The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Feminism = Triumph of White Privilege
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The triumph of feminism in the 1970s and 1980s was a triumph of white privilege, apparently.

For example, in 1970 the average youngish (age 31-37) black woman with four years of college (grey line) had a personal income of 206% (i.e., 106% higher) of the average white woman with four years of college. By 2000, however, that black advantaged had fallen to merely 102% (2% higher). By 2016, black women with 4 years of college were earning 88% (12% lower) than white women with the same educational credential.

Black women in 1960 and 1970 had higher average incomes than white women with the same educational level, probably because so many more white women were stay-at-home-moms.

This is relevant to my new Taki’s column on misinterpretations of Raj Chetty’s latest research.

 
Hide 25 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Black women in 1960 and 1970 had higher average incomes than white women with the same educational level, probably because so many more white women were stay-at-home-moms.

    Is that a valid explanation for black women with 4 years of college earning twice what white women with 4 years of college earned in 1970?

    Were so many college-educated white women back then really choosing not to work? Specially in comparison to black women?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Black women born in the 1940s who had 4 year college degrees in 1970 were a smaller, more selected percentage.
    , @Jim Christian
    Bet 95% of all women who went to college went in order to collect a man with a future along with whatever degree they were never going to use.
    , @Travis
    yes , many white women with college degrees chose not to work since they had the ability to stay home with their kids because their husbands were able to provide for them. Today this is more difficult, as few husbands can support a wife and children and live in a middle class tow with "good schools".

    My mother had a degree in biology and worked in a lab until her first child was born..this was typical...all of my mothers college friends became stay at home mothers between 1967-1977 when they started having children. The only ones who continued working were those that never had children. when my mother went back to work I was 9 , she becomes a teacher so she would be home early. 3 of her friends became teachers for similar reasons, because they grew bored staying him when the kids were all in school. but several of her college friends never went back to work (they had 3 or 4 kids, thus had more reasons to stay home and their husbands had good jobs)

    while in my neighborhood over half the mothers stayed home to raise the kids, but the working moms were not usually college graduates, and usually worked part time unless they were forced to work because the husbands had left.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Steven Pinker on The Rubin Report (YouTube) takes on male/female differences.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    Is he wearing lipstick, or does he always look like a poofter?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. @adreadline

    Black women in 1960 and 1970 had higher average incomes than white women with the same educational level, probably because so many more white women were stay-at-home-moms.
     
    Is that a valid explanation for black women with 4 years of college earning twice what white women with 4 years of college earned in 1970?

    Were so many college-educated white women back then really choosing not to work? Specially in comparison to black women?

    Black women born in the 1940s who had 4 year college degrees in 1970 were a smaller, more selected percentage.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mishra
    Along with much else, this points to how messy the data really are. Similarly with respect to SAT scores, etc: they are to some degree a function of who decides to take the test. Harvard's admissions stats are to some degree a function of who decides to apply to Harvard. And on and on, though you seldom see it mentioned.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. @Frau Katze
    Steven Pinker on The Rubin Report (YouTube) takes on male/female differences.

    https://youtu.be/sYf6dD4N86E

    Is he wearing lipstick, or does he always look like a poofter?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    He moonlights as Margaret Atwood.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Also consistent with shift from discrimination to affirmative action. Mich harder for a black wonan to earn a four year degree back then.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    Much harder for a black wonan to earn a four year degree back then.
     
    Yeah, there weren't so many zero-intelligence black studies, womyn studies and other "oppression" studies courses to leave study time for calculus, chemistry, literature, and history back then. This does make it lots easier nowadays.

    Also consistent with shift from discrimination to affirmative action...
     
    There, fixed that one for you, too, Eve. Discrimination in college in the '60's and '70's (even in the 1940's) - bullshit.

    (ya gotta love that strike feature in HTML - it's my favorite tag.)

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. Also black women with a BA in 1970′s and 80′s were really extraordinary. Much more so than one with a BA today. The change not so great with white women.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Autochthon
    Anyone with a degree back then was, for the most part, selected as someone significantly more intelligent than the population at large. Now, a degree from a university means no more than completion of the thirteenth grade, and one is available and given to damn near anyone with a pulse and the barest inclination at all to apply oneself (miraculously, some people still cannot hack college, which really says something about how stupid, lazy, or both they are, since college an most undergraduate degrees – and even many graduate degrees – are now a complete joke!).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. @Luke Lea
    Also black women with a BA in 1970's and 80's were really extraordinary. Much more so than one with a BA today. The change not so great with white women.

