Skip to content
June 8, 2012 / JayMan

Dysgenic Fertility Among Blacks? Apparently, Yes

In the spirit of (partial) full disclosure, in my earlier post on the topic, I announced that I’m liberal. In this post, I’ll announce that I am Black. That is, at least, according to American hypodescent; I’m a mixed Black/White/Chinese second generation Jamaican-American. As such, of course I have a soft spot for the American Black community, and would like to see the best for Blacks in America (and all citizens—indeed, all people in the world). M.G. of Those Who Can See, (who has a recent post up about the problems of Black governance), left a comment to my earlier blog noting that while the Black fertility rate in America is at replacement level, she recalls that it is highly dysgenic. So to examine this, I once again turned to the GSS data.

This is the average number of children of Black Americans, ages 44-55, by WORDSUM score, from the 1990-2010 GSS data. As we can see, of the Black equivalents of the White Baby Boomers, fertility was highly dysgenic.

This chart—for more contemporary relevance, is the mean number of children of Blacks, ages 35-43, by WORDSUM score. While fertility among the current generation also appears to be highly dysgenic, this mostly occurs on the extremes of IQ, being fairly steady in the middle.

I thought that there might be a strong sex difference in fertility among Blacks by IQ, so I decided to look at the sexes separately:

Sample sizes are pretty small, but for men, it seems that the effect of IQ on fecundity is about neutral. Presumably, Black men benefit from the higher incomes that come with higher education. But for Black women, fertility appears to be highly dysgenic. A large number of intelligent Black women go without having children, as discussed by the Inductivist.

So why this gender gap? Either intelligent Black men are having children with much less intelligent Black women, as possibility indicated by the earlier chart of both sexes, or—as the stereotype suggests—intelligent Black men marry outside their race more (yup, my girlfriend is White), or both. Unfortunately, the GSS doesn’t seem to have a data point for the race of respondent’s spouse, so I’m not able to check this here.

It’s important to note that these data almost certainly underestimate the dysgenic nature of Black fertility. I doubt the GSS interviewers conduct many interviews in the poorest parts of the inner city (though I could be wrong). As well, incarceration rates are very high for Black males, presumably removing their contribution from this sample.

Overall, it is quite clear that Black fertility is highly dysgenic. While the Black population remains roughly static in number, its quality is unfortunately greatly deteriorating. For intelligent Blacks, this seems to be the norm (or even well above average):

Whereas for unintelligent Blacks, this may be more common (click photo for story):

It would seem that the methods I suggested previously for curbing the fertility of the underclass of all races are very important for Blacks. Welfare reform, as I discussed, coupled with heavy marketing/availability of Planned Parenthood seems quite prudent. It’s only too bad that there isn’t a highly effective non-surgical long-term contraceptive for men, but considering the fellow in the previously linked article, an option for voluntary sterilization for individuals who seem to sire more children than they can support might not be that politically unpalatable.

It’s also worth noting that the more intelligent Blacks are more heavily White in ancestry, as I am. Discouraging breeding among unintelligent Blacks would, over time, make Black Americans much more White in ancestry. Not that there’s anything wrong with that either way. I see no issue if the overall level of African ancestry among American Blacks were to stay the same, decrease, or increase, so long as Blacks’ average IQ increases—or at least stops decreasing. However, I’m sure some may take exception to increasing level of European ancestry among Black Americans.

I’ll leave off with this reggae song—a favorite of mine, which seems fitting.

//

About these ads

16 Comments

Leave a Comment
  1. M.G. / Jun 8 2012 5:44 PM

    Ah, bless you JayMan for looking up these numbers and putting them into chart form. This post and the Inductivist one will be my go-to sources for this data now. Mille mercis.

    or—as the stereotype suggests—intelligent Black men marry outside their race more

    I know this is the third rail of the interracial marriage question, but yes, going by the latest stats, black men in the U.S. marry outside the race much more–11%, while for black women it’s only 5%. Steve Sailer has written about this before, the very delicate question of why this is so and why the stats are exactly reversed for Asians–twice as many women as men marry out. The suggested idea is that in a racial hodgepodge like the U.S., black women are considered the ‘least feminine,’ and Asian men are considered the ‘least masculine,’ and that’s why they both lose out. In a mono-ethnic country or one constrained by segregation, this would be far less an issue. But again, multi-ethnic societies have always existed and have always had their winners and losers.

    However, I’m sure some may take exception to increasing level of European ancestry among Black Americans.

    This is also extremely delicate. Your ethnicity is your extended family (Sailer again), and for most people the idea of slowly extinguishing your family group through racial/ethnic outbreeding is horrific. (modern SWPLs excluded, they are positively giddy at the prospect of their own demise) I see a lot of ‘do-as-I-say’ among prominent Blacks who talk a good ‘I love my sistas’ game but lay their head down at night next to anyone but a black woman. There also seems a great deal of tension between ‘perpetuate the group’ and ‘improve the characteristics of the group,’ which has no easy answer.

    I foresee further divergence between a black elite which will become more and more mulatto-ized (but hopefully more fertile), and the less functional cohort which will continue to multiply as it does now, barring big welfare policy reform of the type you’ve proposed.

    • JayMan / Jun 8 2012 10:07 PM

      The suggested idea is that in a racial hodgepodge like the U.S., black women are considered the ‘least feminine,’ and Asian men are considered the ‘least masculine,’ and that’s why they both lose out.

      I see a lot of ‘do-as-I-say’ among prominent Blacks who talk a good ‘I love my sistas’ game but lay their head down at night next to anyone but a black woman.

      There is the issue of physical attractiveness, where Black women (and East Asian men) appear to be on the losing side (something that I’ve been working on for a future post).

  2. princenuadha / Jun 9 2012 2:03 AM

    ” an option for voluntary sterilization for individuals who seem to sire more children than they can support might not be that politically unpalatable.”

    The blame should be shared with those women…

    @jayman

    It’s cool that you talked about your heritage and some of your goals. Just out of curiosity, how come many of your other posts focused so much on europe?

    • JayMan / Jun 9 2012 9:29 AM

      ” an option for voluntary sterilization for individuals who seem to sire more children than they can support might not be that politically unpalatable.”

      The blame should be shared with those women…

      It’s not really so much assigning blame as it is getting people to (slightly) modify their behavior to achieve goals that are in everyone’s best interests. There are already good non-surgical long-term contraceptives available for women, it’d be nice if there were a few available for men, for guys like Hatchett. It’s a recognition that promoting voluntary surgical sterilization with incentives for low-IQ individuals is probably politically impossible.

      Just out of curiosity, how come many of your other posts focused so much on europe?

      As HBD Chick describes so well, I was (and still am) on a Europe kick. Expect more.

  3. Mr. Rational / Jun 10 2012 12:13 PM

    JayMan :
    It’s a recognition that promoting voluntary surgical sterilization with incentives for low-IQ individuals is probably politically impossible.

    There’s one way to find out: create a petition in a state which has a referendum process, and try to get it put on the ballot.

  4. Anthony / Jun 11 2012 6:27 PM

    You say: “It’s also worth noting that the more intelligent Blacks are more heavily White in ancestry, as I am.”

    Leaving you out of it (you’re only one datapoint among millions), is there any good evidence of this? When I think of Black political leaders, it seems that many are mulatto (about 50% white), but there are plenty who are closer to the American average of 20% white, and some who look like they’re completely lacking in pallor.

    • JayMan / Jun 11 2012 6:55 PM

      A genomic study connecting the degree of White ancestry in Blacks to IQ would be the final nail in the coffin of HBD-denialism. As far as I know, no such study exists. But do keep in mind that it isn’t necessarily clear-cut estimating the proportion of White ancestry in Black individuals by skin color.

      That said, there is some evidence for the association between the degree of White ancestry and IQ in Blacks. First is the common observation that lighter-skinned Blacks seem to do better than darker Blacks, of which we can think of several prominent examples (not the least being the President himself).

      Second, South African “Coloreds” (what Black-White hybrids there call themselves), have an average IQ of 85, intermediate between the Northern European average (100) and the sub-Saharan African one (70) (see here).

      Third, as I just confirmed by looking at the GSS, lighter-skinned Blacks do have higher average IQs, the aforementioned caveat considered. See here.

    • Afg / Nov 17 2013 8:18 AM

      More white ancestry = higher skin color (less stereotype threat), higher education, etc. But why is the black IQ variance less than the white IQ? Africans have more genetic diversity AND american blacks have a wider range of racial admixture, but whites have more socieoeconomic diversity. To see a narrower distribution of IQ in blacks suggests environment.

  5. Obsidian / Jul 17 2012 1:55 PM

    Hello JayMan,
    Just wanted to introduce myself. I’m Obsidian, and I’m considered something of a Black HBD blogger. I got wind of your blog’s existence by way of “Those Who Can See” and Half Sigma’s blog.

    I’m quite interested in the questions you’ve raised about dysgenic demographic trends in Black America, and would like very much to converse with you a bit more about it. I’ve also been reading along other posts you’ve made and have questions about your writings in that regard as well.

    Hopefully we’ll have a chance to discuss all this by and by?

    My blog is called The Obsidian Files:
    obsidianraw.bravejournal.com

    Looking forward to hearing from you!

    O.

    • eastmade / Jun 25 2013 4:13 AM

      You sound stupid [Personal attacks are not tolerated here. Do not do so again.] if a lighter skined black man does better in any country not just america, its because of his lighter skin, iq has nothing to do with it. Don’t get me wrong they don’t like giving u a job or a loan either but if they had to choose…….and don’t call yourself black and then try to discredit ur own race, either ur black or white no in between cuz trust they don’t claim u if u think they do I pray for u brotha …from anotha

    • JayMan / Jun 25 2013 9:53 AM

      if a lighter skined black man does better in any country not just america, its because of his lighter skin, iq has nothing to do with it.

      Are you sure about that?

  6. Hail / Oct 15 2012 10:15 AM

    According to Richard Lynn, as well, US-Whites have been losing (genotypic) 0.75 IQ points per generation, while US-Blacks have been losing (genotypic) 1.5 IQ points per generation, due to dysgenic breeding. This has been over the past century, at least, according to Lynn.

    See also: USA’s White Dysgenics Quantified.

  7. Antifeminist / Jun 13 2013 12:26 AM

    Fantastic article. Is there any such data from white samples?

  8. Afg / Nov 17 2013 8:13 AM

    The dysgenic trend was happening longer in the West than other cultures, so africans should have slightly higher IQ once you fix their environment (not sure about black americans). Currently, the trend is GLOBAL. I am not referring to the overall world negative correlation between IQ and fertility, since that reflects economic development. I am referring to within correlations WITHIN american, nigerian, chinese, etc communities. Any exceptions? Un-contacted tribes!

Comments are welcome and encouraged. Comments DO NOT require name or email. Your very first comment must be approved by me. Be civil and respectful. NO personal attacks against myself or another commenter. Also, NO sock puppetry. If you assert a claim, please be prepared to support it with evidence upon request. Thank you!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 953 other followers

%d bloggers like this: