The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Favoring More White Relatives?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Here’s another example of modern conservatism being little more than liberalism from ten–or in this case, six–years ago. The following graph shows the percentages of non-Hispanic whites, by partisan affiliation, who said they either “strongly favor” or “favor” a “close relative marrying a white person” over time:

The arrested decline among white Democrats since the onset of The Great Awokening is interesting. Though I’ve not heard it expressed among white leftists and it currently has no purchase in corporate media, I wonder if whites marrying non-whites will at some point be seen as a sort of cultural appropriation or even cultural imperialism whites will be shamed for doing. It sounds crazy, but the same force has been working against international adoptions, cross-cultural fashion, and gentrification. Imitation has gone from being the sincerest form of flattery to being deplorably racist and insulting.

That half of white America still openly–at least openly enough to tell someone conducting a public survey–expresses a preference for bringing on extended family members with whom they have a broadly shared racial and cultural identity rather than those they do not is surprising. Most of the residual responses are “neither favor nor oppose”–vanishingly few whites, just 2.1% of all whites from 2000 to 2018, “oppose” or “strongly oppose” a white relative marrying another white person.

GSS variables used: MARWHT(1-2)(3-5), RACECEN1(1), HISPANIC(1), YEAR, PARTYID(0-1)(2-4)(5-6)

 
Hide 75 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. I am surprised the numbers (particularly among liberals) are that high

    I would have expected sub 25%

    • Replies: @Arclight
    @Gman

    Same here. For Democrats to have about half of respondents feeling that way, it must mean something like 70 percent of white Dems have this preference. And when the rubber really hits the road as opposed to answering a survey I bet the real number is higher.

  2. How do other ethnicities/races compare? 🤔

    That would show whether whites are less or more in-group conscious vis-a-vis other folks.

    Peace.

  3. This strongly contradicts Gallup’s poll :

    Now, the detail of a generic question vs. ‘a close relative’ may be a factor, but ‘favor a white person’ is not the same thing as ‘oppose a black person’, since the biggest option – indifference – is not accounted for.

    • Replies: @Wency
    @Thomm

    I personally know plenty of people who, in private, would say "I'd prefer my daughter brings home a white man" but who would never say "Blacks and whites should NEVER marry."

    , @Magic Dirt Resident
    @Thomm

    This is just approval of interracial marriage, it has nothing to do with preference.

    , @BANNED by Wormpress
    @Thomm


    Now, the detail of a generic question vs. ‘a close relative’ may be a factor, but ‘favor a white person’ is not the same thing as ‘oppose a black person’, since the biggest option – indifference – is not accounted for.
     
    These two questions aren't even in the same ballpark. One is an abstraction that few White people would defy for a cost-free feelz. The other question posed in AE's post is more concrete and tangible, and thus more White people answered truthfully.

    Interestingly, 50% of White Americans are White Nationalists! How about that, Mahatma Ganges!

    Audie:

    I wonder if whites marrying non-whites will at some point be seen as a sort of cultural appropriation or even cultural imperialism whites will be shamed for doing.
     
    My bet is that in short time, White Wokeism will die and return to the cultural consensus that race mongrelization is low class. It will be the class stigma that pushes White women away from the black, brown, and yellow poles (and White men away from marrying their exotic adventures). It's already in play, given that mudsharks are routinely mocked as fat, toothless walmartians.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Audacious Epigone

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @Thomm

    Approving and favoring are two very different things. If they weren't, we'd expect from this poll that 90% of marriages would be interracial!

  4. Also note that over 20% of babies born now are mixed race. This chart is from 2010-15, so assume each state is 4-5 points higher than the chart :

    • Replies: @Oblivionrecurs
    @Thomm

    I wish the CDC had a way to measure father's race and not just mother. My cousin who has a black babydaddy would get rejoiced by us as populating the white race, even if the mother makes constant insistence that they've got a proud black baby with no evil white DNA.

    Meanwhile my Latina friend's kids are counted as Latino but she strongly prefers them white, married a white guy too.

    Probably the hardest group to quantify is others/unknown, in the Florida voter file they're all over.

    Replies: @Bill

  5. Anon[156] • Disclaimer says:

    The problem with this data is that they cannot really adjust for gradual changes in social attitudes for what is acceptable to believe or say. The Overton Window on what you can even say in private is closing very fast.

    The GSS is … “conducted face-to-face with an in-person interview by the National Opinion Research Center of the University of Chicago.” All answers have to be verbally conveyed to another human who is sitting right across from you, a human whose face you are looking at and who, however well trained, is probably recognizable to all surveyees as a progressive who has lived most of her life in academia.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @Anon


    The problem with this data is that they cannot really adjust for gradual changes in social attitudes for what is acceptable to believe or say. The Overton Window on what you can even say in private is closing very fast.
     
    Dead on. This is a well-known phenomenon in polling called "social desirability bias." Given that Audacious writes about polling all the time, he should write about that factor. It affects polling on immigration and a variety of racial issues.

    Here's a general backgrounder over at VDare.
    https://vdare.com/articles/yes-virginia-dare-social-desirability-bias-is-skewing-immigration-polls-and-trump-s

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    , @Justvisiting
    @Anon


    All answers have to be verbally conveyed to another human who is sitting right across from you, a human whose face you are looking at and who, however well trained, is probably recognizable to all surveyees as a progressive who has lived most of her life in academia.
     
    In this (post Snowden and doxing) day and age what human being is so stupid as to be willing to share such information with any stranger?

    That has got to eliminate anyone with even a mild bit of street smarts.

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @Anon

    Indisputable.

    For what it's worth, though, the interviewers go through enormous lengths to keep participants and results private. Results aren't released at the state level on account of this (which is a real bummer for me, as I'd love to be able to do state-to-state comparisons using the GSS!).

  6. I obviously am opposed.

    I do not think mixed race marriages are a sin, of course, but they should be no more than a novelty in terms of incidence. If they were a novelty across the board, it wouldn’t be so dangerous. But they’re pushing it on us. It isn’t a novelty. It’s just an obvious plan to turn humanity into one big lumpy mass so the enemies of all mankind can do whatever they want without having to deal with a coherent culture.

    Everyone knows this here.

    The real question is how many of us are willing to suffer possible job loss to say the truth.

    There are others out there, too, who are either opposed or strongly opposed. But even the old-timers, like my relatives who are over 85 years old, are afraid to say these truths in public.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    Huh? Turning mankind into one lumpy mass makes it a lot *easier* to unite against the powers that be. If everyone is the same 'race', it's no longer useful as a force of division.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Saxon

  7. Yes, Whites for miscegenation are a big reason for the downfall of the US.

  8. I’ve said this before, but all miscegenation is not created equal.

    If you have whites with South Asians, whites with East Asians, or whites with Amerindians, the resulting offspring are fully capable of behaving (and in many cases even of looking) white.

    Only blacks are excepted. Mulattos often seem more physically and culturally black than physically and culturally white.

    A white man marrying a Chinese or Korean woman hardly seems very race-traitorous anymore, unless your understanding of “race” is a crudely biological one fully exhausted by genetic sequences. If you have a more comprehensive and metaphysical understand of race as those united by a common destiny, then this biological difference is not relevant.

    It is the “common destiny” part that has made whites and blacks so incompatible with each other despite living side by side for 500 years. Their biological differences are miniscule in the grand scheme of things and certainly are inadequate to prevent or prohibit, in and of themselves, fertile pairings between them after the manner of mere animals.

    Most whites don’t want to marry most blacks because they don’t want to live that way, and most blacks aren’t able to marry most whites because they can’t live that way. There are all kinds of complicated exceptions at the margins, but by and large blacks and whites form distinct racial groups because they irritate one another.

    • Disagree: Tusk
    • Replies: @Thomm
    @Intelligent Dasein


    If you have whites with South Asians, whites with East Asians, or whites with Amerindians, the resulting offspring are fully capable of behaving (and in many cases even of looking) white.

    Only blacks are excepted. Mulattos often seem more physically and culturally black than physically and culturally white.

     

    The data bears this out. Blacks are not a large part of interracial marriage. Interracial marriage is rising greatly as second generation Hispanics and Asians reach their 20s and 30s, but blacks, who did not have immigrant parents of course, are not a part of that.

    http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/15153113/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-00-00.png

    Replies: @Bill

    , @BANNED by Wormpress
    @Intelligent Dasein


    A white man marrying a Chinese or Korean woman hardly seems very race-traitorous anymore, unless your understanding of “race” is a crudely biological one fully exhausted by genetic sequences. If you have a more comprehensive and metaphysical understand of race as those united by a common destiny, then this biological difference is not relevant.
     
    genetic sequence is destiny.
    , @Athletic and Whitesplosive
    @Intelligent Dasein


    A white man marrying a Chinese or Korean woman hardly seems very race-traitorous anymore, unless your understanding of “race” is a crudely biological one fully exhausted by genetic sequences. If you have a more comprehensive and metaphysical understand of race as those united by a common destiny, then this biological difference is not relevant.
     
    True on a small scale, not on a large one. Substantial existence of one's people as they are is good in and of itself. Are we still "us" with a small admixture of koreans? I'll say yes. But is an exact 50/50 split or even a majority korean people synonymous with mine? Of course not. Precisely where that divide occurs is hard to say, and we don't gain much in allowing it at all, so best it be avoided. That's why indios to me always seemed to have the most legitimate complaint of all the PC BS (not that that's a particularly high bar), because for whatever other nonsense they might complain about, it is true that due to such extensive interbreeding with whites, the NA Indians as they were can barely be said to exist.
    , @SFG
    @Intelligent Dasein

    It's a population problem, not an essence problem. There are blacks capable of living a standard bourgeois lifestyle (graduate high school and get married before having kids), just as there are whites who aren't. The curves overlap. What you're alluding to, I think, is that mixing with Asians isn't going to cause a widespread decline in IQ (and self-control, etc.), so if it happens the republic will survive, even if the grandkids' eyes will look a little funny.

    What will probably happen is a sorting as different groups wind up in different classes due to ability--there'll be a (gentile) white-Asian-Jewish-Indian upper class, a white-Hispanic mestizo middle class, and a white-black lower class. GNXP gave these the amusing moniker of 'Jeurasians' and 'Redblex'--they only had two.

    It actually provides a conundrum separating white nationalists from other race realists--if the groups remain separate, whites remain pure but become a minority and can be easily oppressed and looted, but a white-Asian-whiter-Hispanic 'mainstream' mix can remain a majority and maintain the bourgeois values necessary for a developed nation.

    Replies: @iffen

    , @Truth
    @Intelligent Dasein


    A white man marrying a Chinese or Korean woman hardly seems very race-traitorous anymore,
     
    Well, uh, yeah, because that's what you did.

    How about these beautiful couples?

    https://pualingo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/white-girl-dating-asian-guy.jpg

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/06/08/article-0-1E8B76CB00000578-414_634x629.jpg

    http://goldsea.com/Text/images/1221.jpg

    https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQjrdBueQskppHyCF_Q2H1evsjGJISGBdmTE4o15NYsBe0OsFZB&s

    As a matter of fact, I'm thinking, since you're all equal and it's "Kumbaya and everything, a dating agency in Stockholm, Oslo, and Copenhangen, that encourages beautiful Nordic blondes (7+ and 2 years old and under only, please) to mix their totally equal seed with older Beijing millionaires would be a wonderful thing, don't you?

    I mean a few hundred thousand more Twinkies/Daniel Chieh's, who wouldn't be in favor of that?

    Replies: @Talha

  9. @Thomm
    This strongly contradicts Gallup's poll :

    https://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/esvvhtlb5ki6_24pn_ojnq.gif

    Now, the detail of a generic question vs. 'a close relative' may be a factor, but 'favor a white person' is not the same thing as 'oppose a black person', since the biggest option - indifference - is not accounted for.

    Replies: @Wency, @Magic Dirt Resident, @BANNED by Wormpress, @Audacious Epigone

    I personally know plenty of people who, in private, would say “I’d prefer my daughter brings home a white man” but who would never say “Blacks and whites should NEVER marry.”

  10. Anon[399] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    The problem with this data is that they cannot really adjust for gradual changes in social attitudes for what is acceptable to believe or say. The Overton Window on what you can even say in private is closing very fast.

    The GSS is ... "conducted face-to-face with an in-person interview by the National Opinion Research Center of the University of Chicago." All answers have to be verbally conveyed to another human who is sitting right across from you, a human whose face you are looking at and who, however well trained, is probably recognizable to all surveyees as a progressive who has lived most of her life in academia.

