Sex & Gender Dating preference across racial groups

It's not just about marriage...


They prefer light dolls since they were children, by the time they have grown up, they will then prefer light partners. We are still living in a society where dark things are devalued and white things are valued.

In Asia, men prefer light ladies too. There are even cream to make you lighter. I don't recommend those, for health consequences.
 
They prefer light dolls since they were children, by the time they have grown up, they will then prefer light partners. We are still living in a society where dark things are devalued and white things are valued.

In Asia, men prefer light ladies too. There are even cream to make you lighter. I don't recommend those, for health consequences.

The real question is whether this is cultural or genetic. Most researchers who tackled the issue concluded that it is genetic.

That's the twist in the plot which will take many people aback... The experiment has been repeated by many people in different time periods and with different groups. The results are always close... It doesn't seem to be a cultural prejudice.

While part of it is undeniably related to the effects of institutionalized racism:

http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2014/05/the_brown_decision_s_doll_test_11_facts/2/

[FONT=&quot]According to Kenneth Clark’s analysis, the doll studies were relevant in that they showed how racial segregation interfered with students’ personality development. But [/FONT]Harvard law professor Lani Guinier has noted[FONT=&quot] (pdf) that [/FONT][FONT=&quot]the Clarks’ conclusions failed to consider that black students with high degrees of contact with whites could very possibly have experienced even greater distress over their racial stigma than their counterparts in segregated communities.[/FONT][FONT=&quot] Plus, plenty of [/FONT]commentators have pointed out[FONT=&quot] that the experiment included a small sample size and no control group.[/FONT]

https://edpolicy.stanford.edu/sites...education-and-interest-divergence-dilemma.pdf

Page 19 of 27 (110)

Basing its opinion on the psychological research of the time, the Court misunderstoodthe source of self-esteem for many blacks and unwittingly contributed to thedivergence of interests along class and geographic lines within and without the blackcommunity. These outcomes can be traced, in part, to the flawed studies on whichplaintiffs relied to prove that physically equal but segregated facilities had a negativepsychological impact on all black children. The most famous of the psychologicalstudies cited by the Court was the doll experiment of Kenneth Clark and MamieClark. The Clark study aggregated findings of northern and southern black children,light-skinned and dark-skinned black children, and middle-class and poor black childrento conclude that segregation caused feelings of inferiority among all blacks.Black children in the more integrated North had more frequently preferred the whitedolls than black children in the South. Many northern black children also verbalizedunease when prompted to consider their physical similarity to the brown dolls, yetKenneth Clark concluded that northern black children were actually psychologicallyhealthier. A historian has summarized Clark’s argument: The reaction of the northernchildren showed their “discomfort with the complicated and harsh reality of racialmores rather than resignation,” whereas racial segregation and isolation had causedsouthern black children to accept their inferior social status as normal. “Such anacceptance,” Clark reported, “is not symptomatic of a healthy personality.” Clarkargued that the racial identification of the southern children, almost 80 percent ofwhom identified themselves in some way with the brown dolls, was tainted becauseof the terms they used to verbalize their choices. The southern black childrendescribed the black dolls as “pretty,” “nice,” or “good” but accompanied their choiceswith statements such as, “This one. It’s a nigger. I’m a nigger.”42

Page 20 of 27 (111)

Clark’s message was that group self-hatred among blacks begins at an early age,involves the rejection of brown skin color by black children, and becomes embeddedin the personality of blacks as a result of the “damage inherent in racial segregation.”These conclusions may have had some merit, but none was entirely consistent withhis research. According to Daryl Scott, Clark’s conclusions (unlike his data) also contradictedother contemporary studies that suggested that black children with greatercontact with whites experienced the most psychological distress. While many blackshailed the Court decision, especially for its vast symbolic value, the opinion’s emphasison the psychological damage segregation does to blacks camouflaged the waysdesegregation “hurt” some blacks, while segregation motivated others to excel, a possibilityHolt had conceded. For some black children, segregated schools provided asanctuary from psychological conflict. More recently, psychological literature has alsosuggested that those blacks who are the most invested in achieving academicallywithin the larger society are often more vulnerable to what Claude Steele and othersterm stereotype threat, the situational threat of being negatively stereotyped. UnlikeClark’s “self-fulfilling prophecy” that black students internalize and then fulfill negativestereotypes and low expectations for achievement, stereotype threat is contextdependentrather than intrinsic. Moreover, social psychologists have found that insome circumstances the ability to maintain a sense of self-worth in a hostile environmentmay actually enhance self-esteem. The key point is that data on self-esteem differencesbetween black kids and white kids were not well developed then; even today“there’s not much evidence of chronic psychological damage done to blacks’ selfesteemas a result of segregation” per se.43

The Indonesian side of the experiment cannot be explained as the result of Indonesian boys and girls living in a racist society where whites are more valued than blacks:


As I said, the variation of the result globally is not that great...
 
