« Wordsum and STEM | Main | Another compromise in Washington »

July 28, 2011

Comments

They do have the right to delete whatever blog they want. If you appreciate him so much why not give him roissy.halfsigma.com and have him share space with you.

Hopefully, Roissy will inform everyone what happened. Last night I was watching John Stewart who was castigating conservatives who proclaim that liberals are vicious towards them and make life difficult. Let's see if Roissy is the victim of liberal viciousness in one way or another. If you are not self-employed writing anything related to HBD is a tremendous risk.

Hi, HS!

See http://heartiste.wordpress.com/

~~Mrs. Blessed

The gynocracy in which we live has a vested interested in keeping him quiet.

No, he changed his web address, for whatever reason. http://heartiste.wordpress.com/

I saw this, right after he had a new post up...My guess is hacking 60%, PC shutdown 35%, 5% self inflicted.

It looked there was some fancy footwork going on behind the scenes - the not-too-plausible insistence that it was a group blog, the "identity borrowing" comment in the Weekly Standard article, and the author-nickname changes from "Roissy" to "Chateau" to "Heartiste" (?).

Looks like the blog has been moved intact to another url, so you'd think that he did that on purpose.

Are there really several different authors contributing to that blog? I haven't read much of it in the last two years, but all the posts I have read are very similar in style to the original Roissy, and the reactionary politics are the same, too.

Speaking of evaporated blogs, does anyone know what happened to Oriental Right f/k/a Asian of Reason?

[HS: I suspect he got scared because someone at the college he attends identified his blog. But it's just a guess.]

You’re all wrong. He was sued into oblivion by Tom Leykis for stealing his shtick.

My guess is that Roissy wants to keep blogging but also reestablish some anonymity, whether it's for the purposes of his work, dating life, or both.

A non-linked break from the Roissy-branded blog is really the only way to do it while still transitioning his readers to the new "heartiste" venue found through other search terms.

I'd bet that his online notoriety probably introduced issues with women -- who are craven internet stalkers of men they date -- and so he's trying to make a clean break. The blog's too popular and possibly profitable for him to walk away from, but having women bail on you because their google prying reveals things they don't want to see is an unacceptable burden for a site devoted to game.

" the original Roissy no longer runs the blog, and the guys currently running the blog got sick and tired of people thinking they were Roissy, so they got rid of the old domain name which was roissy.wordpress.com"

That seems the most possible explanation to me. I heard Roissy has been busy writing a book or something, not really attending his blog with new articles...

Maintaining a blog is difficult. Especially if you're turning out 700+ word posts daily. Roissy has a gigantic ego; he's almost incapable of admitting mistakes, or copping to foolish statements. Also, more than a little insecure when documenting a taxonomy of, say, "haters" -- he'll almost certainly pre-empt the criticism by maintaining he has a life, etc.

As the blog progressed commentors would say "bring back the original author." I've thought the vast majority of posts were by the same author, but this gave him an out, and he continually referred to "we," changed the name to Chateau, and so on. The Unabomber also said "we."

Having a "group" blog allows him to be a little more venturesome when it comes to offering opinion.

Occam's Razor suggests that if a blog says it's a group blog and that if it posts more well-written, witty material than seems likely that one man could generate day after day, year after year, then it probably is a group blog.

I would think it much more likely that some popular blogs that don't admit to being group blogs actually are.

"he'll almost certainly pre-empt the criticism by maintaining he has a life, etc." - The Real Vince

I've always wondered myself when he has any time for women. Presumably he works then during his free time produces high quality blog posts and spends the rest of the day arguing with commentators.

Roissy has been calling himself Heartiste for awhile at his old blog. I'm sure he got a lot of heat after he was outted & this is a countermeasure of sorts.

"Occam's Razor suggests that if a blog says it's a group blog and that if it posts more well-written, witty material than seems likely that one man could generate day after day, year after year, then it probably is a group blog.

I would think it much more likely that some popular blogs that don't admit to being group blogs actually are."

Steve: are you trying to tell us something?!

Commander Shepard,

While he has kept up a very consistent pace and volume of high quality posts, it would not surprise me if many are in the can from weeks or months ago, when time permitted writing them. He intersperses those topic-oriented prefabbed posts in between the timely and impromptu ones.

One thing that will surely sustain a high-volume writer is knowledge that he's actually being read by a lot of people. So Roissy has plenty of incentive to keep the content going.

You'll notice that his evening and weekend posts are light to nonexistent, leaving the prime nighttime gaming hours open.

I have never really bought that there are equal-level writers at the site. Maybe junior contributors but I doubt he gave up any editorial or administrative control at all.

He just wants some plausible deniability -- "my 'colleague' wrote that, not me" -- when busybody girls ask him if he's gaming them.

Long time Roissy reader. My guess (if no hack,deletion etc) - that he is doing it to re-establish anonymity. I am not going to link obviously - but his identity was revealed by another blogger who got pissed about what he wrote about her. Which is why he changed to to Citizen Renegade. Now its easy to just google all his aliases - Roissy, CR etc and find out who he is - by starting with a completely new links, name etc he maybe trying to stop the google algorithm from associating his real name with the blog and the posting identity.

If Roissy is trying to regain his anonymity, then he's doing a poor job of it. Even when he was blogging as Chateau people still referred to him as Roissy and he's been using the Chateau handle for a while now. A simple Google search of "roissy real name" will direct you to his rival's site. Her document drop of Roissy is featured prominently on her blog so unless she wipes her blog, then his name will be out there in Google Land for a long time.

From some thread where this Lady Raine and some other fascist named Denise Romano talk about the so-called "outing":

-------

"Lady Raine says:

January 23, 2010 at 11:53 am

How can Doug NOT know that “hate speech” is NOT covered under the First Amendment?

Why do you think there’s SWAT teams that hose down and use tear gas on groups who are spewing hate speech and inciting riots/violence from their speech? Because they are only allowed “peaceable assembly” and are NOT allowed to use their “speech” to infringe on the rights, freedoms, and safety of any other group of people or person."
----------

Wow, just wow. These types are among us. They've gone through 12-16 years or more of schooling and still haven't the foggiest idea what the First Amendment is.

