Interracial relationships between white men and black women were historically more common than interracial relationships between black men and white women. Why did this change in modern times?
>>17431174>Why did this change in modern times?Because of Talmudic propaganda everywhere and women's proclivity to be easily swayed and be herd animals.
whites were dedicated concubine(resulting in the creation of the intermediate races), defining their foundational history, pic related revealing the traditional dynamic when left to own devices
>>17431174Black guys have more social status than they used to and white guys have less.
White men going after black women was probably seen as less of a "threat" to the overall racial hygiene of the white race for various cultural and evopsych reasons in the inherently limited potential reproductive capacity of women compared to men. Women's sexuality was more controlled in general and a white guy taking a black woman was seen more as "taking one of theirs" and tolerated to an extent, if still seen as undesirable, as opposed to a black man going with a white woman which was "taking one of ours" and totally unacceptable.
>>17431255Also blacks were really the only sizable minority group for much of US history. Once latinas and asian girls hit the scene, white bois inclined to interracial relationships moved on to greener pastures.
>>17431237>judaism is when the state doesn't have the power to decide who I can marry
>>17431174It didn't? The entire premise of this thread is false
>>17431300Your image shows that there are over twice as many black husband-white wife pairings as white husband-black wife pairings. Did you believe otherwise when you posted it?
>>17431174Because white people are some of the biggest rapists on the planet and raping black people was no longer acceptable.
>>17431428In absolute numbers sure, but a larger percentage of black women are married to white men than white women are married to black men. Black people are a minority.
>>17431527That doesn't contradict the wording of the OP.
>>17431531Does OP even have a source for how common each type of interracial pairing was in the 1950s? I'd imagine the statistics were probably the same or less.
>>17431548You're nuts if you think BM/WF would have been as tolerated as much as WM/BF in the 50's even in the places where it was legal. Male insecurity over other races "taking their woman" was probably the core of anti-miscegenation sentiment and laws.
>>17431555I doubt either was tolerated, you know Loving was arrested right?
>>17431563>even in the places where it was legal. There's more to being able to do something than it just being legal on paper. If you're effectively committing social suicide with all your white family and community members by getting married to a black guy you're probably not going to do it. Genders don't experience this equally, like how being an openly gay man was probably harder than being a open lesbian until relatively recently or MtF trannies generally get more heat now than FtM.
>>17431300from this data it seems white men have preferences against black women and white women have preferences against Asian men.
>>17431586White people generally marry within their race (97.9%, 97.7%). Black men are more likely than black women to marry white (8.6% vs 3.9%), Asian women are more likely than Asian men to marry white (15.3% vs 7%).
>>17431270>judaism is when my ethnic group doesn't have the power to decide who I can marryFTFY retard, states should only be vehicles for the advancement of your ethnicity/nation's interests.
>>17431255ye
>plants by the ACLU jews >illegal>commonYeah just like how it was common for rosa parks to fight bus drivers to get kicked off of them so she could sue them or how gay jews went and got married in canada to sue the USvery common
>>17432861Yes, the average black American has 25-30% European DNA
>>17432866Says who?
>>17431300>15.3%Asianbros?...
>>17432870Have you seen Black American families? Often times one sibling looks 100% Black and the other looks 50/50 Mulatto. When one sibling looks 100 percent a race and the other looks 50/50, that's usually 25-30% admixture.
at the quarter range, you get half the kids looking fully the race and half the kids looking 50/50. It's very unpredictable for phenotype.
>>17431255These points, basically. A black man openly courting white women was as good as dead. A white man might be in for it socially, but he's not sure to be lynched. And I think even disapproving people wouldn't surprised at a black women marrying up, nor are they going to be half as defensive about the white man's racial dignity rater than a white woman's.The clandestine nature of interracial relationships in the Jim Crow era means we can't be too sure about how common any pairing really was. The safer ones, definitely easier to see, and no coincidence that it was a wmbf couple that won the case before SCOTUS.
>>17432950I know that most people in major cities in the US are mutts and have nothing to do with the populations outside of them or in the ghettos
>>17431174It wasn't a crime for white men to sleep with black women, but it was a crime for black men to do the same with white women.
>>17432870Their genetics you fucking moron. Do you think a man who looks like this has naturally blue eyes without being blind just because?
>>17433181>I know that most people in major cities in the US are muttsEuropeans are so stupid. Unless you're counting Hispanics as the mutts, this doesn't make sense.
>>17433199Do you think posting a mixed race black from some gutter in a major city proves blacks are mixed race? Are you mentally retarded?
>>17431300What is "other" mainly, Native American?
>>17433432Yes, the US Census only has 4 racial categories. White, Black, Asian, and Native American, keep in mind the census is self-reported. I'd imagine that the most common interracial pairing is actually Hispanic-White but Hispanics are all reported as White in the census so they aren't counted.
>>17431174They were a side piece back in those days and now anti polygamy is enforced
>>17433432Probably mostly mixed race people
>>17433498Wouldn't that depend on how the Hispanic person self identifies? I'm sure a lot of them just check white but there's gotta be some that pick Native American or Black
>>17431250I wouldn’t normally say this but that looks shopped as fuck. Or at least fake.The white dude on the left is far less detailed in his skin, hair, or lining than the guy on the right. The hair especially seems telling. Am I just schizo?
>>17433779Well according to the census around 20% of Hispanics chose the White option on the 2020 census but it's clear from the data that Hispanics that previously identified as White stopped doing so, instead saying that they are "Some other race" or "Two or more races".