Last edited:
The real question is whether this is cultural or genetic. Most researchers who tackled the issue concluded that it is genetic.

That's the twist in the plot which will take many people aback... The experiment has been repeated by many people in different time periods and with different groups. The results are always close... It doesn't seem to be a cultural prejudice.

Nonsense. In isolated African tribes they used to kill albino babies. When I was a girl, an old Calabrian woman told me never to trust people with blue eyes. Since half my family is light eyed, I knew enough to ignore that one. There's an old Italian proverb which someone recently reminded me of...l'altezza mezza belleza. Again, as my grandmother was 5'10, I found that offensive. People are programmed to believe that people who look like them, or among whom they've been raised are more attractive. There's nothing genetic about it.

People who live in ethnic bubbles really aren't capable of judging these things. Having lived for a good part of my life in a multi-ethnic society I've seen a lot of men and women who prefer or are more attracted to darker people, for whatever reason. I know a lot of men who really like Latina women, for example. It's not universal, but there are definitely men like that.

Personally, I can't say I've ever been particularly attracted to men of other races, but I can say I'm almost never attracted to blonde men. It doesn't make Mediterranean looking men better in any objective sense, but that's my preference. I would expect that perhaps women raised among men who fit another template would have other preferences. C'est la vie. To each his own. How boring if we were all alike in the way we look or in our preferences.
 
@Petros Houhoulis,

If you're going to add paragraphs to your original post, either set the additions off by an Ed. or Reply With Quote to your own post.

What I neglected to say in my own post...

Or, rather than liking only the "look" of one's own group, it might be a case of opposites attract. My father was very fair, with dirty blonde hair, green eyes and very fair skin, and not very Med looking at all. I loved and love him dearly, but somehow I wasn't attracted to men who looked like him, even if they were very handsome. Certainly, it seems as if northern European women are attracted to Mediterranean men who don't look like their fathers presumably. I mean, in the summer the train doors open and floods of them pour out, and they're not only interested in the artwork and the architecture, if you get my drift.

Then there's the effect of class. If slaves are all black, and masters are all or mostly fair Europeans, then guess which phenotype will be valued in that society? If farm workers, peasants, are outdoors all the time and get dark, then fair skin will equate to higher class and will be more valued.

Human behavior is very complicated; an interplay of genetics and environment. I was too hasty in my post above. I do think genetics has some part to play, but not in the way that you meant. From the papers I've read, genetics might indeed have a role to play, but the role is in influencing people to be attracted to people reasonably, but not too closely related to them. So, it would seem it would influence one to find one's own "race" more attractive, not the phenotype of a race from 10,000 miles away. Of course, if that alien race invades and subjugates you, or you're bombarded by their media, your preferences are going to change, and perhaps not to the betterment of your mental health. Surely it should be clear to everybody that it's not mentally healthy to find one's own phenotype unattractive and to think that the phenotype of foreigners is more attractive.

Human history is the history of admixture, whether some people like it or not. If they can't or won't accept that they don't belong on a science and genetics site. The "European" phenotype probably didn't exist until 4,000 years ago. Some European nation states are only a couple of hundred years old. It's time to retire these atavistic attitudes.
 
They prefer light dolls since they were children, by the time they have grown up, they will then prefer light partners. We are still living in a society where dark things are devalued and white things are valued.

In Asia, men prefer light ladies too. There are even cream to make you lighter. I don't recommend those, for health consequences.

Havent we already been through this quite recently in one of the skin threads? we also delved in ancient deceptions of dark men flattering with lighter skinned women. Opposites attracts is not only relevant to character but also to looks. Example round headed people seem to be more attracted to long faced people. Not always the case of course but a common occurrence. I seen enough to know its a fact.
 
Nonsense. In isolated African tribes they used to kill albino babies. When I was a girl, an old Calabrian woman told me never to trust people with blue eyes. Since half my family is light eyed, I knew enough to ignore that one. There's an old Italian proverb which someone recently reminded me of...l'altezza mezza belleza. Again, as my grandmother was 5'10, I found that offensive. People are programmed to believe that people who look like them, or among whom they've been raised are more attractive. There's nothing genetic about it.
Adult Blacks in Africa kill Albinos for "magical purposes". We are talking about little kids. If you took notice, black kids prefer white dolls. Indonesian kids prefer white dolls. Hell, even white kids prefer white dolls. That cannot be "programmed" by different societies.
People who live in ethnic bubbles really aren't capable of judging these things. Having lived for a good part of my life in a multi-ethnic society I've seen a lot of men and women who prefer or are more attracted to darker people, for whatever reason. I know a lot of men who really like Latina women, for example. It's not universal, but there are definitely men like that.
People growing up do tend to follow social mores, no doubt. Furthermore they do realize that personality is more important than appearance in the long run. Still, my points was about kids, not adults.
Personally, I can't say I've ever been particularly attracted to men of other races, but I can say I'm almost never attracted to blonde men. It doesn't make Mediterranean looking men better in any objective sense, but that's my preference. I would expect that perhaps women raised among men who fit another template would have other preferences. C'est la vie. To each his own. How boring if we were all alike in the way we look or in our preferences.

We agree about the negative results of inbreeding, no doubt. If we were all the same, we would have been wiped out since a long time ago, like the majority of the indigenous Amerindians after the Europeans brought their germs with them.
 
Havent we already been through this quite recently in one of the skin threads? we also delved in ancient deceptions of dark men flattering with lighter skinned women. Opposites attracts is not only relevant to character but also to looks. Example round headed people seem to be more attracted to long faced people. Not always the case of course but a common occurrence. I seen enough to know its a fact.

Ehm, the "Melanomorpha" vessels are not exactly representative of races. All men were represented as black, all women as white, because the drawing style used only two colors, and there had to be some form of distinction. Plus it contradicts modern research as per Maciamos' opening post. You can argue that social mores have changed, but you would not convince anyone that all Ancient Greek males were black...
 
Don't put words in people's mouths; Maleth never said the things you're imputing to him.

As for these two little experiments, you're missing the point explicitly made by the American high school girl who did this little experiment: it's that even by this age children have absorbed the prejudices of their society. Likewise for the Indonesian children. They're indeed old enough to understand what is valued or not valued in their culture.

You must not have children.

Plus, on this Board we tend to prefer large studies conducted by prestigious universities, where the methodology is transparent and detailed so that we can see that they controlled for all other factors, and not some random internet post by some teenage girl or who knows whom in Indonesia. We may not all be scientists here but it's not the neighborhood kaffe klatsch either. Plus, there's of course the fact that the results of most "social science" studies are not reproducible. Most of them should sport a huge "Buyer Beware" sticker.
 
Don't put words in people's mouths; Maleth never said the things you're imputing to him.

As for these two little experiments, you're missing the point explicitly made by the American high school girl who did this little experiment: it's that even by this age children have absorbed the prejudices of their society. Likewise for the Indonesian children. They're indeed old enough to understand what is valued or not valued in their culture.
I never claimed that Maleth said that all of those melanomorpha vessels depict black males, but I know they do. They happen to be part of my national heritage, thus I do know better.

Anyway, I didn't attack Maleth.

Furthermore, you imply that most if not all human cultures value whiteness. Unfortunately, you cannot prove it, and it is quite unlikely to be true.
You must not have children.

Plus, on this Board we tend to prefer large studies conducted by prestigious universities, where the methodology is transparent and detailed so that we can see that they controlled for all other factors, and not some random internet post by some teenage girl or who knows whom in Indonesia. We may not all be scientists here but it's not the neighborhood kaffe klatsch either. Plus, there's of course the fact that the results of most "social science" studies are not reproducible. Most of them should sport a huge "Buyer Beware" sticker.

Fair point, there are not many large "white doll, black doll" experiments around, but the fact that the few of them have similar outcomes is a bit unusual, don't you think?

