"andrel" <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:4A6### [at] hotmailcom...
> On 18-7-2009 1:37, somebody wrote:

> > There are of course exceptions, but if I were to statistically analyze,
I'd
> > be surprised if, on average, I did not find Europeans and likely Middle
> > Easterners to be more attractive than geographically more distant
peoples. I
> > don't disagree that it's not cultural, I've had little exposure to, say,
> > east indian TV or culture, and have not been brainwashed by their norms
of
> > beauty.

> Some of them are even more beautiful by our standards than theirs. E.g.
> a tan (suninduced ot congenital) is considered adding beauty to a female
> here whereas at least for some in some groups in Japan you can not be
> white enough. Hence some Japanese woman are more beautiful in Europe
> than in their home country. (example not pulled from thin air).

True. It might even be genetic features of an individual that may make one
less attractive to own group and more so to an outside population. Some
humans also seem to have an attraction to the exotic, which also makes it
more complicated. But these are perturbations to the basal preferences.

> >  But that doesn't change the relevant aspect - that is, men hunting,
> > so to speak, in different domains and hence feeling less threatened by
males
> > of the other race/culture/...etc does not automatically imply divergence
of
> > species.

> If you talk about humanity, then I don't think it is useful to discuss
> it, because your premise is false. White men will feel threatened if
> their wife is in a pleasant conversation with a rich, well dressed black
> male and skinny black males will feel the same if their wives are
> talking to a white bodybuilder.

One can always construct special circumstances, or exceptions, that go
against the rule. You do have a point, however, if the rich black males
outnumber rich white males, or white bodybuilders outnumber black
bodybuilders in mixed populations, and if those qualifications are largely
deemed desirable by the females.

> If this is about the example of these birds, it is slightly more
> complicated. I would definitely like to see data on female behaviour. If
> a female with a black father prefers all black males and likewise for
> chestnut breasts the case would be even stronger. But this is research,
> within the boundaries of their protocol they did only check male
> behaviour. I personally think the case is already strong enough, and I
> hope that it generates money for more research to make the case
> undeniable for even the greatest sceptic (at least those that look at
> data, you never convince an anti-scientific creationist).

Yes, it should be studied. But the conclusion that "study caught populations
as they split into species" is premature and risky, IMO.

Post a reply to this message