    Anyone with a degree back then was, for the most part, selected as someone significantly more intelligent than the population at large. Now, a degree from a university means no more than completion of the thirteenth grade, and one is available and given to damn near anyone with a pulse and the barest inclination at all to apply oneself (miraculously, some people still cannot hack college, which really says something about how stupid, lazy, or both they are, since college an most undergraduate degrees – and even many graduate degrees – are now a complete joke!).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Agreed, but then, to make up for this, now the graduates can go out looking for a $10/hr job already saddled with a mortgage-sized loan payment to pay off. So, there's that ...
    , @JackOH
    "Now, a degree from a university means no more than completion of the thirteenth grade . . .".

    Yep. My personal hunch for years is that "credentialist hypertrophy" is and has been a serious threat to America's moral fiber. (I'm a longtime insider-observer of our local non-selective state university.)
    , @Thea
    The carnival atmosphere of colleges is also off-putting to those raised with strict morals.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  8. @Autochthon
    Anyone with a degree back then was, for the most part, selected as someone significantly more intelligent than the population at large. Now, a degree from a university means no more than completion of the thirteenth grade, and one is available and given to damn near anyone with a pulse and the barest inclination at all to apply oneself (miraculously, some people still cannot hack college, which really says something about how stupid, lazy, or both they are, since college an most undergraduate degrees – and even many graduate degrees – are now a complete joke!).

    Agreed, but then, to make up for this, now the graduates can go out looking for a $10/hr job already saddled with a mortgage-sized loan payment to pay off. So, there’s that …

    Read More
    • Agree: Autochthon
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. @Steve Sailer
    Black women born in the 1940s who had 4 year college degrees in 1970 were a smaller, more selected percentage.

    Along with much else, this points to how messy the data really are. Similarly with respect to SAT scores, etc: they are to some degree a function of who decides to take the test. Harvard’s admissions stats are to some degree a function of who decides to apply to Harvard. And on and on, though you seldom see it mentioned.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Medvedev
    Blacks who take SAT are already more selected group than Whites who take SAT (same for Asians vs Whites).
    If we forced everyone to take SAT test the discrepancy/gap between Blacks and Whites would be even more profound. And Asian advantage over Whites would grow a little bit too.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. @ItsEve
    Also consistent with shift from discrimination to affirmative action. Mich harder for a black wonan to earn a four year degree back then.

    Much harder for a black wonan to earn a four year degree back then.

    Yeah, there weren’t so many zero-intelligence black studies, womyn studies and other “oppression” studies courses to leave study time for calculus, chemistry, literature, and history back then. This does make it lots easier nowadays.

    Also consistent with shift from discrimination to affirmative action…

    There, fixed that one for you, too, Eve. Discrimination in college in the ’60′s and ’70′s (even in the 1940′s) – bullshit.

    (ya gotta love that strike feature in HTML – it’s my favorite tag.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. @Autochthon
    Anyone with a degree back then was, for the most part, selected as someone significantly more intelligent than the population at large. Now, a degree from a university means no more than completion of the thirteenth grade, and one is available and given to damn near anyone with a pulse and the barest inclination at all to apply oneself (miraculously, some people still cannot hack college, which really says something about how stupid, lazy, or both they are, since college an most undergraduate degrees – and even many graduate degrees – are now a complete joke!).

    “Now, a degree from a university means no more than completion of the thirteenth grade . . .”.

    Yep. My personal hunch for years is that “credentialist hypertrophy” is and has been a serious threat to America’s moral fiber. (I’m a longtime insider-observer of our local non-selective state university.)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @adreadline

    Black women in 1960 and 1970 had higher average incomes than white women with the same educational level, probably because so many more white women were stay-at-home-moms.
     
    Is that a valid explanation for black women with 4 years of college earning twice what white women with 4 years of college earned in 1970?

    Were so many college-educated white women back then really choosing not to work? Specially in comparison to black women?

