doctors, scientists and my late father-in-law was an industrialist and senator in Taiwan (and no, he was not one of those one sees on tv having fights). The truth is though there is no argument to justify liking inbreeding. It sooner or later leads to recessive genes displaying themselves.

Your husband is a Chinaman and he doesn’t belong in Western countries. Neither do you, you are a source of genetic pollution.

As for the “inbreeding” part: Where is your proof? I always hear people say that Europeans are “inbred”. The incidence of congenital defects ought to be quite high then, yes? Why isn’t it, then? Looks like your hypothesis is as weak as your mind.

Plus, if intellect and creativity are European traits (and they are), I’ll take my “inbreeding” thank you. We don’t need the conformist genes of Asia in our pool, nor do we need the increased incidence of alcoholism that comes with it. Nor do we need the unattractive slant-eyed features. Our current “inbred” condition is fine with me.

From what I’ve seen inter-racial mating usually produces psychotic, mentally-defective offspring. Part of that due to the confusion of the races, and part of it due to the fact that their parents, race-mixers, are already mentally defective.

You coal-burners always defend race mixing because you and your children have an incentive to do so. And almost all of you are sick-minded and want us all to turn into a brown mongrel race. Who’s the real racist? You hate your own whiteness and hate us for loving our identity as whites.

Another thing--I read one website where another idiot had seen one family where one mixed kid was not beautiful. Give me a break! I have seen hundreds of mixed kids, kids that are one half, kids that are one forth, like my granddaughters. It does continue to have effects. I know it because, being only a bit over average looking, there is no way I would have such beautiful kids and grandkids otherwise. I’m amazed every time I look at them.

Bollocks anecdotal nonsense. “I’ve seen the benefits up close.” Well, forgive us if we are reluctant to join your mongrel-breeding experiment.

The mixed phenomena, from my own perspective, appears to be happening mainly among two groups, the poor and the very educated. Most of those whom I have known have been of the latter group. Most have been Asian/white mixes. Most of the black/white and Mexican/white and Mexican/black have been from the former group. I’ve watched the children of both groups. Environment makes such a difference. The ones from the poor group tend to be good, smart students, etc. till about the age of 12 and then the bad environment usually gets them.

Marxism. “The environment determines ability.” No, human biology does that. Many blacks and mexicans are criminal scum and their poor genetic material passes to their mongrel offspring. Conversely, many Asians are conscientious and hard-working and their mongrel offspring inherit these traits. But even a basic knowledge of heredity escapes you because you are a weak-minded female who prefers to believe Jewish fairy tales than learn science. You are a useful idiot for them, nothing more.

Our society abandons its children and then blames them when they get in trouble. What are we doing to ourselves, to our mixed and our unmixed?

Please, the dissolution of the nuclear family was premeditated by Judeo-Marxists and willingly implemented by little lemmings like you.

Fuck off. The time will come when your kind aren’t welcome anymore.

Posted by Janice Ma on July 29, 2009, 05:50 PM | #

Are you really listening to yourself? Why so many derogatory statements? Why do you hate others so much? Why the bad language? And your last sentence. Have you considered the implications of that last sentence? What kind of world would we have if that last sentence were to come true? Noone would be safe, not me, not you, not my children, not yours. People often think that if rules were different, if governments were different, it would favor them. White racists, for example, think if they were in charge things would be great for them (although actually things have already been that way for centuries in most of the world so why do white people complain so much? Color me puzzled.). But what if the guy if charge didn’t like YOU in particular? Or what if your child became ill and a white racist government (like the Nazis) had already killed the black doctor who would have discovered the cure? This kind of racism is never the answer to anything.

What was that about coal burning?

Posted by Desmond Jones on July 29, 2009, 07:14 PM | #

White racist governance...well the Congo is so much better off since the Belgians left.

http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/thegreatestsilence/index.html

How many black doctors did the Nazis kill? How many cures were discovered by black doctors?

The Nazis, the most effective cure for the common cold.

Michael Jackson, killed by a black doctor seeking a cure for insomnia.

Posted by Q on July 29, 2009, 07:54 PM | #

“Or what if your child became ill and a white racist government (like the Nazis) had already killed the black doctor who would have discovered the cure?”

Do you by chance recall the Bakke case? Yes you say? Well here is what happened to the Black affirmative action incompetent that displaced Bakke:

And prominent among the members will be the great Patrick Chavis, who displaced Allen Bakke. Here’s a Jeff Jacoby column from about a decade back, posted on one of Covington’s lists. The title, I assume, is HAC’s:

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION POSTER BOY SCREWS UP

On April 30, 1996, Senator Edward Kennedy vigorously defended racial preferences in a statement to the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee. “Affirmative action has paid enormous dividends in the medical context,” he declared, suggesting that the beneficiaries of race-conscious university admissions are “likely in later life to ... benefit their professions and the communities in which they live.”

He offered proof. “Dr. Bernard Chavis is a perfect example,” Kennedy said. “He is the supposedly less qualified African-American student who allegedly ‘displaced’ Allen Bakke at the University of California-Davis, and triggered the landmark case. Today, Dr. Chavis is a successful ob-gyn in central Los Angeles, serving a disadvantaged community and making a difference in the lives of scores of poor families.” (In fact, Chavis’s first name is Patrick, and he lived not in central LA, but in Compton, a close suburb.)

Kennedy is not the only one to make Chavis a poster boy for affirmative action. Anti-Proposition 209 activists in California, like student-radical-turned-politician Tom Hayden, and Connie Rice, counsel to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, frequently cited Chavis during last year’s volatile campaign.

Writing in _The Nation_, Hayden and Rice noted that while Allen Bakke was now an anesthesiologist in Minnesota, Chavis was “providing primary care to poor women” in a mostly black community.

“Bakke’s scores were higher,” they admitted, “but who made the most of his medical school education? From whom did California taxpayers benefit more?” It’s a question they now probably wish they hadn’t asked. Eight weeks ago, warning of Chavis’s “inability to perform some of the most basic duties required of a physician,” the Medical Board of California suspended his license.

Administrative law Judge Samuel Reyes found Chavis guilty of gross negligence and incompetence in the treatment of three patients—one of whom died at his hands. “Letting him continue to engage in the practice of medicine” the judge ruled, “will endanger the public health, safety, and welfare.”