Ironically all of those experiments are the result of "progressive" "social scientists" who want to prove that cultural bias affects everybody, but the persistence of the outcome lead to rather opposite conclusions. It is possible that some of those experiments are indeed "engineered" to prove cultural biases, but that is still a very far fetched claim for a rather simple experiment.
 
Petros Houhoulis;485809]I never claimed that Maleth said that all of those melanomorpha vessels depict black males, but I know they do. They happen to be part of my national heritage, thus I do know better.

You seem to specialize in misunderstanding people, whether deliberately or not. I believe that Maleth was referring to the fact that we've discussed in the past that in ancient art, including Greek and Etruscan art, often men were depicted as darker precisely because they didn't have a lot of pigments, and men, spending a lot of time outdoors would have been a bit darker. So far as I know he wasn't talking about those vessels. Of course, he can correct me if I'm wrong. Spent a lot of time on forums where you feel you have to defend the "whiteness" of Greeks, have you? Is that why you jumped to the conclusions that the comment was about Greek art? You've been hanging around with the wrong kind of people, I'm afraid. Embrace your Mediterranean heritage, my Greek friend. Why would you want to look like a bottle of milk? I do look like one and wish I didn't. I guess nobody is happy with the way they look.


Furthermore, you imply that most if not all human cultures value whiteness. Unfortunately, you cannot prove it, and it is quite unlikely to be true.

I neither said nor implied that all human cultures now and in the past value whiteness, or even "fairness". Indeed, I said the opposite. You really should try to read more carefully. That's your shtick, not mine. Not only do you seem to believe that, but you believe it's genetic. Little black children in African, Malaysian children, who knows who else, maybe Amazonian Indian children, are born with this love of white skin and hatred of their own darker skins. No? Did I get that wrong? Don't be shy. If that's how you feel, say so, and be sure to provide scientific studies that support that while you're at it.

What I do believe, in case you're really interested, is that in this modern, media driven world of ours it should be no surprise if western, European standards of beauty are transmitted to other people. As it should be no surprise, for example, that the standards of beauty of the Medieval city states of Northern Italy owed something to the fact that the upper class of those city states had a great deal of ancestry from Gothic and Lombard invaders. Art history can indeed teach us a great deal.

Fair point, there are not many large "white doll, black doll" experiments around, but the fact that the few of them have similar outcomes is a bit unusual, don't you think?

What I think is that I don't give any credence to experiments conducted by teenagers and then posted on the internet. Is this the kind of "proof" that is commonly accepted on the sites you usually frequent? Let's assume for the moment, however, that these two videos are indeed reflecting a "reality". What is that reality? You said there is a genetic preference for "whiteness", and these little high school experiments prove it. I already told you that if you believe that children of that age have not already absorbed the values of their culture then you have not read very much about child development and when social mores are inculcated, nor do you even have any practical experience with children. There's nothing more to be said. NEXT.

Ironically all of those experiments are the result of "progressive" "social scientists" who want to prove that cultural bias affects everybody, but the persistence of the outcome lead to rather opposite conclusions. It is possible that some of those experiments are indeed "engineered" to prove cultural biases, but that is still a very far fetched claim for a rather simple experiment.

I'm not at all following your "logic" here. I believe your point was that all human beings are genetically wired to prefer "whiteness". You seemed to be saying that these videos supported your position. Once I pointed out that the purpose of at least the "American" video, which was clearly stated but which apparently you didn't notice, was to show the effect of culture on such values, all of a sudden they were "engineered", and at one and the same time it's far fetched to accept their conclusions, and at the same time they prove that preference for white skin is genetic. Based on what? Where is the proof for that?

Goodness, I have to go take a dramamine pill. All this switching of positions has made me dizzy and nauseous.
 
Havent we already been through this quite recently in one of the skin threads? we also delved in ancient deceptions of dark men flattering with lighter skinned women. Opposites attracts is not only relevant to character but also to looks. Example round headed people seem to be more attracted to long faced people. Not always the case of course but a common occurrence. I seen enough to know its a fact.

Which skin thread? I am not online everyday unlike you, so I don't read as much threads as you on this forum. Recently I come online frequently, but I haven't got time to read many threads only a few of them.
 
Which skin thread? I am not online everyday unlike you, so I don't read as much threads as you on this forum. Recently I come online frequently, but I haven't got time to read many threads only a few of them.