    Bet 95% of all women who went to college went in order to collect a man with a future along with whatever degree they were never going to use.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. @adreadline

    Black women in 1960 and 1970 had higher average incomes than white women with the same educational level, probably because so many more white women were stay-at-home-moms.
     
    Is that a valid explanation for black women with 4 years of college earning twice what white women with 4 years of college earned in 1970?

    Were so many college-educated white women back then really choosing not to work? Specially in comparison to black women?

    yes , many white women with college degrees chose not to work since they had the ability to stay home with their kids because their husbands were able to provide for them. Today this is more difficult, as few husbands can support a wife and children and live in a middle class tow with “good schools”.

    My mother had a degree in biology and worked in a lab until her first child was born..this was typical…all of my mothers college friends became stay at home mothers between 1967-1977 when they started having children. The only ones who continued working were those that never had children. when my mother went back to work I was 9 , she becomes a teacher so she would be home early. 3 of her friends became teachers for similar reasons, because they grew bored staying him when the kids were all in school. but several of her college friends never went back to work (they had 3 or 4 kids, thus had more reasons to stay home and their husbands had good jobs)

    while in my neighborhood over half the mothers stayed home to raise the kids, but the working moms were not usually college graduates, and usually worked part time unless they were forced to work because the husbands had left.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. @Jim Don Bob
    Is he wearing lipstick, or does he always look like a poofter?

    He moonlights as Margaret Atwood.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. I read census reports from 1950, 60, 70. 80 and 90, where the income for 4 different groups were listed.

    Married men, married womyn, single men and single womyn; all of them reported the same pattern.

    Married men first, then single womyn, single men, and married womyn bringing up the rear. The only one that surprised me was single womyn out earning single men. And that was true almost 70 years ago.

    These numbers weren’t broken down by education, just gender and marital status.

    So I think Steve has it correct that the lower marriage potential for negro womyn kept them in the work force while the white womyn were cranking out babies and staying home; because they could afford to.

    I suspect the single men/womyn ranking has to do with the female obsession with money. Where the guys make enough to get by and not interesting in busting their ass just to have more than what they need to live.

    Another thing was in 1975 some judge ruled the banks have to consider a married womyn’s income when qualifying for a loan. So then there was a big reason for the white married womyn to get back to work…outside the home….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Medvedev

    I suspect the single men/womyn ranking has to do with the female obsession with money. Where the guys make enough to get by and not interesting in busting their ass just to have more than what they need to live.
     
    Obsession with money doesn't translate into real wages, unless you're willing to put more hours, smarter, better, more successful. And men on average work more hours, take less vacation days and sick leaves.
    The most likely explanation is paternalism on the man's side even without Affirmative action requirements. To put it into perspective, female performing on the low end for males (25% percentile) would be considered successful and can have a successful career path. Man will be considered a loser)))
    Tech companies, where I worked, would hire female engineer if she performed on the low end for male engineers. And these were private companies with no Affirmative action, no quotas.
    , @Rosamond Vincy
    Please stop with the BS spelling. The -en ending is an Anglo-Saxon plural, as in children, brethren, etc
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. @Mishra
    Along with much else, this points to how messy the data really are. Similarly with respect to SAT scores, etc: they are to some degree a function of who decides to take the test. Harvard's admissions stats are to some degree a function of who decides to apply to Harvard. And on and on, though you seldom see it mentioned.

    Blacks who take SAT are already more selected group than Whites who take SAT (same for Asians vs Whites).
    If we forced everyone to take SAT test the discrepancy/gap between Blacks and Whites would be even more profound. And Asian advantage over Whites would grow a little bit too.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @gunner29
    I read census reports from 1950, 60, 70. 80 and 90, where the income for 4 different groups were listed.

    Married men, married womyn, single men and single womyn; all of them reported the same pattern.

    Married men first, then single womyn, single men, and married womyn bringing up the rear. The only one that surprised me was single womyn out earning single men. And that was true almost 70 years ago.

    These numbers weren't broken down by education, just gender and marital status.

    So I think Steve has it correct that the lower marriage potential for negro womyn kept them in the work force while the white womyn were cranking out babies and staying home; because they could afford to.

    I suspect the single men/womyn ranking has to do with the female obsession with money. Where the guys make enough to get by and not interesting in busting their ass just to have more than what they need to live.

