Consanguinity and miscegenation
Consanguinity refers to the degree of "blood" (genetic) relationship between two people, first cousins, second cousins etc.
Christian churches have always had some prohibions against consanguinity in marriage. At one time it was forbidden to marry even your 7th cousin, though more usually the prohibition stretched only to 4th cousin. These days almost anything goes. Only brother/sister relationships are really frowned on.
From a geneticist's viewpoint, consanguinity prohibitions do have some benefit. If a person has a genetic defect, such as a deformity, it is usually found in more than one member of a family. But it is often the case that the defect is recessive, meaning that it only becomes visible in the progeny if both partners to a marriage have it. So marrying "out" reduces the chances of that happening.
Another benefit is "hybrid vigour", meaning that the progeny from quite different bloodlines are often more healthy, vigorous etc than either of the parent populations. So consanguinity prohibions undoubtedly helped keep Christian populations healthy.
The scene is very different with Islam. The laxity of Muslim divorce law means that a woman and her children have no security or protection from her marriage. She can lose her marriage and any bebefits it conveys in a matter of minutes.
So how does she get any security in her marriage? She has to rely on social pressures, and family pressures in particular. If her husband is her cousin and he tries to divorce her, both families will come down heavily on him with condemnations. So that is why consanguinity in marriages, cousin marriages, is very common in Muslim populations
And the genetic consequences follow as night follows day. In Britain, almost all birth deformities presented to the NHS come from Muslim families.
That is all reasonably well known but I want to extend the point a little further. Mental abilities such as IQ are a brain function and the brain is just another organ of the body. So cousin marriage should affect that too. There should be a lot more poorly functioning brains among Muslim populations. Real bright sparks should be rarer. And they are. The average IQs in the Middle East are markedy lower than they are in Europe, around 90 compared to 100 in Europe. So Muslims exemplify well the laws of genetics. Their failure to regulate consanguinity has dumbed them down and made them less fit generally on average.
So how does that affect interracial marriage or "miscegenation"? It should in theory be an extreme example of the benefit of avoiding consanguinity. The progeny of such unions should display hybrid vigour. And I have seen many rather obvious examples of that happening -- where one of the parents is East Asian, usually Chinese. I have often seen good-looking and very capable offspring from such unions. Australia's population is about 5% Chinese by ancestry and young Chinese-origin women often choose Caucasian men as partners, almost invariably tall ones, so Eurasian children are common. I have written at some length on Eurasians in Australia below:
http://jonjayray.com/eurasian.html
But now we come to the tricky one: black/white marriages. Miscegenation was historically forbidden in America but the grounds for the ban are not entirely clear. There was a clear belief that whites were superior in many ways so mixed race chidren were undoutedly regarded as inferior, but in what way was not systematically argued. Should not mixed race children benefit from hybrid vigour?It would seem that they have done. The term "black" is very loosely used in America today -- covering skin tones from almost Mediterranean to literally black And in the "black" population, lighter skinned blacks cruise. They are generally looked up to by other "blacks". They are more prestigious. And part of that prestige is probably fairly earned. They probably really are healthier and more capable. But it is a topic that would be too fraught to study systematically. I have probably said too much already
But, as even the APA has conceded, the black/white gap in average IQ in America is still large. The APA has put it as one standard deviation, which is a lot. The gap is even greater if we consider blacks back in Africa so miscegenation in America has reduced the average black/white IQ gap but not by a lot.
But however you look at it miscegenation has been BENEFICIAL
********************************************
Is Britain's NHS choked by bureaucracy?
"Support" staff don't usually replace anything the doctors do. On the contrary, they just create more paperwork for the doctors
It used to be that our beloved NHS was in crisis every winter. But now the NHS seems to be permanently in crisis. And every year we’re told the NHS needs ever more of our money and ever more staff. In this week’s budget it was handed another few billion which will no doubt disappear down the massive toilet of waste and profligacy that is our national healthcare service.
I realise we have had the pandemic and then seemingly endless strikes by doctors and others. But the NHS’s problems started long before the pandemic and the strikes.
