Welcome to the
Rockhampton Branch of the W.C.O.T.C.

Physical
differences between the races are just as striking as mental
differences.
by
William Robertson Boggs
Everyone recognizes race. Africans,
Europeans, and Asians can be distinguished at a glance because the
races differ so obviously from each other. Although the differences are
popularly referred to as “skin colour,” as if this
were where they began and ended, colour is one of the least important
ways in which the races differ.
Although many physiological differences
are well established and easy to measure, they are often completely
unknown to the general public. Perhaps this is because the cumulative
effect of a list of physical differences can give an impression of
alienness even more powerful than do assertions about mental
differences.
Just as it was once universally
accepted
that races differ in intelligence, so the study of physical differences
was once entirely respectable. Some 19th century investigators,
however, hoped to find justifications for slavery and not all were good
scientists. Therefore, in the revolt against
“racism,” good data from the past has been thrown
out along with the bad, and the study of physical differences has
languished.
The modern data now becoming available
confirm many 19th century views. The best evidence suggests that races
differ markedly in such things as maturation rate, brain size, bone
density, susceptibility to disease, and perhaps even personality.
The races differ in skin colour because
of
different levels of melanin production. All races have approximately
the same number of melanocytes, or melanin-making cells, but they
differ in how actively the cells make melanin.
Anyone who has seen an albino African
knows how trivial a racial difference skin colour really is. The albino
may actually seem more strange to a European than a normal African,
because negroid features and tightly curled hair seem incongruous in a
light-skinned person. No one would mistake the albino for a European.
Likewise, West Africans, Dravidian Indians, and Australian aborigines
are all “black,” but they are racially very
different.
Colour does have one physiological
effect:
three and a half times as much ultraviolet light from the sun passes
through the skin of Whites as through that of blacks. Light skin is
beneficial in the northern regions where whites evolved, since
ultraviolet light converts ergosterol in the body into vitamin D. Dark
skin protects against the tropical sun.
There are other racial characteristics
that are obviously adaptations to the climates in which the races
evolved. Many East African peoples have elongated limbs and bodies that
easily dissipate heat. North Asians, on the other hand, have evolved in
a cold climate. Their bodies are more squat, they have thick, dark
hair, and the epicanthic fold that gives Asians almond-shaped eyes is
thought to reduce glare from snow and ice. A flat nose is less exposed
to cold, and the virtual absence of facial hair means that condensation
from a man's breath will not freeze on his beard and chill his face.
All of these characteristics are most obvious in the Asians who live in
the coldest climates.
Some racial differences are not so
easily
explained. Phenylthiocarbamide (PTC) is a chemical that can be
synthesized in the laboratory. To some people, it has a strong, bitter
flavor, but to others it has no flavor at all. Seventy percent of
Australian aborigines can taste PTC, but only 13 percent of Navaho
Indians can. Fifty percent of Whites and about 38 percent of Japanese
can taste it.
For whatever reasons, the races do not
smell the same. Blacks and Whites have strong, but differing smells,
and many Asians have scarcely any smell. Koreans often have no
odour-producing glands in their arm-pits at all and Japanese have very
few. Nineteenth-century Japanese found Europeans so foul-smelling that
even today, a common Japanese expression for anything Western means
“stinking of butter.”
Though they may not always be willing
to
say so, sports physicians have found physical differences that give
different races advantages in different sports (see “May
the Best Man Win,” AR,
Oct. 1992). Whites and West Africans, for example, differ in
proportions of body fat, width of hips, thickness of thighs, bone
density, and proportion of fast- and slow-twitch muscle. Even East and
West Africans differ in important ways that explain why they excel in
different sports.
Because blacks have such dense bones,
they
are less buoyant and less likely to be swimming champions. However,
their bones are more resistant to aging. After their mid-30s, White men
lose about 2.5 percent of their bone mass every year. Blacks lose less
than one percent. Loss of bone mass speeds up greatly under conditions
of weightlessness, so blacks could probably survive longer space
voyages than whites.
Studies have repeatedly found that
black
men have more of the male hormone testosterone in their blood than
Whites do. Testosterone is directly related to physical and sexual
aggressiveness, but it also combines significantly with intelligence.
