Preserving the Blue Eyes and blonde Hair in Scandinavia by Sherif Monem

The blue eyes and blond hair may disappear in the Scandinavian countries through marriage with no blue eyes. No law can ban or prevent that but it would be nice that the Scandinavian will be known for that.



The blue eyes may slowly disappear

Peter Frost has written a cool paper on the evolution of blond hair and the origin of the remarkable diversity of eye and hair color in Northern and Eastern Europeans.  His paper will be published in the upcoming March edition of the journal Evolution and Human Behavior.  Frost is spot-on in nailing intense sexual selection as the primary reason for the high prevalence of blondness, which is of recent origin (less than 20,000 years old), and the unusual diversity of hair and eye color among Northern and Eastern Europeans.  Whereas Frost’s proposed reason for the intense sexual selection is open to debate, the conclusion that intense sexual selection is implicated is almost certain.  I am including his paper in this post, but will first mention some important implications.

Frost also proposes that the extreme depigmentation seen among Nordics is partly related to sexual selection.  Frost mentions traits other than pigmentation that suggest strong sexual selection among Nordics, namely the more feminine looks of white women, on average, than women in non-white populations.  I would like to add a high prevalence of fine facial features, too, and certain parts of the face that bear the signature of sexual selection, such as the jaw, whereby the chin is better developed than in non-Nordics, even though all other parts of the jaw have shrunk significantly.

For rapid changes to occur under intense sexual selection, two conditions should be met.  Firstly, there has to be a high level of sexual freedom, especially afforded to women, and secondly, there also has to be a high level of variability with respect to reproductive success in the population, with individuals having less aesthetically desirable traits (ancestral traits) being disproportionately likely to die without reproducing.  Among human populations, it is very clear that the availability of sexual freedom, especially to women, is much higher in Northern Europe than in most other societies, and it has been this way for a long time, except for a short period when the Church was powerful in Northern Europe.  In many human societies, young individuals are not allowed to date, marriages are arranged and fornication or adultery are met with drastic consequences.  Therefore, once again, such cultural differences are consistent with Frost’s hypothesis of more intense recent (on the order of tens of thousands of years at most) sexual selection in Nordics than in other populations.

People in many non-European societies, such as in Middle Eastern and South Asian societies, pride themselves on their alleged superior morality regarding sexual behavior, failing to realize that moral superiority can only be claimed if their sexual behavior remains the same when they have the same opportunity for sexual impropriety as in the West, which is surely not the case.  Arabs and South Asians can sing paeans to their “superior sexual morality” all they want; the consequences of the low level of sexual freedom and arranged marriages in their cultures are very clear: the unattractive among them, thanks to not having to find mates on their own, are more likely to reproduce than unattractive whites; thereby, these populations have been evolving in attractiveness less slowly than whites.  One will find few whites who would disagree that non-Europeans in general, including non-European Caucasoid types, look far less attractive than whites, on average, but also, few non-European Caucasoid types would disagree with the statement, too.  I know for a fact that Razib Khan of Gene Expression blog thinks that white women, especially blondes, are much superior in looks to Bangladeshi women.

This ties in to mass migration of non-whites into the West.  If there are sufficient non-whites around, unattractive whites, who would until the recent past disproportionately die without being able to find a mate and reproduce, may end up with a non-white person who would be more than happy to get a white mate.  For instance, a black man would typically prefer a 250-pound white woman to a 350-pound black woman.  The resulting offspring of such unions, being closer to whites in looks, would be more acceptable as a mate to a greater proportion of whites than the non-white parent, which in turn will set the stage for gradual creeping of non-white genetics into the white gene pool, resulting in reduced attractiveness of the descendants of modern whites.  In addition, if mass migration of the likes of Muslims reduces sexual freedom in the West, then the mulatto descendants of present-day Europeans will also have less of an opportunity to reacquire the looks of their white forebears via intense sexual selection.  The conclusions are clear...we have yet more reasons to keep the non-white masses out of the West, even if they are as intelligent and as well-behaved as whites are.  Personally, I don’t have a problem with a small non-white presence in the West, but allowing mass migration of non-whites to the West is madness.

Peter Frost’s paper cites some genetic data to support greater reproductive skew among white males than non-white males, which is consistent with more intense sexual selection among Europeans in recent history.  In this regard, I would like to add the following three papers that, taken together, show similar evidence:

https://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/the_evolution_of_blond_hair_and_blue_eyes_among_nordics/