[Big Think] has a post, [Do Women Value Ethnicity Over Income in a Mate?]:
> **The results are striking. An African-American man would have to earn $154,000 more than a white man in order for a white woman to prefer him. A Hispanic man would need to earn $77,000 more than a white man, and Asian man would need, remarkably, an additional $247,000 in additional annual income.** > > So do women value ethnicity over income in a mate? They certainly seem too. If income was the more important factor in mate choice these numbers would be small; it would take very little additional income to entice a woman to date a man of a different race. The fact that the numbers are so large suggests that a man’s race is significantly more important that his income. > > And men? Well the problem is that men don’t seem to care about income at all. So even though their behaviour suggests they care less about their partner’s race than women do, the income needed to encourage them to make the trade-off between races is incalculably large. **To really estimate how much men care about race you would have to find a different measure, like perhaps physical beauty.**
First, there has been research controlling for physical beauty. So the white male disinclination toward black females can be accounted for mostly by the fact that they aren’t as physically attracted to them. When you limit the sample of black women to those which they are physically attracted to the discrepancy mostly disappears. In contrast, when you similarly constrain the samples of black men which white women judge as attractive the discrepancy in dating preference remains (the same when you do so for Asian men).
All this is not new. I blogged this [two years ago], and have gotten bored with the topic (there a regular series of papers which confirm the finding in different circumstances). **The _sex difference _in race preference in the dating literature seems relatively robust.** Women care about the race of their partners far more than men, all things equal (in fact, much of the literature suggests men are not concerned about race very much when you control for other background variables). If a site brands itself as “Big Think”, it would be nice to add some value.
I’ll offer a hypothesis in keeping with [Ann Althouse’s] rule-of-thumb in regards to discussing sex differences in polite company: make sure to make it seem as if [women are superior] in some fashion. Perhaps women simply have a [lower time preference]? That is, they’re thinking of long-term consequences. [Interracial divorce] rates are higher, so women may be making implicit calculations as to the probable success of a relationship as opposed to the short-term benefits of a pairing which men fixate upon. Additionally they may be more liable to “think of the children.” Though I’m generally skeptical of the social science research in this area which indicate that mixed-race children experience stress because of their background, there are plenty of high profile media accounts of people of mixed-race and their “struggles” with their identity. This may shape perceptions of the quality of life of the children. In other words, women aren’t being shallow at all, race is an excellent proxy for all sorts of social-cultural variates which might effect the outcomes of a relationship success, and also the fullness of life which their offspring may experience. Women are then in this model being prudent by using a coarse variate, race, as a proxy for the multi-textured reality of how race is lived in America, and how it matters deeply in the lives of human beings.
To test this sort of model we need data from other societies. There are confounds in this analysis in the USA because Asians, for example, are a small minority who as a matter of necessity can’t really limit their dating pool as much as whites. Additionally, it would be useful to take a fine-grained look at Hispanic dating patterns. About ~50% of Hispanic/Latino Americans identify as white, ~40% as “other”, while ~10% a mix with a substantial number of blacks. The race preference may be mostly a function of perception of cultural values, in which case you’d see that Hispanics don’t exhibit any sex bias in race at all. Then it would not be a matter of women being more racist, but being far less cosmopolitan! Oops, I mean that the low time preference is not operating through a racial proxy but a cultural proxy which is correlated with race. In other words, **women are culturally _sensitive_, while men are culturally _insensitive_.**
: http://bigthink.com/ideas/24514 : http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2008/07/why-does-race-matter-for-women/ : http://althouse.blogspot.com/ : http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/3325/are_women_really_superior_to_men.html?cat=71 : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_preference : http://gorigirl.com/interracial-divorce-in-the-u-s-statistics-and-how-much-they-matter : http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/DiscoverBlogs/~4/BbU2PQPwW1s