The legal language of the judge’s interim order barely conveys the horror of what Chavis inflicted last year on Yolanda Mukhalian, Valerie Lawrence, and Tammaria Cotton. On May 11, 1996, just days after Kennedy sang his praises, Chavis performed a simple liposuction on Mukhalian. (Though specializing in obstetrics, Chavis’s practice increasingly focused on liposuction. His training in the procedure was a four-day course at the Liposuction Institute of Beverly Hills—only half of which he completed.) Mukhalian’s surgery left her vomiting, sweating, and urinating helplessly as, in the court’s words, “blood gushed down her pants leg.”

But rather than get her to a hospital, Chavis took her to his home. She lay there bleeding for 40 hours, yet Chavis provided virtually no supervision or medical care. She returned to his office on May 14, still bleeding and in pain. Chavis prescribed heat packs and a massage.

Two days later, she was worse—still bleeding, in extreme pain, and growing delirious. He didn’t return her calls. Nor did he examine her when she returned once more on May 17. By June 8, Mukhalian was in St. Francis Hospital with a severe abdominal infection. She was badly scarred, and had lost 70 percent of her blood. By some miracle, she survived.

A similar miracle must have saved Valerie Lawrence, whose story is almost identical to Mukhalian’s: a botched liposuction, massive bleeding, shocking postoperative neglect. But Tammaria Cotton wasn’t as lucky. When Chavis performed her liposuction on June 22, her blood pressure plummeted and she complained of difficulty breathing. “If you can talk, you can breathe,” Chavis reportedly told her.

As her frightened husband watched, “reddish fluid” leaked from her body for hours, pooling on the floor. Instead of administering emergency treatment, however, Chavis vanished. By early evening, Cotton was in cardiac arrest. She died en route to the hospital.

This is Kennedy’s “perfect example” of an affirmative action success. By himself, Chavis isn’t an argument against racial preferences. Single examples do not constitute data. He is, however, a reminder of something Kennedy and the others can’t seem to grasp: Minority communities and poor families don’t need black doctors. They need GOOD doctors. And when universities admit medical students on grounds other than academic ability, they will turn out fewer doctors who are good.

In its 1978 Bakke decision, the Supreme Court approved the system that put Patrick Chavis in medical school: lower academic standards for most black students in exchange for racial “diversity.” The result is that black students for 20 years have been failing the national medical boards—the leading measure of medical school achievement—far more often than their peers. A study in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that while 88 percent of white students pass the exam, only 49 percent of black students do. The disparity is caused almost entirely by lower admissions standards. Minority students admitted without regard to race rarely fail their boards. The cost of medical affirmative action isn’t theoretical. It is paid in human suffering—sometimes in human lives. Maybe Kennedy and Hayden don’t understand how. Tammaria Cotton’s widower does.

(Jeff Jacoby is a Globe columnist.)

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/weblog/comments/web_site_started_exclusively_for_black_doctors_dont_expect_an_uproar/

Unacceptable, unforgivable .... at least it is for normal people.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 29, 2009, 07:57 PM | #

”Scooby reveals his true racist agenda by referring to my husband as a ‘Chinaman’. This is a term that is traditionally used in a derogatory manner. People who truly have any kind of real argument to put forward do not have to resort to these types of measures. So pathetic.” (—Janice Ma)]

No, Chinaman is perfectly polite (as is Negro by the way). Is there anything impolite about Yorkshireman, New Hampshireman, or Ulsterman? No, so what’s wrong with Chinaman? And I’m not going to “admit” that the perfectly polite word “Chinaman” is some sort of “hold-over from a white racist past” or whatever the song and dance is today thanks to people like Tim Wise and Noel Ignatiev whom I have zero respect for. I’m not buying what you’re peddling, sorry. If “Chinaman” was at times part of some unfair derogatory usage (which it wasn’t any more than anything else was: no one is exempt from being called racial or ethnic names) that’s no reason to 1) ban the word, or 2) impugn its use by others in other perfectly polite contexts. Italian, Puerto Rican, Jap, Jew, German, Yankee, communist, Hindu, and plenty of other perfectly polite racial or ethnic words have been used by some in some derogatory way. I don’t see Jews running around changing what they’ve been called for three thousand years though. The English language is my language. Butcher your own version of it, not mine please. By adopting these ridiculous PC name changes one is implicitly adopting a whole panoply of political baggage along with them, baggage which, in this case, I heartily reject in toto.

The fundamental point is: while we feel miscegenation on a small scale is none of our business, on a large scale it becomes very much our business because then our race’s identity is threatened.

Posted by Lurker on July 30, 2009, 01:56 AM | #

a white racist government (like the Nazis) had already killed the black doctor who would have discovered the cure?

Oh Janice please, listen to yourself. Its painful.

If anything one could make the case that large scale racial mixing is killing off the white doctors of the future, the ones who really would have discovered cures for things. The ones who will never be born because they are now half-black or half-Chinese.

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on July 30, 2009, 07:01 PM | #

Are you really listening to yourself?

Quite.

Why so many derogatory statements?

Race mixers are worthy of derision.

Why do you hate others so much?

Ha ha.

Why the bad language?

Past your bedtime is it?

And your last sentence. Have you considered the implications of that last sentence? What kind of world would we have if that last sentence were to come true? Noone would be safe, not me, not you, not my children, not yours.

Wrong. I don’t have mongrel children nor do I sleep with non-whites. The world would be safe for
Aryans. Not for mongrels, nor for race-mixers. I don’t know how much clearer I can make it.

People often think that if rules were different, if governments were different, it would favor them.

Tard. If we founded a government it would favor us. Like the NS in Germany did. Are you that fucking simple?

White racists, for example, think if they were in charge things would be great for them (although actually things have already been that way for centuries in most of the world so why do white people complain so much? Color me puzzled.).

And here’s the Marxism, folks. This cunt knows nothing of history and presumes to lecture us about “the evil history of white folks.”

Come back when you grow a brain, cunt.

But what if the guy if charge didn’t like YOU in particular? Or what if your child became ill and a white racist government (like the Nazis) had already killed the black doctor who would have discovered the cure?