Last week the Office for National Statistics (ONS) released data showing the number of staff by main work categories for each of the constituent parts of the U.K. – England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. (These figures are expressed as FTEs – full-time equivalents – so this takes account of people who may be working part-time.)
As each of the countries classes NHS employees in slightly different ways, it’s difficult to get reliable total NHS employee figures for the whole U.K. However, if we just look at the largest part of the NHS – NHS England – we can get a reasonable idea of what’s going on.
Now let’s look at the numbers:
The number of doctors increased by 37,467 (up 37%) from 101,137 in 2013 to 138,604 by 2023.
The number of nurses and midwives increased by 68,063 (up 23%) from 295,163 in 2013 to 363,226 in 2023.
The number of scientific staff increased by 42,938 (up 13%) from 123,912 in 2013 to 166,850 in 2023.
The number of support staff increased by 125,510 (up 45%) from 279,579 in 2013 to 405,089 in 2023.
The number of infrastructure staff increased by 62,758 (up 41%) from 152,437 in 2013 to 215,195 in 2023.
The number of ambulance staff increased by just 1,721 (up 10%) from 17,537 in 2013 to 19,258 in 2023.
Here are just a few things you might have noticed:
The total number of staff increased by 338,4577 (35%) from 969,765 in 2013 to 1,308,222 in 2023.
The largest increases were in non-medical staff, with support staff shooting up by 45% and infrastructure staff rising by 41%.
The smallest increase was in ambulance staff – up just 10%. Some people might find that slightly worrying. But don’t worry, at the same time as the number of ambulance staff has gone up by only 1,721, the number of DIE (diversity, inclusion and equality) managers has shot up from virtually none in 2013 to more than 800 now. So, if an ambulance does actually manage to reach you before you croak it, the ambulance workers will no doubt be wonderfully racially and gender diverse, which is what you absolutely want from an ambulance service.
We’re constantly told that one reason the NHS is collapsing is a rising population. But the population of England only rose by around 7% between 2013 and 2023. At the same time the number of doctors rose by 37% and the number of nurses and midwives rose by 23%. In Scotland the number of NHS staff rose by about 20% while the population only rose by around 2.7%. In Wales NHS staff numbers increased by 32% while the population only went up by 2%. And in Northern Ireland, NHS staff numbers rose by 20% while the population only increased by 4%. So the excuse of the NHS needing many more staff to cope with a rapidly rising population doesn’t hold water.
Another reason given for the NHS’s constant state of disintegration is that the U.K. population is getting older. Over the period from 2013 to 2023 the mean age of the U.K.’s population rose from 39 years to about 41.5 years – a rise of 6.4%. So this excuse seems pretty flimsy, too.
And then there’s the usual bleating that we don’t spend as much on health as other developed countries. It’s true that we spend less per capita than several European countries. But U.K. health spending per capita is on the OECD average:
While there is some truth in the claim that some other countries spend much more per capita on health, many spend less and we don’t hear about their health systems collapsing like our beloved NHS. So levels of spending and staffing cannot be the only reasons for the utter chaos in our health service.
A better explanation for the NHS’s floundering failure can possibly be seen in the massive increase in non-medical staff – an increase in support staff in the NHS England of an astonishing 45% and in infrastructure staff of 41%. It’s not obvious why a population which has increased by just 7% between 2013 and 2023 and which has got very slightly older should require such a huge rise in non-medical NHS staff. And there has been a 22% increase in NHS administrative staff in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland yet the population served by the NHS there has only gone up by around 2.7%.
But you can look at the numbers, think about your own, your friends’ and your families’ experiences of our pitiful NHS and make up your own minds about the competence of NHS management and the fact that our NHS seems to be doing ever less with ever more money and ever more staff.
**************************************************
This Masculine Woman Realized How “Crazy” She Looks to Men
A young woman on TikTok recently went viral for her video about why men don’t seem interested in marrying her.
She explains how all the men she’s interested in are already married to women who are soft and feminine.
In contrast, the woman making this observation has tattoos, nose piercings, big burly muscles, fake eyelashes, and nearly a pound of makeup.
“I look crazy!” she says, recognizing how her aesthetic is completely different from the women she initially describes.
She also goes on to say that she thought men liked tough girls. She runs her own business, is a fitness influencer, and has always worked hard to be independent and strong.
But apparently, these qualities are not what men want.
How did she get it so wrong?
Yet another lie of modern feminism
Modern feminism has completely missed the mark when it comes to the qualities that make a woman attractive to men.
We’ve been told that a successful career, being strong and independent, and not “needing a man” are the qualities that men seek out in their female counterparts.
There’s nothing wrong with having those qualities if you genuinely want to live your life that way.
But if you think that the average man will find it attractive, that’s where your thought process has gone wrong.
Women today are being encouraged to act more like men.
Put your career first, be loud and assertive, forgo childbearing, and objectify your body in the name of “sexual liberation.”
By all means, women are free to choose this path. But if they’re hoping to be whisked away by Prince Charming at the end of it, they are sorely mistaken.
Men want feminine women
This shouldn’t be controversial, but this reality is hitting young women like a bucket of ice-cold water.
Typically, men prefer kind and agreeable women with natural beauty and feminine charm. Masculinity and femininity are natural complements that draw two people together. (Generally, masculine men are attracted to feminine women, but feminine men may be attracted to masculine women as well).
The irony here is that most women want masculine men, while simultaneously assuming that having masculine qualities of their own will make them more attractive to said men.
Having a “high-paying job,” a substantial amount of sexual experience, and a go-getter attitude isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.
At least not in the dating world.
What can women do?
Re-learning what it means to be feminine
In some circles, there has been a return to classical femininity.
Dressing more modestly, being sexually selective, enhancing natural beauty, and embracing marriage and motherhood are some ways that women are choosing against modern feminist culture.
But femininity is not just checking certain boxes. It also involves being comfortable letting others lead, learning how to nurture and care for those around us, and allowing ourselves to be vulnerable.
While independence has been drilled into us as an aspirational concept, it also results in emotional detachment, an inflated ego, and a false sense of self-reliance.
The reality is that being ‘strong and independent’ does not make most women happy.
In the same way that men want to feel needed, women also thrive while being an active part of a community.
Final thoughts
Everyone is free to choose how they live their lives, how they act, what they prioritize, and how they present themselves to others.
However, we don’t get to choose how others perceive us.
The woman on TikTok is free to have tattoos, build her physique, wear nose piercings, and as much makeup as her heart desires. If that’s what makes her feel happy and confident, more power to her.
But — she cannot demand that the men she desires also find her attractive.
If better luck in the dating market is what you desire, a return to classical femininity might not hurt.
*******************************************
The decline of marriage
A lot of marriages in the past s were pretty unhappy so this may not be a wholly bad thing
‘Dearly beloved, we are gathered together in the sight of God, and in the face of this congregation, to join together this man and this woman in Holy matrimony, which is an honourable estate…’
This once-standard ceremony has seen a dramatic decline, but this decline is perhaps not terminal.
The recent Irish referendum, with its goal to rewrite definitions of marriage and the role of women and parenthood into the Constitution, has been a dramatic failure. Despite support from all major parties, the two proposals went down by 67 per cent and 74 per cent respectively. After successful referenda on divorce in 1995, same-sex marriage in 2015, and abortion in 2018, the progressive agenda has gone too far.
In Christian terms, the Holy rite was ordained for the procreation of children, to avoid fornication, and for the mutual help and society that one ought to have for the other. It was also intended to last ‘through sickness and in health, for better or for worse, for richer or for poorer, forsaking all others as long as you both shall live’. For many hundreds of years, this institution prospered and provided stability in the English-speaking world. In the last 50 years, this stability has been increasingly under threat.
Examples of changed attitudes are provided by former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, and the latest American Presidents. There have been multiple progenies through multiple liaisons. Even Barnaby Joyce is enjoying a second round of parenthood. Darling of the Left, ex-Kiwi Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, has belatedly signed up. The latest political surprise is Prime Minister Albanese’s announcement that, after a failed marriage, he will marry Jodie Haydon. Maybe all is not lost?
Attitudes to marriage have changed dramatically and, compared with a level of 85 per cent 50 years ago, only 20 per cent of modern couples are married. This, in combination with effective contraception, has resulted in a different attitude to sexual relations and a falling birth rate.
The origins of the institution of marriage are lost in the mists of time. The first recorded marriage ceremony was held in around 2,300 BC in Mesopotamia where the institution developed when humans moved from hunter-gathering to permanent settlement and acquisition of property. Prior to this, family units consisted of small groups of men, women, and children. All were shared in sexual polygamy.
Subsequently, the wedding ceremony was later found in Greek, Roman, and Jewish communities, binding women and their heirs to men.
In other societies, a man was allowed to have as many wives as he could afford. In Shiite culture a temporary marriage, be it for hours or days, (known as Sigheh), is allowed to permit sexual relations. A worldwide survey in 1949 documented 1,200 different groups and found 186 had a monogamous society, over 1,000 with polygamy (multiple wives), and in the Himalayas, 4 with polyandry (multiple husbands). Polygamy is still allowed in many societies, mainly in Africa and the Middle East, and in the Mormon Church in the American State of Utah.
Historically, marriage was used to secure economic or political advantage, with little concern about compatibility. This approach is still normal in many cultures, with the husband not eligible for marriage until financially secure, usually resulting in a significant age gap. It was not until the 1500s that, although marriage was frequently arranged, consent of the individuals was required by the church. These concepts remained firmly established until the last few decades.
In the UK, the Clandestine Marriage Act of 1753 required all couples to be married by a minister of religion, subsequently the Marriage Act of 1836 allowed for non-religious weddings in registry offices. Child marriage was common until the 19th Century, and is still practised in India with a legal age of 14, and Islamic countries following puberty.
In the UK divorce was rare, and individuals required an act of Parliament until a legal process was introduced in 1858. Up to this point, there had only ever been 324 documented cases (only 4 brought by women). Divorce in India, although only around 1 per cent, is increasing in both Hindu and Muslim communities, as recent legal changes mean the wife is less disadvantaged. Australian statistics from 2017 show there were around 110,000 marriages (a fall of 5 per cent on the previous year, and 30 per cent compared with 1975, (when the population was half that of now), and around 40,000 divorces that year. The top 10 countries for divorce are all communist.
The social and religious stigma attached to divorce declined in the 1960s, and the contraceptive pill reduced unwanted pregnancies and forced marriage. Women’s liberation increased, with their involvement in the workforce producing greater independence and less subservience. With the introduction of no-fault divorce legislation in 1975, the divorce rate rose dramatically, at its maximum the rate was 4.6 per thousand of the total population. This has declined, to 2 per thousand in 2017, as fewer now marry.
The number of marriages in Australia continues to drop, falling from 6 per 1,000 in 1999 to 4.5 per 1,000 in 2019, and a low of 3 during the Covid years. Those who cohabit surprisingly have a five times higher separation rate than those who marry, and experience a lower sense of well-being. Around 50 per cent of those who cohabit ultimately marry. Surprisingly, their divorce rate is a third higher when compared with non-cohabitation before marriage.
Surveys of both men and women have demonstrated a greater satisfaction, stability, health, economic development, and commitment in marriage compared with cohabitation, which is associated with increased infidelity and conflict. Studies continue to show that the most successful marriage is the old-fashioned breadwinner/homemaker relationship.
Those who do marry do so at a later age, for men the average is 32 (it was 23 in 1976), for women the average is 30 (it was 21). A consequence of this delay is the increasing age of motherhood, now averaging 31, and an increased likelihood of infertility. Despite this supposed maturity, the expectations of personal freedom, lack of commitment, and boredom have undoubtedly increased the rate of changing partners. The influence of Christian religion in marriage has declined from over 95 per cent of church weddings in 1902, to 50 per cent by 1999, and 22 per cent in 2016. This mirrors falling church attendance, with the 45 per cent attending in 1950, falling to 16 per cent by 2016. The latest 2021 Census showed around 43 per cent still identify as Christian.
The effect of marital breakdown on children has been extensively researched. Studies suggest they are more prone to behavioural problems as they tend to blame themselves for the marital failure. They have worse educational achievement and are more prone to the development of anxiety, depression, aggression, drug use, poverty in later life, and a criminal record. This has to be compared with the stress of being brought up in a dysfunctional relationship.
With divorce or separation comes the likelihood of a new relationship and the arrival of a step-father, many studies have suggested that the new relationship, now labelled the Cinderella effect, maybe more dangerous for the child. Nevertheless, a good male role model is believed important for the child’s future development. The latest Census statistics from 2021 show that there are more than a million one-parent families, a steady increase to now 16 per cent of families.
As heterosexual marriage declines, the demand for homosexual marriage has increased. Gay marriage is rare in history but not unknown. The Roman Emperor Nero had two formal weddings to men and the acceptance increased in 2nd and 3rd Century Rome. It was finally banned in 324 A.D., but this failed to halt the empire’s dissolute decline. Same-sex marriage was recognised in many indigenous cultures in the Americas and in Asia. In 2005, the Civil Partnerships Act was introduced in the UK to accord the same rights and responsibilities to same-sex couples.
Australia introduced legislation in 2017. The number of heterosexuals marrying fell soon after, perhaps with Covid, but these marriages are now at 60 per cent of the pre-Covid level. Same-sex marriage peaked at 6,000 couples in the first year following the legislation, now around 4,000 annually. The cost of the plebiscite was $130 million, around $100,000 for each marriage that year. This legislation is still not enough for the activists. They seem bent on the destruction of traditional life and the marriage that previously sustained it. This is best exemplified by the incomprehensible statement by a lesbian activist that, ‘Future generations will thank us for eliminating heterosexuality!’
Currently, over 30 countries have legislated to formalise same-sex relationships. Australian Census figures from 2016 revealed there are 46,000 couples (around 0.4 per cent of the population and 0.9 per cent of couples) in same-sex relationships, half male and half female. This was an increase from 33,000 recorded in 2011, which was itself a 32 per cent increase from the numbers from 2006. The latest Census figures, from 2021 show there have been 25,000 same-sex marriages.
Statistics for the 10 years from 2005-15 show a failure rate of 30 per cent for lesbian relationships and half that rate for gay males, with a comparison rate of 20 per cent for heterosexual couples.
Historically, Western society has been held together by several important threads. Christianity has been a stabilising force, providing a moral compass while marriage has provided a structured basis for family life. In the post-modern era, our traditions and religion are also under threat. There are increasing demands from intellectuals that we apologise and compensate others for supposed sins of the past.
These pillars of tradition are weakening, we are becoming increasingly selfish and self-centred and losing compassion for others as we fail to commit. The traditional nuclear family has been a target of Marxism since the 19th Century, with the goal of its replacement by the state.
The Millennial generation are increasingly following what has been labelled polyamory, with an expectation of partner rotation or multiple partners. This lack of commitment (currently estimated at 5 per cent in this group, compared with 2 per cent in the homosexual group) is resulting in increased sexually transmitted disease, (levels tripled from 2001-11), financial difficulties, and poorly functioning offspring.
This triumph of self-fulfilment ignores the need of children for stable parenting.
Marriage in many societies will continue to be dictated by their culture, with the rapid expansion of Islam perhaps an important factor for the future of women. In the West we have gone through the stages of marriage for tribal reasons, financial gain, religious requirements, and love. Sexual freedom is now widespread with its self-centred concept of relationship without responsibility. The modern generation need two incomes to support their conspicuous consumption. This has resulted in delay or even abandonment of procreation and a falling birth rate. In Australia there were 23 births per thousand in 1950, this has progressively declined to half that number in 2019, well below replacement levels.
Twenty years ago, some were calling these trends a marriage crisis. It may also prove to be a crisis for our Western society. The advent of Covid produced its own challenges, with the number marrying falling further by 31 per cent in 2021. Perhaps Albo can re-invigorate the institution with his own marriage? The result of the recent Irish referendum indicates that all is perhaps not lost.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2024/03/marriage-a-fading-institution/
****************************************My other blogs. Main ones below:
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*****************************************
/>
Kristina Pimenova, once said to be the most beautiful girl in the world. Note blue eyes and blonde hair
Bliss: What every woman wants: to feel safe and secure in the arms of her man. Robert Irwin and Rorie Buckey. See 
No comments:
Post a Comment