    Replies: @Anon, @Justvisiting, @Audacious Epigone

    The problem with this data is that they cannot really adjust for gradual changes in social attitudes for what is acceptable to believe or say. The Overton Window on what you can even say in private is closing very fast.

    Dead on. This is a well-known phenomenon in polling called “social desirability bias.” Given that Audacious writes about polling all the time, he should write about that factor. It affects polling on immigration and a variety of racial issues.

    Here’s a general backgrounder over at VDare.
    https://vdare.com/articles/yes-virginia-dare-social-desirability-bias-is-skewing-immigration-polls-and-trump-s

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Anon

    As the article pointed out, it didn't show up in the 2016 presidential election. That's baffling. Polling gets a bad rap, but amalgamations like the RCP polling average continue to be remarkably good. The national average missed 2016 by less than 2 points. At the margins that 2% matters, of course, but in detecting trends over time, it's, well, pretty marginal.

  11. Do the whites who are independent have the lowest rate of in-group favoritism because they are libertarian?

    If so, it means the libertarians have lower in-group favoritism than the progressives.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    @Anonymous


    Do the whites who are independent have the lowest rate of in-group favoritism because they are libertarian?
     
    What makes you think white libertarians are most independent? Many are servile to Israel and Zionism.

    Some whites became libertarian as implicit white identity, e.g. anti-affirmative action.

    Other whites became libertarian because they believe in drugs and sex.

    Other whites became libertarian out of cult worship of Ayn Rand.

    Other whites became libertarian out of toady-ish admiration for the super-rich.

    A truly independent white person goes for a balance of nationalism and individualism, of socialism and capitalism. He is slavishly chained to any single ideology or formula. He feels free to take the best and most useful things from various ideas. It's like eating. No sense in eating one food item as the 'perfect food'. No such food exists. One must have meat, veggies, bread, etc.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood

  12. @Anon
    The problem with this data is that they cannot really adjust for gradual changes in social attitudes for what is acceptable to believe or say. The Overton Window on what you can even say in private is closing very fast.

    The GSS is ... "conducted face-to-face with an in-person interview by the National Opinion Research Center of the University of Chicago." All answers have to be verbally conveyed to another human who is sitting right across from you, a human whose face you are looking at and who, however well trained, is probably recognizable to all surveyees as a progressive who has lived most of her life in academia.

    Replies: @Anon, @Justvisiting, @Audacious Epigone

    All answers have to be verbally conveyed to another human who is sitting right across from you, a human whose face you are looking at and who, however well trained, is probably recognizable to all surveyees as a progressive who has lived most of her life in academia.

    In this (post Snowden and doxing) day and age what human being is so stupid as to be willing to share such information with any stranger?

    That has got to eliminate anyone with even a mild bit of street smarts.

  13. Whites should not reproduce with Blacks or Browns or Asians or offbrands, but European Christians should get down to business with other European Christians. Some of the better looking people have 6 or more different European Christian ancestries in the USA and some of the more ugly inbred boneheads have just one.

    Almost all old stocker Americans are a mixed breed of European Christians nationalities and ancestries, especially in the South.

    The rancid morons in the Bush Organized Crime Syndicate that put that Black boob Clarence Thomas on the US Supreme Court should be the last of the morons to advance these Blacks using RACE QUOTAS that deny European Christians top government and private jobs. That mulatto oaf who lied to drag the American Empire into the Iraq War, Colin Powell, was a mulatto who was advanced by the Republican Party weaklings to put a mulatto face on their globalization plans. That gappy gal named Condoleeza Rice was another Bush Organized Crime Syndicate pick to put a mixed race Black type face on the American Empire.

    In England, it was said that the Wogs start over the next hill, let alone Calais.

    In colonial America, especially in the mid-Atlantic and the South, English people of early settler stock got hot-to-trot with recently arrived Germans and old stocker Dutch colonists and French colonists and Irish people and Scottish people and Scotch-Irish people and Welsh people and on and on.

    A big swirl of horny colonists and they got that Andrew Jackson to open up the settlement blockage and from Pennsylvania and those parts and further South they poured over the Appalachian Mountains getting romance with these new people they bumped into.

    I believe that New England stayed the most homogeneous and the East Anglians who colonized and settled new England mixed with each other.

    WHITE CORE AMERICA suggests strongly that mixing with Blacks is bad business, but that brings up the White Core America Party plan to remove the current owners of corporate media from power — internet and electronic and newspapers and all of it — in retaliation for their constant race-mixing propaganda message. White Core America will also remove and retaliate against all advertising corporations that push race mixing and the like. Hollywood will be put on notice that the pushing of the race mixing propaganda message will be met with a retaliatory response from the new political party called White Core America.

    Be cordial with all Blacks who are worthy of it, but don’t start corkscrewing with them.

    I’ll reduce the harshness of this anti-race mixing message by saying that that picture of Rihanna drinking a beer while happily treading water is mighty enticing though. Rihanna looked good in that French magazine too. Barbados is an interesting island and some White Southerners have Barbadian ancestry. Rihanna is a Barbadian mulatto of a not entirely displeasing sort.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @Charles Pewitt

    WTF do you have against Clarence Thomas, Charles? Are you sure you don't mean Thurgood Marshall, the racist bastard appointed by some other bonehead? Clarence Thomas is the best Supreme Court justice that's been part of that arrogant black-robed group of misfits in many decades!

    Long live Clarence Thomas (for our own good)!

  14. And yet for the most part people still marry and date within the same race, although we’ve seen a spike among non-white cohabitation dating among whites (was posted here by audacious) and a fall among conservatives dating non-whites, essentially this in combination of the LGBT/anti-natalist spike will purify the white race into something more cohesive and United.

  15. just 2.1% of all whites from 2000 to 2018, “oppose” or “strongly oppose” a white relative marrying another white person.

    These are true lunatics. Why would anyone oppose marrying into one’s own race? Never mind who you’re talking to, blacks, reds, whites… why would you oppose this.

    You may oppose intermarrying or be indifferent, but to oppose in-marrying…. this is beyond crazy.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  16. @Thomm
    Also note that over 20% of babies born now are mixed race. This chart is from 2010-15, so assume each state is 4-5 points higher than the chart :

    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/FT_17.06.01_multiracialBabies_map.png

    Replies: @Oblivionrecurs

    I wish the CDC had a way to measure father’s race and not just mother. My cousin who has a black babydaddy would get rejoiced by us as populating the white race, even if the mother makes constant insistence that they’ve got a proud black baby with no evil white DNA.

    Meanwhile my Latina friend’s kids are counted as Latino but she strongly prefers them white, married a white guy too.

    Probably the hardest group to quantify is others/unknown, in the Florida voter file they’re all over.

    • Replies: @Bill
    @Oblivionrecurs

    What are you talking about? Birth certificates have race of mother and race of father fields. Page 54 here: ftp://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Health_Statistics/NCHS/Dataset_Documentation/DVS/natality/UserGuide2018-508.pdf

    Both are typically measured by asking the mother.

  17. @Intelligent Dasein
    I've said this before, but all miscegenation is not created equal.

    If you have whites with South Asians, whites with East Asians, or whites with Amerindians, the resulting offspring are fully capable of behaving (and in many cases even of looking) white.

    Only blacks are excepted. Mulattos often seem more physically and culturally black than physically and culturally white.

    A white man marrying a Chinese or Korean woman hardly seems very race-traitorous anymore, unless your understanding of "race" is a crudely biological one fully exhausted by genetic sequences. If you have a more comprehensive and metaphysical understand of race as those united by a common destiny, then this biological difference is not relevant.

    It is the "common destiny" part that has made whites and blacks so incompatible with each other despite living side by side for 500 years. Their biological differences are miniscule in the grand scheme of things and certainly are inadequate to prevent or prohibit, in and of themselves, fertile pairings between them after the manner of mere animals.

    Most whites don't want to marry most blacks because they don't want to live that way, and most blacks aren't able to marry most whites because they can't live that way. There are all kinds of complicated exceptions at the margins, but by and large blacks and whites form distinct racial groups because they irritate one another.

    Replies: @Thomm, @BANNED by Wormpress, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @SFG, @Truth

    If you have whites with South Asians, whites with East Asians, or whites with Amerindians, the resulting offspring are fully capable of behaving (and in many cases even of looking) white.

    Only blacks are excepted. Mulattos often seem more physically and culturally black than physically and culturally white.

    The data bears this out. Blacks are not a large part of interracial marriage. Interracial marriage is rising greatly as second generation Hispanics and Asians reach their 20s and 30s, but blacks, who did not have immigrant parents of course, are not a part of that.

    • Replies: @Bill
    @Thomm

    White/Hispanic does not generally count as an interracial marriage, though, in government statistics. Hispanics usually consider themselves white, though this is declining. So, blacks are a large part of interracial marriage. (5%+11%)/58% = 28%.

  18. Rihanna is a Barbadian mulatto of a not entirely displeasing sort.

    Rihanna looks like a Down syndrome adult. Very displeasing. Check out Paula Patton instead.

    • Replies: @Thomm
    @Intelligent Dasein

    And Halle Berry is probably closer to 3/8ths than to 50%.

    Paula Patton, too, is closer to Quadroon than to Mulatto.

    , @Anonymous
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Rihanna has a very very pretty face, perfect legs and figure and lovely butterscotch ecru skin color. She’s a drop dead beauty by any standards. She’s not a mulatto. She’s almost White, octoroon? 1/16?

    Halle Berry has a prettier face than Rihana and pretty medium chocolate skin. Another drop dead beauty.

    You have extremely high standards of beauty.

  19. @Intelligent Dasein

    Rihanna is a Barbadian mulatto of a not entirely displeasing sort.
     
    Rihanna looks like a Down syndrome adult. Very displeasing. Check out Paula Patton instead.

    Replies: @Thomm, @Anonymous

    And Halle Berry is probably closer to 3/8ths than to 50%.

    Paula Patton, too, is closer to Quadroon than to Mulatto.

  20. @Thomm
    This strongly contradicts Gallup's poll :

    https://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/esvvhtlb5ki6_24pn_ojnq.gif

    Now, the detail of a generic question vs. 'a close relative' may be a factor, but 'favor a white person' is not the same thing as 'oppose a black person', since the biggest option - indifference - is not accounted for.

    Replies: @Wency, @Magic Dirt Resident, @BANNED by Wormpress, @Audacious Epigone

    This is just approval of interracial marriage, it has nothing to do with preference.

  21. @Oblivionrecurs
    @Thomm

    I wish the CDC had a way to measure father's race and not just mother. My cousin who has a black babydaddy would get rejoiced by us as populating the white race, even if the mother makes constant insistence that they've got a proud black baby with no evil white DNA.

    Meanwhile my Latina friend's kids are counted as Latino but she strongly prefers them white, married a white guy too.

    Probably the hardest group to quantify is others/unknown, in the Florida voter file they're all over.

    Replies: @Bill

    What are you talking about? Birth certificates have race of mother and race of father fields. Page 54 here: ftp://ftp.cdc.gov/pub/Health_Statistics/NCHS/Dataset_Documentation/DVS/natality/UserGuide2018-508.pdf

    Both are typically measured by asking the mother.

  22. @Thomm
    @Intelligent Dasein


    If you have whites with South Asians, whites with East Asians, or whites with Amerindians, the resulting offspring are fully capable of behaving (and in many cases even of looking) white.

    Only blacks are excepted. Mulattos often seem more physically and culturally black than physically and culturally white.

     

    The data bears this out. Blacks are not a large part of interracial marriage. Interracial marriage is rising greatly as second generation Hispanics and Asians reach their 20s and 30s, but blacks, who did not have immigrant parents of course, are not a part of that.

    http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/15153113/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-00-00.png

    Replies: @Bill

    White/Hispanic does not generally count as an interracial marriage, though, in government statistics. Hispanics usually consider themselves white, though this is declining. So, blacks are a large part of interracial marriage. (5%+11%)/58% = 28%.

  23. @Intelligent Dasein
    I've said this before, but all miscegenation is not created equal.

    If you have whites with South Asians, whites with East Asians, or whites with Amerindians, the resulting offspring are fully capable of behaving (and in many cases even of looking) white.

    Only blacks are excepted. Mulattos often seem more physically and culturally black than physically and culturally white.

