"A
rapid and effective means for getting noticed in the crowd." Lady Gaga(?) in Stylist France.
I'm
back to blogging after a 3-month absence. During my hiatus the magazine Stylist France interviewed me about head
hair as a form of advertising. The resulting article appeared on October 11 under
the headline "Forget the slogan T-shirt. To get yourself heard, nothing is
more effective than a new hairstyle."
The
full interview, in French with an English translation, is provided below:
French version:
Pouvez-vous expliquer succinctement le rôle de la sélection sexuelle
dans l'apparition des cheveux blonds ?
La sélection sexuelle favorise
la brillance et la nouveauté. Ce qui est brillant demeure plus longtemps en
mémoire; ce qui est nouveau retient plus longtemps l'attention. Si on considère
les couleurs des cheveux et des yeux, on constate une évolution vers la
brillance, c'est-à-dire les cheveux noirs et les yeux bruns cèdent leur place à
des couleurs vives, comme les cheveux roux ou blonds et les yeux verts ou
bleus.
Quant à l'évolution vers la
nouveauté, celle-ci se manifeste par la diversification de la palette des
cheveux et des yeux. Au début, une nouvelle couleur émerge par la mutation,
puis elle se répand jusqu'à ce qu'elle perde sa nouveauté ; à ce moment-là, la
pression de la sélection sexuelle se réoriente pour favoriser une couleur moins
fréquente. Ainsi, un équilibre s'établit entre les diverses couleurs.
Qu'est-ce qui permet d'affirmer que la sélection sexuelle est aussi
importante voire plus importante que les rayons UV dans l'apparition des
cheveux blonds ?
D'abord, les gènes contrôlant
la couleur de la peau et celle des cheveux ne sont pas les mêmes. On peut avoir
la peau très blanche, tout en possédant les cheveux foncés. De plus, la pression
de sélection exercée par les rayons UV n'explique pas la diversification des
allèles contrôlant la couleur des cheveux et des yeux. Enfin, on ne voit pas
cette diversification chez les peoples indigènes habitant les mêmes latitudes
de l'Asie du Nord et de l'Amérique du Nord.
Vous affirmez que ces traits distinguant les Européens sur le plan
visuel résultent d'une pression de sélection qui vise surtout la femme.
Pourquoi pas l'homme ?
Il y a eu une pénurie d'hommes
chez les premiers Européens, en partie parce que la dépendance de la viande,
comme partie dominante de l'alimentation, rendait la polygamie trop coûteuse
pour les hommes, sauf pour les meilleurs chasseurs. De plus, comme on le
constate toujours chez les peoples chasseurs du Nord, le taux de mortalité est
plus élevé chez les hommes que chez les femmes. Résultat : un surplus de
femmes. Celles-ci devaient se concurrencer pour les hommes disponibles.
Finalement, il semble y avoir un parallèle fort entre la supposée
attraction, aujourd'hui, des hommes pour les femmes blondes (et les stéréotypes
et exemples qui en ont découlé dans la pop culture) et le phénomène
d'apparition des cheveux blonds il y a 11.000 ans.
Aujourd'hui, grâce aux études
de l'ADN extraits des restes humains, on sait que les cheveux blonds existaient
déjà il y a 18 000 ans. Le lieu d'origine semble être chez les peoples
chasseurs des plaines de l'Europe de l'est et de la Sibérie de l'ouest pendant
la dernière glaciation.
English
version:
Can you succinctly
explain the role of sexual selection in the appearance of blond hair?
Sexual
selection favors brightness and novelty. Anything bright remains longer in
memory; anything novel holds attention longer. If we consider hair and eye
colors, we see an evolution toward brightness, i.e., black hair and brown eyes
have ceded their place to bright colors, like red or blond hair and green or
blue eyes.
As
for evolution toward novelty, this has manifested itself in a diversification
of the palette for the hair and the eyes. Initially, a new color emerges
through mutation; then it spreads until it loses its novelty; at that moment,
the pressure of sexual selection reorients itself to favor a less frequent
color. Thus, an equilibrium becomes established between the various colors.
What makes you think
that sexual selection is as important, indeed more important, than UV radiation
in the appearance of blond hair?
First,
the genes controlling skin color and hair color are not the same. One can have
very white skin while having dark hair. In addition, the selection pressure of
UV radiation does not explain the diversification of alleles controlling hair
and eye color. Finally, this diversification is not seen among indigenous
peoples inhabiting the same latitudes of northern Asia and North America.
You affirm that
these traits that visually distinguish Europeans result from a selection
pressure that is aimed especially at women. Why not men?
There
was a shortage of men among the first Europeans, partly because dependence on
meat, as a dominant part of the diet, made polygamy too costly for men, except
for the best hunters. In addition, as is still seen among northern hunting
peoples, the mortality rate is higher among men than among women. Result: a surplus
of women. Those women had to compete for the available men.
Finally, there
seems to be a strong parallel between the purported attraction, today, of men
for blonde women (and the resulting stereotypes and examples in pop culture)
and the phenomenon of the appearance of blond hair 11,000 years ago.
Today,
thanks to studies of DNA extracted from human remains, we know that blond hair
already existed 18,000 years ago. The place of origin seems to be among the
hunting peoples of the plains of eastern Europe and western Siberia during the
last ice age.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On
rereading my answers I realize I may have misunderstood the last question. The
intent seems to be: “Given that these
evolutionary processes happened thousands of years ago, how can they explain
the growing popularity of blond hair today?” This intent became clearer to me when
I read the article, which focuses on blondness in pop culture, and its apparent
surge in popularity since the 1970s.
This
trend appears in a study of Playboy
playmates from 1954 to 2007. From a low of about 35% in the mid-1960s the
proportion of blonde playmates rose to a high of 60% by the year 2000 (Anon 2008). A
similar trend was found by Rich and Cash (1993).
Natural
blondes are actually a lot scarcer among white Americans. In a sample of
undergraduates the proportions were 68% brown, 27% blond, and 5% red (Rich and
Cash 1993). Similar proportions appear in a British study: 68% brown, 25%
blond, 1% red, and 6% black (Takeda et al., 2006).
Natural
blond hair has since become less common in the United States and the United
Kingdom. Are we seeing the novelty effect in action? Are blondes becoming sexier
because fewer real ones are out there?
References
Anon.
(2008). Bygone brunette beauty: Fashion in hair color, Gene Expression June 29
www.gnxp.com/blog/2008/06/bygone-brunette-beauty-fashion-in-hair.php
D'Almeida,
P. and M. Giuliani. (2018). Qu'elle a bien pu
vouloir dire avec cette coupe ? Stylist France, October 11, pp.
2-5.
Rich,
M.K., and T.F. Cash. (1993). The American image of beauty: Media
representations of hair color for four decades. Sex Roles 29: 113-124.
Takeda,
M.B., M.M. Helms, and N. Romanova. (2006). Hair color stereotyping and CEO
selection in the United Kingdom. Journal
of human behavior in the social environment 13: 85-99
7 comments:
I don't know whether blonds in the US and UK were ever all that numerous, to be honest. If you watch American TV, white men of Anglo ancestry are very much dark-haired and brown-eyed. The phenotype of someone like Sarah Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, the Bush family, Mitt Romney, etc. seems to be prevalent around here.
America's British cousins are often quite dark themselves, as can be seen with the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, Mr. Bean. John Oliver is a British comedian (now in the US) and extremely dark.
The difference is really felt strongly in Germany and in the East. We don't have a large number of blonds in the US who look like that. Surprisingly, although it's claimed that the German ancestry is the largest one in the US, it seems to be dissolved in Anglo/Irish genes which are much less blond and darker. Examples: Paul Ryan (US House Speaker) and Brett Baier (FOX commentator) both have partial German ancestry, but both have jet-black hair; they're also English, Welsh, or Irish.
If people value a natural blonde over a bottle one, I think there would have to be a genetic linkage between female attractiveness and blonde hair. .
Blonde women get treated bad. Showing up on TV and magazines and porn means the men show no respect whatsoever. If you prefer blonde women you would treat them more like ladies. So I think the non-blonde men are the ones who always oberestimate themselves. I am darkhaired myself and I think some of my fellow men have some sort of inferiority complex that shows up in these kind of topics.
I dont believe in a significant melanin difference in the white race. You sometimes cite ridiculous studies that are done on hair color where bottleblond women count in as blonde. (Most recent hair study on blondes). That mist be a joke.
I have a question for you Peter Frost.
Do you know about studies on gender ratio in Albinos? I personally read 1-2 studies that mention that ratio and they concluded that there were more male albinos than female. How do you explain that the lightest of all ethnicities is predominantly male???
I'm glad to see you are back blogging! I wouldn't have noticed but that I was scanning the responses to Ron Unz' California essay and noticed your comment and his reply -- which did not address the points you raised -- and was reminded to check to see if you were back blogging.
I just wanted to say that I enjoy your blog, as I'm sure many others do, but the subjects you cover obviously are not of mass appeal.
The Unz Review is a political site that covers topical subjects, so naturally it will be more popular. The articles that get the most comments involve either something to do with Jews or old rock bands, and usually devolve into frequent posters quarreling with each other.
Regarding the popularity of blondes, I recall reading that early film producer Irving Thalberg made light-haired actresses like Jean Harlow synonymous with sex appeal. Before, blondes had usually been associated with innocence.
Even if that is true, it doesn't explain the drift to blondes in Playboy decades later. Your figures don't include the 1950s, but it was probably the blondest decade, with so may Hollywood actresses being blondes, from Doris Day and Judy Holliday to Marilyn Monroe and Jane Mansfield, so maybe the Sixties were a jaded reaction to too many blondes, but over time, the interest revived.
Just a thought.
PS: This is the book I read that mentions Thalberg:
I'm No Angel: The Blonde in Fiction and Film
Truth Seeker,
In high school, about a quarter of my classmates were natural blondes. This was in central Ontario.
Tobias,
Can you provide me with references to those studies? I'm not aware of sex linkage for albinism per se.
Wanda,
When I was with The Unz Review I had a lot more traffic, and yet my traffic at ResearchGate seemed unaffected. It was likewise unaffected when I left The Unz Review. Sometimes less is better. I don't mind being associated with Steve Sailer, but I felt bothered being associated with the often violent antisemitism at the Unz Review. As for Ron Unz, I really don't know what to think. Even when he's friendly I get a bad feeling. I can't put my finger on it, other than its like a flashing amber light.
I am black and I enjoy your blog.
While it's all very intriguing, I was absolutely floored by the article on sleep patterns of African-Americans and how that relates to their ancestral origins.
Glad you're back.
Post a Comment