Don’t make me laugh. A black inventor?

This kind of racism is never the answer to anything.

You are a disgrace.

What was that about coal burning?

Well, I didn’t want to say it: Your genitals have borne non-whites and you are polluted for life. So coal-
burning works well enough as a descriptor.

Posted by Janice Ma on July 30, 2009, 08:24 PM | #

Hi fellas, I’m back for one last attempt at this. Listen, you think you hate me and all the mixed people out there. What’s really causing your hatred is people having more than you. And on that subject, well, there’s going to be fewer and fewer of us having more than you because more and more of us are going down and do you know why? It’s because a group of guys who are almost entirely white are screwing the rest of us. These are a small shadowy elite group of corporate owners who brought us out-sourcing, who brought us illegal aliens, who Bill Gates got green cards for so they could take away some of the still good paying educated jobs that were left. They took away all the jobs, caused more unemployment, more homes to be lost..... God only knows where it will end. I’ve read predictions that it will end in riots and a military dictatorship. Look into your hearts and ask yourself--isn’t the real source of your hatred the fact that you’re not making the kind of money that you think you should be making? And you’re right! This economy is f***ed up! It’s screwing around with people’s lives and their heads. Just think about that, okay?

Posted by torgrim on July 30, 2009, 09:24 PM | #

‘’isn’t the real source of your hatred the fact that your not making the kind of money you think you should be making?”, Janice Ma-

NO, and ‘hatred’, is your conception, not mine. If this was only about money, I would not respond to your post. This is about replacing a people on a massive scale. Have you ever seen the projection of population for the year 2035 for the US? It was a rounded curve, now thanks to the 1965 Immigration Act brought to us by a sinister plotting elite and their lackys, the ‘Curve’ is now at a 40 degree angle and projecting a Turd World future for N.America.

Genetics produces culture.

Just take a look at the hatred displayed here…
http://www.sullivan-county.com/wcva/Paulder.htm

Posted by Guessedworker on July 30, 2009, 09:33 PM | #

Mark,

We have a commenting rule that requires those on our side to equit themselves with civility. Don’t lose your cool in this way again, please. This is not the board for that kind if indiscipline.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on July 31, 2009, 03:19 AM | #

A propos of Janice Ma’s comment to the effect that “Scooby reveals his true racist agenda by referring to my husband as a ‘Chinaman’ “: the following went up tonight by chance, over at the Vdare.com Blog:

These days the nicest sort of woman said words formerly reserved for male company. They even said them in magazines and newspapers, and on television.

On the other hand, there were words you couldn’t say anymore, like Oriental and girl. I could sort of understand why women didn’t want to be called girls, although I didn’t see why they wanted to make such a fuss about it. (And they seemed to be making less of a fuss now than they had ten years ago.) But how did Oriental get to be a bad word?

“It’s a matter of political correctness,” Minna explained. “I thought about doing a thesis on it, but I was afraid it wouldn’t be politically correct itself. It’s fascistic, a sort of fascism of the academic left, and it’s all based on the idea that we need euphemisms to hide the fact that we know we’re superior.”

“Superior to whom?”

“To the people we use euphemisms for,” she said. “Look how we keep changing what we call black people. First the polite thing to call them was colored people. Then it was Negro. Then that was an insult, and you had to call them Black.”

“Right.”

“And then that was wrong, or at least it wasn’t right enough, and the proper term was people of color.”

“What’s the difference between that and colored people?”

“I don’t know, Evan. I think people of color means anybody who isn’t white.”

“There’s a word for that,” I said, “assuming you absolutely require one.”

“Non-white.”

“That’s the one.”

“But then you’re defining people by what they’re not, and that’s supposed to be demeaning. Anyway, the current name for black people is African-American.”

“Not Afro-American?”

“No.”

“Because that had its turn a while back, although it never did catch on in a big way. African-American? That’s seven syllables.”

“I know.”

“Black is only one syllable. I have a hunch I know which one I’ll be using.”

“African-American might last,” she said. “Because it’s so cumbersome most people won’t use it. As long as most people don’t use it, it can remain politically correct.”

“How’s that?”

“The whole point,” she said, “is to show that you’re not like other European-Americans, and that you don’t —”

“European-Americans? White folks?”

“Right, people of non-color. You’re not like them, and you don’t call black people by the same insulting term they do.”

“Insulting because they use it.”

“Exactly. Once all the rednecks start calling blacks AfricanAmericans, the P.C. people will have to come up with something else. But that may not happen for a while, because African-American is such an awkward phrase to say.”

“Especially for a redneck,” I said. “Speaking of which, how do they feel about being called rednecks?”

“I don’t think they give a f —,” Minna said, “but I don’t think it’s because they’re more enlightened than everybody else. I don’t think they’re paying attention.”

“Well, good for them,” I said.

[ http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2009/07/30/quote-of-the-day“well-good-for-them”/ ]

Posted by Janice Ma on August 01, 2009, 05:59 AM | #

Guys, just a quick note to thank you for your help. You’ve been fantastic! You’ve completely convinced my editor that I am more than capable of writing from the viewpoint of a nutty left-wing white female. She thought I couldn’t do it. I told her I could write from any viewpoint. Typical, isn’t it? Anyway, thank you! Your over the top responses totally convinced her.

Posted by Harsh_Henry14W on August 01, 2009, 10:28 AM | #

I take it you are a nutty left wing white male instead?!?!?!

Posted by White Preservationist on August 01, 2009, 03:31 PM | #

Janice Ma on July 30, 2009: Look into your hearts and ask yourself--isn’t the real source of your hatred the fact that you’re not making the kind of money that you think you should be making? And you’re right! This economy is f***ed up! It’s screwing around with people’s lives and their heads. Just think about that, okay?

You make a few good points in your post.

That’s why many of us here on this website are fervently opposed to Jewish-led/Jewish-imposed hypermaterialism and the ’Worship of Mammon.’ A great book on this topic is entitled Thinkers of the Right: Challenging Materialism by Kerry Bolton. Read it sometime Janice, you might learn a few things. You can read an excerpt from that book at the following link - http://www.toqonline.com/2009/06/nietzsche-and-spengler/

Here’s a pertinent selection from that above-mentioned link:

Many of the new generation of writers were thus drawn to Spengler’s analysis of the way the rule of money, of money values and of the money baron’s control of politics, had become determinative of the tastes of a civilization in its final cycle. They were concerned with overthrowing the rule of money and returning civilization to its “springtime” where the arts flourished under the patronage of born nobles. Yeats and Evola look to certain epochs of the Medieval period of the West. Ezra Pound sought the overthrow of the banks through the economic theory of Social Credit; Hamsun and Williamson wished for a return to rural values in place of those of the City; many were attracted to Fascism.

Spengler states that in the final phase of the winter cycle there arises a reaction against the rule of money. Money marches on reaching its peak then exhausts its possibilities:

“It thrust into the life of the yeoman’s countryside and set the earth moving; its thought transformed every son of handicraft: today it presses victoriously upon industry, to make the productive work of entrepreneur and engineer and labourer alike, its spoil. The machine with its human retinue. The real queen of this century is in danger of succumbing to a stronger power. Money, also. Is beginning to lose its authority, and the last conflict is at hand in which civilization receives its conclusive form–the conflict between money and blood.”

The rule of money will be overcome by new “Caesars,” strong leaders not harnessed to the plutocrats and their parliaments and media. In Spengler’s last book, The Hour of Decision, he sees the Fascist legions in Italy as heralds of the “new Caesarism.” Mussolini was much impressed with both Nietzsche and Spengler.

Spengler resumes:

“The sword is victorious over money, the master-will subdues again the plunderer-will . . . Money is overthrown and abolished by blood. Life is alpha and omega, the cosmic stream in microcosmic form . . . And so the drama of a high culture–that wondrous world of deities, arts, thoughts, battles, cities–closes with the return of the pristine facts of blood eternal that is one and the same as the ever-circling cosmic flow.”

- Preface to K. R. Bolton, Thinkers of the Right: Challenging Materialism (Luton, England: Luton Publications, 2003).

Posted by Captainchaos on August 01, 2009, 04:17 PM | #

Your over the top responses totally convinced her.

Janice, you came here and communicated with us in a tone of scolding, scoffing sarcasm, and then acted as if mystified, and as if confirmed in your suspicions, as if some root of darkness had been tapped by you in us; as if bitterness, as if vulgarity, as if anger (even if it be righteous) had exposed a truth - one that trumps the scientific/technical arguments contra the adaptiveness of miscegenation given here (which I doubt, if quizzed regarding, you would display full comprehension of) - of the singular evil that only those of European descent possess. In short, you are an intellectually mediocre, emotionally immature provocateur. Get this, because it is all import, we seek not no deny others their humanity, yet if you deny us our peoplehood, an indispensable part of who we are, you deny us our own. We want to preserve our people as they are, because they are good, and loved by us, and we believe they ought live. Justice is with us, and not you, and let the devil take the hindmost.

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on August 01, 2009, 04:51 PM | #

We want a system that supports our people’s interests, openly and explicitly. We want a respite from our hard-earned monies being used to subsidize all manner of goodies for groups of people that haven’t earned anything. We want a respite from the racist violence by blacks and other groups. We want a respite from the crime and filth that Third World populations bring. We want a world where we can go to a city park and not get robbed, raped, murdered. We want the people who push miscegenation and debt slavery and war on our people brought to justice so they can never do so again. We want a land of our own, apart from “integration” at gun point, something we never asked for nor consented to. We want to secure the existence of our people, and a future for white children.

What’s so evil about that, Mrs. Ma?

Who made you the ultimate arbiter of truth and good?

What gives you any stance to lecture and/or preach to us?

When the things I said come to pass, you and your kind will have nothing to fear from us. Until then, you will.

Posted by Captainchaos on August 01, 2009, 05:04 PM | #

Further, Janice, since it is patently obvious that you believe, that some great evil, some hideous power of malevolence, is with us, and that we seek to wield it, against your loved ones, and against others like you, and them and theirs - a great wickedness which borders on the metaphysical, let me give a lesson in metaphysics. You see, there is what is called senescence. Yes? Okay, now what is that? Senescence is a process induced by evolution into an organism’s genetic make up so that it may live to its healthiest until its reproductive age and die slowly and gradually thereafter. It is the progressive changing of that which we love, eventually resulting in the heart rending loss of it. It is the slow descent into nothingness, it is the physical manifestation of dying; it is death. As our people are changed from what they are - that which we love more than our own lives, for which we gladly would give our lives to gain their salvation - our beloved(s) slip away from us, they will no longer be themselves. Sadly, it is true, that for you, and I, and all of us, this love will end, but the bonds of love, the affirmation of our being, of our people, need not for those of our people who come after. So that this love will never end - that is why we fight. We are good men, your father was a White man. Do you understand now? If you are but blind, you simply must.

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on August 01, 2009, 05:08 PM | #

Only Whitey is evil, right?

Aztecs, when the Spanish found them, cut people’s hearts out while they were still beating. They were so despised by the people that surrounded them that the Spanish found it easy to destroy their empire by allying with their foes.

Bantus today routinely torture and murder their enemies as a sign of machismo. It is not uncommon to read accounts from “the New South Africa” about victims being, i.e., cut and slashed to pieces with knives and broken bottles. Or being put through meat grinders while still alive. Their animistic religion involves beheading or slicing off genitals as “talismans.”

Chinese routinely conquer any ethnicity who stands in the way of their imperialism and then begins the process of race-replacing them: See Uighurs, Tibetans, etc.

Indian Hindus consider Muslims subhuman and butcher them regularly. Muslims consider Hindus “infidels” and do the same in kind.

Muslim countries exact horrific punishments on lowly citizens while their Sheikhs and Supreme Leaders live in decadence and luxury.

American Jewry preaches cosmopolitanism and racial diversity while supporting apartheid and racial discrimination for Israel, a jaw-dropping example of hypocrisy not to mention wild-eyed genocidal mania.

I think you get the idea now.

What next? I’m sure it was “white racism” that made all the above things happen too, right Ma?

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on August 01, 2009, 05:17 PM | #

If there is a “malevolence inherent to white men”, then it is the sort of malevolence which arises as a result of having one’s land and people dispossessed before one’s very eyes.