Luckily did not take me long to find it as its been as recent as some three weeks ago. http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ergy-for-other-organs-(-)?p=482873#post482873 check out your interesting contributions on the subject. There are around some 50 threads on Pigmentation. Many arguments and posts could have easily been a continuation of others as they are pretty much of a similar nature.
 
Luckily did not take me long to find it as its been as recent as some three weeks ago. http://www.eupedia.com/forum/thread...ergy-for-other-organs-(-)?p=482873#post482873 check out your interesting contributions on the subject. There are around some 50 threads on Pigmentation. Many arguments and posts could have easily been a continuation of others as they are pretty much of a similar nature.

Yeah ok, they are similar but not exactly the same, now I am not a moderator but are we not allowed to reply to similar threads if we go something to say? Or do we have to wait a while before we reply to a similar topics again. Hmmm 50 more on pigmentation, I really don't have time to read all of them! I stumble on one and if I got something to add, I add a reply or more, isn't this what a forum is for? To express your opinion on topics you got something to say?
 
Yeah ok, they are similar but not exactly the same, now I am not a moderator but are we not allowed to reply to similar threads if we go something to say? Or do we have to wait a while before we reply to a similar topics again. Hmmm 50 more on pigmentation, I really don't have time to read all of them! I stumble on one and if I got something to add, I add a reply or more, isn't this what a forum is for? To express your opinion on topics you got something to say?

Im not a moderator :/. I think it is allowed as no moderator has really complained about it. But personally since it seems we are always the same (20 people? posting) it seems like its lots of repetition. There is a search bar that can help not to open up lots of new threads if its something very generic which probably has already been discussed in depth before.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/search.php?searchid=1724860
 
Ehm, the "Melanomorpha" vessels are not exactly representative of races. All men were represented as black, all women as white, because the drawing style used only two colors, and there had to be some form of distinction. Plus it contradicts modern research as per Maciamos' opening post. You can argue that social mores have changed, but you would not convince anyone that all Ancient Greek males were black...

Just missed this sorry. As Angela said (Thanks) you have gone somewhere totally different. I can feel that you were upset by some supremacist posts in relation to the Greek (and also Italy by the way) because of the E factor. When I started following genetics after having mine tested, I saw posts like Greece, Italy is African and things of the sort. I have no doubt that these supremacists are still around and must still be reeling to know that we all come from Africa anyway and we know that the E-V13 found in balkans and Italy is one of the main European components....beside the fact that when E-V13 showed up on the European continent the majority of humans were dark skinned anyway (it it means anything). To make it worse we had the news that Adolph Hitler turned out to be an E with lots of sensational news that he was African or Jew or anything that excites people, without testing the whole genome. As far as we know he could well be E-V13 which is not rare in Austria anyway. I also heard recently not sure if its a rumor that also Slobodan Milosovic paternal line could be E-V13 (would like to know if its true).

I know its impossible for you to read all posts and there is plenty of them on the subject, but others and myself have brought forward examples of sayings in the UK stating as an attraction, tall dark and handsome (to compliment the subject similar to this one). Very often on a street level this applies to people (some posters also posted pictures) of guys with dark haired and brown eyes and not as black skinned. Although the latter attraction happens too as one can often notice it in larger cosmopolitan cities. It is also a down to earth fact that many southern European Guys seem to like blondes. I think its sort of reciprocal. I don't think I am saying anything out of the extraordinary. I live in a tourist resort and what I see is a good education :)
 
You seem to specialize in misunderstanding people, whether deliberately or not. I believe that Maleth was referring to the fact that we've discussed in the past that in ancient art, including Greek and Etruscan art, often men were depicted as darker precisely because they didn't have a lot of pigments, and men, spending a lot of time outdoors would have been a bit darker. So far as I know he wasn't talking about those vessels. Of course, he can correct me if I'm wrong.
You are referring to Greek and Etruscan art, I am referring to Greek art. No, we are actually discussing the same thing, and Maleth was very specific:

delved in ancient deceptions of dark men flattering with lighter skinned women

Thus, when you do accept that men were depicted as black and women as white, you essentially agree with me against Maleth.
Spent a lot of time on forums where you feel you have to defend the "whiteness" of Greeks, have you?
No, I haven't spent much time trying to defend whiteness of Greeks.

Angela: Content removed for inappropriateness.

Is that why you jumped to the conclusions that the comment was about Greek art?

