![]() | |
The evolution of blond hair and blue eyes among Nordics
Peter Frost has written a cool paper on the evolution of blond hair and the origin of the remarkable diversity of eye and hair color in Northern and Eastern Europeans. His paper will be published in the upcoming March edition of the journal Evolution and Human Behavior. Frost is spot-on in nailing intense sexual selection as the primary reason for the high prevalence of blondness, which is of recent origin (less than 20,000 years old), and the unusual diversity of hair and eye color among Northern and Eastern Europeans. Whereas Frost’s proposed reason for the intense sexual selection is open to debate, the conclusion that intense sexual selection is implicated is almost certain. I am including his paper in this post, but will first mention some important implications. Frost also proposes that the extreme depigmentation seen among Nordics is partly related to sexual selection. Frost mentions traits other than pigmentation that suggest strong sexual selection among Nordics, namely the more feminine looks of white women, on average, than women in non-white populations. I would like to add a high prevalence of fine facial features, too, and certain parts of the face that bear the signature of sexual selection, such as the jaw, whereby the chin is better developed than in non-Nordics, even though all other parts of the jaw have shrunk significantly. For rapid changes to occur under intense sexual selection, two conditions should be met. Firstly, there has to be a high level of sexual freedom, especially afforded to women, and secondly, there also has to be a high level of variability with respect to reproductive success in the population, with individuals having less aesthetically desirable traits (ancestral traits) being disproportionately likely to die without reproducing. Among human populations, it is very clear that the availability of sexual freedom, especially to women, is much higher in Northern Europe than in most other societies, and it has been this way for a long time, except for a short period when the Church was powerful in Northern Europe. In many human societies, young individuals are not allowed to date, marriages are arranged and fornication or adultery are met with drastic consequences. Therefore, once again, such cultural differences are consistent with Frost’s hypothesis of more intense recent (on the order of tens of thousands of years at most) sexual selection in Nordics than in other populations. People in many non-European societies, such as in Middle Eastern and South Asian societies, pride themselves on their alleged superior morality regarding sexual behavior, failing to realize that moral superiority can only be claimed if their sexual behavior remains the same when they have the same opportunity for sexual impropriety as in the West, which is surely not the case. Arabs and South Asians can sing paeans to their “superior sexual morality” all they want; the consequences of the low level of sexual freedom and arranged marriages in their cultures are very clear: the unattractive among them, thanks to not having to find mates on their own, are more likely to reproduce than unattractive whites; thereby, these populations have been evolving in attractiveness less slowly than whites. One will find few whites who would disagree that non-Europeans in general, including non-European Caucasoid types, look far less attractive than whites, on average, but also, few non-European Caucasoid types would disagree with the statement, too. I know for a fact that Razib Khan of Gene Expression blog thinks that white women, especially blondes, are much superior in looks to Bangladeshi women. This ties in to mass migration of non-whites into the West. If there are sufficient non-whites around, unattractive whites, who would until the recent past disproportionately die without being able to find a mate and reproduce, may end up with a non-white person who would be more than happy to get a white mate. For instance, a black man would typically prefer a 250-pound white woman to a 350-pound black woman. The resulting offspring of such unions, being closer to whites in looks, would be more acceptable as a mate to a greater proportion of whites than the non-white parent, which in turn will set the stage for gradual creeping of non-white genetics into the white gene pool, resulting in reduced attractiveness of the descendents of modern whites. In addition, if mass migration of the likes of Muslims reduces sexual freedom in the West, then the mulatto descendents of present-day Europeans will also have less of an opportunity to reacquire the looks of their white forebears via intense sexual selection. The conclusions are clear...we have yet more reasons to keep the non-white masses out of the West, even if they are as intelligent and as well-behaved as whites are. Personally, I don’t have a problem with a small non-white presence in the West, but allowing mass migration of non-whites to the West is madness. Peter Frost’s paper cites some genetic data to support greater reproductive skew among white males than non-white males, which is consistent with more intense sexual selection among Europeans in recent history. In this regard, I would like to add the following three papers that, taken together, show similar evidence:
Also consider the following pictures, starting from Miss India 2005, Amrita Thapar, who has a manly face.
Compare Miss India 2005 to Miss USA 2005, Chelsea Cooley, below.
Look at the top three contestants in the Miss India 2005 beauty pageant.
Now look at the top-ranked contestants in the Miss USA 2005 beauty pageant; shown clockwise from top left: Brittany Hogan, Kristen Johnson, Melissa Witek and Jill Gulseth.
It is unlikely that beauty pageants in India have to deal with political correctness to the extent that is seen in the U.S.A. Therefore, the “beauties” shown below -- from the 2005 Miss India beauty pageant -- are probably among the better looking Hindu women.
Note that Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Negroid and Australoid elements are easily discernible in the women shown above. If race mixing is supposed to increase physical attractiveness, I for sure do not want my female descendents to look as “attractive” as the women above and would prefer the “less attractive” white look. Hindu’s select their actresses for a high level of attractiveness. Look at the three Hindu actresses below; from top to bottom: Shilpa Shetty, Madhuri Dixit and Preity Zinta.
Compare the Hindu actresses to the three Nordic women below; from top to bottom: Ragnhild Marie Alvær, Sharon van der Knaap and Jennifer Avalon.
It may be claimed that I have deliberately picked unattractive Hindu women for comparative purposes, but a quick look at the photos of the untouchables of India suffices to convince that the Hindu women shown above are among the better looking ones in India.
Of course, there are even better looking Hindus as shown below, but guess who they owe their good looks to? Shown clockwise from top: Aditi Govitrikar, Hritik Roshan and Arun Nair.
Finally, look at the physique of the woman that many Hindus consider to be the most beautiful woman in the world, Aishwarya Rai, who has broad shoulders and a wide waist, and compare her physique to that of the white woman shown below her, the likes of which are so many in number that the entire disk space allotted to this site could be easily filled with their pictures.
Peter Frost’s paper follows. European hair and eye color: A case of frequency-dependent sexual selection? Peter Frost Abstract Human hair and eye color is unusually diverse in northern and eastern Europe. The many alleles involved (at least seven for hair color) and their independent origin over a short span of evolutionary time indicate some kind of selection. Sexual selection is particularly indicated because it is known to favor color traits and color polymorphisms. In addition, hair and eye color is most diverse in what used to be, when first peopled by hunter-gatherers, a unique ecozone of low-latitude continental tundra. This type of environment skews the operational sex ratio (OSR) of hunter-gatherers toward a male shortage in two ways: (1) men have to hunt highly mobile and spatially concentrated herbivores over longer distances, with no alternate food sources in case of failure, the result being more deaths among young men; (2) women have fewer opportunities for food gathering and thus require more male provisioning, the result being less polygyny. These two factors combine to leave more women than men unmated at any one time. Such an OSR imbalance would have increased the pressures of sexual selection on early European women, one possible outcome being an unusual complex of color traits: hair- and eye-color diversity and, possibly, extreme skin depigmentation. Keywords: Gender roles; Monogamy; Pigmentation; Polygyny; Sexual selection; Upper Paleolithic. 1. Introduction Human hair and eye color is unusually diverse in a geographic area centered on the East Baltic and covering northern and eastern Europe (Fig. 1 and Fig. 2). Within this area, eyes are not only brown but also blue, gray, hazel, or green, while hair is not only black but also brown, flaxen, golden, or red (Beals & Hoijer, 1965, pp. 212–214). As one moves outward from this area, color diversity declines markedly with eyes becoming uniformly brown and hair uniformly black.
Fig. 1. Hair-color diversity in and near Europe (after Beals & Hoijer, 1965, p. 214). (Reprinted with permission from Beals et al., “An Introduction to Anthropology,” 3rd ed. Published by Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA. Copyright © 1965 by Pearson Education.)
Fig. 2. Eye-color diversity in and near Europe (after Beals & Hoijer, 1965, p. 213). (Reprinted with permission from Beals et al., “An Introduction to Anthropology,” 3rd ed. Published by Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA. Copyright © 1965 by Pearson Education.) Is this diversity due to chance? In particular, could it reflect founder effects during the repeopling of glaciated Europe 15,000 to 10,000 years ago? When a founder group breaks off from its parent population, such “sampling” may indeed increase the frequency of a variant hair- or eye-color allele. It is less probable that two alleles of the same gene would become more frequent, and this probability would decline exponentially with each additional allele. Yet the hair-color gene, MC1R, has at least seven phenotypically distinct alleles that exist only in Europe (Box et al., 1997, Harding et al., 2000 and Rana et al., 1999). Furthermore, eye-color diversity results from another set of alleles at a locus that is at best weakly linked to hair color (Eiberg & Mohr, 1987). Is this diversity due to relaxation of selection and a resulting accumulation of variant alleles? Harding et al. (2000) have investigated this evolutionary scenario and found that the time to the most recent common ancestral hair color would be about a million years, with the redhead alleles alone being approximately 80,000 years old. Templeton (2002) has come to a similar conclusion: If the cause were relaxation of selection, the current level of hair-color diversity would have taken 850,000 years to develop. Yet modern humans have been in Europe for approximately 35,000 years. Is this diversity due to admixture with older European populations, notably the Neanderthals? Recently, human mtDNA has been retrieved from skeletal material on both sides of the transition from Neanderthals to modern humans: No genetic continuity is discernible between the late Neanderthals and the early modern Europeans (Caramelli et al., 2003). In addition, the mtDNA and dental traits of Neanderthals are no more similar to those of present-day Europeans than they are to those of any other modern human population (Krings et al., 1999, Ovchinnikov et al., 2000 and Tyrrell & Chamberlain, 1998). Neanderthal admixture seems to have been minor, if not negligible, and could hardly account for the high proportion of Europeans who deviate from the species norm of black hair and brown eyes. Is this diversity due, then, to some selective force, either natural or sexual selection? The first kind of selection is unlikely. As a rule, highly visible color traits are not adaptations to the natural environment, which typically favors an unobtrusive, cryptic coloration as a means to evade predators. It has been suggested that a lighter colored iris may offer more visual acuity in dim light, such as in the misty maritime environments of northwestern Europe (Short, 1975). Eye color, however, is polymorphic over a much larger area of Europe, most of which is typically continental in climate. It is also unclear why selection for visual acuity would have favored more variability in eye color as opposed to a simple reduction in eye pigment. The alternative, sexual selection, has already been advanced to explain Europe's hair- and eye-color diversity (Cavalli-Sforza et al., 1994, p. 266). This kind of selection is known to favor colorful traits, but there is little consensus on the reasons why. It may be that bright colors stimulate sexual attraction in the brain through (1) mate-assessment algorithms that interpret pigment production as a sign of health and, hence, mate quality; (2) sex-recognition algorithms that pick out sex-specific color stimuli and respond open-endedly with stronger responses to more intense colors; and (3) general monitoring algorithms that respond to highly visible stimuli and indirectly alert other systems, including those related to sexual attraction (Farr, 1980, Hamilton & Zuk, 1982, Kirkpatrick, 1987 and Manning, 1979, pp. 66–75). The opposite sex may exploit all three algorithm types by intensifying its color stimuli until functional constraints intervene or until the cost of easier detection by predators exceeds the benefit of stronger sexual attraction (Endler, 1980 and Endler, 1991). Under certain conditions, sexual selection may also diversify color traits within a single population. When an individual is faced with potential mates of equal value, it will tend to select the one that “stands out from the crowd,” that is, that has the rarest color morph. The selection is frequency-dependent, declining in strength as the rare morph becomes more common and tending toward an equilibrium that maximizes color diversity. This rare-color advantage has been studied mainly in fruit flies and guppies but has also been reported in a parasitic wasp, in red flour beetles, in ladybugs, and in leafroller moths (Anderson, 1969, Brooks, 2002, Farr, 1980, Grant et al., 1974, Hughes et al., 1999, Muggleton, 1979, Simchuk, 2001 and Sinnock, 1970). There are also a number of bird species that exhibit color polymorphisms for which the mode of selection remains unclear (Lank, 2002). Whatever the cause, color polymorphisms are relatively uncommon. They are often hindered by two evolutionary constraints: (1) high predation pressure, this being a constraint on color traits in general and (2) the presence of related species within the same geographic range, apparently because too much intraspecific variability interferes with species recognition and leads to hybridization (Endler, 1980). Many evolutionary biologists dislike the concept of rare-color advantage. There is no gain in fitness from sexual attraction to unusual colors; therefore natural selection should eliminate such nonadaptive behavior. Yet it is difficult to see how, just as it is difficult to see how we can counter the many subterfuges that advertisers use to attract our notice. There are good adaptive reasons for paying attention when an eye-catching object enters our field of view, and it is impossible to disable this response in advance for sexual attraction, given that the nature of the object (animate/inanimate, conspecific/nonconspecific, male/female) is determined at a later stage of mental processing. At that stage, the increased attention could be reversed or given a negative meaning. But there would be a cost: not only in additional processing time but also in overcorrection and undercorrection–like a spam-filter that fails to screen out all unwanted e-mails while blocking some legitimate ones. The cost may be justified if attraction to rare-color morphs leads to hybridization or if the color itself is somehow maladaptive. Otherwise, the benefit will not justify the cost. Rare-color advantage has been reported in humans. Thelen (1983) presented three series of slides showing blonde and brunette females and asked male participants to select the one from each series that they would most prefer to marry. The first series showed 6 brunettes, the second 1 brunette and 5 blondes, and the third 1 brunette and 11 blondes. For the same brunette, preference increased significantly from the first to the third series, that is, in proportion to the rarity of her hair color. The same effect was observed, albeit to a lesser extent, when the study was repeated with male photos and female participants. These findings have some support from other studies. Schweder (1994) found that women tended to change their hair color and hair form to a type that was less common in the general population. Riedl (1990) found that men tended to prefer female faces that diverge from the norm. Finally, Ellis (1928, pp. 182–183) noted less preference for blonde women in England than in France, which he ascribed to the higher prevalence of blondness among the English. Rare-color advantage may have caused hair and eye color to diversify in ancestral humans, there being neither of the evolutionary constraints mentioned above, that is, high predation pressure or likelihood of hybridization. Outside Africa, there were only two potential predators: wolves and bears, the latter being uncommon and the former only an occasional threat to recent hunter-gatherers (Hoffecker, 2002, pp. 238, 240). Hybridization was just as nonproblematic. All other Homo populations had been reduced to extinction or relic status by 30,000 BP. It is less clear, though, why hair and eye color diversified in Europe and not elsewhere. Rare-color advantage is a special case of sexual selection, and the intensity of sexual selection normally varies with the operational sex ratio (OSR; the ratio of unmated males to unmated females). The usual pattern is too many males competing for too few females (pregnancy and early infant care exclude some females from mating at any one time). But why would there have been more competition for women in northern and eastern Europe? If anything, there should have been more in sub-Saharan Africa or Papua New Guinea, where a high incidence of polygyny leaves fewer women unmated. I will argue here that the usual pattern of too many males and too few females was reversed among ancestral Europeans, specifically among the highly mobile groups that once inhabited the continental tundra of ice-age Europe. This environment exposed men to a higher risk of hunting mortality while limiting their ability to provide for more than one wife. With fewer men altogether and even fewer polygynous ones, women had to compete for a limited supply of potential husbands. There was thus sexual selection, but it acted primarily on women—not on men. 2. The Eurasian tundra belt: low-latitude west and high-latitude east As modern humans spread out of Africa during the Upper Paleolithic, they entered new environments, including one that no longer exists. Loess-steppe covered the plains of northern and eastern Europe during successive ice ages and interglacials until 10,000 years ago (Fig. 3). Quite unlike today's northern barrens, it combined Arctic tundra with fertile loess soil and low latitudes, the Eurasian tundra belt having been pushed far to the south by the Scandinavian icecap. Long intense sunlight favored a lush growth of mosses, lichens, grasses, and low shrubs with grazing herds of mammoths, reindeer, bison, and horses. Despite high bioproductivity, Europe's tundra plains posed several adaptive challenges. Winter temperatures averaged −20 to −30 °C, with little natural protection. Wood for fuel or shelter was scarce. Finally, almost all consumable biomass was in the form of large herds of migrating herbivores (Hoffecker, 2002, pp. 21–26, 32–34).
Fig. 3. Major vegetation zones in Europe approximately 18,000 BP (after Mellars, 1985, p. 275, reprinted with permission from Elsevier). South of 60°N, the Eurasian tundra belt lay entirely within Europe. East of the Urals, it narrowed and ran further north across Asia and into Beringia. Colder and drier with proportionately less fertile loess, this eastern end had a lower carrying capacity for herbivores (Goebel, 1999 and Hoffecker, 2002, p. 22). 3. Continental Arctic tundra: consequences of human adaptation 3.1. Less food gathering = increased female dependence on male provisioning In adapting to Arctic tundra, modern humans had to change their sexual division of labor, which normally allocated food gathering to women and hunting to men. Women now processed meat provided by men and did tasks unrelated to food procurement, such as garment making and shelter building. Men procured almost all of the food (Hoffecker, 2002, p. 8). We can see this task reallocation by comparing recent hunter-gatherers from the Tropics to the Arctic. Near the equator, women procure about half of the family food supply by gathering berries, fruits, roots, grubs, eggs, and other sessile items, these tasks being more compatible than hunting with the demands of pregnancy, breast feeding, and infant transport (Kelly, 1955, pp. 268–269). Away from the equator, the cold season lengthens and gatherable food becomes harder to find, declining from 40% to 55% of the family food supply in hunter-gatherers below 40°N to less than 10% above 60°N (Martin, 1974, pp. 16–18). The end point of this trend is Arctic tundra. Among the Caribou Inuit, female food gathering is limited to eggs (during 2 weeks in summer), raw gadfly larvae, the root of a plant species, and some berries (Birket-Smith, 1929, p. 133). On this north–south continuum, ice-age European hunter-gatherers were much closer to the ‘Arctic’ end, with most of their food being procured through hunting. Dickson (1990, p. 180) summarizes the evidence: the abundance of game animals in Europe during the late Pleistocene; the volume of animal bone at archeological sites like Solutré, Moldova, Predmosti, and Dolni Vestonice; the large amount of usable meat on late Pleistocene game animals; and the lack of wear on Upper Paleolithic dentition, indicating a grit-free, carnivorous diet (Butzer, 1964, p. 374; Dahlberg & Carbonell, 1961). In addition, biochemical analysis of human remains from a British Upper Paleolithic site reveals a diet high in animal protein, principally from aurochs and red deer (Richards et al., 2000). At Czech, Russian, and British Upper Paleolithic sites, similar analyses reveal a diet high in protein from terrestrial herbivores, waterfowl, and fish (Richards et al., 2001). None of this means that food gathering was absent, only that it was less important. Indeed, a Czech site has yielded evidence of fleshy taproots from charred plant remains (Mason et al., 1994). The remains date, however, to approximately 26,000 BP, when forest-steppe predominated, and the investigators concluded that such foods were limited to southern and central Europe. 3.2. Increased female dependence on male provisioning = constraints on polygyny As males assume more responsibility for food procurement, polygyny becomes more difficult. In his review of Inuit mating systems, Kjellström (1973, p. 118) concludes, “Since the duty of being a provider was more onerous for the man who had two or more wives, this meant that as a rule it was only the really able and skilful hunters and fishers who could manage this double duty.” Hodge (1959[1905], p. 809) concurs: “monogamy is prevalent, as the support of several wives is possible only for the expert hunter.” This pattern also prevailed among the Chukchi of northeastern Siberia: “The Chukchees commonly live in monogamy; it is only exceptionally that they have two wives” (Nordenskiold, 1882, p. 504). According to the earliest ethnography of the Sami of northern Scandinavia, “Neither is it Lawful for them to Marry more than one Wife at a time, or to be divorced from her. Polygamy and Divorces…, are Things unknown to the Laplanders, both whilst they were Pagans, and since” (Scheffer, 1704, p. 296). These observations are supported by genetic data. The ratio of Y to X chromosome variability rises markedly as one goes from long-established tropical populations (sub-Saharan Africans, New Guineans, and Aboriginal Australians) to other populations (Europeans, Asians, and Amerindians), indicating that the latter have had a higher proportion of men contributing to the gene pool (Dupanloup et al., 2003; see also Scozzari et al., 1997 and Torroni et al., 1990). More work is needed to determine whether this trend peaks in recent Arctic hunter-gatherers. 3.3. Longer hunting distances = higher death rate among young men As hunter-gatherers adapt to less tropical environments, men have to cover more terrain while hunting, partly because they need to hunt more (to offset the decline in food gathering) and partly because the game animals themselves roam over a larger territory, the land supporting less vegetation at colder temperatures (Kelly, 1955, pp. 128–132). Hunting distance peaks in the continental Arctic, where almost all potential food is in the form of wide-ranging and highly mobile herds (Hoffecker, 2002, p. 8). It then decreases further north in the extreme Arctic, where hunters cover shorter distances in pursuit of solitary game, fish, and seals (Kelly, 1955, p. 129). As hunting distance lengthens, more young men die from starvation, accidents, or exposure. Among the Chukchi of the 18th to early 20th centuries, men died young because they followed reindeer over the tundra with a minimum of possessions; in contrast, men lived longer among the Nenets because herd dogs confined the semidomesticated reindeer to nearby pastures (Krupnik, 1985). Arctic populations that still hunted wild game thus had highly skewed sex ratios. Among 19th century Labrador Inuit, only 57 males remained for every 100 females in the 15+ age bracket because of hunting deaths from drowning or exposure (Scheffel, 1984). Among Inuit, in general, “the preponderance of adult women is generally explained by the higher death rate among men due to the natural hazards of hunting” (Weyer, 1932, pp. 135–136). Some evidence points to long hunting distances and high male mortality on the tundra plains of Upper Paleolithic Europe. Many central Russian sites contain large quantities of black flint from sources at least 130–150 km away and other raw materials from sources up to 650 km away (Hoffecker, 2002, pp. 184–185, 248). Human remains from Upper Paleolithic Europe were once thought to be mainly males (Binford, 1968, Harrold, 1980 and Vallois, 1961), but reanalysis with improved sexing criteria has found that females predominate, suggesting either that many men died under conditions unsuited for burial, such as hunting accidents, or that male burials were less conducive to preservation, such as in aboveground coffins (Mallegni & Fabbri, 1995). The Maszycka Cave in Poland has provided the only ‘snapshot’ of a single extended family from the Upper Paleolithic: the remains of three men, five women, and eight children, all apparently killed and partially eaten (Kozlowski & Sachse-Kozlowska, 1995). 3.4. Constraints on polygyny+higher death rate among young men = skewed OSR With less polygyny and more young men dying, the OSR is skewed toward a male shortage. Many women lose reproductive time, even among non-Arctic hunter-gatherers with less skewed OSRs. Among the !Kung, about 75% of all women lose some reproductive time while waiting between partners, and 10–20% lose 5 to 15 years. “A relative scarcity of husbands, then, is a regular and expected part of the !Kung marriage system” (Howell, 1979, pp. 247–250). One might expect that this female surplus would encourage more men to take second wives, but “having two families simultaneously is difficult to manage, both economically (in providing for a large number of dependents) and socially (in avoiding the conflicts and irritations of polygamous marriages)” (Howell, 1979, p. 272). Each additional wife, with her offspring, decreases the ratio of food-providing adults to food-consuming children (Howell, 1979, pp. 53–54). These constraints on polygyny peak in Arctic tundra environments, where women have few opportunities for food gathering. Parallel to this trend, death rates among young men peak in the continental Arctic. OSRs should therefore be most skewed among hunter-gatherers (or rather hunters) living on continental Arctic tundra. Today, this environment is a shadow of its former self, both in the size of its migrating herds and in the extent of its land mass, essentially the northern fringes of mainland Eurasia and North America. Most of its indigenous peoples–low-Arctic Inuit, Chukchi, Yukaghir, Tungus, Nenets, and Sami (Lapps)–rely on a mix of maritime fishing and inland hunting; thus, their OSR characteristics are, at best, indicative of Upper Paleolithic conditions. Nonetheless, if we look at the Labrador Inuit of the 19th century, a very lopsided sex ratio appears at all reproductive ages, with many women, especially widows, shut out of the marriage market entirely (Scheffel, 1984). In the Siberian Arctic east of the Taymyr Peninsula, in the 18th to early 20th centuries, women outnumbered men at all reproductive ages because the men still followed reindeer on foot and suffered proportionately higher death rates. (Krupnik, 1985). OSR skewing seems to have occurred even further west, where reindeer were already semidomesticated in historic times. Sami of 18th to 19th century Finland had female-biased OSRs, although the same was true among the mainly agricultural Finns (Lummaa et al., 1998). Indeed, female-biased OSRs prevailed in most preindustrial European societies, reflecting perhaps the key importance of paternal investment and also cultural constraints on polygyny that predated Christianity (Seccombe, 1992, pp. 184–190; Sherman, 1922, Vol. II, p. 475; Tacitus, 1970, 18; Vatin, 1970, p. 201). North of the continental Arctic, in the extreme Arctic, OSRs were more evenly balanced and sometimes had a male surplus (Schrire & Steiger, 1974). First, male mortality was lower. Men hunted dispersed marine animals and thus avoided the ‘feast or famine’ dilemma that occurred when hunting spatially concentrated terrestrial herbivores. Second, female mortality was higher, specifically female infanticide. In the extreme Arctic, parents viewed the prospects for a daughter as problematic. She would have trouble finding a husband locally (the low carrying capacity of the land limited the local group's size), and thus she would probably marry into another group and not support her parents later on, either directly or through her future husband (Balikci, 1967, Riches, 1974 and Smith & Smith, 1994). At lower latitudes, where the land had a higher carrying capacity, female infanticide occurred much less often, apparently because bigger and closer groups allowed women to marry locally and provide their parents with ‘son-in-law payback’ (Riches, 1974 and Schrire & Steiger, 1974). 4. Peopling of the Eurasian tundra belt Modern humans penetrated the Eurasian tundra belt no earlier than 35,000 years ago, at first in its most southerly and resource-rich portion—southwestern France (Mellars, 1985). This ‘beachhead’ was dissected by valleys that offered wild fruits, grains, tubers, salmon, and non-Arctic game, as well as migrating reindeer in the fall and winter (Blades, 1999a, Blades, 1999b and Mellars, 1985). The reindeer may have drawn humans out of the sheltered valleys, briefly at first, and then for longer periods, as hunting bands adapted to the new niche. Eventually, some bands left the valleys to hunt year-round on the surrounding tundra plains. The initial founder group may have been small, as suggested by the very low genetic variability of northern Europeans today (Reich et al., 2001). There then seems to have been rapid growth (perhaps reflected in the spread of the Gravettian culture) with the front of the demographic expansion spreading eastward into the Central Russian Plain and ultimately reaching Siberia and Beringia by the end of the last interglacial approximately 25,000 BP (Goebel, 1999, Pitulko et al., 2004 and Soffer, 1985, p. 238; Soffer et al., 1993). Thus, when the last ice age began, a single human population occupied a corridor stretching from Europe to Beringia. This inference is supported by several lines of evidence. A Y chromosome study has found that all North Eurasian peoples descend from a common ancestral population dated to about 15,000 BP (Stepanov & Puzyrev, 2000; see also Armour et al., 1996, Santos et al., 1999 and Zerjal et al., 1997). The language families of northern Eurasia, particularly Uralic and Yukaghir and more generally Uralic-Yukaghir, Eskimo-Aleut, Chukotko-Kamchatkan, and Altaic, share deep structural affinities that point to a common origin and not simply to word borrowing (Cavalli-Sforza et al., 1994, pp. 97–99; Fortescue, 1998 and Rogers, 1986). Archeological evidence (characteristic lithic technology, grave goods with red ocher, and sites with small shallow basins) also suggests a common cultural tradition throughout Europe and Siberia 20,000 to 15,000 years ago (Goebel, 1999, Haynes, 1980 and Haynes, 1982). Finally, dental and cranial remains from Mal'ta (23,000–20,000 BP) in southern Siberia indicate strong affinities with Upper Paleolithic Europeans (Alexeyev & Gokhman, 1994 and Goebel, 1999). This Eurasian population would have broken up at the glacial maximum (20,000–15,000 BP). East–west gene flow was severely constricted by the merging of the Fenno-Scandian and Ural icecaps and by the formation of large glacial lakes along the Ob (Rogers, 1986 and Crawford et al., 1997). At the same time, both sides of this ice-age barrier saw sharp declines in human population (Goebel, 1999 and Hahn, 1987). After the glacial maximum, cultural and biological unity continued to disintegrate as part of a trend toward higher population densities, regional diversification, and probably more restricted breeding units (Formicola & Giannecchini, 1999). As gene flow declined between the two ends of the Eurasian tundra belt, selection pressures would have become more localized. Sexual selection, in particular, would have varied in intensity with regional OSR differences. This may explain why hair- and eye-color diversity arose in Europe but not in Asia—where hair is uniformly black and eyes uniformly brown. The eastern end of the Eurasian tundra belt differed from the western end in two OSR-relevant ways. First, its narrower width constrained herbivore mobility, thus shortening hunting distances and reducing hunting deaths among young men. Male mortality would have further decreased after the glacial maximum: An absence of base camps in the archeological record suggests that residential units were dispersing to exploit a variety of resources with shorter hunting distances (Goebel, 1999, p. 223). Second, the eastern Eurasian tundra had higher latitudes, lower carrying capacity, and a more dispersed human population, thus providing the same environmental conditions that in more recent times have led to female infanticide in the extreme Arctic. These two factors, shorter hunting distances and increased female infanticide, would have resulted in a more balanced OSR and, consequently, less sexual selection to diversify hair and eye color. Such diversification would have begun in western Eurasia no earlier than 20,000 BP, given the uniform black hair and brown eyes of populations east of the ice-age barrier in eastern Eurasia. If the beginning of human history marks the latest end date, we are left with a maximum timeframe of 14,000 years. This is fast evolutionary change for human pigmentation, which elsewhere has responded more slowly to selection by the natural environment. A full range of environments, from the Arctic to the Tropics, has not caused the Amerindians to differentiate in hair, eye, or skin color, despite their being in the Americas for approximately 15,000 years. 5. Diversification of European hair color The MC1R gene determines hair color by controlling the production of eumelanin (brown and black pigments) and pheomelanin (red and yellow pigments). It is unusually polymorphic in humans, both in its high number of alleles and in its high ratio of nonsynonymous (phenotypically distinct) to synonymous (phenotypically identical) alleles (Box et al., 1997, Flanagan et al., 2000, Harding et al., 2000, Rana et al., 1999 and Rees, 2000). Whereas most genes have more synonymous alleles than nonsynonymous ones, the reverse is true for human MC1R (Rana et al., 1999). Nonsynonymous MC1R alleles are distributed differently in European and non-European populations: 11 in Europeans, 5 in Asians, and 1 in Africans (Harding et al., 2000, p. 1355). Furthermore, the Asian alleles differ little in their phenotypic effects. Harding et al. (2000) attribute the high MC1R diversity of Europeans to relaxed selection for dark skin outside the tropical zone. This would account for the redhead alleles, which are linked to skin depigmentation, but not for the other alleles. Relaxed selection also fails to explain the low MC1R diversity of non-tropical Asians. Nonetheless, Harding et al. (2000) advance three arguments for relaxed selection, rather than positive selection, to explain the high MC1R diversity of Europeans. The first argument is that relaxed selection has produced a comparable level of diversity at the β-globin locus. Yet β-globin variants clearly have selective value, as indicated by heterozygote advantage and the short time span (less than 5000 years) over which the β-globin polymorphism has evolved (Cavalli-Sforza et al., 1994, pp. 149–152). The second argument is that the ratio of nonsynonymous to synonymous alleles is only 10 to 3 in Eurasia and thus comparable to the ratio of 10 nonsynonymous to 6 synonymous MC1R substitutions that separate humans from chimpanzees. The data in table 1 of their article, however, indicate a ratio of 12 to 3 (2 redhead alleles are excluded because they came from a study that specifically looked for them). In any case, the 10 to 6 ratio separating humans from chimpanzees is hardly a benchmark for neutral selection: Ratios greater than 1 are normally deemed to be evidence of positive selection, and such selection has acted on MC1R in some primate lineages (Mundy & Kelly, 2003). Finally, the third argument against positive selection is that MC1R diversity does not depart significantly from the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, there being neither excess homozygotes nor excess heterozygotes. No such departure, however, would be expected, inasmuch as MC1R heterozygotes exhibit partial effects (Flanagan et al., 2000 and Rees, 2000). 6. Discussion One might object that sexual selection could not have diversified European hair and eye color because there is no sexual dimorphism in these traits. Had women been selected for a diversity of hair and eye colors, they would now be more diverse in this respect than men are. It should be noted, however, that both hair and eye colors are, at best, weakly sex-linked; hence, selection acting on women should have affected men and women equally until sex-linked alleles had arisen through chance mutations. The original alleles (i.e., the non-sex-linked ones) could then have been selected out, but only if men were somehow disadvantaged by the novel hair and eye colors. For most animals, the disadvantage is an increased risk of predation, which will reduce highly visible colors in the sex that does not need them. For early Europeans, such a disadvantage would have been slight. Even wolves were more likely to be prey than predators (Hoffecker, 2002, pp. 180–183, 225, 241–242). This being said, some hair and eye colors seem to be sex linked. Blond hair darkens with age more slowly in women than in men (Olivier, 1960, p. 74). Furthermore, prenatal exposure to estrogen, as indicated by digit ratio, appears to be higher in individuals with blond hair or non-brown eyes (Mather et al., unpublished). If a sex difference does indeed exist in these novel hair and eye colors, it seems to be expressed only right after puberty. It was notably absent in the 18-to-38 year olds studied by Mather et al. (unpublished). Besides diversifying European hair and eye color, sexual selection may have accentuated existing sexual dimorphisms. Several studies have found wider hips, narrower waists, and thicker deposition of subcutaneous fat in women of European descent than in women of other origins (Hrdlička, 1898, Meredith & Spurgeon, 1980 and Nelson & Nelson, 1986). Even before birth, Euro-American fetuses show significantly more sexual dimorphism than do African-American fetuses (Choi & Trotter, 1970). The proximal cause may be lower androgen production than in women of sub-Saharan African descent (Falkner et al., 1999) and higher estrogen production and lower fecal excretion of estrogen than in women of north/east Asian descent (Adlercreutz et al., 1994, Coker et al., 1997, Key et al., 1990, Taioli et al., 1996 and Wang et al., 1991). Prenatal exposure to estrogen, as indicated by digit ratio, may also be higher in European women, albeit with much interpopulation variation (Manning et al., 2000; Manning, J. T. (2003). Personal communication). This variation may reflect a maternal-age effect: digit ratio is higher in Catholic countries like Poland and Spain, where mothers generally bear children in their 20s, than in Germany and Finland, where more mothers bear children in their 30s (Manning et al., 2000). Sexual selection may have also lightened European skin color. The extreme depigmentation of northern and eastern Europeans deviates markedly from the much weaker north–south gradient in skin color of other human populations (the latter gradient may reflect selection pressures to maintain a critical level of vitamin D synthesis). Yet the geographic extent of this extreme depigmentation does not coincide with a specific pattern of solar radiation: Skies are generally overcast over coastal northwestern Europe and become clearer and typically continental further east. It does coincide, however, with the area where hair and eye color has diversified (Fig. 4). Aside from red hair, the color of the hair and eyes is not genetically linked to skin color (Flanagan et al., 2000 and Sturm et al., 2001). It seems, therefore, that a common selective force has acted simultaneously on skin, hair, and eye color within this geographic area while being absent at similar latitudes in northern Asia and North America (Frost, 1994a and Manning et al., 2004).
Fig. 4. Skin-color depigmentation in Eurasia approximately 500 BP (after Brace, 1973, p. 344, reprinted with permission from Wiley). If this common selective force were sexual selection, it could have lightened European skin color by acting on an existing sexual dimorphism. Men and women differ in complexion because of differing amounts of melanin and cutaneous blood flow; in short, women are fairer, men browner and ruddier (Edwards & Duntley, 1939, Frost, 1988, Frost, 2005, Hulse, 1967 and Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000). The size of this sex difference is still debated, largely because most studies are poorly controlled for age (girls lighten only after puberty and immediately before are actually darker than boys). Investigators also try to exclude tanning by measuring under the arm, where there is less subcutaneous fat and probably less dimorphism in skin color, given that the lightness of a woman's skin correlates with the thickness of her subcutaneous fat (Mazess, 1967). In any event, sexual selection may have targeted this sex difference, as suggested by a cross-cultural male preference for lighter complexioned women and, conversely, by some evidence of a female preference for darker complexioned men (Aoki, 2002, Feinman & Gill, 1978, Frost, 1988, Frost, 1994b, Frost, 2005 and Van den Berghe & Frost, 1986). Among ancestral Europeans, such selection, even if acting only on women, would have lightened the complexions of both sexes because most skin-color genes are not sex linked. Nonetheless, some of these genes are; thus, there should have been some selective pressure to make European skin color more sexually dimorphic. Yet skin color actually seems to be less sexually dimorphic in light-skinned populations (Relethford et al., 1985). The reason may be a ceiling effect. As ancestral Europeans approached the phenotypic limit of maximum skin depigmentation, further lightening would have become harder to achieve for women than for men, with the result that sexual selection, although acting primarily on women, lightened men more. In conclusion, sexual selection may have acted on all three color traits in northern and eastern Europe, with hair and eye color being diversified and skin color lightened. This hypothesis is consistent with the narrow timeframe for the evolution of these traits, their geographic distribution, and the large number of alleles involved. Acknowledgments I wish to thank Dr. John Thomas Manning, who independently came to similar conclusions as I did, despite his approaching the question from a different academic perspective and drawing on a different body of evidence. This ‘repeatability of conclusions’ is further support for the arguments presented here. References Adlercreutz et al., 1994 H. Adlercreutz, S.L. Gorbach, B.R. Goldin, M.N. Woods, J.T. Dwyer and E. Hämäläinen, Estrogen metabolism and excretion in Oriental and Caucasian Women, Journal of the National Cancer Institute 86 (1994), pp. 1076–1082. Alexeyev & Gokhman, 1994 V.P. Alexeyev and I.I. Gokhman, Skeletal remains of infants from a burial on the Mal'ta Upper Paleolithic site, Homo 45 (1994), pp. 119–126. Anderson, 1969 W.W. Anderson, Polymorphism resulting from the mating advantage of rare male genotypes, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 64 (1969), pp. 190–197. Aoki, 2002 K. Aoki, Sexual selection as a cause of human skin colour variation: Darwin's hypothesis revisited, Annals of Human Biology 29 (2002), pp. 589–608. Armour et al., 1996 J.A.L. Armour, T. Anttinen, C.A. May, E.E. Vega, A. Sajantila, J.R. Kidd, K.K. Kidd, J. Bertranpetit, S. Paabo and A.J. Jeffreys, Minisatellite diversity supports a recent African origin for modern humans, Nature Genetics 13 (1996), pp. 154–160. Balikci, 1967 A. Balikci, Female infanticide on the Arctic coast, Man 2 (1967), pp. 615–625. Beals & Hoijer, 1965 R.L. Beals and H. Hoijer, An introduction to anthropology (3rd ed.), Macmillan, New York (1965). Binford, 1968 S.R. Binford, A structural comparison of disposal of the dead in the Mousterian and the Upper Paleolithic, Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 24 (1968), pp. 139–151. Birket-Smith, 1929 K. Birket-Smith, The Caribou Eskimos. Material and social life and their cultural position. In: K. Rasmussen, Editor, Report of the 5th Thule expedition vol. 5, Nordisk Forlag, Copenhagen (1929), pp. 1921–1924. Blades, 1999a B.S. Blades, Aurignacian settlement patterns in the Vézère valley, Current Anthropology 40 (1999), pp. 712–719. Blades, 1999b B.S. Blades, Aurignacian lithic economy and early modern human mobility: New perspectives from classic sites in the Vézère valley of France, Journal of Human Evolution 37 (1999), pp. 91–120. Box et al., 1997 N.F. Box, J.R. Wyeth, L.E. O'Gorman, N.G. Martin and R.A. Sturm, Characterization of melanocyte stimulating hormone receptor variant alleles in twins with red hair, Human Molecular Genetics 6 (1997), pp. 1891–1897. Brace, 1973 C.L. Brace, A nonracial approach towards the understanding of human diversity. In: C.L. Brace and J. Metress, Editors, Man in evolutionary perspective, Wiley, New York (1973), pp. 341–363. Brooks, 2002 R. Brooks, Variation in female mate choice within guppy populations: Population divergence, multiple ornaments and the maintenance of polymorphism, Genetica 116 (2002), pp. 343–358. Butzer, 1964 K.W. Butzer, Environment and archaeology, Aldine, Chicago (1964). Caramelli et al., 2003 D. Caramelli, C. Laluez-Fox, C. Vernesi, M. Lari, A. Casoli, F. Mallegni, B. Chiarelli, I. Dupanloup, J. Bertranpetit, G. Barbujani and G. Bertorelle, Evidence for a genetic discontinuity between Neanderthals and 24,000-year-old anatomically modern Europeans, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100 (2003), pp. 6593–6597. Cavalli-Sforza et al., 1994 L.L. Cavalli-Sforza, P. Menozzi and A. Piazza, The history and geography of human genes, Princeton University Press, Princeton (1994). Choi & Trotter, 1970 S.C. Choi and M.A. Trotter, Statistical study of the multivariate structure and race–sex differences of American White and Negro fetal skeletons, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 33 (1970), pp. 307–312. Coker et al., 1997 A.L. Coker, M.M. Crane, R.P. Sticca and D.W. Sepkovic, Re: Ethnic differences in estrogen metabolism in healthy women, Journal of the National Cancer Institute 89 (1997), pp. 89–90. Crawford et al., 1997 M.H. Crawford, J.T. Williams and R. Duggirala, Genetic structure of the indigenous populations of Siberia, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 104 (1997), pp. 177–192. Dahlberg & Carbonell, 1961 A.A. Dahlberg and V.M. Carbonell, The dentition of the Magdalenian female from Cap Blanc, France, Man 61 (1961), pp. 49–50. Dickson, 1990 D.B. Dickson, The dawn of belief. Religion in the upper Paleolithic of Southwestern Europe, University of Arizona Press, Tucson (1990). Dupanloup et al., 2003 I. Dupanloup, L. Pereira, G. Bertorelle, F. Calafell, M.J. Prata, A. Amorim and G. Barbujani, A recent shift from polygyny to monogamy in humans is suggested by the analysis of worldwide Y-chromosome diversity, Journal of Molecular Evolution 57 (2003), pp. 85–97. Edwards & Duntley, 1939 E.A. Edwards and S.Q. Duntley, The pigments and color of living human skin, American Journal of Anatomy 65 (1939), pp. 1–33. Eiberg & Mohr, 1987 H. Eiberg and J. Mohr, Major genes of eye color and hair color linked to LU and SE, Clinical Genetics 31 (1987), pp. 186–191. Ellis, 1928 H. Ellis, Studies in the psychology of sex, Sexual selection in man vol. IV, F.A. Davis Company, Philadelphia (1928). Endler, 1980 J.A. Endler, Natural selection on color patterns in Poecilia reticulata, Evolution 34 (1980), pp. 76–91. Endler, 1991 J.A. Endler, Variation in the appearance of guppy color patterns to guppies and their predators under different visual conditions, Vision Research 31 (1991), pp. 587–608. Falkner et al., 1999 B. Falkner, K. Sherif, A. Sumner and H. Kushner, Hyperinsulinism and sex hormones in young adult African Americans, Metabolism, Clinical and Experimental 48 (1999), pp. 107–112. Farr, 1980 J.A. Farr, Social behavior patterns as determinants of reproductive success in the guppy Poecilia reticulata Peters (Pisces: Poeciliidae), Behaviour 74 (1980), pp. 38–91. Feinman & Gill, 1978 S. Feinman and G.W. Gill, Sex differences in physical attractiveness preferences, Journal of Social Psychology 105 (1978), pp. 43–52. Flanagan et al., 2000 N. Flanagan, E. Healy, A. Ray, S. Philips, C. Todd, I.J. Jackson, M.A. Birch-Machin and J.L. Rees, Pleiotropic effects of the melanocortin 1 receptor (MC1R) gene on human pigmentation, Human Molecular Genetics 9 (2000), pp. 2531–2537. Formicola & Giannecchini, 1999 V. Formicola and M. Giannecchini, Evolutionary trends of stature in upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic Europe, Journal of Human Evolution 36 (1999), pp. 319–333. Fortescue, 1998 M.D. Fortescue, Language relations across Bering strait. Reappraising the archaeological and linguistic evidence, Cassell, London (1998). Frost, 1988 P. Frost, Human skin color: A possible relationship between its sexual dimorphism and its social perception, Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 32 (1988), pp. 38–58. Frost, 1994a P. Frost, Geographic distribution of human skin colour: A selective compromise between natural selection and sexual selection?, Human Evolution 9 (1994), pp. 141–153. Frost, 1994b P. Frost, Preference for darker faces in photographs at different phases of the menstrual cycle: Preliminary assessment of evidence for a hormonal relationship, Perceptual and Motor Skills 79 (1994), pp. 507–514. Frost, 2005 P. Frost, Fair women, dark men. The forgotten roots of color prejudice, Cybereditions, Christchurch, New Zealand (2005). Goebel, 1999 T. Goebel, Pleistocene human colonization of Siberia and peopling of the Americas: An ecological approach, Evolutionary Anthropology 8 (1999), pp. 208–227. Grant et al., 1974 B. Grant, A. Snyder and S.F. Glessner, Frequency-dependent mate selection in Mormoniella vitripennis, Evolution 28 (1974), pp. 259–264. Hahn, 1987 J. Hahn, Aurignacian and Gravettian settlement patterns in Central Europe. In: O. Soffer, Editor, The Pleistocene old world, Plenum, New York (1987), pp. 251–261. Hamilton & Zuk, 1982 W.D. Hamilton and M. Zuk, Heritable true fitness and bright birds: A role for parasites?, Science 218 (1982), pp. 384–386. Harding et al., 2000 R.M. Harding, E. Healy, A.J. Ray, N.S. Ellis, N. Flanagan, C. Todd, C. Dixon, A. Sajantila, I.J. Jackson, M.A. Birch-Machin and J.L. Rees, Evidence for variable selective pressures at MC1R, American Journal of Human Genetics 66 (2000), pp. 1351–1361. Harrold, 1980 F.B. Harrold, A comparative analysis of Eurasian Paleolithic burials, World Archaeology 12 (1980), pp. 195–211. Haynes, 1980 C.V. Haynes, The Clovis culture, Canadian Journal of Anthropology 1 (1980), pp. 115–121. Haynes, 1982 C.V. Haynes, Were Clovis progenitors in Beringia?. In: D.M. Hopkins, Editor, Paleoecology of Beringia, Academic Press, New York (1982), pp. 383–398. Hodge, ([1905]1959) F.W. Hodge, Handbook of American Indians north of Mexico. Part 1, Pageant, New York ([1905]1959). Hoffecker, 2002 J.F. Hoffecker, Desolate landscapes. Ice-age settlement in Eastern Europe, Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick (2002). Howell, 1979 N. Howell, Demography of the Dobe !Kung, Academic Press, New York (1979). Hrdlička, 1898 A. Hrdlička, Physical differences between white and colored children, American Anthropologist 11 (1898), pp. 347–350. Hughes et al., 1999 K.A. Hughes, L. Du, F.H. Rodd and D.N. Reznick, Familiarity leads to female mate preference for novel males in the guppy, Poecilia reticulata, Animal Behaviour 58 (1999), pp. 907–916. Hulse, 1967 F.S. Hulse, Selection for skin color among the Japanese, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 27 (1967), pp. 143–156. Jablonski & Chaplin, 2000 N.G. Jablonski and G. Chaplin, The evolution of human skin coloration, Journal of Human Evolution 39 (2000), pp. 57–106. Kelly, 1955 R.L. Kelly, The foraging spectrum. Diversity in hunter-gatherer lifeways, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington (1955). Key et al., 1990 T.J.A. Key, J. Chen, D.Y. Wang, M.C. Pike and J. Boreham, Sex hormones in women in rural China and in Britain, British Journal of Cancer 62 (1990), pp. 631–636. Kirkpatrick, 1987 M. Kirkpatrick, Sexual selection by female choice in polygynous animals, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 18 (1987), pp. 43–70. Kjellström, 1973 R. Kjellström, Eskimo marriage. An account of traditional Eskimo courtship and marriage, Nordiska Museets Handlingar 80, Lund (1973). Kozlowski & Sachse-Kozlowska, 1995 S.K. Kozlowski and E. Sachse-Kozlowska, Magdalenian family from the Maszycka Cave, Jahrbuch der Römisch Germanischen Zentral Museums Mainz 40 (1995), pp. 115–205. Krings et al., 1999 M. Krings, H. Geisert, R.W. Schmitz, H. Krainitzki and S. Pääbo, DNA sequence of the mitochondrial hypervariable region II from the Neanderthal type specimen, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 96 (1999), pp. 5581–5585. Krupnik, 1985 I.I. Krupnik, The male–female ratio in certain traditional populations of the Siberian Arctic, Inuit Studies 9 (1985), pp. 115–140. Lank, 2002 D.B. Lank, Diverse processes maintain plumage polymorphisms in birds, Journal of Avian Biology 33 (2002), pp. 327–330. Lummaa et al., 1998 V. Lummaa, J. Merila and A. Kause, Adaptive sex ratio variation in pre-industrial human (Homo sapiens) populations?, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B 265 (1998), pp. 563–568. Mallegni & Fabbri, 1995 F. Mallegni and P.F. Fabbri, The human skeletal remains from the Upper Paleolithic burials found in Romito Cave (Papasidero, Cosenza, Italy), Bulletin et Mémoires de la Société d'Anthropologie de Paris, n.s 7 (1995), pp. 99–137. Manning, 1979 A. Manning, An introduction to animal behaviour, Edward Arnold, London (1979). Manning et al., 2000 J.T. Manning, L. Barley, I. Lewis-Jones, J. Walton, R.L. Trivers, R. Thornhill, D. Singh, P. Rhode, T. Bereckzei, P. Henzi, M. Soler and A. Sved, The 2nd to 4th digit ratio, sexual dimorphism, population differences and reproductive success: Evidence for sexually antagonistic genes, Evolution and Human Behavior 21 (2000), pp. 163–183. Manning et al., 2004 J.T. Manning, P.E. Bundred and F.M. Mather, Second to fourth digit ratio, sexual selection, and skin colour, Evolution and Human Behavior 25 (2004), pp. 38–50. Martin, 1974 M.K. Martin, The foraging adaptation—Uniformity or diversity?, Addison-Wesley Module in anthropology 56, Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass (1974). Mason et al., 1994 S.L.R. Mason, J.G. Hather and G.C. Hillman, Preliminary investigation of the plant macro-remains from Dolní Věstonice II, and its implications for the role of plant foods in Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Europe, Antiquity 68 (1994), pp. 48–57. Mather et al., unpublished Mather, F., Manning, J.T., Bundred, P.E. (unpublished). 2nd to 4th digit ratio, hair and eye colour in Caucasians: Evidence for blond hair as a correlate of high prenatal oestrogen. Mazess, 1967 R.B. Mazess, Skin color in Bahamian Negroes, Human Biology 39 (1967), pp. 145–154. Mellars, 1985 P.A. Mellars, The ecological basis of social complexity in the Upper Paleolithic of Southwestern France. In: T.D. Price and J.A. Brown, Editors, Prehistoric hunter-gatherers. The emergence of cultural complexity, Academic Press, Orlando (1985), pp. 271–297. Meredith & Spurgeon, 1980 H.V. Meredith and J.H. Spurgeon, Somatic comparisons at age 9 years for South Carolina White Girls and girls of other ethnic groups, Human Biology 52 (1980), pp. 401–411. Muggleton, 1979 J. Muggleton, Non-random mating in wild populations of polymorphic Adalia Bipunctata, Heredity 42 (1979), pp. 57–65. Mundy & Kelly, 2003 N.I. Mundy and J. Kelly, Evolution of a pigmentation gene, the melanocortin-1 receptor, in primates, American Journal of Physical Anthropology 121 (2003), pp. 67–80. Nelson & Nelson, 1986 J.K. Nelson and K.R. Nelson, Skinfold profiles of Black and White boys and girls ages 11–13, Human Biology 58 (1986), pp. 379–390. Nordenskiold, 1882 A.E. Nordenskiold, The voyage of the Vega round Asia and Europe, with a historical review of previous journeys along the north coast of the old world, Macmillan & Co., New York (1882). Remaining references in comments. Posted by J Richards on Monday, February 27, 2006 at 11:26 PM in Anthropology, Genetics & Human Bio-Diversity, Race realism Comments:Page 9 of 9 pages « FirstP < 7 8 9 Posted by Johnny Nomoma on November 09, 2006, 08:13 PM | # “My message to those moth foking indians..” How do you “fok” a moth? Is that a new Hindu ritual, or what? Posted by andrew on November 10, 2006, 01:50 PM | # Generally speaking ,the Europeans are the better looking of the races,thats undeniable ....however you will find very unattractive Europeans in the same way you will find very attractive asians,Orientals etc… Beauty is in the eye of the beholder of course ,but the general rule is that Most women like men to be tall,attractive,dark ,blue or brown eyed ,usually of northern medditteranean appearance ..while men prefer women to be fair,preferably blue eyed,blonde or occasionally dark hair and of european type shape . generally opposites attract ..ive rarely seen 2 fairs date each other and same applies to 2 darks . Posted by malaikah on November 10, 2006, 08:53 PM | # replying to the comment that most of the asian women want to look whiter and “fair and lovely” is most sold or whatever…
Posted by Real German on November 11, 2006, 09:07 AM | # @Owen Davis
Count Joseph-Arthur de Gobineau was the first one to point it out in his essay about “The Inequality of Human Races”: http://www.amazon.com/Inequality-Human-Races-Arthur-Gobineau/dp/0865274304 More about the achievements of the Nordic people can be read here: 1) The Ancient Romans Were Nordic 2) http://www.white-history.com/earlson/index.htm Greetings RG Posted by nirmal shenaz on November 11, 2006, 09:54 AM | # Hello JR I dont know how you can say that Nordic women are the most beautiful in the world well you may feel so .But wait take the world at large,I am sure that asians countries like china india japan pakisthan and others who hold the 65% or more (appro) of the population in the world have no idea about Nordic women .The asian people think every white people to be same .Then i dont know what is there in blonde hair i am sure asians wont find it beatiful because mostly asian people dye thier hair brown, red. or some other colour but never blonde.The Asian people find Bollywood stars to be perfectly beautiful .I dont say Aishwarya rai is the most beautiful but i have been to india and have seen many womens who look stunningly beautiful that aishwarya rai .Well i have travelled to countries like america ,germany,Russia and there too i have seen stunningly beautiful women so you cannot say that paricular country has the most beautiful women with the perfect features.Is nordic features all that needed for a women to be beautiful i find it rubbish.Well even i have seen women with nordic features to be looking extremely ungly and at the same time i have seen certain south indian women who are dark , nothing Nordic about them very beautiful.Even there are chinese women who does not have the perfect features like straight nose to be very beautiful.Nordic features are no parameters to beauty it differs from individual to individual and from country to country. Then i think the perfect skin colour is that of the arabic women of arabian countries like dubai iran and other muslim countries that is perfect fairness thier skin dont need makeup as the indian skin as done by some bollywood actresses in tonnes and also dont go pale dead white with blemishes and dirty red patches like the white women or as the nordic women as they are also white.But when it comes to beauty it is not to any country or community Posted by johny yespapa on November 11, 2006, 06:09 PM | # A white fuker said “White women are the most beautiful”. Now to this there is a score of indian fukers that want to convince the whiteboy that they are beautiful as well. Oh white master” look we are also caucasian. Please dont ignore us. PLease fuck our women. Let us fuck your women.blah..blah...blah..” You goddamn indians, y do you have to convince others of your beauty or that you are caucasian. Who gives a fuck? I would burn all the indians who think they are caucasian or who want to convince others that they are beautiful or smart or whatever alive. The mothers who give birth to these idiots with low self respect should be force fuked by the big oxes and bulls that you find in indian villages. Posted by Johny yespapa on November 11, 2006, 06:11 PM | # johny nomama, if you had a “moma” I would have shown you how to fok a moth or moma. Posted by Johnny Yomama on November 11, 2006, 09:15 PM | # When you fok a moth, do you do the adult, the caterpillar, or the pupal stage? Is fuk and fok the same thing? “I would burn all the indians who think they are caucasian...” Well, I certainly don’t thing they should be burned, but they are deluded. I’ll agree that Indians should be proud of their own race, which is markedly different from that of Caucasians. Posted by Lurker on November 12, 2006, 01:52 AM | # Its not just moths (and what about butterflies?) Im intrigued by how to fok a moma. Is this some obscure reference to the museum of modern art (NY) perhaps? Posted by nirmal shenaz on November 13, 2006, 09:05 AM | # JR The nordic women you have pasted in this site do you say they are perfectly beautiful sorry man ,i can say they are beautiful but not the best of beauties ,Dear you can see many white women more beautiful than this who does not harbour any nordic features .Blonde hair ,may be bcos i am an asian i find blonde not that attractive i find black hair ,brown hair to be very beautiful.Well it is individual choice what one likes or not. Please dont say that ‘Beauty lies in the eyes of beholder” is not true.this web site of yours itself a big proof that beauty differs from person to person and mostly men of one country find thier own women to be the best. Posted by ok on November 13, 2006, 06:33 PM | # Let’s talk about men! Compare ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blond http://pschuler.club.fr/Cinema/Acteurs/Akshay-Kumar/Akshay7.jpg WOMEN [image]http://www.pocketheather.com/images/paris-hilton-lazy-eye12_copy.jpg [/image]
[image]
... We all bleed RED! Posted by btw on November 13, 2006, 08:58 PM | # I am sorry to hear about the decline of the natural blondes. I can understand your frustration, as you sound very insecure but there is no need to insult brunettes for that. There are two magor populations in the world, Indian and Chinese. Eventually we are all going to blend with them. Personally, I find multiracial people extremely beautiful. Aishwarya Rai is only one of them. There are many beautiful people out there, but they won’t expose themselves as it is offending their culture. http://blogvecindad.com/archives/mt-static/art/aish.jpg http://www.salsamania.it/news/2005/gen05/jennifer%20lopez.jpg http://www.arabiccelebrities.com/images/Letter_T_pictures/Tamara-avakian/tamara-avakian-018.jpg http://media.santabanta.com/gal/mw2004/contestants/bulgaria1.jpg http://withoutabrain.hautetfort.com/images/medium_missbosnie.jpg http://especiales.yucatan.com.mx/reportajes/107/imagenes/participantes/germany.jpg ------------------- and the list goes on.... Posted by btw on November 13, 2006, 09:26 PM | # And more.... http://worldofmiss.webpark.pl/zdjecia/nigeriau02.jpg http://media.santabanta.com/gal/mu2005/contestants/finland1.jpg http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/~rahulpat/mw2004/cont_korea.jpg http://www.veke.net/fashion/teema15kuva6.jpg http://www.missindiaukevent.co.uk/assets/images/nrana_1.jpg http://www.comitesperu.org/images/articles/20060623160953658_1.jpg http://www.pakistanlink.com/images/Entertainment/MissPak1.jpg http://www.misshawaiiteenamerica.org/Chanel_1web.jpg http://www.schwarzwaelder-bote.de/spass_und_freizeit/voting/images/308.jpg http://outsidestory.typepad.com/home/images/miss_england.jpg http://www.cosmopolitan.se/upload/artiklar/fasta/caroline_winberg.jpg It’s a beautiful world, isn’t it? Posted by rustymason on November 13, 2006, 09:39 PM | # Thanks for the links. It’s about time, this thread was getting stale. Comparing the pics, there’s no doubt about it, White womens are the prettiest, the only ones that can truly be called beautiful. Posted by David Morreale on November 13, 2006, 10:29 PM | # Well, I have never seen a better example of shit-wrapping going on than on this blog. you’ve wrapped a load of shit in the fancy wrapping of Ph.d rhetoric pretending to be scientific, but which is, in fact, a bunch of racist clap-trap. But, please, I support you, so read on… I’m so very amused… I thought this was a joke site until I read further looking for photos of gorgeous women, which I found all over the place here. How many of you are married to, or dating leggy, blonde models? How many of you would give your fat, slobbering wives over to experience one evening with a woman as gorgeous as Ashwari? You can cite all the evidence in “scholarly’ journals that you wish, but the fact is that you are speaking of your own opinions of attractiveness. I married a beautiful woman of Irish descent, but previously to that I dated several black women and was lucky enough to date many “ethnic” women who were gorgeous and wonderful and far too smart to bother posting anything to your sad little site as I am doing right now. I feel pity for you, actually. If any of you were half as smart as you pretend to be, you’d know that you’re missing out on huge numbers of gorgeous women because you’re a bunch of racists. I think it’s wonderful! Seriously, because there are I.Q. deficient men like you out there, men like me will not have to deal with you getting in the way when we find a gorgeous woman who is other than blonde leggy model material. Of course, with you guys snapping up all the playboy bunnies (or in the case of the writer, the models from http://www.bigboobdreams.com) the rest of us will just have to content ourselves with hot, sexy, girls with chocolate skin and almond eyes.
Thanks!
Posted by rustymason on November 13, 2006, 11:12 PM | # And how does this make you feel, David? May I call you David? When did you first find out that your parents didn’t love you? How does calling people “racists” make you feel? Your lack of attachment to other people and lack of understanding of how basic society operates is fascinating, please tell us more. Oh, and someone post more pics of hot chicks, please. Posted by Lurker on November 14, 2006, 02:23 AM | # Is this David Morreale? Posted by Lurker on November 14, 2006, 02:35 AM | # If that is ‘our’ David, check out the photos. If I didnt know better Id say that the people pictured on his site seem to having something in common (no, not the beards) I just cant quite seem to put my finger on it… In the happy brown almond eyed, monoracial world of the future Im sure David will still find a willing audience of course. His music after all is a pure cultural artifact entirely divorced from any coarse human substrate, which is why of course we see the rainbow diversity of Davids photo page. If thats not ‘our’ David just ignore me! Posted by btw on November 14, 2006, 08:40 AM | # You are welcome, by rustymason. If you think that women looking like that one http://www.cosmopolitan.se/upload/artiklar/fasta/caroline_winberg.jpg are the prittiest for you, so be it. But there are plenty white men and women who prefer multiracial people. There is nothing you can do to stop them, it’s a natural selection. BTW, many african people have kind a nordic nose. Check this out. http://www.togoforum.com/Ap/missNigeria01.jpg http://www.jugendhilfswerk.de/wi/homepage_maek_0506/bilder/warisdirie.jpg http://www.mimimagazine.com/january2005/images/volume1-issue1-mimimagazine.jpg or wise versa many blond people have african nose. http://userimage.gamespot.com/images/profile/4/5/20298458279975763721733615736254/banner.jpg http://www.margaretriverblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/04/swedish-girl.jpg http://www.marriage.lv/pic/faces/rr11l5_little.jpg So I don’t quite understand your point. Posted by Lurker on November 14, 2006, 10:28 AM | # btw - OK youve listed three black women and three white and drawn attention to their features, kind of white for the black girls, kind of black for the white girls. Where youve shot yourself in the foot is the black girls are all models and rated as pretty but no-one is going to think of those white women as models (though I think one of them is quite nice - I think we all know which one I mean). So youve used pretty black women, whose attractiveness is derived, in part, from european-like aspects of their looks to argue for the equal attractiveness of black women and then cited unattractive white women whose unattractiveness is based, in part, on their possession of black features. Posted by btw on November 14, 2006, 11:24 AM | # “Oh, and someone post more pics of hot chicks, please.” Ok, rustymason. Here are your beautiful blond women for you. Enjoy! http://adweek.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/camerond_3.jpg http://www.romantic-future.com/girls/misa%20blond.jpg http://enjoy.eastday.com/eastday/enjoy/node58771/node58835/node167287/images/00788021.jpg http://www.usd.edu/images/pictures/original/usd%20blonde%20girl-hand_f.jpg http://interaktiv.vg.no/filmextra/bilder/personer/nicole_kidman.jpg http://www.enovine.net/moda/modeli/claudia_schiffer/claudia_schiffer_013.jpg And here are some photos for people who love beautiful women. raveena_tandon/raveena_tandon_10.
http://specials.rediff.com/movies/2006/jun/21sd1.jpg
http://home.sc.rr.com/pix4sale2002/images/cindy_crawford_01.jpg http://imstars.aufeminin.com/stars/fan/D20060228/27_779731392_f86_halle_berry_2_H114832_L.jpg http://gurkova.hit.bg/images/Natalia10.JPG http://media.santabanta.com/gal/mu2004/contestants/bahamas1.jpg http://tn3-2.deviantart.com/fs7/300W/i/2006/002/6/7/Asian_Beauty_by_yummychupachups.jpg http://media.santabanta.com/gal/mw2004/contestants/bulgaria1.jpg http://www.santabanta.com/wallpapers/rating.asp?catid=443060 Posted by btw on November 14, 2006, 11:36 AM | # Thank you Lurker for admiting that there are attractive dark people as well as unattractive blond. See it for yourself. http://www.cumberlink.com/content/articles/2006/11/10/ap/entertainment/d8lafu880.jpg http://www.mallikasherawat.us/img/mallika1.JPG I do not understand why are you so jealous and where are you going with that? BTW, most white female celebreties have done nose, lip and boob job in order to get some oriental look. Posted by Guessedworker on November 14, 2006, 12:11 PM | # btw, You - and many others - consistently fail to understand the import of this post. The issue is not about who has the most beautiful women but about the destruction of Northern European distinctiveness through mass Third World migration. Please try to answer to that rather than spam us with links to pictures of women you consider attractive. Posted by Englander on November 14, 2006, 01:33 PM | # “BTW, most white female celebreties have done nose, lip and boob job in order to get some oriental look.” What are you talking about? Posted by btw on November 14, 2006, 06:05 PM | # Some people here claim that “ White womens are the prettiest, the only ones that can truly be called beautiful.” That statement is ridiculous, ofcourse. Obviously many blond people love to blend with others, so what is your problem? Can you stop your blond women enjoy darker men? I wouldn’t call it “destruction of Northern European”, because multiracial people are prettier and helthier. BTW, I don’t want any race to disappear, but if that happenes through the process of natural selection, so be it! Posted by saira on November 14, 2006, 07:14 PM | # hey you white folks are bloody stupid, all your wihite women are just fucking balck men and you are worried about indians. dumb ass white folk get a life. Posted by Jack on November 14, 2006, 10:53 PM | # Message to J Richards: You, sir, are seriously warped in your views of Asian women. Some of the comparisons you make on this page are outrageous, bordering on hilarious. How can you honestly say that basically every single one of your ethnic examples are outclassed by the supposedly ‘finer’ examples of nordic women. I understand that everone has their own tastes and opinions but you are making comments that seem based on a level of racism and ignorance that I (and others who have seen this page) could only describe as ‘Nazi-esque’. Posted by asdfjkl on November 16, 2006, 12:04 PM | # They’re saying Nordic women are the best looking because they are. They don’t have the wide nose with the large nostrils, the saggy breasts, and the baseball bat shaped legs that many black women do-not saying all black women have these features but it’s in the majority. They also don’t have to use chemical hair relaxers in an effort to approximate another race’s hair texture like EVERY picture posted of EVERY mullatta/latina woman (passed off as black), dye their hair blond, or put a white line down the bridge of their nose with some dark foundation on the sides to give the “illusion” of a long straight nose or get a nose job to narrow their nose (they have those beautiful noses naturally). Nordic women are golden haired, blue eyed, slender bodied beauties. Posted by btw on November 16, 2006, 05:26 PM | # I’m still waiting someone to post pics of good looking
http://news.theglobalindian.com/content_images/Indian%20woman%20eyes.jpg Posted by mon on November 17, 2006, 04:28 AM | # youre completely WRONG WRONG WRONG!! & so freaking biased, dont even start with me! what were you thinking-- all of your reasonging is baised-making this assumption that nordic/ european women are way more beautiful. not stopping to realize the women in india that are beautiful--are NATURALLY beautiful- & have exotic beauty, not the typical commercial beauty thats found everywhere you go! & ahswariya rai is a stick, so i dont know where the heck you pulled a wide waist and braod shoulders out of--but that woman is real, not a bunch of fake plastic & makeup that diets & worksout insanely. Posted by Lisa on November 17, 2006, 07:42 PM | # Racists masquerading as scholars? Who knew this could still happen in the year 2006? Posted by Koyarus on November 18, 2006, 01:24 AM | # BTW, I don’t want any race to disappear, but if that happenes through the process of natural selection, so be it!
Besides, even if nature decided to select against a certain form of organism, that doesn’t mean people should dawdle. If a critically endangered plant found in a rainforest, for example, that naturally produced a rejuvenating serum of some sort, was on the brink of being wiped out by the sudden increase in leaf eating ants in the plant’s habitat, would you sit back and say “meh, it’s natural selection, duder. Go with the flow” or would you say “holy crap, guys, let’s collect some seed samples and grow our own immortality shrubs and get stonking rich!!!1”? I know that analogy went off tangent a bit, but you get the idea. You’re guilty of committing the naturalistic fallacy big time, and even then the supposed ‘natural selection’ you were talking about is entirely in the hands of mere humans.
Racists masquerading as scholars? Who knew this could still happen in the year 2006?
Oh, and hello everyone. If you remember me at all. Posted by Bella on November 18, 2006, 07:57 AM | # Do you guys realize that it’s yourself you love??
Posted by bella on November 18, 2006, 08:15 AM | # I almost forgot..what do the guys think of that blonde chick who married the very black singer Seal??
Posted by Born in Fiji on November 19, 2006, 11:09 AM | # J Richards, White nationalists who post racially biassed statements make others hate whites more. Have you as a white ever thought from that angle? Or is white is right the usual mantra of the day? Posted by Born in Fiji on November 19, 2006, 11:32 AM | # To those Caucasian-centric peoples, The border region of Aandhra Pradesh and Tamizh Naadu is the least caucasian region of India, probably after Chota Nagpur in the Jharkhand Orissa border. This is the core Australoid zone where the rich dark brown colour dominates. This is near the Rayalsima region which boasts the temple of Shrinivas who is depicted as the Lord of the 7 hills(Ezhu Malai Devuda). Folks from this region be proud! The Lord himself is depicted as black skinned and is worshipped by all Hindus of all so-called ‘castes’. In fact in sanatana dharma one does not have to born a Hindu to be a Hindu. It is the eternal truth unlike the rants and raving of Christmas tree worsippers in the west who worship blonde ‘goddesses’. To all you caucasian-feature loving peoples, I challenge to come to the land of Ezhu Malai Devuda and cleanse your mind of stupid carnal lust and forget that so and so Miss Indiana will offer you some ‘favour’ if you send her roses. Better spend energy of make roses to present to the Lord of all mankind. Posted by btw on November 19, 2006, 08:18 PM | # Koyarus, “Mass immigration” is not a threat to your kind. If your people did not like to blend with others, they wouldn’t. But they DO! That is a natural selection. Btw, not olny the cutest people will be selected. The wisest, the good hearted and the helthiest men and women will survive too. Posted by Emma Regina on November 20, 2006, 02:30 AM | # You picked the worst pics ever. The others were Hooters girls. Untouchables are not considered by many to be Indians, as they have no Aryan blood. Mongolians were famous for masculine features. They are not Indians. That what Mongolia’s for. There are other countries besides India. I can see that you are a prostitute. Fuck you! My cousin is a blonde Indian. She is the prettiest person in the world. If the meaning of this is to say that blondes sleep with the whole world, then shut up. I think that you are saying that being a whore is virtuous. Posted by Emma Regina on November 20, 2006, 02:33 AM | # Aishwarya Rai has blue or green eyes. Posted by Emma Regina on November 20, 2006, 02:37 AM | # Your favorite “nordic” stars. http://www.tackystars.com/content/BadMakeUpandhair/index.shtml Posted by Emma Regina on November 20, 2006, 02:57 AM | # Some of the Indian “girls” were Amithabh Bachan in satires. Posted by I. Jonassen on November 20, 2006, 06:02 AM | # De Arndt, This is a response to your allegation of flaws in my previous comment.
“Those studies do not indicate significant clustering patterns either”? Are you kidding? Richards previously posted the following nearest-neighbor dendogram based on 24 neutral craniofacial measurements.
Do you not see any significant clustering pattern? Don’t you see that the clustering is along geographical lines? Once again, no correlation analysis was involved in coming up with the clusters. More interestingly, do you consider the Nubians and the Somalis to be Caucasoid? The neutral craniofacial inter-landmark distances of the Nubians and Somalis being closer to that of Europeans, it is not possible to call Indians Caucasoid but not the Nubians and the Somalis. However, if you or Malcolm believes that the Nubians and the Somalis are a Caucasoid people or members of the same race that whites have membership in then you people are not worth debating with. A study such as above wouldn’t just provide a dendogram; it will also provide numerous statistics documenting the differences between the groups. For instance, C. Loring Brace, the lead author of the study, presented the results from a discriminant analysis of the samples. The probabilities that a skull from the English Neolithic or the German Neolithic cannot be accommodated in the modern European group were 0.686 and 0.168, respectively, but the probabilities that they cannot be accommodated in the India group were 0.004 and 0.032, respectively. In other words, one cannot confidently exclude the English/German Neolithic skulls from the modern European group but easily exclude them from the India group. How is this possible if according to Malcolm there are no significant differences between Indians and Europeans when it comes to craniofacial features, and do you believe that the results support your contention of no significant clustering pattern? Brace also presented Mahalanobis distances (D2) between the clusters; some examples: Northwest Europe-Central Europe (1.7), Northern Europe-Southern Europe (3.34; from a separate study), Northwest Europe-India (10.7), Northwest Europe-black Africa (26.2). Why is the Mahalanobis distance between Europeans and Indians non-zero if there are no statistically significant differences between Indians and Europeans? Where has Malcolm provided any references that the nearest neighbor amalgamation rule does not demonstrate statistically significant differences between clusters?
Wow! You have had people saying there is no genetic basis for race, and then Rosenberg comes along and shows that the largest set of neutral DNA markers at the time of the investigation separates humans along six geographic clusters. These clusters also correspond well with the geographic races proposed by Linnaeus. Very inconvenient for race deniers, isn’t it? However, two objections are raised. It is argued that the geographical clusters are an artifact of sampling geographically well-separated populations and assuming that there is a correlation structure underlying neutral DNA markers within populations. Then, Rosenberg shows that even if one uses an uncorrelated alleles model and samples geographically adjacent populations over a broad region spanning the major populations of the world, one still ends up with the same geographic clusters. Moreover, these geographic clusters are obtained notwithstanding clinal distribution. What argument is left for the race deniers? How can you question the significance of Rosenberg’s work? Do you want him to spell out, “Okay children, humans are divided into the following races...”? Do you expect such a statement from a mainstream academic desirous of maintaining his funding and continuing his research work on population genetics? Can’t you read his papers to see what exactly the races are?
We are not talking about an experimental design where independent variables are being manipulated to see the effect on dependent variables, which is where one would use a factorial design. We have a situation where there are 24 craniofacial measurements per individual, many individuals per population and multiple populations. What n-by-k factorial design do you propose so that the dataset can be “pooled” and then analyzed using a single ANOVA? Do you know of a similar study that has done this? Your comment is absurd. Malcolm is either implying that one carry out multiple ANOVAs, which nobody would given problems with multiple statistical tests as I mentioned previously, or that an ANOVA be used for the multivariate analysis, which cannot be done since it is a univariate tool.
What is the point of your comment? If A and B cluster together before joining C, then A and B are closer to each other than either is to C, which is what you are saying and is also something that I have never disputed, but this does not prove that A and B belong to the same taxonomical group, which is my point and which is something that you have not disputed.
Global consensus is not relevant because I did not address it. I addressed the beauty question using Malcolm’s criteria.
I have not claimed that Malcolm’s personal opinion is evidence of global consensus. I also haven’t implied any contradiction in Malcolm’s comments related to his global consensus comment. “Malcolm’s personal opinion as a white”? Do you seriously believe that Malcolm is white? Malcolm asked Richards to explain why the following Indian does not have Nordic facial features. Is this question coming from a white person or a non-white under the illusion that his kind is a dark version of whites?
Malcolm wrote that the Nordic women posted by Richards all look the same. Is this comment coming from a white person or a non-white who like most people has a hard time distinguishing the facial features of people belonging to another race?
Once again, global consensus is not the issue. Besides, some Indians here have acknowledged that whites look better; some Indians have attempted to pretend to be white to make their point; Malcolm stopped posting links to pictures of attractive Indian women a long time before Richards told him goodbye, and for obvious reasons that I stated earlier; and there have been other non-whites that have stopped posting links to women whom they believe beat Nordic women in looks after Richards responded with comparisons. Richards will probably post other comparisons. Richards has also made other points such as successful men disproportionately seeking white, especially Nordic, trophy wives, Japanese men having a preference for Nordic Russian prostitutes, etc. Therefore, whereas there is no 100% consensus, Nordic women are undoubtedly regarded better looking than Indian women by the majority of the world’s population.
I have not ignored the comment. I clearly stated that Malcolm has called Nordic women better looking than others on average, but that the best looking women are Indian. Malcolm’s assertion appears to be strange. It is Malcolm’s justification for this belief that is absurd and the reason for my euphoric comment. Malcolm explains that the best looking women are found among upper caste Indian women because their white ancestors absorbed non-whites and shifted toward the median of the facial features of the world’s populations; the median being preferable to the extremes. The question is if Nordic facial features are better than others on average, i.e., the Nordic average is better than the non-Nordic average according to Malcolm A, then how is it possible for non-Nordic admixture to increase the attractiveness of a Nordic population? Malcolm’s reasoning is obviously absurd. Why are you defending such an ignorant and stupid charlatan? Posted by btw on November 20, 2006, 11:08 AM | # I’m still waiting to see a proof that nordic woman are better looking. Can you post some photos to convince me? BTW, many blond people say that they wish they had sparkling dark eyes, wavy dark hair and tanned skin. Posted by Englander on November 20, 2006, 02:14 PM | # This thread is badly in need of some photos of beautiful nordic women. I find plenty of non-whites attractive, but I also consider white women to be by far the most beautiful on earth. Tthe most popular appearance-altering procedure would be blonde hair dye. Personally I like brunettes. Posted by andrew on November 20, 2006, 06:20 PM | # The best looking 1% of people on this earth have surely got to be a mix ,as to gain these features you would somewhere along the line have to take the most perfect facial assets of each/a race .
Posted by Emma Regina on November 21, 2006, 01:34 AM | # You can never really say that Indians are “ugly.” Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. This is one crazy beholder.
Think about this:
Posted by Emma Regina on November 21, 2006, 01:35 AM | # GET A LIFE!!! Posted by Pooja on November 21, 2006, 03:15 AM | # Hello. I have to say this is a very racist/biest website. Of all the Indian actresses shown above, the worst pictures were diliberatley chosen. You probably very well know that Aishwarya Rai is considered the most beautiful women in the world also said by Julia Roberts herself. You also can not base the beauty of the entire country of India based on a single Indians beauty. The pictures of India posted up there were diliberatley taken from villages. It would be the same as taking pictures of so called “ghetto” places/neighborhoods in America. Why have you not chosen places such as New Delhi, Pune, Goa, Agra, Amritsar, Madras, Bombay, Banglore or any other city or hill station in India where everyone dresses and acts the same including education standards and lifestyle as here set aside certain cultural basics. Posted by pOOJA on November 21, 2006, 03:24 AM | # NO ONE CAN SAY THE INDIAN ACTRESS AISHWARYA IN NOT BEAUTIFUL. Posted by Pooja on November 21, 2006, 03:30 AM | #
Posted by btw on November 21, 2006, 09:35 AM | # There are many types of beauty. If you like blond women, here it is. http://images.starpulse.com/Photos/pv/Uma%20Thurman-12.jpg http://www.hollywoodjesus.com/movie/john_q/20.jpg If you prefer Universal beauty, check this out! http://www.newamericandimensions.com/images/Salma-Hayek-(2).jpg http://im.rediff.com/movies/2006/may/18poster2.jpg If you like Asian beauty, see here. http://www.meganesuper.co.jp/fm/ueto/aya_megane.jpg http://english.people.com.cn/200605/29/images/0528_A98.jpg If you prefer black beauty, here it is. http://www.celebrities.pl/whitney_houston/whitney5.jpg http://www.transcendmag.com/019.jpg I love diversity. Posted by Englander on November 21, 2006, 01:12 PM | # I appreciate the beauty of women like Aishwarya Rai, but she is not the most beautiful woman in the world, even if Julia Roberts herself says so. Those Indians above look quite weird to me, with their big noses.
Posted by andrew on November 21, 2006, 06:42 PM | # How come all the Indian women shown look very European ? surely there must be attractive ‘Indian looking’ women out there to show ? Posted by Pooja on November 21, 2006, 10:25 PM | # My point here is that not ALL of a certain race is beautiful or perfect. Not EVERY Indian women are beautiful or perfect just as not EVERY nordic women is beautiful or perfect. Only an imbecilic website would discuss the topic of supposedly “ALL” Indians being grotesque while “ALL” nordics being pulchritudinous. It is simply puerile to think so. Posted by Pooja on November 21, 2006, 11:56 PM | #
In conclusion, NORDICS are not the MOST BEAUTIFUL nor are INDIANS the MOST BEAUTIFUL. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.<3 Posted by J Richards on November 22, 2006, 01:24 AM | # Ladies and gentlemen, Retarded Hindus are hell bent on degrading this thread to a “who has the ugliest women” contest, misrepresenting my arguments and coming up with absurdities. Therefore, the comments functionality for this thread is temporarily removed. When I have some free time, I will reopen the comments thread, post my replies and leave this thread open for at least a couple of weeks for people to post their response to my comments. If then I still keep coming across retarded arguments, I will reply to the newer comments and close the thread for good. This thread shows no sign of becoming inactive, and it cannot be allowed to continue with no end in sight, especially if it forces me to repeat my arguments and attracts plenty of lowbrow comments, often by people who have not bothered to go through the entire thread before posting. Page 9 of 9 pages « FirstP < 7 8 9 Next entry: Multiculturalism and false concessions Previous entry: Christians singled out |
|
Existential IssuesOf noteRecent Commentslinksoflondon commented in entry 'John Wadham: father of modern British nationalism!' on 03/18/10, 05:58 AM. (go) (view) PF commented in entry 'Romilly Jenkins: Truth and 'Ethnic' Truth' on 03/18/10, 04:10 AM. (go) (view) PF commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/18/10, 02:39 AM. (go) (view) Wandrin commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/18/10, 02:17 AM. (go) (view) Wandrin commented in entry 'Serious Crime - The Ethnic Dimension; Fact and Fantasy' on 03/18/10, 01:45 AM. (go) (view) Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/18/10, 01:24 AM. (go) (view) Guessedworker commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/18/10, 12:35 AM. (go) (view) Borvo commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/17/10, 11:44 PM. (go) (view) PF commented in entry 'Diasporal Hijinks: Christopher Hitchens and the Janjaweed' on 03/17/10, 10:31 PM. (go) (view) Maximilio commented in entry 'Is Dr. David Duke, Ph.D., a Kosher Nazi?' on 03/17/10, 10:12 PM. (go) (view) Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/17/10, 08:01 PM. (go) (view) PF commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/17/10, 07:44 PM. (go) (view) Robert Reis commented in entry 'Europe's Future: Is this what "they" want?' on 03/17/10, 07:29 PM. (go) (view) PF commented in entry 'Blowing Bubbles' on 03/17/10, 07:27 PM. (go) (view) Dan Dare commented in entry 'Blowing Bubbles' on 03/17/10, 06:33 PM. (go) (view) Dan Dare commented in entry 'Blowing Bubbles' on 03/17/10, 05:44 PM. (go) (view) Gorboduc commented in entry 'Blowing Bubbles' on 03/17/10, 05:22 PM. (go) (view) g commented in entry 'Blowing Bubbles' on 03/17/10, 05:06 PM. (go) (view) Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/17/10, 03:16 PM. (go) (view) Guessedworker commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/17/10, 02:30 PM. (go) (view) DRS commented in entry 'Blowing Bubbles' on 03/17/10, 02:22 PM. (go) (view) James Bowery commented in entry 'Serious Crime - The Ethnic Dimension; Fact and Fantasy' on 03/17/10, 02:00 PM. (go) (view) Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/17/10, 01:45 PM. (go) (view) MsAnnThrope commented in entry 'A genocide in South Africa' on 03/17/10, 12:17 PM. (go) (view) Lurker commented in entry 'A genocide in South Africa' on 03/17/10, 11:42 AM. (go) (view) Guessedworker commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/17/10, 11:35 AM. (go) (view) Gorboduc commented in entry 'Serious Crime - The Ethnic Dimension; Fact and Fantasy' on 03/17/10, 10:37 AM. (go) (view) Gorboduc commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/17/10, 10:18 AM. (go) (view) MsAnnThrope commented in entry 'A genocide in South Africa' on 03/17/10, 09:53 AM. (go) (view) Eddie Booth commented in entry 'Serious Crime - The Ethnic Dimension; Fact and Fantasy' on 03/17/10, 09:12 AM. (go) (view) Søren Renner commented in entry 'Saturday Riddle Classic' on 03/17/10, 03:12 AM. (go) (view) mossydottir commented in entry 'Saturday Riddle Classic' on 03/17/10, 03:08 AM. (go) (view) Guessedworker commented in entry ''Enlightened' Child Abuse' on 03/17/10, 01:12 AM. (go) (view) Gupta commented in entry 'The Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle' on 03/17/10, 12:25 AM. (go) (view) Gorboduc commented in entry 'Saturday Riddle Classic' on 03/16/10, 11:57 PM. (go) (view) Recent Posts
General NewsScience NewsScience CategoriesAll CategoriesThe WritersEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages. LinksEndorsement not implied. Crime General
Immigration
Islam Jews
Nationalist Political Parties
New Right Science Whites in Africa | |