    A white man marrying a Chinese or Korean woman hardly seems very race-traitorous anymore, unless your understanding of "race" is a crudely biological one fully exhausted by genetic sequences. If you have a more comprehensive and metaphysical understand of race as those united by a common destiny, then this biological difference is not relevant.

    It is the "common destiny" part that has made whites and blacks so incompatible with each other despite living side by side for 500 years. Their biological differences are miniscule in the grand scheme of things and certainly are inadequate to prevent or prohibit, in and of themselves, fertile pairings between them after the manner of mere animals.

    Most whites don't want to marry most blacks because they don't want to live that way, and most blacks aren't able to marry most whites because they can't live that way. There are all kinds of complicated exceptions at the margins, but by and large blacks and whites form distinct racial groups because they irritate one another.

    Replies: @Thomm, @BANNED by Wormpress, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @SFG, @Truth

    A white man marrying a Chinese or Korean woman hardly seems very race-traitorous anymore, unless your understanding of “race” is a crudely biological one fully exhausted by genetic sequences. If you have a more comprehensive and metaphysical understand of race as those united by a common destiny, then this biological difference is not relevant.

    genetic sequence is destiny.

  24. @Thomm
    This strongly contradicts Gallup's poll :

    https://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/esvvhtlb5ki6_24pn_ojnq.gif

    Now, the detail of a generic question vs. 'a close relative' may be a factor, but 'favor a white person' is not the same thing as 'oppose a black person', since the biggest option - indifference - is not accounted for.

    Replies: @Wency, @Magic Dirt Resident, @BANNED by Wormpress, @Audacious Epigone

    Now, the detail of a generic question vs. ‘a close relative’ may be a factor, but ‘favor a white person’ is not the same thing as ‘oppose a black person’, since the biggest option – indifference – is not accounted for.

    These two questions aren’t even in the same ballpark. One is an abstraction that few White people would defy for a cost-free feelz. The other question posed in AE’s post is more concrete and tangible, and thus more White people answered truthfully.

    Interestingly, 50% of White Americans are White Nationalists! How about that, Mahatma Ganges!

    Audie:

    I wonder if whites marrying non-whites will at some point be seen as a sort of cultural appropriation or even cultural imperialism whites will be shamed for doing.

    My bet is that in short time, White Wokeism will die and return to the cultural consensus that race mongrelization is low class. It will be the class stigma that pushes White women away from the black, brown, and yellow poles (and White men away from marrying their exotic adventures). It’s already in play, given that mudsharks are routinely mocked as fat, toothless walmartians.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    @BANNED by Wormpress

    Actually, all interracial relationships involving white males and nonwhite females are higher class than white woman+white man relationships. Higher status white men prefer women of color.


    https://static01.nyt.com/images/2012/02/16/business/economy/economix-17interracial/economix-17interracial-blog480.jpg

    Nonwhite male + white female is indeed lower class, although Whitefemale+Asianmale stands out as the exception.

    White male + nonwhite female is the future of the upper classes.
    Monoracial white relationships have an unshakeable stigma of poverty, chaos, drug and alcohol malaise/death, divorce, and other assorted degeneracies. And that's because it's more than a stigma; it's a reality. Has been for a long time.

    Replies: @Talha, @anonymous, @The Shiv In Shiva's Crusty Hide

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @BANNED by Wormpress

    What is going to kill Wokeism? I want to think it eventually eats itself, but it's a big world with a lot of people to eat. Does that happen in a short time?

  25. according to Pew , in 2015 14% of children younger than 1 were mixed , while in 2017 17 % of new married couples were interracial/interethnic , among cohabiting couples the percentage is slightly higher at 18 % . while 76 % of mixed children have a white parent, only 11% of whites have a spouse/partner of another race/ethnicity.

  26. @Intelligent Dasein
    I've said this before, but all miscegenation is not created equal.

    If you have whites with South Asians, whites with East Asians, or whites with Amerindians, the resulting offspring are fully capable of behaving (and in many cases even of looking) white.

    Only blacks are excepted. Mulattos often seem more physically and culturally black than physically and culturally white.

    A white man marrying a Chinese or Korean woman hardly seems very race-traitorous anymore, unless your understanding of "race" is a crudely biological one fully exhausted by genetic sequences. If you have a more comprehensive and metaphysical understand of race as those united by a common destiny, then this biological difference is not relevant.

    It is the "common destiny" part that has made whites and blacks so incompatible with each other despite living side by side for 500 years. Their biological differences are miniscule in the grand scheme of things and certainly are inadequate to prevent or prohibit, in and of themselves, fertile pairings between them after the manner of mere animals.

    Most whites don't want to marry most blacks because they don't want to live that way, and most blacks aren't able to marry most whites because they can't live that way. There are all kinds of complicated exceptions at the margins, but by and large blacks and whites form distinct racial groups because they irritate one another.

    Replies: @Thomm, @BANNED by Wormpress, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @SFG, @Truth

    A white man marrying a Chinese or Korean woman hardly seems very race-traitorous anymore, unless your understanding of “race” is a crudely biological one fully exhausted by genetic sequences. If you have a more comprehensive and metaphysical understand of race as those united by a common destiny, then this biological difference is not relevant.

    True on a small scale, not on a large one. Substantial existence of one’s people as they are is good in and of itself. Are we still “us” with a small admixture of koreans? I’ll say yes. But is an exact 50/50 split or even a majority korean people synonymous with mine? Of course not. Precisely where that divide occurs is hard to say, and we don’t gain much in allowing it at all, so best it be avoided. That’s why indios to me always seemed to have the most legitimate complaint of all the PC BS (not that that’s a particularly high bar), because for whatever other nonsense they might complain about, it is true that due to such extensive interbreeding with whites, the NA Indians as they were can barely be said to exist.

  27. @Gman
    I am surprised the numbers (particularly among liberals) are that high

    I would have expected sub 25%

    Replies: @Arclight

    Same here. For Democrats to have about half of respondents feeling that way, it must mean something like 70 percent of white Dems have this preference. And when the rubber really hits the road as opposed to answering a survey I bet the real number is higher.

  28. @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan
    I obviously am opposed.

    I do not think mixed race marriages are a sin, of course, but they should be no more than a novelty in terms of incidence. If they were a novelty across the board, it wouldn't be so dangerous. But they're pushing it on us. It isn't a novelty. It's just an obvious plan to turn humanity into one big lumpy mass so the enemies of all mankind can do whatever they want without having to deal with a coherent culture.

    Everyone knows this here.

    The real question is how many of us are willing to suffer possible job loss to say the truth.

    There are others out there, too, who are either opposed or strongly opposed. But even the old-timers, like my relatives who are over 85 years old, are afraid to say these truths in public.

    Replies: @SFG

    Huh? Turning mankind into one lumpy mass makes it a lot *easier* to unite against the powers that be. If everyone is the same ‘race’, it’s no longer useful as a force of division.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @SFG


    Huh? Turning mankind into one lumpy mass makes it a lot *easier* to unite against the powers that be. If everyone is the same ‘race’, it’s no longer useful as a force of division.
     
    Except that the racially conscious want borders, which plutocrats find inconvenient.
    , @Saxon
    @SFG

    Not when it's an incoherent, non-cohesive mass of various mixes, which s what it would actually be like in India or Brazil. Then you just have a corrupt hellhole where nothing can ever be fixed and everything is a low trust nightmare. That's the real end product of racial diversity and racemixing.

  29. @Intelligent Dasein
    I've said this before, but all miscegenation is not created equal.

    If you have whites with South Asians, whites with East Asians, or whites with Amerindians, the resulting offspring are fully capable of behaving (and in many cases even of looking) white.

    Only blacks are excepted. Mulattos often seem more physically and culturally black than physically and culturally white.

    A white man marrying a Chinese or Korean woman hardly seems very race-traitorous anymore, unless your understanding of "race" is a crudely biological one fully exhausted by genetic sequences. If you have a more comprehensive and metaphysical understand of race as those united by a common destiny, then this biological difference is not relevant.

    It is the "common destiny" part that has made whites and blacks so incompatible with each other despite living side by side for 500 years. Their biological differences are miniscule in the grand scheme of things and certainly are inadequate to prevent or prohibit, in and of themselves, fertile pairings between them after the manner of mere animals.

    Most whites don't want to marry most blacks because they don't want to live that way, and most blacks aren't able to marry most whites because they can't live that way. There are all kinds of complicated exceptions at the margins, but by and large blacks and whites form distinct racial groups because they irritate one another.

    Replies: @Thomm, @BANNED by Wormpress, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @SFG, @Truth

    It’s a population problem, not an essence problem. There are blacks capable of living a standard bourgeois lifestyle (graduate high school and get married before having kids), just as there are whites who aren’t. The curves overlap. What you’re alluding to, I think, is that mixing with Asians isn’t going to cause a widespread decline in IQ (and self-control, etc.), so if it happens the republic will survive, even if the grandkids’ eyes will look a little funny.

    What will probably happen is a sorting as different groups wind up in different classes due to ability–there’ll be a (gentile) white-Asian-Jewish-Indian upper class, a white-Hispanic mestizo middle class, and a white-black lower class. GNXP gave these the amusing moniker of ‘Jeurasians’ and ‘Redblex’–they only had two.

    It actually provides a conundrum separating white nationalists from other race realists–if the groups remain separate, whites remain pure but become a minority and can be easily oppressed and looted, but a white-Asian-whiter-Hispanic ‘mainstream’ mix can remain a majority and maintain the bourgeois values necessary for a developed nation.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @SFG

    What will probably happen is a sorting as different groups wind up in different classes due to ability–there’ll be a (gentile) white-Asian-Jewish-Indian upper class, a white-Hispanic mestizo middle class, and a white-black lower class.

    This is what we already have except you will need to make some corrections, for example, there will be Asians in all classes. If Twinkie shows up he can tell you which Asians will be in which groups. Also, there are some blacks and hispanics that will be in the upper class, etc. Basically there will be (are) some from each group in each class. The problem, the point of discombobulation, is that the groups are not proportionate to the numbers of each group in the population.

  30. @Anonymous
    Do the whites who are independent have the lowest rate of in-group favoritism because they are libertarian?

    If so, it means the libertarians have lower in-group favoritism than the progressives.

    Replies: @Priss Factor

    Do the whites who are independent have the lowest rate of in-group favoritism because they are libertarian?

    What makes you think white libertarians are most independent? Many are servile to Israel and Zionism.

    Some whites became libertarian as implicit white identity, e.g. anti-affirmative action.

    Other whites became libertarian because they believe in drugs and sex.

    Other whites became libertarian out of cult worship of Ayn Rand.

    Other whites became libertarian out of toady-ish admiration for the super-rich.

    A truly independent white person goes for a balance of nationalism and individualism, of socialism and capitalism. He is slavishly chained to any single ideology or formula. He feels free to take the best and most useful things from various ideas. It’s like eating. No sense in eating one food item as the ‘perfect food’. No such food exists. One must have meat, veggies, bread, etc.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    @Priss Factor


    A truly independent white person goes for a balance of nationalism and individualism, of socialism and capitalism. He is slavishly chained to any single ideology or formula. He feels free to take the best and most useful things from various ideas.
     
    As they watch their belief system burn to the ground, and their faces get repetitiously stomped by the iron boot that reaches through their computer monitor every time they look at a news site or an advertisement, since every attempt by "middle ground" parties in Europe and the USA to effect the change they speak of results in humiliating failure, while American woke libertarianism marches on without even achieving conscious political power; like a phantom outside human control, crushing everything in its path and captivating every waking neuron of human attention through its sheer success and brilliance; creating a Utopian world in which the "balance" people will awaken penniless, powerless, and with only a small garden, a couple of retard kids with fucked up teeth who weren't allowed to read about evolution, and a collection of useless firearms to their name.
  31. @SFG
    @Intelligent Dasein

    It's a population problem, not an essence problem. There are blacks capable of living a standard bourgeois lifestyle (graduate high school and get married before having kids), just as there are whites who aren't. The curves overlap. What you're alluding to, I think, is that mixing with Asians isn't going to cause a widespread decline in IQ (and self-control, etc.), so if it happens the republic will survive, even if the grandkids' eyes will look a little funny.

    What will probably happen is a sorting as different groups wind up in different classes due to ability--there'll be a (gentile) white-Asian-Jewish-Indian upper class, a white-Hispanic mestizo middle class, and a white-black lower class. GNXP gave these the amusing moniker of 'Jeurasians' and 'Redblex'--they only had two.