    Another thing was in 1975 some judge ruled the banks have to consider a married womyn's income when qualifying for a loan. So then there was a big reason for the white married womyn to get back to work...outside the home....

    I suspect the single men/womyn ranking has to do with the female obsession with money. Where the guys make enough to get by and not interesting in busting their ass just to have more than what they need to live.

    Obsession with money doesn’t translate into real wages, unless you’re willing to put more hours, smarter, better, more successful. And men on average work more hours, take less vacation days and sick leaves.
    The most likely explanation is paternalism on the man’s side even without Affirmative action requirements. To put it into perspective, female performing on the low end for males (25% percentile) would be considered successful and can have a successful career path. Man will be considered a loser)))
    Tech companies, where I worked, would hire female engineer if she performed on the low end for male engineers. And these were private companies with no Affirmative action, no quotas.

    Read More
    • Replies: @gunner29

    And men on average work more hours, take less vacation days and sick leaves.
     
    That is a lot of the reason why the married guys make the most money out of the 4 groups. They have the boot of society as well as wifeys, ankle deep up their ass to work the hours to make the most money for her and the kids.

    The single guys don't or won't work extra hours, they'd rather do something more enjoyable than work.

    Womyn, with their security obsession, equate money to security, so they are real sweat hogs to pile up the cash. They'd much rather have some guy waste most of his life doing a job he really doesn't enjoy or like, but it pays the most. But if they can't snag a bread earner, plan B is to work. I'm certain the vast majority of male hate from womyn is because some guy wouldn't support them.


    Tech companies, where I worked, would hire female engineer if she performed on the low end for male engineers. And these were private companies with no Affirmative action, no quotas.
     
    I was private sector too. But they went full blown AA when they started writing multi-million dollar checks to womyn and feral minorities because they didn't get a promotion or somebody said or did something to create a 'hostile' work environment.

    That started over 35 years ago, because we were on the left coast and that is where it started because of the left wing judges and juries.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. @Autochthon
    Anyone with a degree back then was, for the most part, selected as someone significantly more intelligent than the population at large. Now, a degree from a university means no more than completion of the thirteenth grade, and one is available and given to damn near anyone with a pulse and the barest inclination at all to apply oneself (miraculously, some people still cannot hack college, which really says something about how stupid, lazy, or both they are, since college an most undergraduate degrees – and even many graduate degrees – are now a complete joke!).

    The carnival atmosphere of colleges is also off-putting to those raised with strict morals.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. I’m not sure white women staying home for their kids is the full story. The decline in marriage didn’t hit them hard by then:

    [quote]
    In 2012 The U.S Census Bureau released a report that studied the history of marriage in the United States. They discovered some startling statistics when calculating marriage by race. They found that African Americans age 35 and older were more likely to be married than White Americans from 1890 until sometime around the 1960s. Not only did they swap places during the 60s but in 1980 the number of NEVER jmarried African Americans began a staggering climb from about 10% to more than 25% by 2010 while the percentage for White women remained under 10% and just over 10% for White men.[\quote]

    http://blackdemographics.com/households/marriage-in-black-america/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  20. @gunner29
    I read census reports from 1950, 60, 70. 80 and 90, where the income for 4 different groups were listed.

    Married men, married womyn, single men and single womyn; all of them reported the same pattern.

    Married men first, then single womyn, single men, and married womyn bringing up the rear. The only one that surprised me was single womyn out earning single men. And that was true almost 70 years ago.

    These numbers weren't broken down by education, just gender and marital status.

    So I think Steve has it correct that the lower marriage potential for negro womyn kept them in the work force while the white womyn were cranking out babies and staying home; because they could afford to.

    I suspect the single men/womyn ranking has to do with the female obsession with money. Where the guys make enough to get by and not interesting in busting their ass just to have more than what they need to live.

    Another thing was in 1975 some judge ruled the banks have to consider a married womyn's income when qualifying for a loan. So then there was a big reason for the white married womyn to get back to work...outside the home....

