Friday, June 26, 2015

Show matrimonial love by spreading it around far and wide

Anthony Kennedy, writing for the majority:
It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves.
A graphical representation of data compiled from the GSS over the last few years:



No less respectable a media organ of the Cathedral than The New York Times reported the same half a decade ago.

If the presumption is that marriage precludes extramarital sexual activity, then it seems reasonable to argue that opening it up to same-sex couples does in fact "disrespect the idea of marriage".

Perhaps it's time for that aspect of the definition of marriage to change as well. Expect it to be the next big Cathedral objective after the holy warriors are done mopping up any residual resistance to transgendering.

Parenthetically, lest there be any doubt about the Cathedral's zeal for the gay cause, consider it utterly dispelled.

Wednesday, June 24, 2015

Not licked yet

Created using preliminary data on US births in 2014:


A few years ago the Census bureau announced that (non-Hispanic) whites no longer comprised a majority of newborns in the US, the implication being that in (less than) five years' time they would no longer constitute a majority of kids under the age of five, in (less than) eighteen years' time the would no longer constitute a majority of minors, etc.

Pew has a piece explaining the possible reasons for the premature announcement, though "wishful thinking" is conspicuously absent from among them. For the last three years whites have held the line at 54% of all births in the country.

In most states a majority of newborns are white. That is not the case in New York, Georgia, Florida, New Jersey, Maryland, Arizona, Nevada, Texas, DC, California, New Mexico, and Hawaii, however. Though the number of states is small, the number of people in these states is not, with the country's four most populous ones in the majority-minority column.

Politically, the Rubicon runs through Texas. When it inevitably flips from red to blue, the consequence will be 76 electoral college vote swing, ending any chance for a Republican to ever occupy the White House again. Florida is probably already forever lost to the GOP and Georgia is only a couple election cycles away from the same fate.

If you're of the persuasion that demography is destiny, there are two crucial determinants that shape the future: Immigration and differential fertility. These are the battlefronts.

In the interest of full disclosure, an indication of which side I'm on:



Friday, June 19, 2015

It's not good to be king

A naif might think that the putative benefits provided by white privilege and membership in the patriarchy, combined with the Potato Heading of the West, would see non-whites and women running from their oppressed statuses to enjoy the benefits that naturally accrue to white men.

Curiously, the contemporary high profile cases of race and sex changes involve whites 'becoming' non-whites (Dolezal) and men 'becoming' women (FauxcahontasJenner). These don't appear to be exceptions to prove the rule, either. There has been a pronounced flight from white evident in the US Census over the last several decades, and people from ancestries conventionally considered to be white, such as Middle Easterners and North Africans, are pushing for the creation of non-white categories to self-identify themselves as.

In 2004, the GSS asked respondents to choose from ten descriptors to answer the question "which is most important to you in describing who you are?" Respondents were also asked to select the second and third most important descriptors from the same list. Race/ethnicity was one of the options. The following table shows the percentages of respondents, by race, who identified race/ethnicity as the most important, second most important, or third most important aspects of how they identify themselves (n = 1,185):

RespondentR/E important
Hispanic42.1%
Black38.8%
Asian35.5%
White10.4%

Another option among the ten provided was gender. The percentages of respondents, by sex, who identified gender as the most important, second most important, or third most important aspects of how they identify themselves (n = 1,201):

RespondentGender important
Female32.1%
Male23.9%

Quite the conundrum. It's almost as if being white and being male, rather than conferring tacit benefits upon a person, actually has a deleterious effect on one's social status and perceived moral worth.

Parenthetically, these data are over a decade old. I suspect the white and male identification deficits are even greater now than they were then.

GSS variables used: SOCID1(2)(3), SOCID2(2)(3), SOCID3(2)(3), RACECEN1(1)(2)(4-10)(15-16), SEX

Tuesday, June 16, 2015

Vibrant creationism and pale, male, stale evolution

The convergence of homo sapiens and Mr. Potato Heads has given the information technology industry a reprieve from the media scrutiny it had recently received for being too male, too white, and, if pressed, too Asian.

I'm indefatigably vigilant, however, and I'm not about to allow the icy chauvinists to escape the censure they so sorely deserve. To the contrary, I'm piling on. Not only have they hijacked high tech, it turns out they also predominate when it comes to accepting the theory of evolution as an explanation of the origin of humanity. They're stealing science right out from under the noses of disadvantaged groups like women and NAMs.

The following tables show the percentages of people, first by race and then by sex, who concur with the assertion that "Human beings, as we know them today, evolved from earlier species of animals" (n = 5,238). For contemporary relevance, all responses are from the year 2000 on.

By race:

RaceEvolved
Asian71.2%
White54.1%
Hispanic46.7%
Black37.9%

And by sex:

SexEvolved
Men58.5%
Women41.5%

GSS variables used: RACECEN1(1)(2)(4-10)(15-16), SEX(1)(2), EVOLVED, YEAR(2000-2014)

Saturday, June 13, 2015

Righteous Leftists

The percentage of GSS respondents who have ever "expressed political views on the internet", by political orientation (n = 1,203, the question was posed for the first time in 2014):

Orientation%Expressed
Liberal32.4
Moderate18.0
Conservative20.6

This isn't just the result of people tending to become more conservative as they get older and of older people being less likely to be plugged into the internet. The pattern holds consistently across age ranges. Among those under 30:

Orientation%Expressed
Liberal45.0
Moderate26.1
Conservative34.3

Adults aged 30-64:

Orientation%Expressed
Liberal32.7
Moderate18.9
Conservative20.8

Seniors, aged 65 and older:

Orientation%Expressed
Liberal14.2
Moderate5.1
Conservative10.8

The "silent majority" remains a fairly relevant phrase today.

Parenthetically, self-described liberals and conservatives are about at parity when it comes to intelligence. Moderates tend to be of more modest intellectual capabilities, so the fact that they are less likely to broadcast their political sentiments than the more politically committed isn't surprising since many of them probably don't have established views and among those who do have them, many haven't given much thought to them.

GSS variables used: POLINTER(1-2)(3-4), AGE(18-29)(30-64)(65-89), POLVIEWS(1-3)(4)(5-7)