    It actually provides a conundrum separating white nationalists from other race realists--if the groups remain separate, whites remain pure but become a minority and can be easily oppressed and looted, but a white-Asian-whiter-Hispanic 'mainstream' mix can remain a majority and maintain the bourgeois values necessary for a developed nation.

    Replies: @iffen

    What will probably happen is a sorting as different groups wind up in different classes due to ability–there’ll be a (gentile) white-Asian-Jewish-Indian upper class, a white-Hispanic mestizo middle class, and a white-black lower class.

    This is what we already have except you will need to make some corrections, for example, there will be Asians in all classes. If Twinkie shows up he can tell you which Asians will be in which groups. Also, there are some blacks and hispanics that will be in the upper class, etc. Basically there will be (are) some from each group in each class. The problem, the point of discombobulation, is that the groups are not proportionate to the numbers of each group in the population.

  32. OT: slight white pill?

    Lots of states got slightly whiter this year in 2018 new births. Mississippi is back to majority white births too.

    Overall, (brackets is 2016)
    white fertility was 1.64 (1.72)
    black fertility was 1.79 (1.83)
    American Indian 1.65 (1.79)
    Asian 1.52 (1.69)
    Hawain 2.11 (2.08)
    Hispanic 1.96 (2.09)

    keep crankin’ em out boys. our left wing poz machine is getting to the minorities too!

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    @LoutishAngloQuebecker

    No states got whiter this year. No amount of decrease in the minority birth rate can make up for +40 years of below replacement white fertility. The number of white people dying far exceeded the number of live births in both years, and whites remain a solid +30 years older than their nonwhite counterparts, on average.

    Getting enthused by sub-2 fertility rates is the absolute state of the modern enslaved cuckface male. It's not "cranking them out" until it rises above 15 (in light of the staggering losses of the 20th century).

    , @JohnnyWalker123
    @LoutishAngloQuebecker

    The cost of living is increasing, which is applying downward pressure on the birthrates of lower-income populations. It's tough to afford kids when the cost of rent is ridiculously high. Especially when there's so much pressure to compete and keep up with the Joneses.

    Also, there's been a huge fall in the teen birthrate lately. Given that teen pregnancy is disproportionately found among Non-Whites (Blacks and Hispanics), the fall in the teen birthrate is disproportionately affecting Non-White fertility. This fall in the teen birthrate seems to a product of declining teen sexual activity, which is occuring because Social Media is pushing teens to socially disengage and party/socialize/hangout MUCH less with their friends.

    America (and probably even more so Canada) are becoming increasingly expensive, competitive, and anti-social. That has all sorts of interesting implications.

    Imagine a society full of young people working long hours for low wages, deep in debt, living in tiny apartments/pods (or with parents), eating vegan, "socalizing" through a smartphone, afraid of being accused of sexual harassment, staring at a screen for most of the day, and immersed in a pro-gay/lesbian/trans culture.

    It's not an environment conducive towards getting pregnant.

  33. @SFG
    @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    Huh? Turning mankind into one lumpy mass makes it a lot *easier* to unite against the powers that be. If everyone is the same 'race', it's no longer useful as a force of division.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Saxon

    Huh? Turning mankind into one lumpy mass makes it a lot *easier* to unite against the powers that be. If everyone is the same ‘race’, it’s no longer useful as a force of division.

    Except that the racially conscious want borders, which plutocrats find inconvenient.

  34. @SFG
    @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    Huh? Turning mankind into one lumpy mass makes it a lot *easier* to unite against the powers that be. If everyone is the same 'race', it's no longer useful as a force of division.

    Replies: @Rosie, @Saxon

    Not when it’s an incoherent, non-cohesive mass of various mixes, which s what it would actually be like in India or Brazil. Then you just have a corrupt hellhole where nothing can ever be fixed and everything is a low trust nightmare. That’s the real end product of racial diversity and racemixing.

  35. @BANNED by Wormpress
    @Thomm


    Now, the detail of a generic question vs. ‘a close relative’ may be a factor, but ‘favor a white person’ is not the same thing as ‘oppose a black person’, since the biggest option – indifference – is not accounted for.
     
    These two questions aren't even in the same ballpark. One is an abstraction that few White people would defy for a cost-free feelz. The other question posed in AE's post is more concrete and tangible, and thus more White people answered truthfully.

    Interestingly, 50% of White Americans are White Nationalists! How about that, Mahatma Ganges!

    Audie:

    I wonder if whites marrying non-whites will at some point be seen as a sort of cultural appropriation or even cultural imperialism whites will be shamed for doing.
     
    My bet is that in short time, White Wokeism will die and return to the cultural consensus that race mongrelization is low class. It will be the class stigma that pushes White women away from the black, brown, and yellow poles (and White men away from marrying their exotic adventures). It's already in play, given that mudsharks are routinely mocked as fat, toothless walmartians.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Audacious Epigone

    Actually, all interracial relationships involving white males and nonwhite females are higher class than white woman+white man relationships. Higher status white men prefer women of color.

    Nonwhite male + white female is indeed lower class, although Whitefemale+Asianmale stands out as the exception.

    White male + nonwhite female is the future of the upper classes.
    Monoracial white relationships have an unshakeable stigma of poverty, chaos, drug and alcohol malaise/death, divorce, and other assorted degeneracies. And that’s because it’s more than a stigma; it’s a reality. Has been for a long time.

    • Replies: @Talha
    @JohnPlywood

    That is one of the most interesting charts I have ever seen - thanks!

    My wife (a family/marriage therapist/counselor) was just telling me about a client of hers who is a black lady married to a white man*. Since her sons came out quite white-looking it gets assumed that she's the hired help when she's out in public with them. Very interesting dynamic.

    Peace.

    *As I've mentioned before, the white-male/black-female marriage is the strongest combination according to divorce statistics - they are significantly (around 40%) less likely to divorce than white/white marriages. I find that absolutely fascinating; it seems to be the only inter-racial combo that leads to less divorce than a same-racial one. And the stats you included show that it is the least likely coupling also (while being on-par with or slightly higher economically than white/white ones). I would love to see a documentary or something about it how the dynamics work in that relationship that make it unique. It was, of course the famous coupling that took anti-miscegenation laws to court:
    https://www.vanityfair.fr/uploads/images/thumbs/201521/38/vf_mildred_jeter_richard_loving_8527.jpeg_north_640x640_transparent.jpg

    Replies: @iffen

    , @anonymous
    @JohnPlywood

    "Monoracial white relationships have an unshakeable stigma of poverty, chaos, drug and alcohol malaise/death, divorce, and other assorted degeneracies. And that’s because it’s more than a stigma; it’s a reality. Has been for a long time."

    You need to move into a better quality trailer park.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood

    , @The Shiv In Shiva's Crusty Hide
    @JohnPlywood

    this:


    Higher status white men prefer women of color.

     

    does not follow from this:

    Actually, all interracial relationships involving white males and nonwhite females are higher class than white woman+white man relationships.
     
    Nor does income and class perfectly overlap.

    But you knew that already, nonsequiturboy. Now back to your designated street stall.
  36. @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    OT: slight white pill?

    Lots of states got slightly whiter this year in 2018 new births. Mississippi is back to majority white births too.

    Overall, (brackets is 2016)
    white fertility was 1.64 (1.72)
    black fertility was 1.79 (1.83)
    American Indian 1.65 (1.79)
    Asian 1.52 (1.69)
    Hawain 2.11 (2.08)
    Hispanic 1.96 (2.09)

    keep crankin' em out boys. our left wing poz machine is getting to the minorities too!

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @JohnnyWalker123

    No states got whiter this year. No amount of decrease in the minority birth rate can make up for +40 years of below replacement white fertility. The number of white people dying far exceeded the number of live births in both years, and whites remain a solid +30 years older than their nonwhite counterparts, on average.

    Getting enthused by sub-2 fertility rates is the absolute state of the modern enslaved cuckface male. It’s not “cranking them out” until it rises above 15 (in light of the staggering losses of the 20th century).

  37. @Priss Factor
    @Anonymous


    Do the whites who are independent have the lowest rate of in-group favoritism because they are libertarian?
     
    What makes you think white libertarians are most independent? Many are servile to Israel and Zionism.

    Some whites became libertarian as implicit white identity, e.g. anti-affirmative action.

    Other whites became libertarian because they believe in drugs and sex.

    Other whites became libertarian out of cult worship of Ayn Rand.

    Other whites became libertarian out of toady-ish admiration for the super-rich.

    A truly independent white person goes for a balance of nationalism and individualism, of socialism and capitalism. He is slavishly chained to any single ideology or formula. He feels free to take the best and most useful things from various ideas. It's like eating. No sense in eating one food item as the 'perfect food'. No such food exists. One must have meat, veggies, bread, etc.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood

    A truly independent white person goes for a balance of nationalism and individualism, of socialism and capitalism. He is slavishly chained to any single ideology or formula. He feels free to take the best and most useful things from various ideas.

    As they watch their belief system burn to the ground, and their faces get repetitiously stomped by the iron boot that reaches through their computer monitor every time they look at a news site or an advertisement, since every attempt by “middle ground” parties in Europe and the USA to effect the change they speak of results in humiliating failure, while American woke libertarianism marches on without even achieving conscious political power; like a phantom outside human control, crushing everything in its path and captivating every waking neuron of human attention through its sheer success and brilliance; creating a Utopian world in which the “balance” people will awaken penniless, powerless, and with only a small garden, a couple of retard kids with fucked up teeth who weren’t allowed to read about evolution, and a collection of useless firearms to their name.

  38. @JohnPlywood
    @BANNED by Wormpress

    Actually, all interracial relationships involving white males and nonwhite females are higher class than white woman+white man relationships. Higher status white men prefer women of color.


    https://static01.nyt.com/images/2012/02/16/business/economy/economix-17interracial/economix-17interracial-blog480.jpg

    Nonwhite male + white female is indeed lower class, although Whitefemale+Asianmale stands out as the exception.

    White male + nonwhite female is the future of the upper classes.
    Monoracial white relationships have an unshakeable stigma of poverty, chaos, drug and alcohol malaise/death, divorce, and other assorted degeneracies. And that's because it's more than a stigma; it's a reality. Has been for a long time.

    Replies: @Talha, @anonymous, @The Shiv In Shiva's Crusty Hide

    That is one of the most interesting charts I have ever seen – thanks!

    My wife (a family/marriage therapist/counselor) was just telling me about a client of hers who is a black lady married to a white man*. Since her sons came out quite white-looking it gets assumed that she’s the hired help when she’s out in public with them. Very interesting dynamic.

    Peace.

    [MORE]

    *As I’ve mentioned before, the white-male/black-female marriage is the strongest combination according to divorce statistics – they are significantly (around 40%) less likely to divorce than white/white marriages. I find that absolutely fascinating; it seems to be the only inter-racial combo that leads to less divorce than a same-racial one. And the stats you included show that it is the least likely coupling also (while being on-par with or slightly higher economically than white/white ones). I would love to see a documentary or something about it how the dynamics work in that relationship that make it unique. It was, of course the famous coupling that took anti-miscegenation laws to court:

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Talha

    it gets assumed that she’s the hired help when she’s out in public with them

    Does this happen to you when you bring the car around?

    Replies: @Talha

  39. anonymous[191] • Disclaimer says:
    @JohnPlywood
    @BANNED by Wormpress

    Actually, all interracial relationships involving white males and nonwhite females are higher class than white woman+white man relationships. Higher status white men prefer women of color.


    https://static01.nyt.com/images/2012/02/16/business/economy/economix-17interracial/economix-17interracial-blog480.jpg

    Nonwhite male + white female is indeed lower class, although Whitefemale+Asianmale stands out as the exception.

    White male + nonwhite female is the future of the upper classes.
    Monoracial white relationships have an unshakeable stigma of poverty, chaos, drug and alcohol malaise/death, divorce, and other assorted degeneracies. And that's because it's more than a stigma; it's a reality. Has been for a long time.

    Replies: @Talha, @anonymous, @The Shiv In Shiva's Crusty Hide

    “Monoracial white relationships have an unshakeable stigma of poverty, chaos, drug and alcohol malaise/death, divorce, and other assorted degeneracies. And that’s because it’s more than a stigma; it’s a reality. Has been for a long time.”

    You need to move into a better quality trailer park.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    @anonymous

    Nice try anonymous[191], but the group of white men running farthest from white women are those of above average means. Hence the complaints from white women and the poor fucks who fathered them (90% of the white nationalist community at this point).

    Replies: @JohnPlywood

  40. Now do it for Jews.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Moses

    Jews have only been asked about twice, in 1990 and 2000. Sample is a measly 63, but 75% of Jews favor a relative marrying a Jew while 2% oppose. Outmarriage rates are extraordinarily high among (non-Orthodox) Jews today, so I suspect the sentiment isn't as strong now as it was two or three decades ago.

    Replies: @Moses

  41. @Talha
    @JohnPlywood

    That is one of the most interesting charts I have ever seen - thanks!

    My wife (a family/marriage therapist/counselor) was just telling me about a client of hers who is a black lady married to a white man*. Since her sons came out quite white-looking it gets assumed that she's the hired help when she's out in public with them. Very interesting dynamic.

    Peace.

    *As I've mentioned before, the white-male/black-female marriage is the strongest combination according to divorce statistics - they are significantly (around 40%) less likely to divorce than white/white marriages. I find that absolutely fascinating; it seems to be the only inter-racial combo that leads to less divorce than a same-racial one. And the stats you included show that it is the least likely coupling also (while being on-par with or slightly higher economically than white/white ones). I would love to see a documentary or something about it how the dynamics work in that relationship that make it unique. It was, of course the famous coupling that took anti-miscegenation laws to court:
    https://www.vanityfair.fr/uploads/images/thumbs/201521/38/vf_mildred_jeter_richard_loving_8527.jpeg_north_640x640_transparent.jpg

    Replies: @iffen

    it gets assumed that she’s the hired help when she’s out in public with them

    Does this happen to you when you bring the car around?

    • Replies: @Talha
    @iffen

    No - possibly because I'm not that dark - I get mistaken for Persian or Arab quite a bit. I do get questions at the mosque once in a while from someone that is curious that these little white kids are running around with me (especially when I would start speaking some Urdu to one of them). But once I tell them I married a white lady, they get it.

    What IS interesting is how surprised my kids' friends are that my wife and I are so young. Most of their parents are well near a decade older than us.

    Peace.

  42. @anonymous
    @JohnPlywood

    "Monoracial white relationships have an unshakeable stigma of poverty, chaos, drug and alcohol malaise/death, divorce, and other assorted degeneracies. And that’s because it’s more than a stigma; it’s a reality. Has been for a long time."

    You need to move into a better quality trailer park.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood

    Nice try anonymous[191], but the group of white men running farthest from white women are those of above average means. Hence the complaints from white women and the poor fucks who fathered them (90% of the white nationalist community at this point).

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    @JohnPlywood

    I grew up in a very established upper class neighborhood, the second richest in my area. It used to be about half Ashkenazi/half white gentile. I still live next door to it, and travel to and through it almost every day of the week. I seldom see white couples there.* Most couples I see are white men with Asian women. Every white woman is sordid-looking and overcast, bar none. Jewish women appear to be the most jaded, which nakes sense, as they take the biggest losses, financially and socially, when Jewish men marry out. Most monoracial couples in that neighborhood are middle aged South Asian immigrant couples.

    *I rarely see monoracial couples anywhere anymore. I'm just tickled by all the WN trying desperately to convince us that there are actual monoracial couples out there and that that is somehow normal or expected. If I were to gander, I would say that, among young people, monoracial couples are the minority in the developed world. Most young people are single and that includes the majority of racists. Biracial relationships are the most common.

    Monoracial relationships suck and are against God's will, and have to be forced because they are destined to fail by their very nature, hence all the (laborious, failing) propaganda from WN.

    Replies: @Talha

  43. @iffen
    @Talha

    it gets assumed that she’s the hired help when she’s out in public with them

    Does this happen to you when you bring the car around?

    Replies: @Talha

    No – possibly because I’m not that dark – I get mistaken for Persian or Arab quite a bit. I do get questions at the mosque once in a while from someone that is curious that these little white kids are running around with me (especially when I would start speaking some Urdu to one of them). But once I tell them I married a white lady, they get it.

    What IS interesting is how surprised my kids’ friends are that my wife and I are so young. Most of their parents are well near a decade older than us.

    Peace.

  44. @JohnPlywood
    @anonymous

    Nice try anonymous[191], but the group of white men running farthest from white women are those of above average means. Hence the complaints from white women and the poor fucks who fathered them (90% of the white nationalist community at this point).

    Replies: @JohnPlywood

    I grew up in a very established upper class neighborhood, the second richest in my area. It used to be about half Ashkenazi/half white gentile. I still live next door to it, and travel to and through it almost every day of the week. I seldom see white couples there.* Most couples I see are white men with Asian women. Every white woman is sordid-looking and overcast, bar none. Jewish women appear to be the most jaded, which nakes sense, as they take the biggest losses, financially and socially, when Jewish men marry out. Most monoracial couples in that neighborhood are middle aged South Asian immigrant couples.

    *I rarely see monoracial couples anywhere anymore. I’m just tickled by all the WN trying desperately to convince us that there are actual monoracial couples out there and that that is somehow normal or expected. If I were to gander, I would say that, among young people, monoracial couples are the minority in the developed world. Most young people are single and that includes the majority of racists. Biracial relationships are the most common.

    Monoracial relationships suck and are against God’s will, and have to be forced because they are destined to fail by their very nature, hence all the (laborious, failing) propaganda from WN.

    • Replies: @Talha
    @JohnPlywood


    Monoracial relationships suck and are against God’s will, and have to be forced because they are destined to fail by their very nature
     
    Not sure about this. Most societies preferred to marry within their group for centuries and centuries. Tribes, clans, even with extended family - you name it. Note the operative word "preferred".

    If you are saying mono-racial relationships are against God's will; does that mean you think they are actually "immoral"? Like "sinful"? That doesn't make much sense - anymore than claiming mixed-racial relationships are immoral.

    Where did you get that assumption from? Which religion teaches that?

    If I misunderstood your words, I apologize ahead of time.


    Biracial relationships are the most common.
     
    Not in the Midwest where I live - nor according to the chart that you posted from Pew. According to it, 80%+ marriages are still of the same race, so...not sure what you are trying to get at here...?

    Peace.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Audacious Epigone

  45. @JohnPlywood
    @BANNED by Wormpress

    Actually, all interracial relationships involving white males and nonwhite females are higher class than white woman+white man relationships. Higher status white men prefer women of color.


    https://static01.nyt.com/images/2012/02/16/business/economy/economix-17interracial/economix-17interracial-blog480.jpg

    Nonwhite male + white female is indeed lower class, although Whitefemale+Asianmale stands out as the exception.

    White male + nonwhite female is the future of the upper classes.
    Monoracial white relationships have an unshakeable stigma of poverty, chaos, drug and alcohol malaise/death, divorce, and other assorted degeneracies. And that's because it's more than a stigma; it's a reality. Has been for a long time.

    Replies: @Talha, @anonymous, @The Shiv In Shiva's Crusty Hide

    this:

    Higher status white men prefer women of color.

    does not follow from this:

    Actually, all interracial relationships involving white males and nonwhite females are higher class than white woman+white man relationships.

    Nor does income and class perfectly overlap.

    But you knew that already, nonsequiturboy. Now back to your designated street stall.

    • Troll: JohnPlywood
  46. @JohnPlywood
    @JohnPlywood

    I grew up in a very established upper class neighborhood, the second richest in my area. It used to be about half Ashkenazi/half white gentile. I still live next door to it, and travel to and through it almost every day of the week. I seldom see white couples there.* Most couples I see are white men with Asian women. Every white woman is sordid-looking and overcast, bar none. Jewish women appear to be the most jaded, which nakes sense, as they take the biggest losses, financially and socially, when Jewish men marry out. Most monoracial couples in that neighborhood are middle aged South Asian immigrant couples.

    *I rarely see monoracial couples anywhere anymore. I'm just tickled by all the WN trying desperately to convince us that there are actual monoracial couples out there and that that is somehow normal or expected. If I were to gander, I would say that, among young people, monoracial couples are the minority in the developed world. Most young people are single and that includes the majority of racists. Biracial relationships are the most common.

    Monoracial relationships suck and are against God's will, and have to be forced because they are destined to fail by their very nature, hence all the (laborious, failing) propaganda from WN.

    Replies: @Talha

    Monoracial relationships suck and are against God’s will, and have to be forced because they are destined to fail by their very nature

    Not sure about this. Most societies preferred to marry within their group for centuries and centuries. Tribes, clans, even with extended family – you name it. Note the operative word “preferred”.

    If you are saying mono-racial relationships are against God’s will; does that mean you think they are actually “immoral”? Like “sinful”? That doesn’t make much sense – anymore than claiming mixed-racial relationships are immoral.

    Where did you get that assumption from? Which religion teaches that?

    If I misunderstood your words, I apologize ahead of time.

    Biracial relationships are the most common.

    Not in the Midwest where I live – nor according to the chart that you posted from Pew. According to it, 80%+ marriages are still of the same race, so…not sure what you are trying to get at here…?

    Peace.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    @Talha


    Not in the Midwest where I live – nor according to the chart that you posted from Pew. According to it, 80%+ marriages are still of the same race, so…not sure what you are trying to get at here…?
     
    That chart uses a controlled sample with equal numbers of biracial couples of all age groups; it isn't a reflection of the actual distribution of biracial pairings (especially at younger ages).

    54% of millennials have dated outside their race nationally.


    https://splinternews.com/more-than-half-of-millennials-have-dated-outside-their-1793845015




    Per capita, the midwest has an extremely high rate of interracial relationships; states that are 80-90% white have interracial rates comparable to much more diverse states like New York or Louisiana, and about half that of states where whites don't even have plurality (like California).

    Kansas actually equalled Texas (30% non-hispanic white) in interracial births; which is astounding for a state that is 75% non-hispanic white.


    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/FT_17.06.01_multiracialBabies_map.png

    Replies: @Talha, @Achmed E. Newman

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @Talha

    For most humans throughout most of human history, anything other than monoracial marriage was practically impossible.

    Replies: @Talha

  47. @Talha
    @JohnPlywood


    Monoracial relationships suck and are against God’s will, and have to be forced because they are destined to fail by their very nature
     
    Not sure about this. Most societies preferred to marry within their group for centuries and centuries. Tribes, clans, even with extended family - you name it. Note the operative word "preferred".

    If you are saying mono-racial relationships are against God's will; does that mean you think they are actually "immoral"? Like "sinful"? That doesn't make much sense - anymore than claiming mixed-racial relationships are immoral.

    Where did you get that assumption from? Which religion teaches that?

    If I misunderstood your words, I apologize ahead of time.


    Biracial relationships are the most common.
     
    Not in the Midwest where I live - nor according to the chart that you posted from Pew. According to it, 80%+ marriages are still of the same race, so...not sure what you are trying to get at here...?

    Peace.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Audacious Epigone

    Not in the Midwest where I live – nor according to the chart that you posted from Pew. According to it, 80%+ marriages are still of the same race, so…not sure what you are trying to get at here…?

    That chart uses a controlled sample with equal numbers of biracial couples of all age groups; it isn’t a reflection of the actual distribution of biracial pairings (especially at younger ages).

    54% of millennials have dated outside their race nationally.

    https://splinternews.com/more-than-half-of-millennials-have-dated-outside-their-1793845015

    Per capita, the midwest has an extremely high rate of interracial relationships; states that are 80-90% white have interracial rates comparable to much more diverse states like New York or Louisiana, and about half that of states where whites don’t even have plurality (like California).

    Kansas actually equalled Texas (30% non-hispanic white) in interracial births; which is astounding for a state that is 75% non-hispanic white.

    • Replies: @Talha
    @JohnPlywood


    it isn’t a reflection of the actual distribution of biracial pairings
     
    Hmmm - OK, do you have reliable stats on bi-racial marriage rates then (broken down by paired combinations)?

    54% of millennials have dated outside their race nationally.
     
    Thanks for the link and the stat. While this is interesting, dating doesn't necessarily imply marriage. We have guys on UNZ forums that consider themselves white nationalists; wouldn't mind kicking out non-white women, but have no problem sleeping with them while they are around - they just wouldn't marry them.

    Hell, there was this Jewish guy here name "Greasy William" who considered multiple different ethnicities to be "sub-human", but went on about who he would "totally bang" this or that girl from the same. Weird, I know.