I doubt multiple authors are responisble for the site's content.

While I don't read Roissy all the time, I've read enough to know his best entries all have the same style which suggests that only one person is writing the best content and Roissy is a single author.

I believe there's one author behind Roissy. The reason being is that the writings posted there almost always share a similar, distinctive voice, even if the writings stray from Game. His voice is multifaceted, but that's just in line with how great of a writer he is.

I don't think his blog posts get in the way of his actual Game. Roosh makes almost every facet of his life easy to access online, and aside from a few awkward moments when girls google his name, his online persona doesn't really get in the way of his seductions.

The problem Roissy has is that he's trying to preserve his middle class existence and employment, while also being a mischievous daredevil online. Writing Game posts, which are unpalatable to feminists, would hurt his chances of keeping his job if he were outed. But the kiss of death is how Roissy merges HBD with Game. Numerous PUAs, such as Mystery, delve into evolutionary theory to justify their ideas. Roissy isn't afraid to go one step farther, and apply what you read in Steve Sailer's writings into the world of romance.

His identity has been outed before, and can be found with a simple Google search. It seems that hasn't fired him, but it's plausible that promotions, and alternative employment opportunities, would be much harder to nab. All the name changes are likely an attempt to keep coworkers unaware of what can be easily found.

"The problem Roissy has is that he's trying to preserve his middle class existence and employment, while also being a mischievous daredevil online."

I'm not sure if being outed is that big a hamper on one's career.

Randall Parker of Futurepundit blogs with his real name and Sigma's name is publicly available on Google. Sigma once wrote that his girlfriends were more likely to Google his blog entries than were his employers.

Maybe Roissy has moved to the West Coast?

His newest entry at his current address talks about the Pacific.

My guess is that he thinks it's "beta" to announce that your blog is moving and "alpha" to just move the blog and create an aura of mystery.


I too would like to know what happened to Oriental Right. His blog was interesting, and its disappearance was rather abrupt. But I admit there's a rather perverse part of me that is somewhat thrilled at the possibility that his blog shut down because someone in his college found out his true identity through clues and tips he left in his blog posts. I'm a NAM who loves reading HBD blogs but I still harbor a tiny bit of irrational resentment towards HBD people. Not sure why. The rational side of my mind accepts their reasonable arguments, but the irrational, emotional side has issues with their "meanness" towards NAMs.

"Steve: are you trying to tell us something?!"

That was my first thought as well! :-)

“‘meanness’ towards NAMs.”

The obvious, high-EQ response is Derbyshire’s acknowledgment that there is only one at the top of the pyramid. Even those on the far-right end of the IQ bell curve can have a mature understanding of their flaws in their other qualities. We can all commiserate or share a Buddhist-like nothingness.

Another way of looking at it is a detached, deep lookism. If we get old or our ex-boyfriend throws acid in our face, we shall separate the one inside from the outer layer. Genetics peels more layers. We are not our IQ. That is just an accident of birth. Your personality, your addictions, your temper are all hiding the real you. That does not make it much easier because there might not be a you, other than qualia. Plus, we still have to contend with your quick temper and obnoxious personality.

A third approach is utter nihilism, which gives me a profound sense of peace. If you start from the premise that humanity evolved, you are like Copernicus removing Earth from the Center. I recall reading Stephen Jay Gould comment on the Cambrian explosion and saying that complex life forms need not be. Well, the oneness of humanity need not be. Hence, diversity. Humans are not so special because we are not done, yet. I am an intermediate. I am a crocoduck. Nothing matters. Why regard anything in life as more meaningful than selfish ALU repeat sequences copying themselves over and over?

Major domo - I am one of those NAMS (Indian). Ignore the comment above. I came here to to study, 26 yrs old now, six figure income etc etc. Got laid with attractive Caucasian albeit promiscuous women. Do I get affected by the meanness of HBD blogs - not really. The best you can do in life is try your best, have decent people as friends and be happy. I have been racially abused a couple of times. The first time I was shocked,dumbfounded and didn't know what to say (was called a chimp among other things) - its hard to describe when someone makes you feel you are basically an animal not worthy/deserving of basic human decency. Now I shrug it off - for some reason it doesn't affect me. The only people I care about are my family, friends (white/Asian/Indian), that I do my best and lead a good life. Most of the abusers are losers themselves. Peace!

[HS: NAM is a non-Asian minority. As an Indian from south Asia, you are not a NAM.]

There have been several in-blog references to multiple writers at the "chateau." Roissy said it "had become a chore." It is rather different than it was when it was Roissy in DC. For instance, the lack of drawings and pictures, not constantly linking to himself and general lack of his humor. Most of the old commenters picked up on this and stopped reading.

The blog is rather repetitive so it wouldn't be hard to imitate.

"NAM is a non-Asian minority. As an Indian from south Asia, you are not a NAM." - Half Sigma

What about people from southwest asia (the middle east) they behave well in the USA and are middle class. In Europe it's another story....

Although for the record I think most of the trouble comes from North Africans and Pakistanis.

"What about people from southwest asia (the middle east) they behave well in the USA and are middle class. In Europe it's another story...."

Middle Easterners are interesting, in that they're definitely Caucasian, but ambiguously white. Ralph Nader is a Lebanese-American, and Steve Jobs' biological parents were Syrian. All but a few people would consider Nader or Jobs to be non-white.

I think Levantine Christians are ethnically white, so long as they speak fluent English. Levantines are also very white. (When I was in Israel and Palestine, I had a hard time making out the difference between Palestinians and Israelis, so long as they wore similar clothing.) Other Arabs, such as Saudis, Egyptians and Gulf State Arabs, are much darker and can't pass for white. Iraqis and often Berbers are comparatively light-skinned (Ibrahim al-Douri, the uncaptured Baathist, is a freaking ginger), though Levantines are lighter.

[HS: 99% of the people who know what Steve Jobs looks think that he's white, including me.]