[/QUOTE]I didn't jump to conclusions. This was indeed Greek art, and I know it better than you do.
You've been hanging around with the wrong kind of people, I'm afraid. Embrace your Mediterranean heritage, my Greek friend.
I don't have any problem with my Mediterranean heritage, others do. The Turks were trying to prove I am Turkic, but most folks classified me as a Borreby. I'm still fine with myself, and I wouldn't change at all even if the Turkic link was proven correct. Lately Laberia was trying to "attack" me because I have admitted to having some Bulgarian ancestor a few generations back, but Laberia is nothing more than entertainment to me!
Why would you want to look like a bottle of milk? I do look like one and wish I didn't. I guess nobody is happy with the way they look.
I guess you suffer a lot when you go for swimming in the Mediterranean eh?
I neither said nor implied that all human cultures now and in the past value whiteness, or even "fairness".
No, I said that the "white doll, black doll" experiment proves than most human societies value "fairness", and if that trait is not genetic, it has to be cultural, unless if you can find a third way to explain it.
Indeed, I said the opposite.
...But failed to prove it! For me, proofs count more than assertions.
You really should try to read more carefully. That's your shtick, not mine. Not only do you seem to believe that, but you believe it's genetic.
I cannot explain why the results are uniform wherever the test took place in any other way.
Little black children in African, Malaysian children, who knows who else, maybe Amazonian Indian children, are born with this love of white skin and hatred of their own darker skins. No?
I am not so sure that those kids "hate" their own skin. Unfortunately the experiment makes them choose which doll is "good" and which doll is "bad", yet some of them refuse to choose.
Did I get that wrong?
Probably you did. The experiment is not exactly perfect, it was conducted to prove that segregation in American schools was harmful to black children, and yet the actual results points to the exact opposite, as my earlier post points out. More than that, the author of that paper point out that desegregation failed to improve the condition of black people in the U.S. of A.
Don't be shy. If that's how you feel, say so, and be sure to provide scientific studies that support that while you're at it.
What I "feel" is not relevant to the truth. What has been proven so far is that for some reason, kids tend to prefer whiter people, not necessarily degrading their own skin color. Maciamos' original post points exactly that, but for adults. Somehow you want to believe it is cultural, but you cannot prove it. What I point out might not look like a proof to you, but unfortunately we are living in a politically correct world where many experiments are discouraged as "racist", and yet the few experiments the progressives themselves are making, point to my view.
What I do believe, in case you're really interested, is that in this modern, media driven world of ours it should be no surprise if western, European standards of beauty are transmitted to other people.
All people? All over the world? Even to 5 years old Indonesian kids? Do Indonesians watch their own TV shows, or American soap operas? Furthermore, how do you know that the "standards of beauty" in other parts of the world were the same even before Europeans arrived. Maybe they were indeed different as per a scene of "The gods must be crazy", but that movie was unfortunately a comedy...
As it should be no surprise, for example, that the standards of beauty of the Medieval city states of Northern Italy owed something to the fact that the upper class of those city states had a great deal of ancestry from Gothic and Lombard invaders.
In a similar fashion, the first Chinese emperors claimed to descend from 8 foot tall men with blue or green eyes, while we have evidence that Ramesses II was a red haired person.

I sincerely doubt that the standards of beauty are as much varied as you want to believe. People very often choose to vote for people who are taller for example, and generally tend to value appearance in politicians more than substance. This cannot be construed as some sort of superiority of a particular race, because polymorphism is a positive trait for humanity, mostly for aspects that have nothing to do with external appearance, but it does have a meaning, and I believe an underlying reason as well.

Besides pigmentation, the canon of beauty is believed to be closely associated with the golden ratio, rather than cultural traits.
face-new-golden-ratio-beauty-proportions.gif