    Per capita, the midwest has an extremely high rate of interracial relationships
     
    Well, I do see them more when I go into the city (Chicago) for sure, but do you have a source for this?

    Kansas actually equalled Texas
     
    Sure, but look at Vermont or New Hampshire or the Dakotas - or along the Appalachians; still single digits.

    I don't know, bro - I still don't see a tsunami like you seem to be projecting.

    Peace.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @JohnPlywood

    Oklahoma - that's likely marriages between white people with nor enough Injun blood to count as feather-Indian and people with enough to count. As Steve Sailer puts it - "flight from white" - that's where the goodies lie.

  48. @JohnPlywood
    @Talha


    Not in the Midwest where I live – nor according to the chart that you posted from Pew. According to it, 80%+ marriages are still of the same race, so…not sure what you are trying to get at here…?
     
    That chart uses a controlled sample with equal numbers of biracial couples of all age groups; it isn't a reflection of the actual distribution of biracial pairings (especially at younger ages).

    54% of millennials have dated outside their race nationally.


    https://splinternews.com/more-than-half-of-millennials-have-dated-outside-their-1793845015




    Per capita, the midwest has an extremely high rate of interracial relationships; states that are 80-90% white have interracial rates comparable to much more diverse states like New York or Louisiana, and about half that of states where whites don't even have plurality (like California).

    Kansas actually equalled Texas (30% non-hispanic white) in interracial births; which is astounding for a state that is 75% non-hispanic white.


    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/FT_17.06.01_multiracialBabies_map.png

    Replies: @Talha, @Achmed E. Newman

    it isn’t a reflection of the actual distribution of biracial pairings

    Hmmm – OK, do you have reliable stats on bi-racial marriage rates then (broken down by paired combinations)?

    54% of millennials have dated outside their race nationally.

    Thanks for the link and the stat. While this is interesting, dating doesn’t necessarily imply marriage. We have guys on UNZ forums that consider themselves white nationalists; wouldn’t mind kicking out non-white women, but have no problem sleeping with them while they are around – they just wouldn’t marry them.

    Hell, there was this Jewish guy here name “Greasy William” who considered multiple different ethnicities to be “sub-human”, but went on about who he would “totally bang” this or that girl from the same. Weird, I know.

    Per capita, the midwest has an extremely high rate of interracial relationships

    Well, I do see them more when I go into the city (Chicago) for sure, but do you have a source for this?

    Kansas actually equalled Texas

    Sure, but look at Vermont or New Hampshire or the Dakotas – or along the Appalachians; still single digits.

    I don’t know, bro – I still don’t see a tsunami like you seem to be projecting.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @JohnPlywood
    @Talha

    Sure. This is Pew data:

    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/05/18/1-trends-and-patterns-in-intermarriage/


    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-01-00.png

    A wealth of new information from the Census should be relesed later this year.


    Hell, there was this Jewish guy here name “Greasy William” who considered multiple different ethnicities to be “sub-human”, but went on about who he would “totally bang” this or that girl from the same. Weird, I know.
     
    LMFAO. Almost all white nationalists seem to have this attribute, male and female.

    Well, I do see them more when I go into the city (Chicago) for sure, but do you have a source for this?
     
    We would have to infer it from racial demographic data in Illinois, so I don't have a source that specifically states that. I have been to the Western suburbs of Chicago (Aurora, Naperville, Downer's Grove, etc). It's all interracial out there.

    Sure, but look at Vermont or New Hampshire or the Dakotas – or along the Appalachians; still single digits.
     
    Indeed, however, we must take in to special consideration the demographics of these states. Vermont is 90% white, but most importantly, old. Like all New England states there is a dearth of young people due to persistently low birth rates and outmigration of young people. Vermont's median age is 42, which means they have way fewer young people than the national average.


    Why did North Dakota have so fewer interracial relationships in 2010-2014 with a median age of 35? My hunch: the extreme sex ratio of 105 men per 100 women, which is China tier. Oil and natural gas industry brought an influx of white male adults to a state that was already especially white to begin with.


    http://mongabay-images.s3.amazonaws.com/14/us-gender-ratio.jpg

    Replies: @Talha, @Achmed E. Newman

  49. @Talha
    @JohnPlywood


    it isn’t a reflection of the actual distribution of biracial pairings
     
    Hmmm - OK, do you have reliable stats on bi-racial marriage rates then (broken down by paired combinations)?

    54% of millennials have dated outside their race nationally.
     
    Thanks for the link and the stat. While this is interesting, dating doesn't necessarily imply marriage. We have guys on UNZ forums that consider themselves white nationalists; wouldn't mind kicking out non-white women, but have no problem sleeping with them while they are around - they just wouldn't marry them.

    Hell, there was this Jewish guy here name "Greasy William" who considered multiple different ethnicities to be "sub-human", but went on about who he would "totally bang" this or that girl from the same. Weird, I know.


    Per capita, the midwest has an extremely high rate of interracial relationships
     
    Well, I do see them more when I go into the city (Chicago) for sure, but do you have a source for this?

    Kansas actually equalled Texas
     
    Sure, but look at Vermont or New Hampshire or the Dakotas - or along the Appalachians; still single digits.

    I don't know, bro - I still don't see a tsunami like you seem to be projecting.

    Peace.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood

    Sure. This is Pew data:

    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/05/18/1-trends-and-patterns-in-intermarriage/

    A wealth of new information from the Census should be relesed later this year.

    Hell, there was this Jewish guy here name “Greasy William” who considered multiple different ethnicities to be “sub-human”, but went on about who he would “totally bang” this or that girl from the same. Weird, I know.

    LMFAO. Almost all white nationalists seem to have this attribute, male and female.

    Well, I do see them more when I go into the city (Chicago) for sure, but do you have a source for this?

    We would have to infer it from racial demographic data in Illinois, so I don’t have a source that specifically states that. I have been to the Western suburbs of Chicago (Aurora, Naperville, Downer’s Grove, etc). It’s all interracial out there.

    Sure, but look at Vermont or New Hampshire or the Dakotas – or along the Appalachians; still single digits.

    Indeed, however, we must take in to special consideration the demographics of these states. Vermont is 90% white, but most importantly, old. Like all New England states there is a dearth of young people due to persistently low birth rates and outmigration of young people. Vermont’s median age is 42, which means they have way fewer young people than the national average.

    Why did North Dakota have so fewer interracial relationships in 2010-2014 with a median age of 35? My hunch: the extreme sex ratio of 105 men per 100 women, which is China tier. Oil and natural gas industry brought an influx of white male adults to a state that was already especially white to begin with.

    • Replies: @Talha
    @JohnPlywood

    Thanks for the links, much appreciated. Did not know about that lopsided sex ratios across the country - very interesting.

    From that Pew article is this:
    "By 1980, the share of intermarried newlyweds had about doubled to 7%. And by 2015 the number had risen to 17%."
    So it is still a minority thing, but it has definitely shot up within a generation - and doesn't look to really decline...maybe it will level off. I guess we'll see.


    A wealth of new information from the Census should be relesed later this year.
     
    True - definitely looking forward to it.

    Peace.

    , @Achmed E. Newman
    @JohnPlywood

    Thank you for all the great graphs and charts, Mr. Plywood. I just read through this thread today, so I don't have an argument for anyone ...yet, haha. On this particular graph, that higher women/men ratio in the Mississippi valley and the rest of the deep South makes me wonder if prison inmates have been subtracted out. I'm not kidding - that's one explanation, as the amount of black men in prison is very significant.

    Then, there's the Boston area, in which I'd guess the higher W/M ratio is due to all the colleges there and knowing that the universities are majority female now.

  50. @JohnPlywood
    @Talha

    Sure. This is Pew data:

    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/05/18/1-trends-and-patterns-in-intermarriage/


    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-01-00.png

    A wealth of new information from the Census should be relesed later this year.


    Hell, there was this Jewish guy here name “Greasy William” who considered multiple different ethnicities to be “sub-human”, but went on about who he would “totally bang” this or that girl from the same. Weird, I know.
     
    LMFAO. Almost all white nationalists seem to have this attribute, male and female.

    Well, I do see them more when I go into the city (Chicago) for sure, but do you have a source for this?
     
    We would have to infer it from racial demographic data in Illinois, so I don't have a source that specifically states that. I have been to the Western suburbs of Chicago (Aurora, Naperville, Downer's Grove, etc). It's all interracial out there.

    Sure, but look at Vermont or New Hampshire or the Dakotas – or along the Appalachians; still single digits.
     
    Indeed, however, we must take in to special consideration the demographics of these states. Vermont is 90% white, but most importantly, old. Like all New England states there is a dearth of young people due to persistently low birth rates and outmigration of young people. Vermont's median age is 42, which means they have way fewer young people than the national average.


    Why did North Dakota have so fewer interracial relationships in 2010-2014 with a median age of 35? My hunch: the extreme sex ratio of 105 men per 100 women, which is China tier. Oil and natural gas industry brought an influx of white male adults to a state that was already especially white to begin with.


    http://mongabay-images.s3.amazonaws.com/14/us-gender-ratio.jpg

    Replies: @Talha, @Achmed E. Newman

    Thanks for the links, much appreciated. Did not know about that lopsided sex ratios across the country – very interesting.

    From that Pew article is this:
    “By 1980, the share of intermarried newlyweds had about doubled to 7%. And by 2015 the number had risen to 17%.”
    So it is still a minority thing, but it has definitely shot up within a generation – and doesn’t look to really decline…maybe it will level off. I guess we’ll see.

    A wealth of new information from the Census should be relesed later this year.

    True – definitely looking forward to it.

    Peace.

  51. Many white women get fat and horrible once they reach early middle age and their men only stay with them because there are kids involved or through loyalty or because they don’t know any better or are themselves gross and couldn’t do any better.

    Oriental women age much better and don’t get fat. Sex appeal is far more important than Race loyalty. The best way to get white men to marry white women is to get the women to stay out of the sun and go on a diet.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @martin_2

    That is some real down-to-earth truth there, Martin. Race loyalty, pleasing the family, and even cultural compatibility all fall by the wayside when it's a matter of a trim hottie vs. a fattie. You can't fool Mother Nature, and for young men, it's concentrated in one place alone.

    BTW, though, Oriental women do stay slimmer in general, but there are plenty here and in China that could use to lose 15 to 20 lb. I used to think they were genetically predisposed to staying thin till I saw a number of girls at a western-US university campus that had lots of Orientals. Half of them were overweight (not nearly obese though) It's the diet, and that white rice has a high glycemic index too - increased diabetes risk. In the past, I just think all those countries were just never overwhelmed with food, is all.


    The best way to get white men to marry white women is to get the women to stay out of the sun and go on a diet.
     
    I got a better idea. Get on your bikes and ride! (It does wonders for the rear end. Though these songs must go together, Freddy Mercury didn't get the bicycle/fat-bottomed-girl relationship at all, but then, again, how would he?)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8QNZQE4F64
  52. @Intelligent Dasein
    I've said this before, but all miscegenation is not created equal.

    If you have whites with South Asians, whites with East Asians, or whites with Amerindians, the resulting offspring are fully capable of behaving (and in many cases even of looking) white.

    Only blacks are excepted. Mulattos often seem more physically and culturally black than physically and culturally white.

    A white man marrying a Chinese or Korean woman hardly seems very race-traitorous anymore, unless your understanding of "race" is a crudely biological one fully exhausted by genetic sequences. If you have a more comprehensive and metaphysical understand of race as those united by a common destiny, then this biological difference is not relevant.

    It is the "common destiny" part that has made whites and blacks so incompatible with each other despite living side by side for 500 years. Their biological differences are miniscule in the grand scheme of things and certainly are inadequate to prevent or prohibit, in and of themselves, fertile pairings between them after the manner of mere animals.

    Most whites don't want to marry most blacks because they don't want to live that way, and most blacks aren't able to marry most whites because they can't live that way. There are all kinds of complicated exceptions at the margins, but by and large blacks and whites form distinct racial groups because they irritate one another.

    Replies: @Thomm, @BANNED by Wormpress, @Athletic and Whitesplosive, @SFG, @Truth

    A white man marrying a Chinese or Korean woman hardly seems very race-traitorous anymore,

    Well, uh, yeah, because that’s what you did.