But mention dispossession to any one of these “compassionate liberals” like the egregious Janice Ma and you’ll receive no sympathy. After all, those devil whites deserve it, right? And watch all that compassion blow away like the hot air it is.

Your righteous anger is hollow, Janice. Give it up.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 01, 2009, 05:27 PM | #

Janice, ask your husband how the Chinese people in China or Taiwan would react if what’s being done to us demographically were done to them.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 01, 2009, 05:31 PM | #

And mind you, it’s being done to us, not by us: public opinion was never honestly consulted or listened to and still isn’t, and the public doesn’t want it.

Posted by White Preservationist on August 01, 2009, 05:31 PM | #

In case y’all missed them, a few recent posts on TOQOnline which deal with the obvious pitfalls of race-mixing:

- http://www.toqonline.com/2009/06/race-mixing/

- http://www.toqonline.com/2009/06/more-on-race-mixing/

- http://www.toqonline.com/2009/06/miscegenation-the-morality-of-death/

- http://www.toqonline.com/2009/05/from-dusk-to-dawn/

- http://www.toqonline.com/2009/07/the-banality-of-genetic-destruction/

- http://www.toqonline.com/2009/06/lilly-white-daughter-deep-black-boyfriend/

---

From some comments I made there under the name WHITE SURVIVAL:

Many people don’t realize that race-mixing causes a host of problems (physiological as well as sociological/psychological) among the offspring of such matings.

For instance, it was recently revealed that Asian women who are impregnated by Caucasian men often have to have a C-section in order to safely give birth to that racially-mixed child because the larger Caucasoid head does not comfortably fit through the smaller Asian birth-canal. See: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/article713674.ece - “The researchers speculate this is because Asian women tend to be “smaller people” than Caucasians, and that their smaller pelvises cannot accommodate a more sizable baby, in some cases.”

Another quote from that article: “Few studies have focused specifically on Asian-Caucasian couples. Most research has focused on interracial Caucasian and black couples, and those studies found that couples with a white father and black mother had notably high rates of stillbirths, pre-term births and low-birth-weight babies, Dr. Caughey said.”

Also see: “Mixed-race patients struggle to find marrow donors”

I fully agree that White race-mixers are in many respects defective. However, I say let the Whites who seek to mix with other races go ahead and do so during this time of extreme ethno-racial turmoil and chaos until we can gain full racial control of our White countries again…this is because the White race-mixers (who are generally weak, non-ethnocentric, and often psychologically and/or physically defective as you write) will be ‘weeded out’ of the core White gene-pool by mixing with other races — thus the overall White gene-pool is being made better, stronger, and more ethnocentric as a result of those weak/stupid/ugly race-mixing Whites breeding out.

Posted by torgrim on August 01, 2009, 07:48 PM | #

Ms. Ma said; “Your over the top responses totally convinced her.”

Real nice, come to this Board and misrepresent yourself and, “jab” a knife in a wound, and then make light of your words. Unbelievable!

Thank you “White Preservationist”, I really must read Spengler. It made my day! .....Spengler,

“It thrusts into life of the yeoman’s countryside and set the earth moving; it’s thought transformed every son of handicraft: today it presses victoriously upon industry, to make the productive work of entrepreneur and engineer and labourer alike, it’s spoil. The machine with it’s human retinue. The real queen of this century is in danger of succumbing to a stronger power. Money, also. Is beginning to lose it’s authority, and the last conflict is at hand in which civilization receives it’s conclusive form-the conflict between blood and money.

Excellent! How true.

Posted by torgrim on August 01, 2009, 07:57 PM | #

Just as an aside, in reference to the above post by White Preservationist, the mention of the values of the urban vs the rural here is a link about Hamsun;

http://www.hamsun.dk/uk/hamsun_gallery.html

Posted by RebelliousVanilla on August 01, 2009, 11:48 PM | #

This was amusing. It started really good and ended in garbage. First of all, white people having children with other white people isn’t really inbreeding in the genetic way. If a population and for the sake of the argument, Northern Europeans, is inbreeding they’d experience:
1)Reduced fertility both in litter size and sperm viability
2)Increased genetic disorders
3)Fluctuating facial asymmetry
4)Lower birth rate
5)Higher infant mortality
6)Slower growth rate
7)Smaller adult size
8)Loss of immune system function
And it’s really not the case. Neither of these apply. And even if people would inbreed, the aberrant results will be cleaned in time, but it’s obviously not the case. Actually the deCODE study showed that the best results come from kids of parents who are 3rd degree cousins. You might call whites having kids with other whites line breeding, not inbreeding.

And outbreeding is called outcrossing. And by the way, medical evidence supports what I will say. Outcrossing can actually lead to an increase of individuals carrying a disease. This combined with outbreeding depression leads to interracial children experiencing more health problems and the medical statistics back this up. For example, that tiredness that was analyzed is congruent with research related to outbreeding depression - outbreeding undermining vitality by reducing positive things and increasing negative ones due to each race’s genes not crossing well.

Anyway, the white population is big enough to have children that show no effects of inbreeding and so far science actually points the other way than the book that is reviewed does.

I doubt our current understanding of genetics is deep enough to substantiate the claim of Alon Ziv and his book and it’s a pity that his book masquerades as science. It’s just as much science as those supplement commercials who have been shown to be great by 50 000 different scientific studies. What’s even worse is that a lot of studies show the other way. I guess it’s the same as global warming. Let’s tout up people who praise interracial breeding and let’s bash those who are against it.

And I’m far from being racist. Affirmative action is racist AND sexist, for example, since it discriminates based on race. And I’m not prejudiced either - blacks have inferior intelligence, for example. But unlike most people here, I don’t think it’s genetic. MRI scans of brains show no difference and my point of view is that the IQ gap is cultural. For example, I know a lot of black people who come from families who are pretty much white culturally and they’re smart. And I’m not a Marxist, I don’t believe that people can’t break this cycle through hard work and dedication and I don’t find it moral to bail other people out for their wrong decisions with my tax money.

About Asian people… The difference is cultural too, in my opinion. White culture is starting to get destroyed from within - and this is something that is more important to preserve than ethnicity - while Asians culturally appreciate hard work. This is why, even though I dated interracially, I doubt I will have children interracially. The cultural barrier is fairly important. And I’m disgusted by this “interraciality” worship and not because I mind people dating others of different races - especially since I did it too - but it’s a problem because people should be pushed to have children with people who are compatible with them - similar intelligence, socio-economic status and culture - not based on race.

But what do I know… I’m just a White woman who looks better than the mixed woman who posted pics. Unlike her though, I have the self-esteem to not need to post pictures of myself here.

Posted by Lurker on August 02, 2009, 05:11 AM | #

Warning! Argument from anecdote coming up…

Someone I know of is half white/half asian. Has experienced problems sleeping properly for many years. Has poor circulation (hands literally turn blue in a bad winter). Always has somewhat bad breath.

I don’t know the cause(s) of these problems, might be nothing to do with out-breeding depression but at least they dont have to worry about inbreeding eh Janice!

Posted by Al Ross on August 02, 2009, 05:49 AM | #

Despite the fact that Janice Ma is an American citizen, she should not, of course, be resident in the US. Asian cultures, which she doubtless venerates, are firm on the principle that a wife should follow her husband, e.g. both Malaysia’s and Singapore’s immigration laws allows male citizens to import foreign wives who will be given permanent residence but do not allow female citizens to import foreign spouses and this status quo is ensured by denying the foreign male partner right of residence.
If, as I suspect, Mrs Ma’s husband is an ‘American’ Chinese then that sorry fact is a testimony to the suicidally insane immigration policy of the ‘Untied’ States.

Posted by Frank on August 02, 2009, 07:50 AM | #

Northeast Asians are a great suprarace, but when they mix with whites the results are aweful. The children have these misshapen heads and strange skin colour… It’s as if pieces from two different jigsaw puzzles were pounded together.

When inbreeding occurs within a race, the recessive genetic mutations can be brought to the surface and so removed allowing for a renewal of genetic strength. Outbreeding with other races just builds up this trash in addition to combining incompatible genes.

The Spengler quote is the same as Machiavelli’s concept of Lions and Foxes. Spengler’s right - imho.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 02, 2009, 01:32 PM | #

”MRI scans of brains show no difference” (—Rebellious Vanilla)

That doesn’t sound true. I believe MR-based brain volume determinations have confirmed the interracial volume differences known for a hundred and fifty years from pouring birdshot into skulls.

I liked Rebellious Vanilla’s comment very much up to where she denied that racial differences in intelligence were inborn and whites should choose mates within the race. But I once thought as she does and I’ve come to see the truth, so maybe she will. In fact, for the first couple of years I posted at this site I endorsed Steve Sailer’s view that you should marry the one you love (regardless of race), so on that I’ve changed only recently, as a result of realizing the magnitude of the demographic threat and the determination of the other side not to back down til Eurowhites are eliminated through encouraged-and-coerced blending with something else.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 02, 2009, 01:36 PM | #

“I doubt our current understanding of genetics is deep enough to substantiate the claim of Alon Ziv and his book and it’s a pity that his book masquerades as science.” (—Rebellious Vanilla)

His book is a tribal attack by a Jew on a rival tribe, the Eurochristians. It certainly isn’t science. The Jews have to attack in sneaky ways because they’ve always been physically and numerically too weak to attack in more open ways. This is what Ziv is doing: attacking a tribe that rivals his.

Posted by Frank on August 02, 2009, 01:51 PM | #

In fact, for the first couple of years I posted at this site I endorsed Steve Sailer’s view that you should marry the one you love (regardless of race), so on that I’ve changed only recently, as a result of realizing the magnitude of the demographic threat and the determination of the other side not to back down til Eurowhites are eliminated through encouraged-and-coerced blending with something else.

Arranged marriage is good for preserving order, and you can learn to love whomever is matched with you. I’ve seen it argued that the more introverted (who are often more intelligent at least in a sense) have more difficulty attracting mates, though I dunno if that’s good eugenically or not.

Those who do marry outside their race or otherwise endanger society with their mate selection could just get themselves fixed. The problem seems to be too few are strong enough to make such responsible choices. No one cares about the future - they don’t even want to think of it.

Posted by RebelliousVanilla on August 02, 2009, 05:05 PM | #

Fred Scrooby, everyone should choose their mate based on who they love. If you take similar intelligence people, but of different races, the result will be worse than similar intelligence people within the same race? Supposing intelligence is codified genetically, there are completely other genes than race. And I don’t view lightly smart people who marry dumb people or who are culturally opposites, but I wouldn’t force my way on people either. I didn’t say that whites should all start marry interracially like Alon Ziv, I said that to me preserving the culture is more important.

For example, I highly doubt that I will have children outside my race and not because I mind other races, but because I am fond of my cultural values and I wouldn’t put up with someone insecure about their race. It’s a lot easier to do it inside the race so I don’t see why I’d do it outside. But again, I’m not the kind of person that will have 5 kids and live on welfare. Well, maybe I will have 5 kids, but I’m sure I won’t live on welfare.

The problem is this race worship that promotes people to mingle. I mean, without it people would do what’s naturally for them.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 02, 2009, 06:59 PM | #

What I said didn’t mean I think you should marry the one you don’t love just to save the race. Definitely NOT. It means you should, and you can, find the one you love among your own race, the white race.

If you haven’t found her yet keep looking rather than starting to consider non-white girls. She’s out there patiently waiting. For you. Don’t give up looking till you find her because she’s the only one you were meant to marry. If necessary — if Jewish college professors have already turned all the girls you know into something resembling Maureen Dowd (herself a Frankenstein-monster-like creation of the Jews who own and run the Jew York Times) consider traveling to Europe to look, especially eastern Europe or certain places in Mediterranean Europe where girls still haven’t been Jewed out of their Euro-race femininity. There’s a white girl there waiting for you.

In choosing a white American wife don’t mistake circulating androgens for “intelligence” (seeming to talk like a guy, showing some male-type intelligence, being good at types of college courses males excel in, disinterest in “girly” stuff) and don’t mistake circulating estrogens for the opposite of intelligence (feminine/girly behavior/tastes/dress, quietness/inner depth and female-type “spaciness,” intense interest in babies/toddlers, interpersonal relationships, and romance, deferential avoidance of confrontation, poorer ability to compete in the types of college courses males excel in, etc.). Feminine girls who come from plenty smart-enough families and who themselves carry plenty intelligent-enough genes on their chromosomes and will give you plenty-intelligent enough kids if you marry them can be weak in the sort upper-level math and science courses in which you’ll encounter other types of girls who seem quite smart. Often those “smart” girls are no smarter, they’re just androgenic — more mannish. You don’t want that. Don’t dismiss the feminine white girls you’ll find in less demanding courses or who opted not to go to college: they may be smarter than the ones in your complex analysis class or law-school class or medical school class but smarter in feminine ways, not androgenic ways resulting from too much testosterone. Go for the feminine, not the “college-class seeming smartness,” because the seeming smartness may just be hormonal/genetic mannishness. Female smartness isn’t male smartness and men can’t judge female smartness: it shows as different characteristics than men are used to. You have to ask your mother to judge a girl’s smartness: you can’t. Your mother will tell you whether she’s smart or not, judging the right way. Believe your mother because she’s judging the female way, a way you are totally blind to. If you’re still not sure about a girl, meet her brothers and/or parents: if they’re smart she likely carries smartness in her no matter how “girly” she is or what formal education level she has attained, and she likely will give you plenty smart-enough children.

In women feminine is best. Submissive doesn’t mean weak. That’s Jewish college professor talk. There’s a lock and there’s a key. The lock submits to the key. Is it weak for that? These feminine women have greater strength than the lock, greater strength than the mannish women, and greater strength than you. Their strength is deep and quiet. Try a volcano — it’s like that. Mostly dormant but you DON’T want the thing to erupt. Are you as strong as a volcano? Didn’t think so — that’ll give you an idea. They submit when it suits them, when they desire the particular outcome submission brings on a particular occasion, like the flower submitting to the bee: it desires to be pollinated, is on a mission to make the next generation of flowers. Is the flower weak for submitting to the bee? Who’s stronger, the flower with its perfume or the bee with its sting, and who’s “using” whom? And who’s “smarter”? You’re beyond “smartness” here, that’s superficial and you’re in far deeper territory. Don’t worry, that feminine, quiet, submissive wife you chose will suddenly assert herself as inflexibly as the ocean tide (think you can fight against the ocean tide?) the instant your behavior transgresses her instinctive notions of right and wrong. You’ll be as able to go against her then as you would against the tectonic plates. She’ll quietly show both you and that smart girl in your complex analysis class who’s stronger. Quietly, because she has no interest in rubbing it in, only in the outcome. Try going against, say, her notion of what’s best for her baby. You’ll see. What will you see? What these tornado chasers see when they get too close to what they’re chasing. Warning: don’t try this at home.

Submissive doesn’t mean weak, neither does “girly” mean unintelligent. “Girly” means intelligent in a different way. You studied, let’s say, hard math and physics and learned about, let’s say, infinities via definitions, equations, and formulas. That’s trivial to feminine girls, doesn’t impress them. They already live in a sort of infinity, like Emily Dickinson or Emily Brontë. This kind of girl no more needs your equations than someone living in the forest or mountains or at the seashore needs your travel guide to know what the trees, peaks, or ocean look like. He’s there. When you describe it to him reading from your book he looks down in his lap and smiles politely; likewise feminine women when you talk about equations. So don’t mistake the androgenic for the intelligent where feminine women are concerned. Marry the feminine girl, not the one who seemed so smart in topology class.

Posted by Frank on August 02, 2009, 07:04 PM | #

Fred Scrooby, everyone should choose their mate based on who they love.

Why? If you marry young then you’ll marry before you fall in love. And when people marry young not only are offspring produced earlier (fighting the demographic war), but there’s less chance of sex outside of marriage which could result in bastard offspring or abortion (baby killing).

Posted by Janice Ma on August 04, 2009, 03:35 PM | #

Okay, I’m not a loony left winger either. My real name is James Macht. That is not my writing name, of course. A writer has to be able to present a number of viewpoints, sometimes all in the same book, since books do have more than one character. I’ve obviously been very successful at the previous female character’s viewpoint.
I would have been even more successful had I been presenting the white male supremacist viewpoint because I can present it with facts. Real facts. To truly argue any viewpoint one needs real facts. Would you like to know some of these? I’ll give you three.
The first is this--the DNA guys say that the human race had the most genetic diversity right at the start and that we’ve been getting less more and more inbred ever since. Nothing does any real good. Of course, guys like the Iraqis with their 1st and 2nd cousin marriages make it much worse. Second fact, recessive genes, specific example, blood. To have good blood and survive one needs one out of 2 good genes. If one had a sickle cell gene from a black parent and this other blood gene (I forget what it’s called and there may be more than one type) from a Mediterranean parent, the child would eventually die. And then there are the advantageous genes such as those that Eskimos have which prevent them from suffering frostbite as quickly as others. One would assume if they married out that they would lose it.
A good writer can present any viewpoint and can take any facts and twist them to make them into anything he wants even when he’s completely wrong. I’ve given you some facts. It’s up to you to build on them. Happy trails.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 04, 2009, 04:08 PM | #

I vote for deleting all of “Janice Ma’s” comments. This guy gives me the creeps. He’s a moron too.

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on August 04, 2009, 04:50 PM | #

”MRI scans of brains show no difference” (—Rebellious Vanilla)

Fuck your MRI scans.

The whole of history demonstrates that there positively is a difference. End of story.

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on August 04, 2009, 04:52 PM | #

Appealing to authorities to contradict what is demonstrable fact is a logical fallacy, RebelliousVanilla.

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on August 04, 2009, 05:02 PM | #

Saturating one’s Aryan genetic code with Negroid genetics is like a genetic time bomb. Sooner or later, no matter how attractive or intelligent you thought that black you coupled with was, the ugliness and stupidity will return in your genetic line as a result of this bastardization. After all, the Negroid genes will eventually regress towards the mean - their mean (see: Haiti, Africa).

So, miscegenation impoverishes future generations in an unpredictable, scattershot fashion.

