A scientific study by a doctor at the London School of Economics concludes that black women are "objectively" less attractive than other women. And tries to explain it. An article whose anachronistic and reprehensible racism has provoked an outcry over the canvas.
According to a self-proclaimed scientific analysis (for which he is responsible), Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa argues that "black women are statistically … much less attractive than white, Asian and Native Americans."
Black men, on the other hand, would not suffer from the same defect, according to the Doctor of the London Economics School (LES).
The scientist could have stopped there but he goes a little further in the stigmatization of women of color. For in addition to being uglier than the others, black women would, according to him, also more pretentious.
"It is interesting to note that although black women are objectively less physically attractive than others, black women consider themselves subjectively more attractive than others," he wrote in his article "Why Black Women Are Physically Less attractive than other women?".
An article in which he tries to explain the supposedly lesser beauty of women to black skin by several factors. "Black women are on average heavier than non-black women," says Satoshi Kanazawa. A precision undoubtedly added for the pleasure of accumulating the vexations with regard to the black women. The author goes on to say that "it is not the reason" that explains their least potential for seduction.
Why, then, does he explain his indefensible thesis? It is here that the "scientific" rigor of Dr. Kanazawa spreads out into the open. "Because they have existed much longer in the history of human evolution, Africans have more mutations in their genomes than other races." Let us pass on the anachronism of the concept of "race" to designate human groups. Suspect vocabulary inherited from the racialist thinking which only nauseating residues have survived the 20th century.
Besides this dubious language, the doctor tells us that the "Africans" are a "race". White Africans from South Africa or Zimbabwe would therefore be part of the same "race" as the Berbers of Morocco, the Fulani of Guinea, the Balubas of the Kasai or the Maasai of Kenya. Let us remind the doctor that when we speak of human, "black" is not equal to "African" and vice versa.
And anyway, according to Dr. Kanazawa, these "genetic mutations" incurred by Africans (or blacks, we no longer know very well) can not explain why black women are less attractive.
So? So the only thing that this eminent scientist thinks of to explain the inferior beauty of black women is "testosterone". "Africans (sic) have a higher average testosterone level than other races (sic),"whereas" testosterone is androgenic (a male hormone), it affects the physical attractiveness of women negatively.
"Racial differences in testosterone levels can potentially explain why black women are physically less attractive than women of other races." "Potentially" therefore, one is still at the stage of the calculation. Certainly, in terms of scientificity, the publication of Dr. Kanawaza is not worth trifling.
Given the number of nonsense and the revolting nature of the primary racism that emerges from this study, the article has obviously sparked a genuine storm of protest on the web. No wonder that the site Psychology Today (presented as "very serious" by the Nouvel Obs) decided to remove it from its site and to publish instead a text that belies the conclusions of the statistical analyzes on which the article is based Of the LSE doctor.
It is not surprising that after receiving more than 75,000 complaints about this article via email or via social networks, Psychology Today finally decided to stop any collaboration with the researcher, as well as to remove his Blog and its personal page on the site.
What is much more surprising is that a site "very serious" could publish such a mass of nonsense and insults to psychological science and black women around the world.
Source: RTBF Info