    How about these beautiful couples?

    https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQjrdBueQskppHyCF_Q2H1evsjGJISGBdmTE4o15NYsBe0OsFZB&s

    As a matter of fact, I’m thinking, since you’re all equal and it’s “Kumbaya and everything, a dating agency in Stockholm, Oslo, and Copenhangen, that encourages beautiful Nordic blondes (7+ and 2 years old and under only, please) to mix their totally equal seed with older Beijing millionaires would be a wonderful thing, don’t you?

    I mean a few hundred thousand more Twinkies/Daniel Chieh’s, who wouldn’t be in favor of that?

    • LOL: Rosie
    • Replies: @Talha
    @Truth

    A brother I know from college days (used to be my roommate and is now a student under my spiritual teachers) is Chinese and a total alpha male; tall, doctor, into guns, Brazilian jiu jitsu, outdoor camping/trekking - mashaAllah. Very cool guy - knows Arabic too from studying in Syria.

    Anyway, he nabbed himself a white convert from Missouri - four kids (again, mashaAllah). Also a cool couple.

    Kids are usually very cute in that combo.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

  53. @Thomm
    This strongly contradicts Gallup's poll :

    https://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/esvvhtlb5ki6_24pn_ojnq.gif

    Now, the detail of a generic question vs. 'a close relative' may be a factor, but 'favor a white person' is not the same thing as 'oppose a black person', since the biggest option - indifference - is not accounted for.

    Replies: @Wency, @Magic Dirt Resident, @BANNED by Wormpress, @Audacious Epigone

    Approving and favoring are two very different things. If they weren’t, we’d expect from this poll that 90% of marriages would be interracial!

  54. @Anon
    The problem with this data is that they cannot really adjust for gradual changes in social attitudes for what is acceptable to believe or say. The Overton Window on what you can even say in private is closing very fast.

    The GSS is ... "conducted face-to-face with an in-person interview by the National Opinion Research Center of the University of Chicago." All answers have to be verbally conveyed to another human who is sitting right across from you, a human whose face you are looking at and who, however well trained, is probably recognizable to all surveyees as a progressive who has lived most of her life in academia.

    Replies: @Anon, @Justvisiting, @Audacious Epigone

    Indisputable.

    For what it’s worth, though, the interviewers go through enormous lengths to keep participants and results private. Results aren’t released at the state level on account of this (which is a real bummer for me, as I’d love to be able to do state-to-state comparisons using the GSS!).

  55. @Anon
    @Anon


    The problem with this data is that they cannot really adjust for gradual changes in social attitudes for what is acceptable to believe or say. The Overton Window on what you can even say in private is closing very fast.
     
    Dead on. This is a well-known phenomenon in polling called "social desirability bias." Given that Audacious writes about polling all the time, he should write about that factor. It affects polling on immigration and a variety of racial issues.

    Here's a general backgrounder over at VDare.
    https://vdare.com/articles/yes-virginia-dare-social-desirability-bias-is-skewing-immigration-polls-and-trump-s

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    As the article pointed out, it didn’t show up in the 2016 presidential election. That’s baffling. Polling gets a bad rap, but amalgamations like the RCP polling average continue to be remarkably good. The national average missed 2016 by less than 2 points. At the margins that 2% matters, of course, but in detecting trends over time, it’s, well, pretty marginal.

  56. @Truth
    @Intelligent Dasein


    A white man marrying a Chinese or Korean woman hardly seems very race-traitorous anymore,
     
    Well, uh, yeah, because that's what you did.

    How about these beautiful couples?

    https://pualingo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/white-girl-dating-asian-guy.jpg

    https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/06/08/article-0-1E8B76CB00000578-414_634x629.jpg

    http://goldsea.com/Text/images/1221.jpg

    https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQjrdBueQskppHyCF_Q2H1evsjGJISGBdmTE4o15NYsBe0OsFZB&s

    As a matter of fact, I'm thinking, since you're all equal and it's "Kumbaya and everything, a dating agency in Stockholm, Oslo, and Copenhangen, that encourages beautiful Nordic blondes (7+ and 2 years old and under only, please) to mix their totally equal seed with older Beijing millionaires would be a wonderful thing, don't you?

    I mean a few hundred thousand more Twinkies/Daniel Chieh's, who wouldn't be in favor of that?

    Replies: @Talha

    A brother I know from college days (used to be my roommate and is now a student under my spiritual teachers) is Chinese and a total alpha male; tall, doctor, into guns, Brazilian jiu jitsu, outdoor camping/trekking – mashaAllah. Very cool guy – knows Arabic too from studying in Syria.

    Anyway, he nabbed himself a white convert from Missouri – four kids (again, mashaAllah). Also a cool couple.

    Kids are usually very cute in that combo.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Talha

    I thought Twinkie was a Christian.

    Replies: @Talha

  57. @BANNED by Wormpress
    @Thomm


    Now, the detail of a generic question vs. ‘a close relative’ may be a factor, but ‘favor a white person’ is not the same thing as ‘oppose a black person’, since the biggest option – indifference – is not accounted for.
     
    These two questions aren't even in the same ballpark. One is an abstraction that few White people would defy for a cost-free feelz. The other question posed in AE's post is more concrete and tangible, and thus more White people answered truthfully.

    Interestingly, 50% of White Americans are White Nationalists! How about that, Mahatma Ganges!

    Audie:

    I wonder if whites marrying non-whites will at some point be seen as a sort of cultural appropriation or even cultural imperialism whites will be shamed for doing.
     
    My bet is that in short time, White Wokeism will die and return to the cultural consensus that race mongrelization is low class. It will be the class stigma that pushes White women away from the black, brown, and yellow poles (and White men away from marrying their exotic adventures). It's already in play, given that mudsharks are routinely mocked as fat, toothless walmartians.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Audacious Epigone

    What is going to kill Wokeism? I want to think it eventually eats itself, but it’s a big world with a lot of people to eat. Does that happen in a short time?

  58. @Moses
    Now do it for Jews.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    Jews have only been asked about twice, in 1990 and 2000. Sample is a measly 63, but 75% of Jews favor a relative marrying a Jew while 2% oppose. Outmarriage rates are extraordinarily high among (non-Orthodox) Jews today, so I suspect the sentiment isn’t as strong now as it was two or three decades ago.

    • Replies: @Moses
    @Audacious Epigone


    Outmarriage rates are extraordinarily high among (non-Orthodox) Jews today
     
    How high is "high"?

    And what is the fertility rate of out-marriage unions vs in-marriage unions? That matters a lot.

    I suspect in-marriage fertility much higher. After all, we Jews are still here with strong in-group indentity. 3,000 years, still going strong.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Audacious Epigone

  59. @Talha
    @JohnPlywood


    Monoracial relationships suck and are against God’s will, and have to be forced because they are destined to fail by their very nature
     
    Not sure about this. Most societies preferred to marry within their group for centuries and centuries. Tribes, clans, even with extended family - you name it. Note the operative word "preferred".

    If you are saying mono-racial relationships are against God's will; does that mean you think they are actually "immoral"? Like "sinful"? That doesn't make much sense - anymore than claiming mixed-racial relationships are immoral.

    Where did you get that assumption from? Which religion teaches that?

    If I misunderstood your words, I apologize ahead of time.


    Biracial relationships are the most common.
     
    Not in the Midwest where I live - nor according to the chart that you posted from Pew. According to it, 80%+ marriages are still of the same race, so...not sure what you are trying to get at here...?

    Peace.

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @Audacious Epigone

    For most humans throughout most of human history, anything other than monoracial marriage was practically impossible.

    • Replies: @Talha
    @Audacious Epigone

    Well, I guess it depends. The in-group preference is surely there, tribes don't really survive by being big on exogamy. But once you add empires and conquest and slavery into the mix (which is a big part of history), you get some racial mixing; depending on footprint of the empire and how much economic incentive there is for outsiders to bring slaves to its markets. I mean, maybe it was because the Muslim empires were smack dab in the middle of all these regions, but you could fetch a white or black or Asian concubine at the market if you had the coin. I myself have some trace Nubian in me from one of my ancestors that married a Nubian freedwoman way back a thousand years ago. Now maybe it was not achievable for the average farmer or laborer that couldn't really afford a slave (that is, along with a wife - plenty could afford a slave in lieu of paying the dowry for a wife), but the upper class had no problems with this.

    For another example, the Spaniards start cohabiting with local native women in South America fairly quickly. Once contact is made, men usually do their thing.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

  60. @Talha
    @Truth

    A brother I know from college days (used to be my roommate and is now a student under my spiritual teachers) is Chinese and a total alpha male; tall, doctor, into guns, Brazilian jiu jitsu, outdoor camping/trekking - mashaAllah. Very cool guy - knows Arabic too from studying in Syria.

    Anyway, he nabbed himself a white convert from Missouri - four kids (again, mashaAllah). Also a cool couple.

    Kids are usually very cute in that combo.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    I thought Twinkie was a Christian.

    • LOL: Talha
    • Replies: @Talha
    @Audacious Epigone

    The brother I'm talking about is Chinese (born from a Taiwanese Muslim family - they fled when the Communists took over) also went to medical school. So, no - not Twinkie.

    Peace.

  61. @Audacious Epigone
    @Talha

    I thought Twinkie was a Christian.

    Replies: @Talha

    The brother I’m talking about is Chinese (born from a Taiwanese Muslim family – they fled when the Communists took over) also went to medical school. So, no – not Twinkie.

    Peace.

  62. @Audacious Epigone
    @Talha

    For most humans throughout most of human history, anything other than monoracial marriage was practically impossible.

    Replies: @Talha

    Well, I guess it depends. The in-group preference is surely there, tribes don’t really survive by being big on exogamy. But once you add empires and conquest and slavery into the mix (which is a big part of history), you get some racial mixing; depending on footprint of the empire and how much economic incentive there is for outsiders to bring slaves to its markets. I mean, maybe it was because the Muslim empires were smack dab in the middle of all these regions, but you could fetch a white or black or Asian concubine at the market if you had the coin. I myself have some trace Nubian in me from one of my ancestors that married a Nubian freedwoman way back a thousand years ago. Now maybe it was not achievable for the average farmer or laborer that couldn’t really afford a slave (that is, along with a wife – plenty could afford a slave in lieu of paying the dowry for a wife), but the upper class had no problems with this.

    For another example, the Spaniards start cohabiting with local native women in South America fairly quickly. Once contact is made, men usually do their thing.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @Talha

    Post-Bronze Age doesn't constitute most of human history. 10,000 year explosion and all that, but still.

    Replies: @Talha

  63. @Audacious Epigone
    @Moses

    Jews have only been asked about twice, in 1990 and 2000. Sample is a measly 63, but 75% of Jews favor a relative marrying a Jew while 2% oppose. Outmarriage rates are extraordinarily high among (non-Orthodox) Jews today, so I suspect the sentiment isn't as strong now as it was two or three decades ago.

    Replies: @Moses

    Outmarriage rates are extraordinarily high among (non-Orthodox) Jews today

    How high is “high”?

    And what is the fertility rate of out-marriage unions vs in-marriage unions? That matters a lot.

    I suspect in-marriage fertility much higher. After all, we Jews are still here with strong in-group indentity. 3,000 years, still going strong.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Moses

    I know a fair amount of mixed Jew goy marriages. Even if the kids were baptized and dragged to church by the Christian grandma never bar mitzvahed, no Friday night dinner, the kids and grandkids know they’re Jews and identify as Jews. Even if they marry Asians. Even if they practice a Christian religion.

    Most people of these “ Jews are dying out” polls and articles assume that the goy marriage and even baptism means the kids aren’t Jews. They are jews, even if the mothers a goy they know it and preserve the Jewish identity. There’s plenty of people who are proud to say they’re 1/4 or 1/8 Jewish.

    , @Audacious Epigone
    @Moses

    The rates reported range fairly widely, but 25%-50% is in the ballpark.

    You're probably right re: fertility--certainly correct in the case of the orthodox.

  64. The relative trajectory of the Democrats and Independents seems odd. Do you think that is real, or is it just noisy data?

    P.S. Do you think it was a good idea to truncate the y-axis at 40%? The graph seems quite misleading to me at first glance.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
    @res

    The arrested Democrat downturn is probably real, and to me very curious.

    Yes, I meant to note that. I've now done so, thanks.

  65. Anonymous[322] • Disclaimer says:
    @Intelligent Dasein

    Rihanna is a Barbadian mulatto of a not entirely displeasing sort.
     
    Rihanna looks like a Down syndrome adult. Very displeasing. Check out Paula Patton instead.

    Replies: @Thomm, @Anonymous

    Rihanna has a very very pretty face, perfect legs and figure and lovely butterscotch ecru skin color. She’s a drop dead beauty by any standards. She’s not a mulatto. She’s almost White, octoroon? 1/16?

    Halle Berry has a prettier face than Rihana and pretty medium chocolate skin. Another drop dead beauty.

    You have extremely high standards of beauty.

  66. Anonymous[322] • Disclaimer says:
    @Moses
    @Audacious Epigone


    Outmarriage rates are extraordinarily high among (non-Orthodox) Jews today
     
    How high is "high"?

    And what is the fertility rate of out-marriage unions vs in-marriage unions? That matters a lot.

    I suspect in-marriage fertility much higher. After all, we Jews are still here with strong in-group indentity. 3,000 years, still going strong.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Audacious Epigone

    I know a fair amount of mixed Jew goy marriages. Even if the kids were baptized and dragged to church by the Christian grandma never bar mitzvahed, no Friday night dinner, the kids and grandkids know they’re Jews and identify as Jews. Even if they marry Asians. Even if they practice a Christian religion.

    Most people of these “ Jews are dying out” polls and articles assume that the goy marriage and even baptism means the kids aren’t Jews. They are jews, even if the mothers a goy they know it and preserve the Jewish identity. There’s plenty of people who are proud to say they’re 1/4 or 1/8 Jewish.

  67. @Talha
    @Audacious Epigone

    Well, I guess it depends. The in-group preference is surely there, tribes don't really survive by being big on exogamy. But once you add empires and conquest and slavery into the mix (which is a big part of history), you get some racial mixing; depending on footprint of the empire and how much economic incentive there is for outsiders to bring slaves to its markets. I mean, maybe it was because the Muslim empires were smack dab in the middle of all these regions, but you could fetch a white or black or Asian concubine at the market if you had the coin. I myself have some trace Nubian in me from one of my ancestors that married a Nubian freedwoman way back a thousand years ago. Now maybe it was not achievable for the average farmer or laborer that couldn't really afford a slave (that is, along with a wife - plenty could afford a slave in lieu of paying the dowry for a wife), but the upper class had no problems with this.

    For another example, the Spaniards start cohabiting with local native women in South America fairly quickly. Once contact is made, men usually do their thing.

    Peace.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    Post-Bronze Age doesn’t constitute most of human history. 10,000 year explosion and all that, but still.

    • Replies: @Talha
    @Audacious Epigone

    Well played; I concede this point.

    Peace.

  68. @Moses
    @Audacious Epigone


    Outmarriage rates are extraordinarily high among (non-Orthodox) Jews today
     
    How high is "high"?

    And what is the fertility rate of out-marriage unions vs in-marriage unions? That matters a lot.

    I suspect in-marriage fertility much higher. After all, we Jews are still here with strong in-group indentity. 3,000 years, still going strong.

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Audacious Epigone

    The rates reported range fairly widely, but 25%-50% is in the ballpark.

    You’re probably right re: fertility–certainly correct in the case of the orthodox.

  69. @res
    The relative trajectory of the Democrats and Independents seems odd. Do you think that is real, or is it just noisy data?

    P.S. Do you think it was a good idea to truncate the y-axis at 40%? The graph seems quite misleading to me at first glance.

    Replies: @Audacious Epigone

    The arrested Democrat downturn is probably real, and to me very curious.

    Yes, I meant to note that. I’ve now done so, thanks.

  70. @Audacious Epigone
    @Talha

    Post-Bronze Age doesn't constitute most of human history. 10,000 year explosion and all that, but still.

    Replies: @Talha

    Well played; I concede this point.

    Peace.

  71. @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    OT: slight white pill?

    Lots of states got slightly whiter this year in 2018 new births. Mississippi is back to majority white births too.

    Overall, (brackets is 2016)
    white fertility was 1.64 (1.72)
    black fertility was 1.79 (1.83)
    American Indian 1.65 (1.79)
    Asian 1.52 (1.69)
    Hawain 2.11 (2.08)
    Hispanic 1.96 (2.09)

    keep crankin' em out boys. our left wing poz machine is getting to the minorities too!

    Replies: @JohnPlywood, @JohnnyWalker123

    The cost of living is increasing, which is applying downward pressure on the birthrates of lower-income populations. It’s tough to afford kids when the cost of rent is ridiculously high. Especially when there’s so much pressure to compete and keep up with the Joneses.

    Also, there’s been a huge fall in the teen birthrate lately. Given that teen pregnancy is disproportionately found among Non-Whites (Blacks and Hispanics), the fall in the teen birthrate is disproportionately affecting Non-White fertility. This fall in the teen birthrate seems to a product of declining teen sexual activity, which is occuring because Social Media is pushing teens to socially disengage and party/socialize/hangout MUCH less with their friends.

    America (and probably even more so Canada) are becoming increasingly expensive, competitive, and anti-social. That has all sorts of interesting implications.

    Imagine a society full of young people working long hours for low wages, deep in debt, living in tiny apartments/pods (or with parents), eating vegan, “socalizing” through a smartphone, afraid of being accused of sexual harassment, staring at a screen for most of the day, and immersed in a pro-gay/lesbian/trans culture.

    It’s not an environment conducive towards getting pregnant.

  72. @JohnPlywood
    @Talha

    Sure. This is Pew data:

    https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/05/18/1-trends-and-patterns-in-intermarriage/


    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/05/PST_2017.05.15.intermarriage-01-00.png

    A wealth of new information from the Census should be relesed later this year.


    Hell, there was this Jewish guy here name “Greasy William” who considered multiple different ethnicities to be “sub-human”, but went on about who he would “totally bang” this or that girl from the same. Weird, I know.
     
    LMFAO. Almost all white nationalists seem to have this attribute, male and female.

    Well, I do see them more when I go into the city (Chicago) for sure, but do you have a source for this?
     
    We would have to infer it from racial demographic data in Illinois, so I don't have a source that specifically states that. I have been to the Western suburbs of Chicago (Aurora, Naperville, Downer's Grove, etc). It's all interracial out there.

    Sure, but look at Vermont or New Hampshire or the Dakotas – or along the Appalachians; still single digits.
     
    Indeed, however, we must take in to special consideration the demographics of these states. Vermont is 90% white, but most importantly, old. Like all New England states there is a dearth of young people due to persistently low birth rates and outmigration of young people. Vermont's median age is 42, which means they have way fewer young people than the national average.


    Why did North Dakota have so fewer interracial relationships in 2010-2014 with a median age of 35? My hunch: the extreme sex ratio of 105 men per 100 women, which is China tier. Oil and natural gas industry brought an influx of white male adults to a state that was already especially white to begin with.


    http://mongabay-images.s3.amazonaws.com/14/us-gender-ratio.jpg

    Replies: @Talha, @Achmed E. Newman

    Thank you for all the great graphs and charts, Mr. Plywood. I just read through this thread today, so I don’t have an argument for anyone …yet, haha. On this particular graph, that higher women/men ratio in the Mississippi valley and the rest of the deep South makes me wonder if prison inmates have been subtracted out. I’m not kidding – that’s one explanation, as the amount of black men in prison is very significant.

    Then, there’s the Boston area, in which I’d guess the higher W/M ratio is due to all the colleges there and knowing that the universities are majority female now.

  73. @Charles Pewitt
    Whites should not reproduce with Blacks or Browns or Asians or offbrands, but European Christians should get down to business with other European Christians. Some of the better looking people have 6 or more different European Christian ancestries in the USA and some of the more ugly inbred boneheads have just one.

    Almost all old stocker Americans are a mixed breed of European Christians nationalities and ancestries, especially in the South.

    The rancid morons in the Bush Organized Crime Syndicate that put that Black boob Clarence Thomas on the US Supreme Court should be the last of the morons to advance these Blacks using RACE QUOTAS that deny European Christians top government and private jobs. That mulatto oaf who lied to drag the American Empire into the Iraq War, Colin Powell, was a mulatto who was advanced by the Republican Party weaklings to put a mulatto face on their globalization plans. That gappy gal named Condoleeza Rice was another Bush Organized Crime Syndicate pick to put a mixed race Black type face on the American Empire.

    In England, it was said that the Wogs start over the next hill, let alone Calais.

    In colonial America, especially in the mid-Atlantic and the South, English people of early settler stock got hot-to-trot with recently arrived Germans and old stocker Dutch colonists and French colonists and Irish people and Scottish people and Scotch-Irish people and Welsh people and on and on.

    A big swirl of horny colonists and they got that Andrew Jackson to open up the settlement blockage and from Pennsylvania and those parts and further South they poured over the Appalachian Mountains getting romance with these new people they bumped into.

    I believe that New England stayed the most homogeneous and the East Anglians who colonized and settled new England mixed with each other.

    WHITE CORE AMERICA suggests strongly that mixing with Blacks is bad business, but that brings up the White Core America Party plan to remove the current owners of corporate media from power -- internet and electronic and newspapers and all of it -- in retaliation for their constant race-mixing propaganda message. White Core America will also remove and retaliate against all advertising corporations that push race mixing and the like. Hollywood will be put on notice that the pushing of the race mixing propaganda message will be met with a retaliatory response from the new political party called White Core America.

    Be cordial with all Blacks who are worthy of it, but don't start corkscrewing with them.

    I'll reduce the harshness of this anti-race mixing message by saying that that picture of Rihanna drinking a beer while happily treading water is mighty enticing though. Rihanna looked good in that French magazine too. Barbados is an interesting island and some White Southerners have Barbadian ancestry. Rihanna is a Barbadian mulatto of a not entirely displeasing sort.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    WTF do you have against Clarence Thomas, Charles? Are you sure you don’t mean Thurgood Marshall, the racist bastard appointed by some other bonehead? Clarence Thomas is the best Supreme Court justice that’s been part of that arrogant black-robed group of misfits in many decades!

    Long live Clarence Thomas (for our own good)!

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  74. @JohnPlywood
    @Talha


    Not in the Midwest where I live – nor according to the chart that you posted from Pew. According to it, 80%+ marriages are still of the same race, so…not sure what you are trying to get at here…?
     
    That chart uses a controlled sample with equal numbers of biracial couples of all age groups; it isn't a reflection of the actual distribution of biracial pairings (especially at younger ages).

    54% of millennials have dated outside their race nationally.


    https://splinternews.com/more-than-half-of-millennials-have-dated-outside-their-1793845015




    Per capita, the midwest has an extremely high rate of interracial relationships; states that are 80-90% white have interracial rates comparable to much more diverse states like New York or Louisiana, and about half that of states where whites don't even have plurality (like California).

    Kansas actually equalled Texas (30% non-hispanic white) in interracial births; which is astounding for a state that is 75% non-hispanic white.


    https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/FT_17.06.01_multiracialBabies_map.png

    Replies: @Talha, @Achmed E. Newman

    Oklahoma – that’s likely marriages between white people with nor enough Injun blood to count as feather-Indian and people with enough to count. As Steve Sailer puts it – “flight from white” – that’s where the goodies lie.

  75. @martin_2
    Many white women get fat and horrible once they reach early middle age and their men only stay with them because there are kids involved or through loyalty or because they don't know any better or are themselves gross and couldn't do any better.

    Oriental women age much better and don't get fat. Sex appeal is far more important than Race loyalty. The best way to get white men to marry white women is to get the women to stay out of the sun and go on a diet.

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman

    That is some real down-to-earth truth there, Martin. Race loyalty, pleasing the family, and even cultural compatibility all fall by the wayside when it’s a matter of a trim hottie vs. a fattie. You can’t fool Mother Nature, and for young men, it’s concentrated in one place alone.

    BTW, though, Oriental women do stay slimmer in general, but there are plenty here and in China that could use to lose 15 to 20 lb. I used to think they were genetically predisposed to staying thin till I saw a number of girls at a western-US university campus that had lots of Orientals. Half of them were overweight (not nearly obese though) It’s the diet, and that white rice has a high glycemic index too – increased diabetes risk. In the past, I just think all those countries were just never overwhelmed with food, is all.

    The best way to get white men to marry white women is to get the women to stay out of the sun and go on a diet.

    I got a better idea. Get on your bikes and ride! (It does wonders for the rear end. Though these songs must go together, Freddy Mercury didn’t get the bicycle/fat-bottomed-girl relationship at all, but then, again, how would he?)

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS