The female desirability advantage, by race

The following chart, produced from the 2000 Census data, shows the percent of U.S. born citizens, age 30 to 40, who are married, broken down by sex and race. Mixed race respondents are not included.

Why people ages 30 to 40? Some people think that’s an age category where people ought to be married.

Why only people born in the U.S.? Most Asian immigrants come here married, so the Asian figures look a lot different when foreign born Asians are included. Foreign born Asians of both sexes are more likely to be married than whites.

	Percent married
Race	Male	Female	Female desirability advantage
Non-Hispanic white	64.9	69.6	4.7
Black	48.1	38.3	-9.8
Asian	51.6	65.9	14.3
American Indian	56.7	54.6	-2.1
Mexican	58.6	61.8	3.2
Puerto Rican	51.9	51.8	-0.1

I believe that the chart above tells us the female desirability advantage for each race. The fact that more white women are married than white men demonstrates that white women are more desired as spouses (due to the Woman Shortage).

There is no woman shortage for the black man. Among blacks, there is a Man Shortage.

But for Asian men, the Woman Shortage is the most severe.

Comments

[Turambar]

Nice piece of work.

It does lie on the premise that people are marring inside their own age group though.

Supposing that a black 30yo marries a black 25yo- that counts as a woman deficit.

Like wise if a 45 yo Asian man marries a 30 yo asian girl its -1 to the Asian males.

[Peter]

Now I'm confused. Let's just focus on the 4.7% "female desirability advantage" among whites. It's a known fact that more white men than white women marry outside the group, given the relatively large number of WM/AF marriages. Shouldn't that mean that a higher percentage of white men than of white women would be married? Or am I missing something?

[trumwill]

It's a known fact that more white men than white women marry outside the group, given the relatively large number of WM/AF marriages.

Look at the Black Male advantage. It outstrips the White Woman advantage by a factor of two. That likely overcomes the Asian Woman factor.

As Turambar points out, though, that some of these numbers might be skewed by when people get married. It would probably be better to measure ten years out from the average marriage age from each group or maybe measure people 5-15 years out from the average.

[PA]

I believe that BM/WF numbers fly under the radar somewhat because many such couples are live-in unmarrieds or post-breakup single moms. But the BM/WF effect on white men is somewhat dampned by the fact that many black men who have white women are bottom-feeders.

Asian men, however, have to deal with white men often taking the best-looking and smartest Asian girls.

[Mace]

How about the male desirability advantage?

From a study of online dating:

All genders and races tended to actually prefer partners of the same race. Generally less than 25% self-reported preferences for the same race. The only two exceptions were that very slightly higher than 25% of black females self-reported preference for the same race and 50% of white females self-reported a preference for the same race. Furthermore, when it came to white females and their actual pattern of responses, those that reported no preference for race had patterns of racial preference that were nearly identical to those that self-reported a preference for the same race. Either they were outright lying or somewhat more plausibly, I think they are simply unaware of their own subconscious racial preferences, or at least of their extent. Except perhaps when they are repeatedly attracted to assholes, women seem to be fairly content unreflectively going with whatever is in their subconscious patterns of attraction.

...In order to receive as many replies as the average white man, a hispanic man would need $77,000 more income per year, a black man $154,000, and an asian man would need $247,000 to be on a par with the average white man.

White men did also tend to be at a disadvantage for dating minority women. A white man needed to make $220,000 more per year to be on a par with black men in dating black women, and $59,000 more per year to be on a par with hispanic men in dating hispanic women. When it came to asian women though, they needed $-24,000 to be on a par with asian men.

[Hope]

"I believe that the chart above tells us the female desirability advantage for each race."

If this is the case then why are there so few Asian women represented in mass media (film, TV, music, modeling, etc.)? The entertainment industry in Asia is thriving with tons of Asian female idols, so it can't be that Asians have zero interest in these fields. Overall, think there is very little desire generated by popular culture for Asian females. In fact, if the modeling/acting industries are reliable indicators of beauty, Asian women are in general less attractive than women of other races -- I suspect white women reiterate this fact behind closed doors.

"white men often taking the best-looking and smartest Asian girls."

I may be projecting a bit here, but these are my general observations. I think it's not so much that most white men out there are actively daydreaming about Asian women, but that Asian women are more receptive to white men. Based on physical beauty alone (after you control for weight), an Asian woman is not more appealing than women of other races.

Smaller eyes, thinner lips, and smaller average breast sizes are not working in the Asian woman's favor, appearance-wise. There will probably be those out there who disagree with me about the subject of exotic Asian female beauty, but keep in mind that the standard of beauty in Asia is large eyes, larger breast size and lighter skin. The Asian female's sexual market value is likely artificially inflated by a perceived scarcity vis-a-vis the Asian male.

Asian women do express a marked preference for white men (on par or greater than their preference for Asian men), and since women are the gatekeepers, it's a lot easier for white men to get Asian women to form commitment with them than it is for them to get white women to do the same. Studies have shown that people in committed relationships tend to rate their partners to be more attractive (cognitive dissonance). The so-called yellow fever is probably something that only happens after a man gets involved with an Asian female in a long-term relationship.

[Mace]

^well said.

As for why Asian girls go for white guys, we can ask the Asian girls themselves:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SI3lPLsbwjw

[the professor]

I was going to point the same problem as Turambar, but now I'll just reinforce his point.

I believe there are more people married in their late 30s - early 40s than late 20s - early 30s. Also, men marry younger spouses. These two properties combined gives that if you look at the borderline couples, one (female) below 30, one (male) 30-40 OR one (female) 30-40 and one (male) 40+, you will have more women sampled. Simply put, this invalidates your "findings".

[the professor]

Another reason why your "findings" are wrong is that assuming the vast majority of people marry the same age, if you compute a weighted desirability based on percentages of people of that race, you'll get a positive number, which means more women got married, which means there are more married lesbians :) LOL

[Rob]

Professor, unless there are big racial differences in the age patterns of marriage(there may be, I dunno)the age effect should cancel out when we compare unmarried men v. unmarried women by race.

My first thought was that HS was only going to find a male pathology difference (black and hispanic men are in prison so the women aren't married) but the gap runs opposite in blacks and hispanics, so I think he's onto something.

Let's predict the results. If the sex that tends to marry later shows fewer of its members married in the 30-40 range, we would, based on the data, expect to see white men marry later than white women, black women marry later than black men, asian men later than asian women, and so on and so forth. Is this what we do see?

[Rain and]

If you go to White Nationalist discussion forums like Stormfront, you'll find a reoccurring theme is embittered white guys ranting about black guys taking white women. It is reasonable to assume these guys constitute part of the 4.7% who are left out because of higher quality black males in the sexual free market.

... Which is actually still heavily rigged against black males because of lingering extended family racism which discourages white women from dating black males. Expect this kind of dating to explode as women become more financially independent (allowing them to select men on the basis of sexual criteria instead of how much they earn at their embarrassing cubicle job) and Boomer relatives kick off.

If you go to Asian-American discussion forums like Model Minority you'll find the exact same bitter ranting (though couched in Leftist instead of Rightist political terms) coming from part of the 14.3% of Asian males who suffer from all the other higher sexual quality male ethnic groups.

Asian-Americans, by their very existence, probably buffer the spread of White Nationalism by lessening the gap between married white males and females. Part of the disparity white males would experience because of black males is passed onto Asian males by sucking up a substantial fraction of eligible Asian women.

[Bill]

Great website.

[-]

If you go to White Nationalist discussion forums like Stormfront, you'll find a reoccurring theme is embittered white guys ranting about black guys taking white women. It is reasonable to assume these guys constitute part of the 4.7% who are left out because of higher quality black males in the sexual free market.

What is quality here???

High class white women won't give a second look to ghetto men, and this is where the vast majority of minorities fall. On the other hand, only 1-3% of women are high class...

Most of the low class women look for quick sex, and they know that so do low class men. Hence the people in the ghetto have the most sex.

[ewr]

embittered white guys ranting about black guys taking white women.

Whereas black guys love seeing black women with white men? And black women love seeing black men with white women even more.

It is reasonable to assume these guys constitute part of the 4.7% who are left out because of higher quality black males in the sexual free market.

Except the percent of white women married to black men in the 2000 census is more like .47%. It's reasonable to assume you're either a black with poor reasoning ability or a Jew with a homoerotic interest in blacks.

By the way, note the study posted earlier in this thread: white women are more likely the black women to express same-race preference. You don't see more WM-BF couples because white men find black women less attractive than white women. Black men apparently agree.

Which is actually still heavily rigged against black males because of lingering extended family racism which discourages white women from dating black males.

Whereas black extended families actively encourage black women to date white men?

Expect this kind of dating to explode

Or don't, as PC orthodoxy ceases to be tenable in the face of science and racial preferences collapse under the weight of hispanic immigration.

Entitlement programs already subsidize the type of white women who are likely to breed with black men. Affirmative action has created a pool of middle-income dull blacks, artificially increasing their attractiveness to dull, ugly white women. Even still, we've yet to see an "explosion" in such pairings. Women who attain "financial independence" in professional or managerial jobs are unlikely to ever mate with blacks in large numbers, to say the least.

[ewr]

A total of 42,912,091 white husbands (non-hispanic) are reported, versus 42,655,663 white wives (non-hispanic), are reported in the 2000 Census.

The numbers are roughly 1.9 and 2.2 million for Asian husbands and wives, and 3.7 and 3.5 million for blacks.

http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/phc-t19.html

[PA]

There was a BM/WF interracial dating explosion of sorts involving younger women during the early to mid-1990s. It was fueled by a couple of things:

1) A youth pop culture that took a turn for virile R&B (groups like Boys 2 Men that got heavy MTV airlpay) while white youth culture offered little at the time besides hard rock in its dying self-parody phase and morose, asexual Grunge. And some girls were curious.

2) A general atmosphere of affirmation for black culture, which coincided with Bill Clinton's election. This was a zeitgeist thing rather than a direct causation, but I think it was a factor anyway. As I remember, post-Cold War / pre-Internet Political Correctness had its heydey during those few years, and probably had an effect on the B-W miscegenation taboo losing its force.

3) An affirmative-action fueled rise of black middle class, which created a large pool of non-ghetto young black males

In any case, just from my observation, it looks like BM/WF pairing has had its day, peaking around the mod-90s, and I see a lot less of it now.

That's probably because it's been commonplace enough for the "forbidden fruit" curiosity to no longer be a factor.

Also, no doubt young girls see plenty of washed-up unmarried, unsupported white women yelling at their mixed-race kids at Walmart. Maybe that even describes their older sisters. Hardly a glamorous image.

[K]

Regarding BM/WF, it's huge. In Minnesota sometime in the early 2000's, about half the black men who married married white women.

There are LOTS of black men / white woman pairings.

[ewr]

Regarding BM/WF, it's huge. In Minnesota sometime in the early 2000's, about half the black men who married married white women.

I just checked, and as of 2005, Minnesota is 86% white and 4.1% black. If every black man in Minnesota married a white woman, you'd get just barely over 4.7% of white women married to black men.

What proportion of black men actually marry in MN? And how representative of blacks in general is this group?

Of those who do marry, you say half marry white women. That's still quite a bit less than would be expected if marriage partners were assigned randomly, hardly supporting the idea white women are lining up to marry black men.

If roughly half of black men marry in MN (someone who cares can look up the actual number), and half of those marry white women (if that's correct), we get something like 1.2% of (frequently ugly/overweight) white women in MN marrying black men.

[Rain And]

I think what the chart really shows is that the biggest wife thieves of all aren't white or black males, but the goddam geezers. Blacks are the only excess males on the chart, and there is no way 9% can explain the disparities in the other groups, so the extra men have to be coming from somewhere else. So unless the women are married to foreigners, lesbians, or bigamists, the disparity must be caused by goddam geezers stealing all our fertile women-folk.

If Half Sigma really wants to defend all the bare branch betas, he should, instead of condemning the modest number of white male rice kings, call upon the true cold-hearted alphas-- the geezer males of this nation-- to look into their cholesterol packed hearts and agree to stop pusillanimously poaching preferential prime pudendas.

[Bruce G Charlton]

From an evolutionary psychology perspective, the interpretation should focus on female choice.

The primary factor motivating female choice is male status (women prefer men to be of higher status than themselves).

This could explain the different levels of male marriage since the average status would (I guess) be white higher than asian higher than black.

Your data suggests that a secondary factor of female choice may be that women find black men more attractive than white men than asian men (all else being equal) .

This could explain the pattern shown: the low level of black female marriage (since black women are seeking the relatively rarest category of black men of high status) and also the low level of asian men's marriage (since asian women may find white men more atractive than asians and they are also of higher status).

[Peter]

I think what the chart really shows is that the biggest wife thieves of all aren't white or black males, but the goddam geezers. Blacks are the only excess males on the chart, and there is no way 9% can explain the disparities in the other groups, so the extra men have to be coming from somewhere else. So unless the women are married to foreigners, lesbians, or bigamists, the disparity must be caused by goddam geezers stealing all our fertile women-folk.

Uh-oh, I'm guilty. My wife and I were in different age cohorts by decade when we got married - I was 40, she was 39. For a few months, therefore, we contributed to the higher percentage of women being married while in their 30's. So blame me.

But seriously, I suspect that many of the different-age-decade marriages are of this type, men in their early to middle 40's marrying women in their middle to late 30's. In many cases (as with ours) both were previously married.

[David Alexander]

A youth pop culture that took a turn for virile R&B (groups like Boys 2 Men that got heavy MTV airlpay)

Ah yes, the days when R&B wasn't polluted with hip-hop. As far as I'm concerned, there's no R&B anymore, but black females singing to hip hop beats...

A general atmosphere of affirmation for black culture, which coincided with Bill Clinton's election.

Or as he's jokingly referred to by some, America's first black President.

Interestingly, I remember the early 90s littered with lots of young black people who were interested in Bob Marley and Afrocentrism. The back to Africa movement was at its peak and it sucked up a lot of smart black kids who should have been in college or working and doing something productive.

An affirmative-action fueled rise of black middle class, which created a large pool of non-ghetto young black males

The first generation of blacks who were born after the Civil Rights movement were entering college and reaching their twenties.

[AG]

What left for Asian men? Only top SES Asian men get married and have offsprings. Another evolution pressure for Asians. It is good thing in long run.

If hard competitive enviroment selecting high IQ, this is one of them.

[AG]

If future, maybe hundred years later, all pure blood East Asians in USA are descendants of highly successful Asian men since Asian men hardly marry outside their ethnicity. Low SES asian men will be wiped out.

Then, legacy is like that of southeast Asia. Pure blood Chinese are more successful.

The worst thing to any ethnic group is to let loser survive. That is dysgenic.