Men who are intelligent but who have high testosterone levels are
likely to be more successful, socially and professionally, than
intelligent men with low testosterone levels. Men who are unintelligent
but who have high testosterone are more likely to be criminals than
unintelligent men with low testosterone. High crime rates among blacks
are consistent with low intelligence and high testosterone.
Although egalitarian partisans —
most notably Steven Jay Gould in his 1981 book, The
Mismeasure of Man —
have tried to discredit the evidence, it is well established that
average brain size differs from race to race. A study by K. L. Beals,
published in Current
Anthropology in 1984, reported
that a survey of 20,000 skulls shows that the average size of the brain
case in Asia is 1380 cc, while in Europe it is 1362 cc and in Africa
1276 cc. Other studies have found that the brains of American blacks
are approximately eight percent lighter than those of American Whites.
Studies of brain size and weight can be
difficult to replicate because researchers do not often have access to
enough skulls or cadavers and may use different measuring techniques. A
1989 study overcame these difficulties by using magnetic resonance
scanning to determine skull capacity. Brain size was found to have a
positive correlation of about 0.3 with intelligence.
Not surprisingly, the bones within
which
brains reside can be markedly different. A child could distinguish
between the skulls of Eskimos and Laplanders as easily as he could tell
cucumbers from zucchinis. The skulls of Australian aborigines have
characteristics not found in any other race, but common in fossils of pithecanthropus.
The bones of the skull are twice as thick as those of any other race
(10 mm v. 5 mm), and the skull has heavy frontal and parietal ridge
lines typical of pithecanthropus.
The teeth and lower jaws of aborigines are also larger than those of
other races, and more similar to those of our remote ancestors.
It is little known that Africans have
identical twins twice as frequently as Europeans — who in
turn have them twice as frequently as Asians. Some African populations
have identical twins seven times as frequently as whites. Blacks also
have shorter gestation periods than Whites or Asians. By the 39th week,
51 percent of black babies have been born but only 33 percent of
Whites. By the 40th week, the figures are 70 percent and 55 percent.
Shorter gestation seems to be a characteristic of blacks that is
independent of social status or access to medicine.
Prof. J. Philippe Rushton of the
University of Western Ontario, who has probably studied maturation
rates more extensively than anyone else, reports that rapid development
of blacks continues after birth. Many African and black American
newborns can hold their heads up whereas White and Asian newborns
almost never can. The average age at which black children walk is 11
months, compared to 12 months for Whites and 13 months for Asians.
Prof. Rushton has found that blacks
reach
sexual maturity earlier than Whites. By age 12, 19 percent of black
girls have full development of breasts and pubic hair, whereas only two
percent of White girls do. Black American women menstruate at an
earlier age than White women. They then go on to have sexual
intercourse for the first time at an average age that is two years
younger than that of Whites.
Although it has long been the subject
of
ribald speculation, the races do appear to differ in the size of their
sex organs. The best data seems to have been gathered in 1979 by P. H.
Gebhard and A. B. Johnson. They actually took measurements and found
that popular myths are correct: blacks are better endowed than Whites.
In extensive interviews, they also found that black men at least report
themselves to be less restrained than Whites in their willingness to
commit adultery, likelihood of frequenting prostitutes, and number of
sexual partners.
Somewhat comparable differences have
been
found between Whites and Asians. Even after controlling for body size,
Danes have testes that are proportionately twice the size of those of
Chinese. Whites are also estimated to produce twice the number of
spermatozoa per day as Asians.
Earlier maturation and early sexual
activity among blacks may have a biological price. In the United
States, blacks, on average, can expect to die six years sooner than
Whites. Higher homicide, accident, and disease rates contribute to this
difference, but it is entirely possible that blacks may also have a
naturally shorter life span.
Our society generally keeps quiet about
physical differences between the races, but information about them
occasionally surfaces in news stories about disease. Alcoholism, for
example, appears to strike different races at different rates. Asians
(and American Indians to whom they are related) react more strongly
than Whites to alcohol. More Asians than Whites show an allergic
reaction to alcohol and therefore do not drink, whereas many American
Indians seem to have a biological predisposition to alcoholism.
Curiously, Asians are twice as likely as Whites to suffer from motion
sickness.
In the United States, the most
frequently
reported medical differences concern blacks and Whites. It is well
known that only blacks suffer from sickle-cell anemia, for example, a
condition that helps the body resist malaria, and is therefore a
benefit in the African jungle.
Most of the known medical differences,
however, seem to disadvantage blacks. Black women are twice as likely
to have strokes as White or Hispanic women, and they suffer more
damaging aftereffects. Blacks are three to four times more likely to
have dangerously underweight babies. This could be due to bad diet,
poor general health, or scant medical care, but some studies indicate
that even when these factors are equalized, black babies are more
likely to be underweight.
Kidney disease is eighteen times more
common among blacks than Whites. Left untreated, AIDS kills blacks more
rapidly than it does Whites or Hispanics, and blacks do not respond as
well to the drug AZT as do patients of other races. Glaucoma strikes
blacks five times more often than it does Whites. It sets in earlier,
and the likelihood of getting the disease does not appear to be
affected by social status or availability of medical care.
Blacks are also twice as likely as
Whites
to have high blood pressure, and five to seven times more likely to
have dangerously high blood pressure. This is often attributed to the
pressures of “racism,” but physiology is certainly
part of the cause.
A study at the University of Maryland
found that when black and White students were paired for age, diet,
fitness, and medical history, and given a mild stress — their
hands were put in ice for 30 seconds — blacks reacted by
constricting their blood vessels (a hypertensive reaction) for at least
ten times longer than Whites. Research in Barbados has shown that
mixed-race blacks are more likely to have high blood pressure if their
maternal rather than paternal ancestors were African; genes passed down
from the mother seem somehow to be involved. One reason for high blood
pressure among blacks may be their relative inability to secrete
sodium, so a salty diet can be more dangerous for blacks than for
Whites.
It has long been known that blood
transfusions and organ transplants work best between people of the same
race. Until the Second World War, stocks of blood were routinely
segregated by race for this reason. Classification by race was ended
when it was discovered to be “racist,” but blood
banks are reinstituting segregation.
The distribution of the common blood
types
is different from race to race, and some rare types are unique to
certain races. Only blacks have U negative blood; only Whites have Vel
negative or Lan negative blood. Dr. W. Laurence Marsh of the New York
Blood Center justifies racial classification: “It
makes no sense to screen 100,000 Whites for U negative when no U
negative White person has ever been found.”
Kidneys and other organs are classified
by
race for similar reasons. About 20 percent of blacks are so genetically
incompatible with Whites that they reject organs from all White donors.
Clearly, all these differences cannot
be
dismissed with the fashionable notion that race is nothing more than a
matter of skin colour. No one knows for how long the different races
have been evolving independently, but it might be necessary to go back
one million years or more to find an ancestor common to all races.
Clearly, a great deal of divergence has taken place during that time.
In his magisterial work, Race,
John Baker suggests that certain racial groups are already so different
from each other that they are not, technically speaking, the same
species. Certain matings between extremely unrelated stocks —
Bushmen and Europeans, for example — are thought to have
produced only female children, or in some cases hybrids that could not
mate successfully among themselves. These are well-known signs of an
unrelatedness that is so vast as to be verging on separation into
different species.
Indeed, according to Dr. Baker, in the
prehistoric past different races and sub-races probably avoided
cross-breeding and behaved as if they were different species. He points
out that in nature, animals that are no more different from each other
than northern Europeans and southern Europeans never breed with each
other. It is only in domestication that a horse, for example, can be
made to mate with a donkey. Man is, of course, the most domesticated of
animals. As the French anthropologist Paul Broca remarked, “Man,
especially civilized man, is of all the animals the least exclusive in
his amours.”
Separate development is, to use Charles
Darwin's phrase, the origin of species. Apes and humans once had a
common ancestor but are now distinct species. Likewise, racial
differences are nature's first steps towards the creation of new
species. Left to themselves for long enough, the different races of man
would have become so different that they could no longer produce
fertile young. This might well have happened if the domesticating
effects of civilization had come later, or if discovery and travel had
not brought isolated peoples into contact with each other.
One of the great ironies of today's
quest
for “diversity,” — the forcible mixing of
peoples as unlike each other as possible — is that it is a
destroyer of diversity. It is only through separation that nature can
produce that culmination of true diversity: a new species.
Back
to Musings page
Top
of Page
Home