Interracial Dating

It seems that "More than eight-in-ten Americans (83%) now agree that "it's all right for blacks and whites to date," reflecting the most dramatic change among the racial attitudes tested in Pew polls." It's interesting that this change doesn't merely reflect cohort replacement. It's true that young people have more liberal attitudes about interracial dating, but old people's attitudes have also become more liberal over time. Interracial dating hasn't been a political issue per se for quite some time, but these changes in attitude have huge political implications as progressive politics in the United States has perennially been hampered by the country's deep racial divides.

I'm also a bit surprised by the truly overwhelming support (97 percent) among African-Americans for interracial dating, as I'd always gotten the sense that this was a pretty contentious issue in the black community.

Comments

I wonder if they would have gotten a lower number if they asked if it was OK for blacks and whites to marry, or have kids.

Posted by cs | June 2, 2007 1:36 PM

Steve Sailer in 5...4....3...2...

Posted by Freddie | June 2, 2007 1:38 PM

I knew things had changed when I read a LeBron James interview (or something like it) by Bill Simmons in which Simmons suggested (IIRC) that James date and have a kid with Sharpova and James said, with some seriousness, something like, "That might be a good idea." And there was no uproar at all. Just shocking. And awesome.

And in the past, as I recall, the primary concern was black men dating white women. I suspect that it's at least as likely that black women date white men, given education rates, etc., so, you know, who cares?

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 2, 2007 1:39 PM

I'd be interested to see comparative statistics for opinions on different racial hookups: whether people accept white and asian, black and middle eastern, or whatever, more readily than black and white.

Posted by Jackmormon | June 2, 2007 1:48 PM

Between this question implying 'someone else' participating in dating other races and the social opprobrium in admitting otherwise, I think these numbers are essentially bogus. While I don't have issues with interracial marriage (I'm in one), I agree with cs that this requires more and better questions.

I suggest: "I think it's all right for my son/daughter to date interracially" or "I would date someone of a different race"

Posted by Klug | June 2, 2007 1:55 PM

"I'm also a bit surprised by the truly overwhelming support (97 percent) among African-Americans for interracial dating, as I'd always gotten the sense that this was a pretty contentious issue in the black community."

I think this question has to be differentiated between support and tolerance; while 97 percent of african americans might be "all right" with white and blacks dating 97 percent might not necessarily be advocates for interracial dating.

Posted by James | June 2, 2007 1:59 PM

Matt: Remember that the question probably sounds different to whites and blacks. Whites might hear the question as, "Would you let a black man date your daughter?" and so the numbers creep up -- grudgingly. A black person might hear the question as, "Should you have the right to date white people?" which gets an enthusiastic yes.

Posted by Martin | June 2, 2007 2:17 PM

Oh no-no-no-no. I am going to have to cry high bullshit here. White men dating black women is a huge taboo in the African-American community, and anyone who says otherwise is lying or misinformed. My girlfriend & I simply could not be seen together in many downtown (predominantly black) clubs in Oakland, (which is a pretty liberal enclave). These issues go deep and I'm very suspicious of any poll that thinks it can get past first base on these questions. This is simply a photo negative of the Bradley Effect.

Posted by sangfroid826 | June 2, 2007 2:21 PM

Call me shallow, but what the hell is wrong with 17% of the population (or perhaps more specifically 6% of the Gen-Yers)? I hope we eventually reach a point where the question is comparable to "Do you think it's all right for people with blue eyes to date people with brown eyes?"

Posted by RSA | June 2, 2007 2:21 PM

White men dating black women is a huge taboo in the African-American community, and anyone who says otherwise is lying or misinformed.

At least on my part, misinformed, then.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 2, 2007 2:30 PM

According to a black friend of mine, there's a big gender issue in there.

Basically, (standard disclaimer- I know this is a generalization) black women resent it when black men date white women. Especially when educated black men date white women. It reduces the dating options for black women who want an educated, successful black man.

