Perhaps the reason Turks are so fertile is because their testicles had to become more robust and potent to handle a life of being jostled on horseback. Herodotus says that the Scythians sometimes suffered infertility because they wore pants too often and were always riding around on horseback.
Ashkenazi Jews had explosive birth rates for much of their history and still in religious circles retain high birth rates, so I'm a little surprised you rank them lower than Central Asians.
The Jewish phenotype can be simplified as being equivalent to that of Southern European/MENAs, with the distinction of high neuroticism and intelligence. Neither of those groups are high in fertility in modern environments (MENA fertility in particular will tank soon), and their distinct psychological profile is not strongly enabling of their fertility. Even if IQ becomes correlated with fertility at .1, that would only give them a .05 - .07 SD advantage in fertility, about .1 to .2 more children or so.
Fair points. On a side note, Im gonna assume you’ve seen some of Futurist Right’s posts on the East Asian Question and their low birth rates. I don’t entirely agree with his hypothesis but I think it could explain modern low birth rates to some extent among Southern Europeans as well, where women typically had less choice than in Northern Europe. Southern Europeans are less fertile despite being more religious, and have gone through recorded periods of birth rate decline before in history (ex: Roman gentry). The women there are very beautiful but the men are only somewhat beautiful — they suffer from slightly shorter stature than Nordic men, they are a bit gracile, and they seem to go bald a lot. Since Southern Europeans are still handsome and allowed some female freedom it’s not as bad as it is in East Asia
My dad was one of 11 kids born in China in the 1950s and this was an average number. Moreover, northern European countries like Ireland were known for massive fertility in the 19th century.
>In terms of personality, within both sexes, extraverted and close minded people had less children, and within women, conscientious people had less children.
"White women who date outside their race are more likely to have a child in comparison to White men" -- I think this is due to those women having lower levels of education.
WW with XM are selecting for something, whereas WM with XW are selecting for something else, and those two somethings impact fertility.
For a WW to select an AM I assume there is something special about the AM, because that is a rare pairing.
However, it seems that any WM will pair up with any AW since the pairing is common.
In general, it is difficult for XM to pair up with WW and they face significant intragroup and intergroup competition. Any XM who wants a WW is going to have to somehow differentiate himself from all the other XM and also the WM.
The data seems to indicate that BM with WW have higher IQ, which doesn't necessarily lend itself to higher fertility, but it does indicate a kind of selection.
Besides neuroticism and conscientiousness, I would suggest assertiveness as a factor.
Perhaps the reason Turks are so fertile is because their testicles had to become more robust and potent to handle a life of being jostled on horseback. Herodotus says that the Scythians sometimes suffered infertility because they wore pants too often and were always riding around on horseback.
Ashkenazi Jews had explosive birth rates for much of their history and still in religious circles retain high birth rates, so I'm a little surprised you rank them lower than Central Asians.
The Jewish phenotype can be simplified as being equivalent to that of Southern European/MENAs, with the distinction of high neuroticism and intelligence. Neither of those groups are high in fertility in modern environments (MENA fertility in particular will tank soon), and their distinct psychological profile is not strongly enabling of their fertility. Even if IQ becomes correlated with fertility at .1, that would only give them a .05 - .07 SD advantage in fertility, about .1 to .2 more children or so.
Fair points. On a side note, Im gonna assume you’ve seen some of Futurist Right’s posts on the East Asian Question and their low birth rates. I don’t entirely agree with his hypothesis but I think it could explain modern low birth rates to some extent among Southern Europeans as well, where women typically had less choice than in Northern Europe. Southern Europeans are less fertile despite being more religious, and have gone through recorded periods of birth rate decline before in history (ex: Roman gentry). The women there are very beautiful but the men are only somewhat beautiful — they suffer from slightly shorter stature than Nordic men, they are a bit gracile, and they seem to go bald a lot. Since Southern Europeans are still handsome and allowed some female freedom it’s not as bad as it is in East Asia
Is this roughly the genetic order?
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=bbw,big%20ass
My dad was one of 11 kids born in China in the 1950s and this was an average number. Moreover, northern European countries like Ireland were known for massive fertility in the 19th century.
>In terms of personality, within both sexes, extraverted and close minded people had less children, and within women, conscientious people had less children.
Extroverted had more.
So you predict a fertility revival in Western Europe? I don´t see this happening in the next 40 years. Which timespans are you talking about?
Not revival.
"White women who date outside their race are more likely to have a child in comparison to White men" -- I think this is due to those women having lower levels of education.
In some cases, the fertility of XMWW couples increases after controlling for educational attainment.
(see https://sci-hub.se/10.1111/jomf.12758 )
The trend doesn't hold for AMWW. I think the factor must be selection for low neuroticism or low conscientiousness.
The comparison group in that case is WMAF couples
Oh? I thought it was the WMWF couple.
WW with XM are selecting for something, whereas WM with XW are selecting for something else, and those two somethings impact fertility.
For a WW to select an AM I assume there is something special about the AM, because that is a rare pairing.
However, it seems that any WM will pair up with any AW since the pairing is common.
In general, it is difficult for XM to pair up with WW and they face significant intragroup and intergroup competition. Any XM who wants a WW is going to have to somehow differentiate himself from all the other XM and also the WM.
The data seems to indicate that BM with WW have higher IQ, which doesn't necessarily lend itself to higher fertility, but it does indicate a kind of selection.
Besides neuroticism and conscientiousness, I would suggest assertiveness as a factor.