"HS: 99% of the people who know what Steve Jobs looks think that he's white, including me."

Steve Jobs was adopted but he had an American mother. And when he was younger, he looked fairly ethnic. He could have easily passed for Russian, Jewish, Turkish, or Levantine Arab back then. His looks became more WASPy as he aged though.

[HS: Click here and you see a photo in which he looks white:

http://www.toptechreviews.net/tech-news/steve-jobs-iphone-4-is-a-normal-handset-with-occasional-errors/

Only racist white nationalist types would say he's not white.]

""NAM is a non-Asian minority""

NAM is not a good designator, as there are vast differences between North and South Asians. The average IQ of China is 104. The average IQ of India is 81. Big difference. Please don't group us all together.

[HS: The term isn't about IQ, it's about which groups are causing problems in the United States. Whatever the average IQ of Indians in India, Indians in the US don't cause any social problems (other than causing American-born people working in IT to paid a lot less than they otherwise would be).]


English Woman Speaks Frankly About Difficulties of Having Mixed-Race Baby with Man from India

Lowri Turner

Daily Mail, UK, 13 July 2007


"She's getting very dark, isn't she?" This is what one of my friends recently said about my much adored - 12-week-old daughter.

She didn't mean to be rude. But it was a comment that struck me with the force of a jab to the stomach.

Immediately, I was overwhelmed by a confusion of emotions. I felt protective, insulted, worried, ashamed, guilty, all at once. The reason? My lovely, wriggly, smiley baby is mixed race.

...

I am white and I have two sons from my first marriage who are both milky complexioned and golden haired. My twin sister, who I spend a lot of time with, has a Danish partner. As a consequence, she has two boys who are also pale skinned and flaxen haired.

Into this positively English next generation, I have now injected a tiny, dark-skinned, dark-haired girl. To say she stands out is an understatement.

...

The truth is, whatever the label, the fact there is a label proves that my daughter's conflicting parentage matters.

...

But when I turn to the mirror in my bedroom to admire us together, I am shocked. She seems so alien. With her long, dark eyelashes and shiny, dark brown hair, she doesn't look anything like me.

I know that concentrating on how my daughter looks is shallow. She is a person in her own right, not an accessory to me. But still, I can't shake off the feeling of unease.

I didn't realise how much her looking different would matter and, on a rational level, I know it shouldn't. But it does.

Evolution demands that we have children to pass on our genes, hence the sense of pride and validation we get when we see our features reappearing in the next generation.

With my daughter, I don't have that. Do black fathers who marry white women and then have paler-skinned children feel my sense of loss? Or maybe Chinese mothers or Middle-Eastern grandparents grieve when they see a child they know to be their own, but whose features don't reflect that?

...

Even admitting to having mixed feelings about her not being blonde and blue eyed, I feel disloyal and incredibly guilty.

I know the obvious comment is that I must have known how a child of our union would look when I married an Indian man, but it is a wise woman who thinks that far ahead when she falls in love.

I didn't think about any of this before I got pregnant. I wanted to have a baby. Her colour and culture were immaterial then.

But self-flagellation is not useful. I have more pressing concerns. I am now the mother of a 'black' child, even if she is more the hue of weak tea than espresso.

This is a role for which I am utterly unprepared. Part of me thinks I should be playing sitar music to her in her cot, mastering pakoras and serving them dressed in a sari, but that would be fantastically fake coming from me.

When she was born, pale but with lots of dark hair, I asked the midwife if her eyes would stay blue. 'Asian genes are very strong,' she said in what I took to be an ominous tone.

No more Brady Bunch kids for me. The midwife has been proved right and every day my baby's eyes get a little darker.

...


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-467787/I-love-mixed-race-baby--does-feel-alien.html


...

The IQ testing in India and China was done in the major urban areas. IQ comparisons between China and India are not completely fair, as China has historically had a policy of pushing the impoverished masses out of the urban areas in favor of the middle class. India has a policy of letting anybody squart wherever he wants and gets lots of peasants and slum dwellers in even the nicest areas. I bet if you exclusively tested middle class Indians, you'd find a mean higher than 81. Every programmer in the US has dozens of relatives back home that are about as smart as him.

Levantines are light skinned, but their facial features and build tend to be different. Tony Rezko has light skin, but is smaller and more ethnic looking than the typical European.

Steve Jobs is half-white.

[HS: Click here and you see a photo in which he looks white:

http://www.toptechreviews.net/tech-news/steve-jobs-iphone-4-is-a-normal-handset-with-occasional-errors/

Only racist white nationalist types would say he's not white.]

Did you not read my post? I said his looks became more WASPy as he aged. When he was younger, he definitely looked ethnic. Some people don't accept (some) Russians, (some) Jews, Turks, and Levantine Arabs as white because they originated from outside Europe so the distinction between "white" and "ethnic white" is important.

B

I have a personal story that could expand on that article. An Indian girl I knew was the spawn of mixed race sex. Apparently the guy was Indian and the woman was a hot prole. This mating is uncommon today and even more so back in the early 1990's. Though it confirms my suspicions that white prole girls are much more open to inter-racial dating than SWPL women despite their tolerance posturing. Still the Indian guy must have been pretty alpha to get with a hot white woman. Well the Indian guy's family would never let him marry a Caucasian girl so he abandoned her and his daughter. The daughter looks purely Indian (though quite attractive I might add) unfortunately underscoring the role of upbringing she has adopted prole culture. She's into taking drugs, getting drunk, is very promiscuous, has engaged in threesomes, has regular sex with other girls (though she says she prefers sex with men) etc. The daughter has never met her father and her prole mother discourages her from dating Indian guys and given the mother's experience it's understandable why. Despite this she still socializes with Indians in an attempt to fit in. Her appearance will never let her be truly accepted amongst whites.

Because of the ancient Hellenization in the near East (what is today Turkey, Lebanon, and Syria), you have some people from there who have Greek genes and look white, but they are probably a minority. You see many people from Turkey, Lebanon and Syria who are dark and look more Semitic than white.

The Middle East is a genetic crossroads of sorts. You have people from that area with all different kinds of looks. Some are more Semitic, some more Asiatic, etc.

Jobs looks white from the photo referenced above.

MUST-READ Articles on Indians:


Richard Lynn, IQ & the Wealth of Nations: Average IQ of India is 81

India & Racial Admixture: India is the Brazil of Asia

http://s1.zetaboards.com/anthroscape/topic/2633384/1/


Software Executive says Indians are Incompetent Programmers, Cheats and Frauds

http://www.vdare.com/letters/tl_102709.htm


The growing Indian lobby mirrors other Third World lobbies

http://www.thesocialcontract.com/artman2/publish/tsc1404/article_1241.shtml

Indians are the second largest group of illegal aliens in the United States:

http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2011/02/20/h-1b-and-illegal-immigration/


"Indian" is not a relevant group to measure for IQ. This is because castes have been largely endogamous for 1000s of years, as supported by genetic information. So, you have a whole range of IQ's, not one "Indian" one. South Indian Brahmins have very high IQ's. Northern Brahmin and banias are pretty high too, although Muslim depredation took a toll compared to the south of India. Many Indian Christian families that have been Christian for a long time are also converts from South Indian Brahmins and so high IQ. More recent converts tend to be lower-caste. Also, remember the 81 figure is doubtless reduced by childhood infection, etc. So the potential is much higher even for lower castes.

I think white proles are more open to dating lower class minority men. SWPLs go more for the Obama type of NAMs. A prole dating an Indian is pretty strange, unless the Indian was a Native American.

HS: "Indians in the US don't cause any social problems (other than causing American-born people working in IT to paid a lot less than they otherwise would be"

This isn't completely true. In the US, Indians are not as violent as blacks (although they're almost as violent as blacks in the UK). But there are other problems in the US. Indians are very dishonest, which causes many other problems, and there's probably an evo-bio explanation for it. Any honest STEM professor will tell you that the students he worries most about regarding cheating are Indians. This also carries over to professional life. Look at the Wall Street prosecutions for fraud in the past 5 years. Probably about 1/2 of those prosecuted are Indian -- not only were they involved in blatant financial fraud but they were not even very clever about it.

HS, why don't you just send the guy an email and ask? You did the same thing to Mangan. As annoying and talentless as Mr. Hissy is, I'd respect his right to cover his tracks for employment or family purposes.

Lawrence Auster blogged that he has metastatic pancreatic cancer. This type of cancer is terminal.

Sad to hear about Auster.

It's lower class for anyone to date someone from another race for the simple reason that this person must not value his or her own genes since not as many of them will be passed on in biracial children.

Regarding one's genetic fitness and passing on as many of his genes as possible (by procreating with someone from the same race) see:

http://www.mankindquarterly.org/samples/SalterMQXLVIII-3.pdf

Is that really so Nigel? I understand the social stigma against mixed race mating but is there really a biological one? It seems like the need to procreate with new groups would be high, particularly groups that are desirable. For example immigrants or first generation non-whites really lust hard for Caucasian women. Part of it is a beauty related for sure but some of it also has to be due to a need for validation and to feel like they've made it in the west (when high status mating partners like white women accept them) and also because white genotypes and phenotypes would be advantageous to their offspring in a western society.

Sure, there's a need for validation and to be able to say you've made it.

Check out the above poster AM in NAM.

"Major domo - I am one of those NAMS (Indian). Ignore the comment above. I came here to to study, 26 yrs old now, six figure income etc etc. Got laid with attractive Caucasian albeit promiscuous women."

First two things he does - claims big money and lots of attractive women. This in a post about not liking the HBDsphere attacking NAMs. He's probably making stuff up (alphas usually don't get called names or abused), but giving off the impression of having made it is his way of winning the argument.

Regarding Jobs, contrary to WN/Paleocon/Alt Right claims that Southern Europeans are "mud people" because Southern Europeans admixed with nonwhites, there has in fact been very little gene flow from Middle East in Southern Europeans.

Rather, to the extent there has been gene flow, it has been from Southern Europe TO the Middle East thanks to Alexander the Great and the Roman Empire's military victories in the Near East.

That's why Dr. Oz (Turkish), governor Mitch Daniels (Syrian) and Steve Jobs can pass for European (in some cases, like Mitch Daniels, North Western European).

"Levantines are also very white. (When I was in Israel and Palestine, I had a hard time making out the difference between Palestinians and Israelis,"

The majority of the 33% or so of the European Jewish genome which is Middle Eastern in origin is not Levantine Arab, it's Anatolian.

Modern European Jews have little if any genetic connection to the original tribal Palestine Jews from 2000 years ago.

See Dienekes' data which indicates Jewish Near Eastern DNA is Anatolian, not Levantine Arab, in origin and the majority of Jewish DNA (60-66%) is European:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadDUyeEtjNnBmY09EbnowN3M3UWRyNnc&hl=en_US&authkey=COCa89AJ#gid=0

"Regarding one's genetic fitness and passing on as many of his genes as possible (by procreating with someone from the same race) see:"

Salter (and the WNs/palecons/AltRighters) are idiots who STILL haven't been able to give the correct reason why race is important.

Contra Salter, there IS NO INSTINCT to exterminate outgroups (aka Genetic Interests/Group Selection) in favor of those most similar to you because evolution's purpose is to pass on adaptive traits - and not "similarity" - to ensure your descendents have the best genes needed for survival.

If maintaining similarity across generations were the purpose of evolution, then all lifeforms would reproduce asexually because asexual reproduction would limit how different your descendents would be geneticall from their ancestors.

The correct reason race is important is because of the adaptive TRAITS each race has which distinguishes them from the others. The most important adaptive trait in humans are psychological traits.

Nigel, if there is an instinct for racial loyalty to group, as Salter argues, then why are almost all non-white men attracted to white women*?

If there were actually an instinct for group interests, why do black men date non-black women at every opportunity?

* Note: According to the physical anthropologist and blogger Peter Frost, the reason non-white men are universally attracted to white women is because white women are inherently more beautiful than non-white women in terms of facial and physical morpohology.

""Levantines are also very white. (When I was in Israel and Palestine, I had a hard time making out the difference between Palestinians and Israelis,"

The majority of the 33% or so of the European Jewish genome which is Middle Eastern in origin is not Levantine Arab, it's Anatolian.

Modern European Jews have little if any genetic connection to the original tribal Palestine Jews from 2000 years ago."

Sure, but Israelis and Palestinians sure do look alike. I'll readily state that Palestinians are, on the whole, much darker than the Israelis, and that the Israelis have many fair skinned people. But when I traveled through Jerusalem, I found it difficult to distinguish Palestinians from Israelis if they were wearing similar clothing. The people in Palestinian camps didn't look physically that different from people in, say, Haifa.

There's no doubt that there are conflicting interests.

Frost is right that fair skinned white females are probably the most desired women on the planet - by all races.

There are mitigating factors.

And there's the desire to acquire adaptive traits.

Still, this doesn't negate that people want to pass on their own genes as much as they can, that they want children who look like them, etc. If you really like yourself and think that you are genetically adaptive, then it is in your interest to maximize the passing on of your own genes (by procreating with someone of the same race).

Obviously, notwithstanding all the chatter about "black pride," black men really do not like themselves and do not think themselves the pinnacle of evolutionary achievement; and thus black men are willing to forgo their own genes for the higher status of dating a white woman. This probably goes without saying.

But from the perspective of whites and North Asians, endogamy is an adaptive strategy.

Let me put it this way. Salter's analysis may be lacking some in terms of description, but his On Genetic Interests is not a descriptive account but a prescriptive tract. It's about ought and not is. Regarding Van Den Berghe's insights, they still hold. People generally tend to favor their own co-ethinics, even if there are other mitigating factors.

That said, Frost is probably right that fair white females are the most desired among various races, but that doesn't mean that every non-white is willing to forgo his own genotype to gain the status of possessing a fair white female.

I suspect there's a trade off and that one could graph this trade off: how many of one's own genes is a non-white willing to forgo to gain the status of marrying a fair white female.

The graph might look something like this from those least willing to forgo their own genes to those most willing to forgo their own genes.

Top: North Asians. Although some North Asian men might forgo their own genes to reproduce with a white female, this doesn't seem to be the general trend. Most North Asians want to marry North Asians. (I am looking for a study that shows that even in brothels Chinese men generally prefer Asian prostitutes to white prostitutes.)

Middle Ground: Middle Eastern men, Mestizos, Amerindians and South Asians. This is probably a mix. Some seem to be quite attached to their own women (and thus their own genes) and others seem to be willing to forgo their own genes for the status of dating a fair white female. In my experience, in this group Indians are probably the lowest, as they seem to be almost as obsessed with white women as are blacks.

Bottom: Blacks. I suspect that the vast majority of black men would forgo their own genotype to gain the status of possessing a white woman. (I bet some would even agree to artificial insemination by a white donor if they could still have the public advantage of being marriage to a white woman.)

"fair skinned white females are probably the most desired women on the planet - by all races."

White women (per Frost) are not merely inherently more beautiful than the women of other races, but because of their body build and facial morphology, not just light skin tone.

According to Frost, the actual geometric proportions of a beautiful white woman's face more closely meets the ideal form of beauty (regardless of skin tone) than other races.

"then it is in your interest to maximize the passing on of your own genes (by procreating with someone of the same race)."

Not necessarily.

It could be in one's individual (not "group") genetic interests to mate with someone who has more desirable adaptive Darwinian traits than their local men's.

For instance, would it be more in the genetic interests of a Scots Irish American woman from West Virginia to marry a tall, blonde, athletic, charismatic, Slovakian heart surgeon with a 150 IQ or a local West Virginian truck driver with whom the West Virginia woman would be more genetically related too? Should women and men mate based on adaptive traits or on similarity?

Also, if there's is an instinct for group loyalty, why are non-white men attracted to white women? Shouldn't black men almost always prefer black women due to "genetic similarity"?

TUJ: Read my comment directly above yours. I think you responded to my first comment without seeing the second.

TUJ: Skin tone is part of it. White princesses in fairy tales are always "fair," upper class white women are "blue blood" (i.e. have skin fair enough to see the veins through their skin). Until the last 30 years, tanning was always looked down upon among white females because it lowered their sexual desirability -- made them more swarthy.

"how many of one's own genes is a non-white willing to forgo to gain the status of marrying a fair white female."

If Salter were right (and he isn't) no ethnic group should EVER find outgroups sexually attractive.

The only explanation for interracial attraction (which has always existed throughout history) is adaptive trait selection at the individual level, not group selection.

TUJ: "For instance, would it be more in the genetic interests of a Scots Irish American woman from West Virginia to marry a tall, blonde, athletic, charismatic, Slovakian heart surgeon with a 150 IQ or a local West Virginian truck driver with whom the West Virginia woman would be more genetically related too? Should women and men mate based on adaptive traits or on similarity?"

This is a very interesting case study - - partly because the trade off. If you look at my comment above (8:53) about trade off, you will notice the trade off here is not that great.

The genetic distance between the Celtic genotype and Slovakian is small enough that increased social status would probably justify the trade off for most women.

But, in the extreme, the genetic distance toward dating a black would be much greater. Cavilla-Sforza's genetic distance charts say that a Slovakian is about 2 times more distant from a Celt and a black about 140 more times distant from a Celt than, say, a Celt would be to another Northern European.

With a black, the Scots-Irish woman would lost much more of her genotype -- to the point that her children wouldn't even resemble her -- that the trade off would have to be immense, which probably explains why millionaire NFL thugs get white women but average black thugs on the street do not.

"The genetic distance between the Celtic genotype and Slovakian is small enough"

Doesn't matter how small the difference is. According to Salter, it is still more evolutionary advantageous for the West Virginian to marry to the truck driver based on similarity, but according to Darwin, Galton and almost every other evolutionary theorist, it is in the interests of the West Virginian to select her mate based on environmentally ADAPTIVE TRAITS, which favors the Slovakian.