Anyway, most of the defenders of Alon Ziv’s filth here are probably folks with hormone problems looking for any possible excuse to “justify” their insatiable appetite for sexual encounters with non-racial kin. But maybe that’s just me turning the tables on the Freudians.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on August 04, 2009, 06:36 PM | #

“Saturating one’s Aryan genetic code with Negroid genetics is like a genetic time bomb. Sooner or later, no matter how attractive or intelligent you thought that black you coupled with was, the ugliness and stupidity will return in your genetic line as a result of this bastardization. After all, the Negroid genes will eventually regress towards the mean - their mean (see: Haiti, Africa). So, miscegenation impoverishes future generations in an unpredictable, scattershot fashion.”

Besides, we DON’T need to do the experiment because the experiment’s already been done: Egypt, the Maghreb, Brazil. Do we want that? No. Case closed.

Anyone still want to do it? Go there and do it, not here. Or go to the Island of Dr. Moreau. Here is not the place for your experiments.

Posted by Mark Ijsseldijk on August 05, 2009, 05:02 PM | #

Besides, we DON’T need to do the experiment because the experiment’s already been done: Egypt, the Maghreb, Brazil. Do we want that? No. Case closed.

Anyone still want to do it? Go there and do it, not here. Or go to the Island of Dr. Moreau. Here is not the place for your experiments.

LOL, bravo.

Exactly the point I’ve tried to get across.

Hey, we evil racists are fine with race mixing as long as it doesn’t happen in our countries and we don’t have to subsidize it.

Posted by James Macht on August 10, 2009, 05:31 PM | #

Hey, sorry for feeding you guys such a line of crap with the chinese stuff and all that but a guys got to do what he can to make it in this economy (book sales aren’t what they used to be) & I had to prove I could be convincing as that particular kind of woman.

Posted by James Macht on August 10, 2009, 05:55 PM | #

Back again. Actually one part of my earlier rantings was partly real, the part of my worries about the economy. Out here in California you may have noticed we’re having massive layoffs starting. I always thought our governor was a moderate republican but, apparently, he’s not. The entire state is going bankrupt. Soon crime will escalate out of sight especially with all the illegal hispanics. What is anyone going to do about this? Something needs to be done!

Posted by indians on November 05, 2009, 09:02 AM | #

‘’White women look more feminine, and I would refer the reader to a previous, currently active, thread on Nordic beauty, where I have put up numerous comparisons;’’
Racial mixing can increase the attractiveness of already attractive people as testified by real scholors doing real work.
http://WWW.FEMININEBEAUTY.COM
Ekaterina Joukova: Why do modeling agencies not book me?
Submitted by Admin on Sun, 01/04/2009 - 15:16

link | Submitted by Erik on Sat, 01/10/2009 - 23:45.
THE ASIATIC ELEMENT IN SWEDEN
Another reply to Kayla B.
‘’If you believe that Asian mixture can improve the looks of a Nordic, I’d say you are correct; it can sometimes, but this improvement will almost never be because the face is shifted toward East Asian norms but because of other factors. If this doesn’t make sense, wait for me to post an article on this topic.’’

Posted by indians on November 05, 2009, 09:05 AM | #

http://WWW.FEMININEBEAUTY.COM
Correction

http://www.femininebeauty.info/

Posted by RebelliousVanilla on December 24, 2009, 01:14 AM | #

Actually, I agree with you now. I did more research and found out that intelligence is the most heritable polygenic trait discovered or at least up there. I’m 19, give me a break. Most people don’t even care about this at my age.

And I can’t be looking for a wife in Eastern Europe, considering I’m an Eastern European girl, you know? lol. Thanks for the endorsement and yes, the family system didn’t collapsed like yours did, but hurry up because we are importing Western non-values pretty fast and considering we share the same abysmal birth rates, the number of us is decreasing.

Posted by Javier on December 28, 2009, 09:25 AM | #

Pure toxic, sulfuric acid, writings from a man who is well versed in his knowledge and articulates his destructive misinformation splendidly. One would hope that this man Ziv would be given the post of minister of eugenics and El supremo race mixer, in the state of Israel. One would expect an opening of the holy land frontiers to the massive onslaught of third worlders to enrich the bucolic and sparse tapestry of Israel’s demographic framework. Ziv’s diatribe for racial suicide will hit the trash can before a single line hits the printing press in the state of Israel, but will be promoted and funded to sell millions of copies in the nations targeted for racial destruction.
One wonders if Ziv’s choice of mate is well rounded buttock-ed Hottentot female, or a pigmy female from the Congo ? .

Where are our geneticists ? why are they not allowed to publish thesis’s and scientifically based racial instructions ? Why there must always be a chosenite spreading the Gospel lies ? Like Samson breaking the pillars, Ziv and his tribetribe will take the entire planet into a quagmire or race debauchery , rescuing themselves from the racial deluge, to lord it supreme . We need counter Ziv’s , in their thousands, to resist and throw out the poison emanating from Ziv and his ilk.

Seal looks like a descendant of orangutans , fit to be locked up in a cage , not to be allowed, by a decadent , corrupt and terminally sick society, to impregnate and cohabit with the flower of her womanhood. That is what our enemies, or multicluturalist cyclopes, seek to push us through. Make a role model of the black ogre Seal, deaden our senses to all discriminatory faculties , where it all “looks nice, and the primate sings so well”, and addle our brains into submitting the best of our women to predatory beasts. A society, a race , that behaves in this way ,certainly has a black future before it.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on December 28, 2009, 01:25 PM | #

Excellent comment by Javier. Good work, comrade! You’re a first-rate thinker, in my estimation.

Posted by Dasein on January 27, 2010, 12:59 PM | #

Some might consider Javier’s comment as unduly harsh. Here are a couple of photos to consider as you’re reading his comment.

Remember this ‘cute kid’ from the 70s/80s?

Here he is today:

http://www.tmz.com/2010/01/26/gary-coleman-movie-nudity-bail-arrested/

Page 3 of 3 pages « FirstP < 1 2 3

Next entry: The Bear’s Lair: Is the world global?

Previous entry: New mouse may mean new hope for Europe.

Existential Issues

Of note

General News

Science News

Science Categories

All Categories

The Writers

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Crime

General

Immigration

Islam

Jews

Nationalist Political Parties

New Right

Science

Whites in Africa