Simultaneously, black men resent it when black women date white men. Especially when the white man is educated and successful, because they perceive an implication that black men (and specifically, they themselves) aren't good enough.

But of course, black men don't have a problem with black men dating white women. Nor do black women have a problem with black women dating white men. Its not about what their own gender is doing, its about the opposite gender and what interracial dating does to one's gender's dating pool.

Again, again, I know, huge generalization, and this is just one black person's opinion transcribed by a white guy.

Posted by Patrick | June 2, 2007 2:38 PM

one black person's opinion transcribed by a white guy.

America has come so far. One or two generations ago, it would have been a white person's opinion transcribed by a black guy.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 2, 2007 2:42 PM

On one hand, I agree with comments above that this poll is not entirely hopeful - the question is more likely to get a positive response than some other questions.

On the other hand, it has the benefit of being directly comparable to the same question asked years earlier. And while it doesn't prove we've moved beyond racism, it certainly suggests that people are significantly less racist (or at least espouse less racism) than they were.

Posted by MDtoMN | June 2, 2007 3:17 PM

MDtoMN -- I understand what you mean about people answering poll questions differently, but if people today are more likely to think they shouldn't say that interracial dating is a bad idea, they are also more likely to believe it, even if some people primarily motivated to answer a particular way in order to not appear biased.

That point is buttressed by dating statistics: according to the census bureau, in 1999 10% of all unmarried couples who lived together were mixed race/ethnicity; in 2006 that had increased to 15%.

Posted by Jed Lewison | June 2, 2007 4:03 PM

My girlfriend & I simply could not be seen together in many downtown (predominantly black) clubs in Oakland, (which is a pretty liberal enclave).

I'm from Oakland and black and downtown Oakland club scene is not a good place to be if your black, white, Asian etc. Have you ever been to Luca's on Broadway & Grand? You'd have no problem being there with a black woman at all. I've been there plenty of times and it's a diverse background. They even have Drinking Liberally there. I think your problem is choice of venue.

That being said, I definitely agree that 97% number seems too high. I know plenty of black folks that are against black-white dating. Mostly because of the taboo as a tradition, family pressures, (bringing home a white person) peer pressure and str8 up racism. I also would like to see how the question is framed since this seems to me to be a code word question.

Posted by Dave | June 2, 2007 4:10 PM

"I knew things had changed when I read a LeBron James interview (or something like it) by Bill Simmons in which Simmons suggested (IIRC) that James date and have a kid with Sharpova and James said, with some seriousness, something like, "That might be a good idea." And there was no uproar at all. Just shocking. And awesome."

Why wouldn't Mr. James want to marry Sharapova? She is pretty, tall, athletic, and smart. And she is, of course, white, which would mean his kids would be lighter skinned and thus seen as more attractive by both blacks and whites. Something tells me Maria Sharapova wouldn't be as amenable to marrying LeBron though. He is unattractive, black, and uneducated, and comes from a culture with many negative attributes. He wouldn't bring much to the table, besides money and athletic talent, and Sharapova already has plenty of both.

Posted by Harry | June 2, 2007 4:21 PM

I see that although neither Sharapova nor James have college degrees, the former is described as "smart" while the latter is "undeducated." One hopes that it's merely a parody of the inevitable racist trolls, but...

Posted by Scott Lemieux | June 2, 2007 4:29 PM

interracial marriage data for various asian groups:
http://www.asian-nation.org/interracial.shtml

Posted by razib | June 2, 2007 5:05 PM

I think some of the change with the born before '46 cohort comes from people dying.

I"m really amazed at how low the acceptance rate was in the '80s. Well not that amazed. But these numbers do tend to confirm my personal sense that person-to-person racism has declined in my lifetime and that the 90s were a crucial decade in this transition.

Posted by Ben P | June 2, 2007 5:25 PM

Why is Gen X separated out from Gen Y? If a generation is about 20 years, then why is Gen X only ten years long and Gen Y includes everything post-77? That makes no sense. Are there really substantive differences between these supposedly separate generations? Sorry, I think not.

Posted by b | June 2, 2007 5:31 PM

I think your problem is choice of venue.

Exactly so. Luka's is a great example -- it doesn't represent the African-American community per se. Anywhere that serves Oysters Rockefeller isn't going to have a problem with the white boy canoodling with the black girl in the corner. But I found that to let my girlfriend drag me to an all-black scene and then to expect to no hostility, is a naïveté of the first order. Sometimes it's wasn't overt, sometimes it was. But I would disagree that the culprit was the crime, rather than intolerance. We experienced the same dynamic at her church, and at some family gatherings. Admittedly, it's a raw subject that I can't think very clearly about. Your post makes me consider whether the issue wasn't just intolerance, but more of a combination of that and the fact that I was Whitey encroaching on an all-black sphere. (Less people thinking "slave rape" and more people thinking "Can't we just have a place to ourselves?")

Posted by sangfroid826 | June 2, 2007 5:38 PM

Razib,

Does Scott Lemieux have a point here:

"I see that although neither Sharapova nor James have college degrees, the former is described as "smart" while the latter is "undeducated."

Is it foolish of me to assume that the Russian Sharapova is smarter than the African American baller Lebron James?

I defer to your large brain and knowledge of these things.

Posted by Harry | June 2, 2007 5:41 PM

James had a 3.5 GPA in high school, while I strongly suspect that Sharapova drinks a gallon of vodka every day.

THAT'S RIGHT YOU'RE NOT RACIST.

Posted by Barbar | June 2, 2007 6:09 PM

I'm not sure I understand the resistance to thinking that attitudes have improved. I think its pretty clear that they have. I agree that the way the question is phrased does matter. But it is important when people become ashamed of their prejudices. If even many people who have a certain discomfort with interacial relationships are no longer willing to say that they believe such relationships are "wrong" that is real progress. By the way anyone know what segment of american society has the highest rate of interacial marriage? Its the military...

Posted by Gabe | June 2, 2007 7:49 PM

Give me a break. My point was at the time I saw little Harry-like chatter. So there's at least one racist left (assuming he's in the US). That's hardly shocking.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 2, 2007 7:58 PM

Basically, (standard disclaimer- I know this is a generalization) black women resent it when black men date white women. Especially when educated black men date white women. It reduces the dating options for black women who want an educated, successful black man.

This has been my overwhelming experience.

Simultaneously, black men resent it when black women date white men. Especially when the white man is educated and successful, because they perceive an implication that black men (and specifically, they themselves) aren't good enough.

This has not been my experience AT ALL. A white guy with a black girlfriend is, in my experience, seen as evidence that he's down. Might be a class thing, but amongst the many college educated black people I know, I have never heared disapporval of a white man/ black woman relationship. However, I've gotten many lectures from college educated black women (including one who's engaged to a white guy) about why it's unfair to date white women.

I agree with a poster above: blacks are more likely to read the question as one of them having the right to date a white person. Anti-miscegenation laws are still fresh in black folks' minds.

Posted by WillieStyle | June 2, 2007 8:09 PM

Call me when you have the data for the percentage of asian men and black women involved in an interracial relationship.

Posted by date sure, but marry.... | June 2, 2007 8:09 PM

Call me when you have the data for the percentage of asian men and black women involved in an interracial relationship.

After watching the show California Dreams, I thought black men and asian women relationships happened all the time.
TV is an interesting medium for interracial relationships because the predominant interracial relationship is white men and asian women. Black-white relationships are much harder to find unless one watches children's show on, say, Nick or Disney.

Posted by Dan the Man | June 2, 2007 9:20 PM

Television commercials almost never ever featured interracial couples, until right about 1999 or 2000, when there was a sudden change and they became quite common.

Posted by Steve Sailer | June 2, 2007 9:48 PM

"Call me when you have the data for the percentage of asian men and black women involved in an interracial relationship."

Asian-black marriages are both rare and feature the most extreme "dating disparity" -- the 2000 Census found that black husband-Asian wife couples were six times more likely than Asian husband-black wife couples. However, I suspect that disparity is slowly moderating. In two decades of big city life, I had never seen an Asian man-black woman couple until about 1999. I probably have seen one or two per year since then, suggesting a sizable change.

Posted by Steve Sailer | June 2, 2007 9:54 PM

Having studied interracial marriage since about 1981, let me point out that Matt, however, is mostly naive about changes in _attitudes_ toward interracial marriage as having much impact on practical politics. There is little if any evidence, for example, that white parents have become more accepting of sending their children to heavily black middle schools or high schools over the last 25 years. Indeed, some analysts have argued that public schools have gotten more segregated over that period.

Matt's assumption is based on the increasingly outmoded view that irrational animus is at the heart of racial stress in the 21st Century. That would be nice, but the unpleasant reality is that objective statistical differences in average behavior in key areas like crime and schooling are the driving factors today.

Posted by Steve Sailer | June 2, 2007 10:05 PM

I like this blog a lot, but why is it such a magnet for racist trolls? Is there some link to Stormfront ot something? Are the comments completely unmoderated? Anytime Matt posts anything remotely related to African-Americans, you can about bet that someone will post "Blacks are stupid" or something like that.

I don't think Matt or most of the people posting here are down with that, but why does that stuff just go unabated? I know folks are trying not to feed the trolls, but that doesn't mean they don't affect the atmosphere. Kind of makes a darkie like me just wanna go back to perfecting the windmill dunk, chucking watermelon, and lusting after white women...

Posted by TC | June 2, 2007 10:46 PM

WillieStyle- You are correct. It is a class thing.

Posted by Patrick | June 2, 2007 10:57 PM

Simultaneously, black men resent it when black women date white men. Especially when the white man is educated and successful, because they perceive an implication that black men (and specifically, they themselves) aren't good enough

This han't been my experience at all. I dated a black girl for a while in college, and was never aware of any resentment among the black guys I (or she) knew. Maybe that was a special atmosphere, since everyone was in college. But I'm not sure why that wopld make a difference.

Posted by Al | June 2, 2007 10:58 PM

Kind of makes a darkie like me just wanna go back to perfecting the windmill dunk, chucking watermelon, and lusting after white women...

You've given yourself away as a fraud: the windmill dunk has already been perfected. People don't feed the trolls because...well, you know why. Nothing good comes of engagement; it ends up allowing them to control the conversation, and everyone ends up having to deal with their psychodrama over not getting into the school of their choice (or whatever) and how they would totally NOT be a virgin now if they had gotten in.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 2, 2007 11:09 PM

TC:

I would argue that allowing racists to say racist statements improves the discussion. It helps ensure that people do not engage in "well, racism is over" arguments. If people have animus in their hearts and in their heads, it's best we all know about it (at least on a political blog like this - not in every environment). Also, the political support for civil rights and anti-discrimination statutes is often rooted in people viewing racism at its ugliest.

Posted by MDtoMN | June 2, 2007 11:12 PM

Yeah, I can't argue with that. Better to know, then not, I guess. It's just shocking to see how quick this stuff comes out. It would be like if every time Matt posted something about Israel, 2-3 people automatically popped up to say, "It's because the Jews control everything in the world, and are clearing the way for Satan."

As for the windmill, I meant my own version.

Posted by TC | June 2, 2007 11:25 PM

TC:

There's a difference between what racial provocateurs like Harry write and what Steve Sailer wrote:

"Matt's assumption is based on the increasingly outmoded view that irrational animus is at the heart of racial stress in the 21st Century. That would be nice, but the unpleasant reality is that objective statistical differences in average behavior in key areas like crime and schooling are the driving factors today."

If you don't get the significance of that paragraph, you will not understand what drives the thinking of the vast majority of middle class Americans on race. The average upper middle class couple is bidding up the prices on houses in neighborhoods with a paucity of blacks and Hispanics. Why, because they bear an irrational hatred toward blacks and Hispanics? No; on the contrary, many of these upper middle class folks are socially liberal and just the sort who would have a positive view of interracial dating. So why are they avoiding the black and Hispanic neighborhoods? Because they know that, on average, blacks and Hispanics commit more crimes and do worse in school than white and Asian-Americans.

This attitude is neither irrational nor driven by hate.

Posted by Fred | June 3, 2007 12:01 AM

Erm, I don't think I mentioned Sailer. Specifically, I was talking about the Lebron bit further up.

I don't know how this went from a debate on interracial dating to some sort query on why middle class white people don't want to live around blacks.

Still, if you wanna go there we can. I can safely say I speak for quite a few black folks, when I say we loose very little sleep over white people bidding up prices in white neighborhoods. We loose even less sleep over white people NOT bidding up prices in black neighborhoods. Indeed, speaking as resident of gentrifying Harlem, nothing would make me happier.

Seriously though, I like integration as much as the next guy--some of my best friends are white :P But they tend to be smart enough to know that moving into my neighborhood isn't going to help my son's SAT scores, make better black fathers, get more black kids into college, or decrease our rate of teen pregnancy. From that perspective, I could care less whether the housing pattern is driven by hate or sound reason. It really isn't my problem. There is no "insert white people and stir" cure for what plagues black America. Get over yourself.

Posted by TC | June 3, 2007 12:38 AM

Dan the Man: Has there ever been a network television show that featured an asian man in an interracial relationship? I don't think there were any during this past year. The only interracial romances I can think of from the very limited sample of what is TiVo'd in our house is a as follows:
Grey's Anatomy: black guy/asian girl and white guy/Latina.
Scrubs: black man/Dominican woman
Office: white guy/Indian woman
Lost: white guy/black woman
24: Jack Bauer/automatic weapons
Heroes: black guy/1.5 white women
Earl: Crabman/white woman
Ugly Betty: Latinas/white men

Lots of options on television for white and black men. Only one black woman (minor character)in an interracial marriage and the asian men on these shows either have no relationship (Mohinder)or are married to an Asian woman (Jin).

Gen X and Y may be comfortable with interracial relationships but apparently these relationships still don't test well in tv pilots and movies.

Posted by date sure, but marry.... | June 3, 2007 12:45 AM

I knew there was a reason I liked Harold and Kumar so much...

Posted by Neil the Ethical Werewolf | June 3, 2007 1:29 AM

From the Rice U. Sallyport:

Does Education Help Breed Segregation?
http://www.rice.edu/sallyport/2006/fall/sallyport/segregation.html

Most of us think that education broadens an individual’s perspective and helps diminish racist attitudes. Prior studies have validated that conventional wisdom, but new research indicates just the opposite may be true. A study, co-authored by Rice sociologist Michael Emerson, shows that increased education of whites, in particular, may not only have little effect on eliminating prejudice, but it also may be one reason behind the rise of racial segregation in U.S. schools. Furthermore, higher-educated whites, regardless of their income, are more likely than less-educated whites to judge a school’s quality and base their school choice on its racial composition.

Black–white racial segregation has been on the rise in primary and secondary schools over the past decade. While whites, especially those who are highly educated, may express an interest in having their children attend integrated schools, in reality, they seek out schools that are racially segregated. In the study, researchers found, on average, that the greater the education of white parents, the more likely they will remove their children from public schools as the percentage of black students increases.

“We believed from prior studies that education has a significantly positive impact on racial attitudes,” says Emerson, the Allyn and Gladys Cline Professor of Sociology. “We found when studying behaviors, however, that acquiring more education is not a means of combating segregation. Education may broaden an individual’s world, but it also leads to greater negative sensitivity toward blacks’ presence in public schools.”

Emerson and research colleague David Sikkink, an associate professor of sociology at the University of Notre Dame, know that income and other factors come into play in terms of school choice, but their study shows that, even after controlling for these variables, education has an unintended effect. Whites with more education place a greater emphasis on race when choosing a school for their children, while higher-educated African Americans do not consider race.

“I do believe that white people are being sincere when they claim that racial inequality is not a good thing and that they’d like to see it eliminated,” says Emerson. “However, they are caught in a social system in which their liberal attitudes about race aren’t reflected in their behavior.”

Posted by Steve Sailer | June 3, 2007 1:50 AM

TC:

"There is no "insert white people and stir" cure for what plagues black America."

I don't know how you read that in what I wrote, but I agree with you. BTW, do you own an apartment in Harlem or rent?

Posted by Fred | June 3, 2007 2:03 AM

I don't disagree with TC or even Fred here. But I would argue that Steve Sailer' type of "rational" thinking:
1) Is often not, in reality, detached from irrational racism; and
2) Is still deeply problematic and unnecessary.

Here's why:
1) I'm a white guy, and a lot of white people who don't know me well feel free to express their ideas about race to me (notably, a significant chunk who know me well don't, and that's fine). Many white people express their beliefs about race based on empirical evidence and then throw in some ridiculously ignorant stuff. For instance, an Ivy educated kid once said basically what Sailer said. He then started talking about how black people smell different (I have not found that to be the case). I would argue that his views are motivated by animus as well as rationality. When talking about affirmative action, a blue collar woman once told me that if she went to the emergency room, and a black woman was also there, they would treat the black woman first because she is black. That's insane & untrue - but she had some rational arguments to start with. So, we have to engage a reality that people have some rational arguments for their viewpoint, but they still have irrational racist views as well.

2) Purchasing a house is a good example, because it does effect the ability of black people to invest in real estate and see the returns a white family could expect. There is no good reason to look to the RACE of a neighborhood to determine its crime rate, its school system's success, or almost any other important factors. Buying a house is a huge investment - there's no reason NOT to do a little research. And, if people did the research, they would realize that not all black neighborhoods are the same. They would also realize that not all white neighborhoods are the same. And they would be learning to think in a less racialized way, which would be a good thing.

Posted by MDtoMN | June 3, 2007 11:28 AM

I rent. Prices are just too high, and if I can't buy in the next year I'll probably move like the rest of the neighborhood. The funny thing is that the crime rate in Harlem--and in a lot of gentrifying neighborhoods in cities across the country--is still higher than in the rest of the city. But that hasn't precluded whites from moving in, most likely because there is a perception that the neighborhood is "coming up."

BTW, sorry for being snarky earlier. I just think that integration--while a laudable goal, and very good for the country as a whole--gets too much attention when we talk about what's wrong in black communities. There a plenty of de facto segregated black middle class and upper middle class suburbs, outside cities like Atlanta, D.C. and Chicago, that are doing relatively well. I don't want to come off as some sort of seperatist. I just think that those are two distinct problems, that sometimes, but not always, are related.

Posted by TC | June 3, 2007 3:03 PM

That press release on the rice study (why not link to the actual paper, eh?) shows that blacks with more education live in more racially integrated areas and send their kids to more racially integrated schools.

It also says that that whites with more education send their kids to schools that are more white.

Given the tremendous inequality between blacks and whites, these findings are hardly rocket science.

These are not incompatible. They also do not imply causation.

As it turns out, the highest and most highly educated income whites live in the zip codes that are more racially and ethnically diverse than the opposite, even when you look at same size zip codes.

Posted by Jed Lewison | June 3, 2007 4:30 PM

Steve "I'm not a white nationalist because it would be worse than wrong it would be a mistake" Sailer writes:

"the unpleasant reality is that objective statistical differences in average behavior in key areas like crime and schooling are the driving factors today"

Do you think these differences are the expression of genetic traits?

If so, do you think that the much higher rate of suicide amongst white non-hispanics is also genetic?

Do you still believe your silly theory about the hidden ethnic bias of baseball?

What genetic factors do you think cause the black-white income gap to close during Democratic administrations and widen during Republican administrations?

Do you think you could have written a more convoluted sentence?

Are you a victim of or do you exploit cognitive bias?

Posted by Jed Lewison | June 3, 2007 4:39 PM

TC:

As you know, if you don't own, your neighborhood gentrifying isn't a huge help for you. I own a condo in a non-fancy,(mostly) non-white town, but I got it several years ago and units like mine are now going for more than double what I paid. Not because my town has gentrified much, mind you -- just because lots of first-time condo buyers have gotten priced out of the fancier, whiter towns.

"I just think that integration--while a laudable goal, and very good for the country as a whole--gets too much attention when we talk about what's wrong in black communities."

My point was simply that those who can afford it tend to move to towns with few blacks and Hispanics because they want better schools and safer streets; I never meant to suggest that integration was necessary to improve things for black or Hispanic neighborhoods. In fact, the opposite may be the case. Some of the most successful programs at educating poor black and Hispanic kids have been charter schools like the KIPP system. Most of the KIPP schools have no white students. And most of the KIPP students wouldn't thrive in, say, an elite public school in Scarsdale, NY.

Posted by Fred | June 4, 2007 1:29 AM

MDtoMN:

Rational thinking on race (which really shouldn't be ceded solely to Sailer) isn't something which can be dismissed just because some folks attracted to it happen to have irrational biases. We all have irrational biases of one sort or another; this shouldn't be an excuse to ignore copious data.

On race and intelligence, there are a few uncomfortable facts that we need to address:

1) Intelligence isn't a meaningless concept, and it can be accurately (if, perhaps incompletely) measured by objective tests. Organizations like the U.S. military use intelligence tests (e.g., the ASVAB) and find the results highly predictive of future accomplishment.

2) Numerous studies involving millions of individual tests have demonstrated that blacks, on average, score significantly lower than other races.

3) Intelligence -- like height, hair color, etc. -- may be partly or mostly determined by heredity.

A rational person absorbing those facts would come to two conclusions. First, that one shouldn't discriminate against individual blacks, because even though blacks, on average, have lower IQ-type scores, this isn't true of all blacks, and there are some exceptionally intelligent blacks. Second, affirmative action and integration policies that are based on the premise that a "fair" percentage of blacks in, say, a medical school, or the FDNY should be roughly equivalent to the percentage of blacks in American population, are flawed.

Posted by Fred | June 4, 2007 10:17 AM

Perhaps now would be a good time to mention the studies which show minority children raised by white parents and studies of minority immigrant/refugee children both show these groups scoring higher on standardized tests than your average minority child.
These adopted/immigrant children's genetic code apparently changes as soon as they are either adopted or set foot in this country. All hail the mystical gene changing power of white parents and America.

Posted by Charles Murray still hates you | June 7, 2007 6:17 AM

crtjvx qoscdrlf pnyfz uepki ymgcelsxh mpjqbaexc btydnozp

Posted by wnatduo lyjvq | June 7, 2007 11:54 AM

tpzsenvhd tknyuvo pjqmway wzqlb hcif kbnh ryuomkd http://www.yljxmaizb.jpcgqzasi.com

Posted by ehranpof nohq | June 7, 2007 11:55 AM

Perhaps now would be a good time to mention the studies which show minority children raised by white parents and studies of minority immigrant/refugee children both show these groups scoring higher on standardized tests than your average minority child.

Actually the largest longitudinal transracial adoption study found that, by adulthood, the IQ difference between black and white adoptees was larger than the difference between blacks and whites in the general population.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial_Adoption_Study

Immigrant children do not score higher than their native equivalents. Some immigrant children score higher than their native equivalents. Whatever groups you have in mind, immigrants aren't always representative selections of their home ethnic group. If children of highly educated South Asian immigrants perform at the 95th percentile compared to American children this says nothing about the comparative potential of South Asians in general.

Posted by Charles Murray still loves you | June 8, 2007 4:38 AM