Regarding blacks, why are wealthy black athletes marrying white women at all? Shouldn't blacks be wired to be attracted ONLY to other black women?

Black thugs on the street get white women too. Mostly fat white women, but they get them just fine. Areas with a high degree of racial tension and segregation have less black-white mixing, but there's substanial interaction in an area with fewer blacks and better race relations.

Cleaner cut black guys do really well with good looking white women. I've seen it a lot where I live. Even occasionally the thug type can pick up cute blonde girls, believe it or not. Mexicans and Latinos don't do too shabby either. The guys that really struggle in the ST mating market are Indian and Asian.

TUJ: Salter's argument is largely prescriptive and not descriptive. He claims that OGE is a manifesto of sorts. So, if X "should" do Y, then Y should be worth doing for X.

As I show in my trade-off scale above (8:53) some people are more likely to want to preserve their own genotypes and some less likely. There may be some truth to whites, North Asians and Ashkenazis being the most "supremacist." They have the most to lose.

Salter does allow for some adaption, if I remember. The jump from Celtic to Slovakian is small enough where one could maintain her genes and acquire social status. And it makes sense. She would still have a close genetic distance to her children and acquire status (versus a slightly closer genetic distance and no acquired social status).

It's quite different from, say, the same woman reproducing with a black man where she will not even resemble her children and forgo her genetic uniqueness almost entirely.

Johnny: Yes, there are all kinds of anachronistic accounts, but statistically the overwhelming majority of whites (and North Asians) want to reproduce within their own race.

There are enough studies to show that ethnic nepotism is real -- that in most cases ceteris paribus people do prefer their own race and show more altruism toward their own race -- but this doesn't mean there aren't other mitigating factors.

Read the account of the English woman reproducing with the Indian:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-467787/I-love-mixed-race-baby--does-feel-alien.html


You can tell that it really does bother her that she has forgone her genotype. You don't think this is a natural response?


I am not here arguing for a purist Salter account. What I am arguing for is an account of genetic interests mitigated by other factors (social status, money, etc.). Isn't this how the world really works?

Contra Salter, there IS NO INSTINCT to exterminate outgroups (aka Genetic Interests/Group Selection) in favor of those most similar to you because evolution's purpose is to pass on adaptive traits - and not "similarity" - to ensure your descendents have the best genes needed for survival.

That's like saying I have NO INSTINCT to get rich because the purpose of the market is to reward efficiency.

"The people in Palestinian camps didn't look physically that different from people in, say, Haifa."

Sid,
Quite a lot of the people in Israel are Mizrahi Jews and Arabs. All told, they probably account for over half of the population. TUJ is positing a comparison between Ashkenazi Jews and Palestinians. Doing a mental comparison of the American Jewish community (predominantly Ashkenazi) and Palestinians might be more illustrative. That said, I think many Ashkenazi Jews do show phenotypic signs of a Middle Eastern ancestral component. We just aren't purely Middle Eastern based on the autosomal genetic studies, and we lack much of the sub-Saharan admixture that is partially responsible for the phenotypic differences between Arabs and Europeans.

An interesting study from last year:

Alession Avenanti: "Racial Bias Reduces Empathic Sensorimotor Resonance with Other-Race Pain." Current Biology, 20, 2010

Summary:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/05/27/race.empathy/index.html?hpt=C2

Again, this is not to say that genetic interests are always determinative, but that the do exist, although mitigated by other factors.

"Rather, to the extent there has been gene flow, it has been from Southern Europe TO the Middle East thanks to Alexander the Great and the Roman Empire's military victories in the Near East.

That's why Dr. Oz (Turkish), governor Mitch Daniels (Syrian) and Steve Jobs can pass for European (in some cases, like Mitch Daniels, North Western European)."

Well, that doesn't apply to Mitch Daniels or Steve Jobs since they only have partial Arab ancestry. Daniels only has paternal grandparents that are Arab. The reason these two pass as European has more to do with having at least half of their ancestry originating from Europeans. And Dr. Oz is most likely descended from elite Greeks who converted to Islam so he's European.

"Quite a lot of the people in Israel are Mizrahi Jews and Arabs. All told, they probably account for over half of the population. TUJ is positing a comparison between Ashkenazi Jews and Palestinians. Doing a mental comparison of the American Jewish community (predominantly Ashkenazi) and Palestinians might be more illustrative. That said, I think many Ashkenazi Jews do show phenotypic signs of a Middle Eastern ancestral component. We just aren't purely Middle Eastern based on the autosomal genetic studies, and we lack much of the sub-Saharan admixture that is partially responsible for the phenotypic differences between Arabs and Europeans."

I'm not disputing that. The point I'm trying to make is that Levantine Arabs are, compared to other Arabs, fair-skinned. I think this is evident in how Palestinians are only a touch or two darker than the Israelis. Now, the Israelis are surely a heterogeneous ethnicity, but in total, they tend to be on the light side.

But, pictures describe more than words do. As can be seen, the Lebanese are notably light-skinned, and arguably are lighter than mainland Greeks: http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/000813.html

"Black thugs on the street get white women too. Mostly fat white women, but they get them just fine...Cleaner cut black guys do really well with good looking white women. I've seen it a lot where I live. Even occasionally the thug type can pick up cute blonde girls, believe it or not. Mexicans and Latinos don't do too shabby either. The guys that really struggle in the ST mating market are Indian and Asian." - Johnny


My own observations match yours. White women love black alpha cock. They prefer potentially spawning little nigglets over being impregnated by loser betas (most whites but especially Indians and Asians).

The Palestinians are also heterogenous. Some of them seem to have Bedouin blood, which manifests as a dark brown skin tone, which is unusual even for most Mizrahi Jews (except those from Yemen).

It's true that the lighter Lebanese and Syrians, and Palestinians to a lesser extent, can greatly resemble Ashkenazi Jews. Unlike TUJ, I don't believe that Jews are descended from "Anatolians", if by Anatolians one means people from the Caucasus region and inland Turkey.
If you've ever been around Armenians and Georgians, you'll know that despite their large noses and dark hair, they have a very distinctive look which is quite different from Jews'.

It's interesting that despite the fact that there's constant pro-miscegenation propaganda in the media (these days nearly non-stop pro-miscegenation messages in movies, television and advertising), that white women still overwhelmingly marry within their own race. They want eventually to have kids that look like them, not like Tupac.

Think that if we didn't have this propaganda --- if the media were either neutral or anti-miscegenation ---- then there would be hardly any white women engaging in miscegenation at all, save the few overweight women and dysfunctional drug addicts.

IHTG,

The Palestinian and Bedouin populations have significant sub-Saharan admixture (~9% and 12%, respectively, from Dienekes' data, see below). Might that account for the occasional very dark tone in Palestinians and Bedouins?

TUJ seems to be talking about Ashkenazi Jews only, not all Jews. Most Mizrahi Jews have little or no European admixture, but Ashkenazim and to a lesser extent Moroccan Jews do have it. The source and timing of the admixture's entry into the population isn't known for certain, but the late Roman period during which large Jewish communities existed in western coastal Anatolia and Southern Europe, is an educated guess.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0ArAJcY18g2GadDUyeEtjNnBmY09EbnowN3M3UWRyNnc&hl=en_US&authkey=COCa89AJ#gid=0

"My own observations match yours. White women love black alpha cock. They prefer potentially spawning little nigglets over being impregnated by loser betas (most whites but especially Indians and Asians)."

You are a disgusting human being. Nigglets? Seriously? Mods?

Are you so bitter and such a beta loser prole that you have to take a dump on everybody who might be enjoying life a little more than you? Go back to Chile or wherever your prole parents came from.

"Until the last 30 years, tanning was always looked down upon among white females because it lowered their sexual desirability -- made them more swarthy. "

"Tanning" has only become popular with white western women since the advent of tanning beds, and since the rise of the idea that a tan shows that you're healthy, well-travelled, well-vacationed and luxurious.

Before 1950 if you were white and tanned it meant that you only got that way through manual labor outdoors, thus the advent of the term "redneck".

"You are a disgusting human being. Nigglets? Seriously? Mods?

Are you so bitter and such a beta loser prole that you have to take a dump on everybody who might be enjoying life a little more than you? Go back to Chile or wherever your prole parents came from." - blah


Oh shut up. I'm just being a little provocative for the lulz.

Thanks for the psychoanalysis, Freud. I hope I'm not gonna be billed for it. I just call things as I see them.

"White women still overwhelmingly marry within their own race. They want eventually to have kids that look like them, not like Tupac." - Nigel


Inter-racial dating is somewhat common but inter-racial marriage is not common at all. I don't think that's for the reasons you believe. If women are having sex inter-racially there is always the chance of pregnancy. Biologically the purpose of sex is to mate and reproduce the idea of having fun is a recent one. If your theory were true little to no inter-racial sex should be occurring. Even white women who marry white men later rode the rainbow cock carousel at some point.

I believe the answer isn't biological but social. Inter-racial marriage is frowned upon by older people and unlike hooking up marriage means interacting with family members. Women are much more status conscious than men and crave the approval of others much more strongly.

@ blah

It's ironic that you denigrated me during your diatribe by telling me to leave the USA. Seriously? How intolerant of you. This is a country of immigrants. You are the hateful racist. You are a disgusting human being. Mods?

"Oh shut up. I'm just being a little provocative for the lulz."

Nah. Sounds like nerdrage to me. You're basically Whiskey with a potty mouth (very prole).

"It's ironic that you denigrated me during your diatribe by telling me to leave the USA. Seriously? How intolerant of you. This is a country of immigrants. You are the hateful racist. You are a disgusting human being. Mods?"

I thought you were white? That doesn't make me racist. I also Googled your handle and it turns out to be a character from a vidya game. Perhaps if you played less vidya games and spent more time in the real world then maybe you'd have better luck with girls. You remind me of David Alexander. He was a prole beta like yourself but he was much more intelligent and pleasant. There was definitely a lot less nerdrage in his posts. He was also black. You could learn a lot from him.

" Even white women who marry white men later rode the rainbow cock carousel at some point."

Get back to the ghetto, homeboy.

@ blah

Blowing more hot air out of your ass I see. Your tolerance posturing and attempt to score "enlightened" points didn't win over anyone. "Disgusting human being. Seriously? Mods?" - lawl

In case you weren't aware this was a blog entry about Roissy. His commentary doesn't stray far from my own but apparently my observations are "nerdrage".

Regarding perpetuating your genes, if they are really superior (in the adaptive sense) you will spread them fastest by introducing them into populations that don't already have them. You also don't want to mate too close because of bad recessives, mating with your close relatives is bad strategy. And in most cases (in the modern world where most children survive) how many children you have is going to be more important than who you have them with.

Inter-racial dating is somewhat common but inter-racial marriage is not common at all.

According to GSS data (as reported by Inductivist), the percentage of white female respondents who have ever had a black sexual partner is practically the same as the percentage of white women married to black men (4% vs. 3% if memory serves). Oh, and it was broken down by hair color; from highest to lowest (again IIRC), it was black, brown, then blond.

So, at least I have a shred of data. I suspect people who pump up the bm-wf inter-racial dating numbers via assertion and anecdote aren't often interested in data.

"Blowing more hot air out of your ass I see. Your tolerance posturing and attempt to score "enlightened" points didn't win over anyone. "Disgusting human being. Seriously? Mods?" - lawl"

Calling bi-racial children "nigglets" is disgusting and only proles would find it funny. For someone like you who is obsessed with status, you really should know that such behavior will keep you prole.

The Seriously? Mods? thing is a joke as it would be obvious to anyone who didn't suffer from aspergers.

"In case you weren't aware this was a blog entry about Roissy. His commentary doesn't stray far from my own but apparently my observations are "nerdrage"."