Art history can indeed teach us a great deal.
It can teach us that people of all mixed races might actually prefer a beauty style which is in the extreme minority of their own variety as population, rather than the mean.
What I think is that I don't give any credence to experiments conducted by teenagers and then posted on the internet.
The experiments are far from perfect, but you should keep in mind that the specific format of the experiment is not particularly complex, and that they all yield, more or less, the same results. In fact the most significant deviation was with modern black kids who are being indoctrinated by their educational system to "love their own skin", and still many of them chose white dolls over black dolls. I am not suggesting that this indoctrination is something negative, but it shows that the deviation from older experiments with black kids has more to do with modern educational standards.
Is this the kind of "proof" that is commonly accepted on the sites you usually frequent? Let's assume for the moment, however, that these two videos are indeed reflecting a "reality". What is that reality? You said there is a genetic preference for "whiteness", and these little high school experiments prove it. I already told you that if you believe that children of that age have not already absorbed the values of their culture then you have not read very much about child development and when social mores are inculcated, nor do you even have any practical experience with children. There's nothing more to be said. NEXT.
I am aware that a more proper experiment would have to be based upon 6 months old babies, but there is a little problem, they cannot speak! As I said, the real problem for your point of view is that you want to believe that the cultural values of the entire planet are now dictated by western mores, but for some reason all of the evidence out there, even the Medieval statues of North Italy that you speak of, are promoting whiteness. There is a modern obsession with Political Correct culture to promote a variety of physical appearances as beautiful, and yet most people on the planet tend to ignore those efforts. It's never going to work!
I'm not at all following your "logic" here. I believe your point was that all human beings are genetically wired to prefer "whiteness". You seemed to be saying that these videos supported your position.
That was before. Now those Medieval statues of Northern Italy that you mention point to the same direction, as well as much more, but I won't waste much time listing every proof.
Once I pointed out that the purpose of at least the "American" video, which was clearly stated but which apparently you didn't notice, was to show the effect of culture on such values, all of a sudden they were "engineered", and at one and the same time it's far fetched to accept their conclusions, and at the same time they prove that preference for white skin is genetic. Based on what? Where is the proof for that?
Once more, my point is based on the fact that all the videos all over the world reach the same conclusion, irrespective of the local culture. The notion that culture has the greatest impact on the experiment was the belief of the man who conducted the experiment, and he did it in order to prove that segregation was hurting black children. His conclusions were wrong, and your conclusion, and all of those progressives' conclusions who make those videos that those kids are making their choices based on culture are plainly wrong. You believe what you want to believe, but somehow it turns out that most if not all cultures promote whiteness, for some weird reason. It doesn't make sense...
Goodness, I have to go take a dramamine pill. All this switching of positions has made me dizzy and nauseous.

I do get the same feeling when I watch social "scientists" trying to dispel "racism" wherever they see it, especially with those videos. Fortunately many of their beliefs are gradually truncated by biologists...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is little point in responding to the vague, rambling and unsupported statements in the prior post. I just can't help but respond to one point, however:

The statues created in the Italian Renaissance aren't white as some sort of racist tribute to the awesomeness of white flesh, irrespective of the actual attitudes of the artists, but because they were created out of MARBLE! You know, that white stuff. They quarry it right near me in Carrara; my father was even apprenticed there as a sculptor.

carrara-marble-quarry-10.jpg


They were copying the Classical Era sculptures they found; they had no idea they used to be painted.

Not that there weren't statues created in other materials:

Donatello's David-
2david.jpg

http://www.wga.hu/art/d/donatell/1_early/david/2david.jpg

http://image.slidesharecdn.com/ital...ptures-15th-16th-cent-7-728.jpg?cb=1297620112

italian-renaissance-sculptures-15th-16th-cent-7-728.jpg


I personally much prefer them to the following. I am second to none in my admiration for the genius of Michelangelo, but his female statues are usually just men with breasts, and in this case, deformed breasts. Hideous.
michelangelo-night.jpg


This, of course, is different: a beautiful young Italian woman, and a beautiful young Jewish man,on top of everything else:

michelangelo_pieta_grt.jpg

I do indeed have a problem with our Mediterranean summers. If all else fails, there's always this:
mfox100914_131.jpg

Or, I can just stick to my father's Apennines and leave the coast for the fall.
 
michelangelo-night.jpg

I personally much prefer them to the following. I am second to none in my admiration for the genius of Michelangelo, but his female statues are usually just men with breasts, and in this case, deformed breasts. Hideous.
Lol, I thought my eyes were deceiving, but you noticed that too. :)
 
I'm white and I have a little gipsy blood. But, I'm white. Though, I prefer latinas, middle eastern looking girls or mullato ones.
Maybe because I grew up in a neighbourhood with different races, and all my best friends are gypsies.
 

This thread has been viewed 42953 times.

Back
Top