    Please stop with the BS spelling. The -en ending is an Anglo-Saxon plural, as in children, brethren, etc

    Read More
    • Replies: @gunner29
    I'm just repeating what the feminazi's started back in the '70s. They didn't want to see it spelled woman or women because that was the patriarchy suppressing the sisters, putting their mark on them. So they came up with the yn instead of an or en.....Look it up!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. How could you not adjust for these obvious factors and still be credible, much less known as any kind of scientist? It’s absurd. Laughable. Intellectually criminal. And unfortunately par for the course in Clown World.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. @Rosamond Vincy
    Please stop with the BS spelling. The -en ending is an Anglo-Saxon plural, as in children, brethren, etc

    I’m just repeating what the feminazi’s started back in the ’70s. They didn’t want to see it spelled woman or women because that was the patriarchy suppressing the sisters, putting their mark on them. So they came up with the yn instead of an or en…..Look it up!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @Medvedev

    I suspect the single men/womyn ranking has to do with the female obsession with money. Where the guys make enough to get by and not interesting in busting their ass just to have more than what they need to live.
     
    Obsession with money doesn't translate into real wages, unless you're willing to put more hours, smarter, better, more successful. And men on average work more hours, take less vacation days and sick leaves.
    The most likely explanation is paternalism on the man's side even without Affirmative action requirements. To put it into perspective, female performing on the low end for males (25% percentile) would be considered successful and can have a successful career path. Man will be considered a loser)))
    Tech companies, where I worked, would hire female engineer if she performed on the low end for male engineers. And these were private companies with no Affirmative action, no quotas.

    And men on average work more hours, take less vacation days and sick leaves.

    That is a lot of the reason why the married guys make the most money out of the 4 groups. They have the boot of society as well as wifeys, ankle deep up their ass to work the hours to make the most money for her and the kids.

    The single guys don’t or won’t work extra hours, they’d rather do something more enjoyable than work.

    Womyn, with their security obsession, equate money to security, so they are real sweat hogs to pile up the cash. They’d much rather have some guy waste most of his life doing a job he really doesn’t enjoy or like, but it pays the most. But if they can’t snag a bread earner, plan B is to work. I’m certain the vast majority of male hate from womyn is because some guy wouldn’t support them.

    Tech companies, where I worked, would hire female engineer if she performed on the low end for male engineers. And these were private companies with no Affirmative action, no quotas.

    I was private sector too. But they went full blown AA when they started writing multi-million dollar checks to womyn and feral minorities because they didn’t get a promotion or somebody said or did something to create a ‘hostile’ work environment.

    That started over 35 years ago, because we were on the left coast and that is where it started because of the left wing judges and juries.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Medvedev
    I'm an idiot ... forgot to tell "Tech companies in Russia/Ukraine")))
    In the US if you're in charge of hiring, need to hire 20 tech professionals and cannot find 4-5 female engineers for the job you're in a deep trouble.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. I know, but they’re idiots who know NOTHING about the history of the English language. They also wanted to replace history with “herstory” even though it’s from Latin, and a feminine declension at that.

    These people never worry about the concerns of real women.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  25. @gunner29

    And men on average work more hours, take less vacation days and sick leaves.
     
    That is a lot of the reason why the married guys make the most money out of the 4 groups. They have the boot of society as well as wifeys, ankle deep up their ass to work the hours to make the most money for her and the kids.

    The single guys don't or won't work extra hours, they'd rather do something more enjoyable than work.

    Womyn, with their security obsession, equate money to security, so they are real sweat hogs to pile up the cash. They'd much rather have some guy waste most of his life doing a job he really doesn't enjoy or like, but it pays the most. But if they can't snag a bread earner, plan B is to work. I'm certain the vast majority of male hate from womyn is because some guy wouldn't support them.


    Tech companies, where I worked, would hire female engineer if she performed on the low end for male engineers. And these were private companies with no Affirmative action, no quotas.
     
    I was private sector too. But they went full blown AA when they started writing multi-million dollar checks to womyn and feral minorities because they didn't get a promotion or somebody said or did something to create a 'hostile' work environment.

    That started over 35 years ago, because we were on the left coast and that is where it started because of the left wing judges and juries.

    I’m an idiot … forgot to tell “Tech companies in Russia/Ukraine”)))
    In the US if you’re in charge of hiring, need to hire 20 tech professionals and cannot find 4-5 female engineers for the job you’re in a deep trouble.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored