Are women who tan sluts?

In the field of human biodiversity, there recently has been more attention on color variation, such as Rushton and Templer’s “Do pigmentation and the melanocortin system modulate aggression and sexuality in humans as they do in other animals?”

And as noted by Peter Frost and others, there seems to be same-race variation in pigmentation.  Both among Europeans and North Asians, one finds that the upper classes tend to be fairer skinned, and the lower classes darker skinned.  Think of the “fair princess” (beauty = fair skin) and epithets throughout literature, such as “white-armed Andomache” or the fact that fair-skinned women are often thought of as more virtuous.

Globally, women will go to great lengths to make themselves appear more fair, as skin-lightening products are some of the most-sold beauty products in the world. In short, surveying history, one could say fairness is adaptive; swarthiness, maladaptive, at least as they concern recent post-hunter-gatherer societies.  Is fairness part of the domestication of Europeans and North Asians (as with foxes)?

Why, then, in the West,  the radical changes of the past 40 years or so?  Why is tanning among white women now considered hip?  Why do some white women intentionally try to make themselves look darker?

In short, one could say much in the West is now dysgenic; whatever the media (and those who have real power) prescribe is probably contrary to reality.

Also note that the rise of the tanning phenomenon coincides with the sexual revolution.  Does tanning of women denote sexual availability?  Are tan women perceived as being sexually easier?

I have no hard data on this but from my experience (of frequently going out for a decade in major American and European cities) guys internally view fair women as marriage material, and overly tanned women as sluts. (If this is true, this could be a powerful weapon for women looking to snag a husband.)

Thoughts?

Further Reading:

Peter Frost on Ashkenazis and the vilification of blondes, Skin color and the menstrual cycle, and the trading of fair-skinned women.

“Human Nature vs. Hollywood Political Correctness”

Torn

From time to time to time, Victor Davis Hansen creeps up to the very edge of honesty on matters of race, ethnicity, crime &c.

But, as soon as he gets called out on it, his first reaction is to point out how quick he was to condemn The Derb for The Talk.

I assume that everybody here has seen the relevant bits & pieces at NRO, Vdare &c, so I won’t bother linking to them all (unless somebody asks!)

So what do we think of VDH? Mostly a good guy, or mostly a coward?

Personally, I find it hard to blame him. He’s got tenure, NRO will publish pretty much anything he writes…but all of that could be taken away in a moment if he steps over the line.

I’ve never had that much to risk. So it’s easy for me to say: he’s mostly a coward.

Sob Bruthahs

Commenter Harry Baldwin at ISteve sums up nicely my own reaction to Obama’s presser following the Zimmerman verdict:

“One of the most notable elements in Obama’s remarks on the Zimmerman case, as well as in his 2008 race speech, is that he always puts the anger of black people in context, i.e., justifies it, while as far as he’s concerned the concerns of white people have no context outside of racism. Thus, he understands why blacks are angry that a woman would clutch her purse when they walk by or that a shopkeeper would follow them in his store, but sees no justification for the woman’s fear of black street crime or the shopkeeper’s concern about black shoplifting. But shouldn’t the entirely reasonable fear of black criminality carry more weight than the wounded amour-propre of young black males? And anyway, aren’t black handbag-holders and shopkeepers just as wary as white ones of those young black males (dubbed by police ‘suspect: usual’)?

“Why have we sacralized black anger? Who cares what black people are complaining about this week? Why must they be taken any more seriously than spoiled children?”

Well, why indeed?

For literally decades, now, I’ve watched (certain) black males gnash their teeth and rend their garments about how awful it is to be the object of white fear* – while never once showing the least interest in or understanding of the reasons for that fear.

Limitless self-pity plus zero empathy makes for a singularly unattractive combination of traits.

And there really is a better way to approach these things, as I can testify from long personal experience. Strange to tell, I have fairly regularly, over the course of many years, been the object of unwarranted fear. But I never took offense, I always sympathized, and whenever I noticed the problem, I took immediate action to defuse it. I strongly recommend that the young coulda-been-Obama’s-sons of the world take note:

I’m a fast walker. Always have been – it just comes naturally to me. I’m also (or, at least, used to be) a bit of a night owl, and more than a bit of a loner. So I’ve often found myself out, walking fast, here and there, by myself, late at night. So I’ve often found myself approaching people, on foot, from behind, late at night. Sometimes older people, sometimes women. Sometimes older women.

So here I am, striding along, minding my own business, contemplating Aquinas’ First Way, or Nietzsche’s Parable of the Lambs, and suddenly I realize that the person a little ahead of me on the sidewalk is showing distinct signs of nervousness – hesitating, glancing furtively from side to side – possibly even clutching her handbag.

Do I get offended? Am I outraged by this undeserved suspicion? Well, um, no. On the contrary: I kick myself for being so insensitive as not to have noticed earlier. And I take steps.

I’ve heard that in such situations it can be helpful to whistle a cheerful tune. But, unfortunately, I can’t whistle. So usually I just cross the street. A little more trouble for me, but I’m happy, ’cause I’m no longer causing anybody any unnecessary anxiety.

So what’s wrong with that? Is that too much to ask?

* * * * *

*And, for about the same length of time, I’ve watched (certain other) black males positively glorying in the same phenomenon. Funny, that.

The racial caste hierarchy of Latin America

In our previous discussion of Hispanics and crime, “Hispanics, Mestizos and Crime,” a commenter offers the following racial caste hierarchy of Latin America (from highest to lowest):

European  –> Castizo  –> Quadroon –> Mestizo  –> Mulatto  –> Amerindian  –> black African

Further Reading:

“Hispanics, Mestizos and Crime”

“What Race Are Hispanics?”

“Hispanics:  A Statistical Portrait“

“Pigmentocracy: Racial Hierarchies in the Caribbean and Latin America“

 

 

Team Obama Wants Every Neighborhood in the USA to be a Ghetto

Fox News reports:

The federal government is getting serious about pushing racial and ethnic diversity into America’s neighborhoods–and is using big data and big money to achieve its aims.

A new interactive database will help regulators, local housing officials and individuals take action on a newly proposed regulation that would require agencies to “affirmatively further” the inclusion of minority residents in white neighborhoods.

Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan announced the database and regulation at last week’s NAACP convention, saying the Obama administration was battling “a quieter form of discrimination” that was “just as harmful” as long-outlawed segregationist practices, like racially restrictive property covenants.

And so the progressive narrative has come to its logical end.  Deep in their hearts, even progressives know that blacks and mestizos will never be high achievers, so, instead of the quaint old narrative of lifting up the disenfranchised, the final narrative is to turn white enclaves of success into ghettos.  We’re now witnessing the terminal stage of the dispossession of European-descended peoples.

Hispanics, Mestizos and Crime

Chateau Heartiste on Twitter pointed out the fact that most of Texas’ most wanted criminals are Hispanic (actually, mestizo), although they’re listed as white, in reference to Ron Unz’s recent piece on race and crime.  The US Gov. listing Hispanics as white creates all kinds of problems for those analyzing data (so it’s not surprising that people, like Unz, have miscalculated data on Hispanics and crime).

Here’s an idea.  If the USA wants to be the hip multiracial empire it pretends to be, it really needs to learn to start using the M-word (mestizo).  It’s not derogatory, it’s already used by governments and demographers throughout Latin America, and it provides a more accurate breakdown than  the nebulous category of “Hispanics”.  In theory, leftists should like it.  Do they want their affirmative action set-asides going to successful white Argentinians or oppressed (non-white) Mexican mestizos?  Of course, to use such a category will break up the coveted “Hispanic” grouping that many on the left are now trying to foster. Those on the right, however, have no excuse and should see the obvious value of breaking up the “Hispanic” category, but there’s a reason why Republicans are called the “Stupid Party”.

Further Reading:

“What Race Are Hispanics?”

“Hispanics:  A Statistical Portrait”

“Pigmentocracy: Racial Hierarchies in the Caribbean and Latin America”

Updates:

“The racial caste hierarchy of Latin America“

The UK: Island of Geniuses

There was much hype this week about a small British company that is on the verge of “curing cancer.”  The Independent reports:

A single-storey workshop on a nondescript business park in Oxfordshire is not the sort of place where you would expect scientific revolutions to take place. But behind the white-painted walls of this small start-up company, scientists are talking about the impossible – a potential cure for cancer.

For the past 20 years, the former academics who set up Immunocore have worked hard on realising their dream of developing a totally new approach to cancer treatment, and finally it looks as if their endeavours are beginning to pay off. In the past three weeks, the company has signed contracts with two of the biggest players in the pharmaceuticals industry which could lead to hundreds of millions of pounds flowing into the firm’s unique research on cancer immunotherapy – using the body’s own immune system to fight tumour cells.

Immunocore is probably the only company in the world that has developed a way of harnessing the power of the immune system’s natural-born killer cells: the T-cells of the blood which nature has designed over millions of years of evolution to seek out and kill invading pathogens, such as viruses and bacteria. T-cells are not nearly as good at finding and killing cancer cells, but the hard-nosed executives of the drugs industry – who are notoriously cautious when it comes to investments – believe Immunocore may have found a way around this so that cancer patients in future are able to fend off their disease with their own immune defences.

The leader of the research team, Bent Jakobsen, is Danish born, but the team largely English, which got me to thinking of the brilliance of British accomplishment.

Science isn’t truly practiced everywhere.  As Gregory Cochran illustrates with this graphic, science is only performed in certain regions of the world (mostly by European or North Asian-descended peoples).  And even then, certain European groups seem to outperform others (esp. the British, Germans, and French).

Regarding Charles Murray’s Human Accomplishment, it’s really quite remarkable how many of the world’s greatest accomplishments were performed by the British.  The UK has been a true intellectual powerhouse.

Here’s my own abbreviated list of major British scientific achievements:

Newton   (physics, calculus, optics)

Darwin (natural and sexual selection)

Michael Faraday (electromagnetic induction, diamagnetism and electrolysis)

Ernest Rutherford (NZ of English ancestry, nuclear physics)

James Clerk Maxwell (physics, electromagnetism)

Charles Lyell (geology)

Arthur Eddington (astrophysics)

Francis Galton (HBD)

Alan Turing (computer language)

Watson & Crick (DNA)

WD Hamilton (Neo-Darwinism, inclusive fitness)

Quite an impressive list, given the UK’s size, which can only make one proud of his English ancestry.

On the downside, one only worries that mass Third World immigration into the UK will eventually have a dysgenic effect, bringing this long trend of accomplishment to an end.

Quote of the Week: If Obama had a city, it would look like Detroit.

“If Obama had a city, it would look like Detroit.”

– Dennis Mangan

In other news, roaming gangs of black “Bash Mobs” prey upon Southern California.

Legal Justice in Multi-Racial Societies

The concept of ‘justice’ is ancient.  First widely popularized by Plato and Aristotle, ‘justice’ has remained a common element in Western political and ethical thought.  And while blind justice might be largely attainable in racially homogenous societies of European-descended peoples, it might not be so in multi-racial states. People, esp. non-Europeans, by design, might be just too tribal. Perhaps the real implication of the Zimmerman trial / Trayvon Martin affair is that the quaint  and fragile notion of ‘justice’ is often unattainable in multi-racial states.

Related:

“Can Multi-Racial States Ever Function? Some Examples with Caveats.”

“Blacks on twitter threaten random violence.”

Updates:

Cooper Sterling: “A Tale of Two Trials: What the George Zimmerman and O.J. Simpson Verdicts Reveal About Racial Denial“

Blacks on twitter threaten random violence

In light of the Zimmerman verdict, as predicted, blacks as of this hour are not only rioting in at least five cities, but are behaving quite badly on Twitter.  They’re promising to loot, rape, burn and and even kill people.  And nevermind that Zimmerman isn’t even white (but mestizo), blacks are threatening violence against whites too!  Gotta love diversity!

Here is but a small sample of things that were re-tweeted on Twitter over the past 30 minutes:

[N.B.  You might want to skip to the updates at the end of this post.]

The Neocon war against the West

I rarely read neocon Jennifer Rubin‘s drivel but took interest in a couple of her recent articles denouncing “racists” and plugging for mass immigration for the USA.

It got me to thinking about the immigration policy of Israel.  Let’s see.

– Israel supports the deportation of Africans from Israel.

– Israel supports the forced sterilization of Africans living in Israel.

– Israelis won’t even share a swimming pool with Africans.

– Israel wants to protect the wages of Israelis, and doesn’t want them driven down by mass immigration from Africa.

If Rubin cares so much about “racism,” why doesn’t she write about these “injustices”?

Of course, Rubin won’t ever denounce these sensible policies by Israel, but she’ll continue to produce op-ed after op-ed supporting mass immigration into the West and denouncing whites as being “racists.”

Why does Rubin support sound policy for Israel but mass immigration for the USA and Europe?  Why does Rubin want to see the West transformed into a Third World sewer?

One can’t help but wonder that Jennifer Rubin and her ilk are the true enemies of the West.

Related:

“Primer on Immigration and Human BioDiversity”

“Who Supports Open Borders? Summary of Open-Borders Elite in USA”

“Conservative Evangelical Nutjobs Pray for Amnesty“

The rise of identitarian thought…

As Conservatism now scuttles toward its much-deserved death, in Europe, and to a lesser extent in the United States, we are witnessing the rise of identitarian thought.

What is identitarianism?  Well, it’s about identity, but not a superficial cultural identity, which one can easily exchange for another, but deep identity, that is a genetic / hereditarian /  racial-ethnic identity that cannot be exchanged.  (Yes, blank slatists / culturists / Cultural Marxists  will despise identitarian thought.)

We previously discussed the implications of identitarian thought on religion:  “Religion 2.0: Identitarian Religion”

Now here are some other recent articles on identitarianism:

Gregory Hood: “Waking Up from the American Dream: Markus Willinger’s Generation Identity”

John Morgan: “Identity vs. Globalism in Stockholm: The 2013 ‘Identitarian Ideas’ Conference”

Saul Lilleby: “Identitarians Meet in Stockholm”

Roman Bernard:  “Remaking A People”

Georges Feltin-Tracol:  “Back to the Future: Guillaume Faye’s Archeofuturism”

F. Roger Devlin: “The Rectification of Names: Guillaume Faye’s Why We Fight”

Updates:

How exactly does Bryan Caplan differ from Cultural Marxists?

Nick Land has up an excellent post pointing out the absurdities of Bryan Caplan’s libertarian suicide race, which brings up another question.

How exactly does Bryan Caplan differ from Cultural Marxists?  Let’s look at similarities:  support of mass Third World immigration into the West: check; war against the biological family:  check; hostility against ethnocentrism (esp. among whites): check; bleeding-heart sentimentalism about how “bad” it is in Third World and how it’s Westerners’ moral imperative to let the Third World move to the West: check.

At the end of the day, the fanatical libertarianism of Bryan Caplan seems not to differ much from Cultural Marxism in that they both have the same goal:  the destruction of the historic West.