Your views are nerdrage because they are whiny and laced with passive-aggressive name calling. Roissy and Whiskey are also ideologically close but one is an alpha and one is a beta. You are more like Whiskey.

James Shearer wants to highlight what's most "adaptive" but he forgot the male-female split. It makes much more sense for white males to pursue this "adaptive" miscegenation with blacks than it does for females, whose reproductive capacity is far lower.

"For someone like you who is obsessed with status, you really should know that such behavior will keep you prole." -blah

I'm not a prole. My parents are middle to upper middle class and my sister will be attending Georgetown Law School. I said my upbringing was prole like because immigrant parents are like proles except they work hard.


"The Seriously? Mods? thing is a joke as it would be obvious to anyone who didn't suffer from aspergers." - blah


Suddenly it's a joke now. Stop digging the hole deeper you pompous ass.


"Your views are nerdrage because they are whiny and laced with passive-aggressive name calling. Roissy and Whiskey are also ideologically close but one is an alpha and one is a beta. You are more like Whiskey." - blah

Whiskeys is popular enough to have a following and is listed on Half Sigma's blogroll. I'll take a comparison to him as a compliment.

"The percentage of white female respondents who have ever had a black sexual partner is practically the same as the percentage of white women married to black men (4% vs. 3% if memory serves). So, at least I have a shred of data. I suspect people who pump up the bm-wf inter-racial dating numbers via assertion and anecdote aren't often interested in data." - Svigor


You are correct. We aren't interested in "data" because women aren't honest about their sexual histories at all. That's a well known social fact. Therefore such purported "data" isn't useful in these discussions.

Svigor, you got a link to that percentage? If true, then a lot fewer WFs have been with blacks than I would suspect. Perhaps a lot of WFs want to go on a date with BM for fun, but wouldn't seriously consider doing anything with them physically. All I know is that you see plenty of those couples in public.

Also remember that there have been changes over the generations. For seniors, it was completely taboo. For boomers, still not really acceptable. By Gen X, more accepted by still frowned on by a lot. It's only with the millenials that we see a lot of people accepting IR relationships. I see the most BM-WF couples among them.

White guys are a mixed bag. Some are beta as heck, but a lot of alphas and plenty in the middle. Asians/Indians are basically all beta, to some extent.

All the white females I know (mostly upper class but a few lower class ones too) are completely repulsed by black men. They may find the younger ones cute (in the way that one finds a young chimpanzee cute) but they know to avoid them at all costs. Women are much more attune to harsh realities like this

http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=26368

than are men.

How the hell are Asians/Indian be be all beta and only beta to some extent at the same time?

Disclaimer: I am Asian and taking some offense. I can agree Asians as a whole seem the be more beta or just more possible versus the other races, but I cannot agree the entire race is beta while Whites is a mix bag with the majority in the middle between beta and alpha.

Well, no offense intended. It's just my observation from living around a lot of them. I do think that there are some exceptions, but very few are built or act like alphas. I guess I could restate what I said and add that a fair minority of American-born Asians/Indians are higher on the beta scale and comparable to average white, so it's not all hopeless.

Rushton has an r-K theory that places blacks on one extreme, whites in the middle, and Asians on the other extreme. On the alpha to beta scale, I'd say this is how I'd order them out. If you look up testosterone differences between the races, it comes out blacks>whites=Latinos>Asians=Indians.

I do think that some Asian ethnic groups, like Filipinos, can be more like Latinos than other East Asians. Those guys seem more alpha than Chinese or Indians.

Whites are a pretty mixed group in general - jocks, nerds, frat boys, skaters, geeks, SWPLs, guidos, hillbillies. You can find a lot of anything you're looking for, as the variance seems higher than with other groups. Lots of macho men that compete man-to-man with blacks, lots of asperegy guys that'd be more at home writing code with the Asian/Indian techs of Silicon Valley.

"Disclaimer: I am Asian and taking some offense. I can agree Asians as a whole seem the be more beta or just more possible versus the other races, but I cannot agree the entire race is beta while Whites is a mix bag with the majority in the middle between beta and alpha."

Alpha males always begin an argument with a gasp about how offended they are.

"blacks>whites=Latinos>Asians=Indians"

You obviously have never been to India, where the behavior of most Indians on the street is probably not much different from blacks.

Until about 15 years ago, the Indian immigration to the US was selective, but this is now changing with chain migration and illegal immigration.

The average IQ of India is only 81 and in just one decade India (a country of a billion people) has already tapped out all its higher-IQ potential.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703515504576142092863219826.html

And with Indian illegal immigration on the rise now in the US

http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2011/02/20/h-1b-and-illegal-immigration/

I suspect you'll start seeing many more Indians behaving like blacks. In fact, just go to NJ and you already can see it. Here's a taste:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eocBhidYuM8

I was stating the rank of the races in testosterone, from most to least. In comparison to whites, studies show Indians have much less testosterone and blacks are quite a bit higher. Which is likely why Indians are more beta, while blacks are more alpha.

The UK has large numbers of Indian migrants of diverse origins. They have outdone the large Carribean black community economically and academically (Pakistanis have not), but have fared poorly in pop culture and sports. This is to be predicted if testosterone levels are analyzed.

Rushton r-K theory from Wikipedia also noted that Asians is 6 point ahead while Blacks are -15, cranial capacity difference is 17 vs -80 for blacks, neurons difference is about 100 vs -500. So in data terms, this tends to point that Asians and Whites differences is a lot smaller than Blacks and Whites. Or in another view, the big hump of the bell curve for Asians is not super skewed on the beta end with White's big hump being in the middle and seriously separated. Rushton used it for effect, not reality.

So Asian betaness is more cultural than genetic. As you noticed with American-born Asians, if nurture was held constant, I think the difference would be much smaller. Also in reality, you seem to forget there's a bell curve and selection bias too. I can expect a smaller proportion, but I believe there's plenty of mix-bag Asians.

HS, Can you close the comments? The whole thread has been derailed by some losers. What a load of crap!

[HS: I agree that my experiment with turning off comment moderation has led to undesirable results.]

The comments to this entry are closed.