Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Black Damsel In Dating Distress: A Response to OkCupid's Conclusions

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 125 posts

Re: The Black Damsel In Dating Distress: A Response to OkCupid's Conclusions

#71

Post by dkarl »

lsb wrote: post #24
petercooper wrote: post #7

That's because all the black men who don't want to date white women are on the African American Dating Network or Blacksinglesconnection. There simply is no real white corollary. Stormfront excluded, there aren't many "WhiteSingles" websites or "EliteIvory" dating sites. There is no Caucasian Dating Network, because the broader world is the Caucasian Dating Network. [..] Disagree. The reason there are no popular whit…

It is to Morgan Freeman, as he explained to Mike Wallace: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=1131418n "You're going to relegate my history to a month? What about White History Month? Black History is American History. I'm going to stop calling you a white man, and I'm going to ask you to stop calling me a black man."

How quickly a beachhead can become a ghetto.

Re: The Black Damsel In Dating Distress: A Response to OkCupid's Conclusions

#72

Post by _pius »

natrius wrote: post #66
_pius wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard to believe that you're serious.

I don't see what's unserious about it. It's an incorrect explanation of the effect at work, but it was still a valuable comment.

The comment essentially said: "black women are fatter than white women, which is why they don't do as well on OKCupid."

That doesn't strike me as particularly serious or valuable, especially when a quick look at the OKCupid methodology would have ruled it out immediately.

Re: The Black Damsel In Dating Distress: A Response to OkCupid's Conclusions

#73

Post by natrius »

jrockway wrote: post #59
petercooper wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more ethically acceptable to discriminate racially when it's about really serious stuff? There's a vast gulf between saying "I prefer white/black people and tend to only look for that type I prefer" and saying "I will ONLY date white/black people so gimme a whites/blacks only dating site." I tend to work better (in an employment sense) with men, but I'd never dream of using a "men only" employment/freelance site…

I am only speculating, as I am not into single-race dating sites (and for some reason, have never seriously dated anyone of the same race; but that's coincidence, not preference). But I think the issue is that there is absolutely no rational reason why you could possibly not want to share a public space with someone of a different race. When you're on the train, you don't have to interact, you just have to sit there.…

Suppose you are the last person to get on a train before it reaches capacity. You are more likely to interact with someone who is on the same train than someone who isn't. If you prefer to interact with people of the same race, you would be better off if your train had been restricted to only people of your race. Similar logic applies to a full bar or any workplace. If you prefer to date people of a certain race, you also prefer to interact with people of that race compared to others of your desired gender since less intimate interactions are a prerequisite for dating.

"It would be nice if everyone was so enlightened as to not care about race, but there is 10,000+ years of evolutionary pressure pushing things the other direction."

No such pressure exists. Cross-breeding is usually evolutionarily advantageous.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vigor

"There are 5.9999 billion other people the person you discriminated against can date."

The same exact logic applies to jobs. Sure, the job you get may not pay as much or might not be in the location you would prefer, but the mate you end up with might not make as much money or be nearby either. Eliminating potential mates from consideration based on their race is just as bad as throwing out the resumes of an entire race because you think they're not likely to be qualified for the job. It does hurt people. Mating is a market just like everything else in life, and if you reduce demand for someone's product due to something as arbitrary as melanin level, then you're reducing their equilibrium price and requiring them to make more compromises when it comes to choosing a mate.

No one expects you to sleep with someone just to give them a helping hand, but that shouldn't be expected with jobs either.

Re: The Black Damsel In Dating Distress: A Response to OkCupid's Conclusions

#74

Post by natrius »

_pius wrote: post #72
natrius wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see what's unserious about it. It's an incorrect explanation of the effect at work, but it was still a valuable comment.

The comment essentially said: "black women are fatter than white women, which is why they don't do as well on OKCupid." That doesn't strike me as particularly serious or valuable, especially when a quick look at the OKCupid methodology would have ruled it out immediately.

Expecting people to both read the linked article as well as go back and re-read the original post is a lot to ask. I definitely didn't, and I also forgot that OkCupid had already ruled out that factor. The comment was a hypothesis backed with data, which I consider serious and valuable.

Re: The Black Damsel In Dating Distress: A Response to OkCupid's Conclusions

#75

Post by najirama »

natrius wrote: post #65
najirama wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Skin color isn't any more an indicator of class than shoe size or fingernail length. To show this, one need only think about the consequences of skin color actually being an indicator of class. Given a random sampling among a race, if skin color was an accurate indicator of class, you should be able to predict the same class (other than middle class) for each sample, and ultimately be right more than you were wrong.…

In America, skin color is a good predictor of class. The barometer isn't being right more than you're wrong; it's being more accurate than assuming everyone earns the average income. You will be able to make a more accurate guess of an American's income if you know their race. When you add in clothing, hair and accent, it'd be pretty difficult to misidentify someone's class, or more importantly, culture. Identifying…

A "good" predictor must be useful, correct? Well, then how can it be useful if it is wrong more than it is right....?

Simply stated, being right more than one is wrong is the same thing as being more accurate than a random assignment (as we approach a large number of "trials") if the outcomes are equally likely. And that is the point - race tells you nothing more significant about class then guessing does (if we remove 'middle class' as a selection), and class tells you nothing significant about behavior.

Also, you seem to be conflating 'class' and 'culture' now. Culture is a much, much better indicator of behavior than class, as culture speaks to beliefs and value judgements. As such, they are not interchangable ideas (that is, the propostion that 'Skin color is a good predictor of culture' is not the same as the one you made prior, 'Skin color is a good predictor of class' - but is probably just as fallacious).

Clothing and hair (God only knows what you meant by 'accent.' Care to clarify?) in isolation are strong enough indicators of culture, that race quite literally adds nothing to their accuracy - the same can be said of 'style of dress' and 'price of car driven,' for class. Race is superfluous.

Re: The Black Damsel In Dating Distress: A Response to OkCupid's Conclusions

#76

Post by darshan »

danieldon wrote: post #18
carbocation wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is relying on the same data for his assertions as everyone else has been. I see his analysis of that data as no less valid than that of OKCupid, etc.

Maybe you read a different post, but the one linked here simply argues that "any black person will tell you, when black folks date online they don't go to OKcupid," then lists a bunch of sites targeting black users and concludes that the OKCupid data is not representative of the public at large, despite the complete absence of supporting data. I don't see an analysis of data, just a hypothesis.

Coates is pointing out that there are good reasons to suspect strong sample bias. OkCupid didn't address this -- they just assumed an unbiased sample. I find Coates' argument far more compelling than OkCupid's blind assumption.

Blacks do look seriously underrepresented based on the response rates to the two questions. (Suggesting that blacks account for around 4% of OkCupid's users.) That's hardly proof of anything, but it does offer some credence to Coates' argument.

In the real world, it's often very hard to find compelling data, so we sometimes have to rely on compelling argument.

Re: The Black Damsel In Dating Distress: A Response to OkCupid's Conclusions

#77

Post by barmstrong »

danieldon wrote: post #18
carbocation wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is relying on the same data for his assertions as everyone else has been. I see his analysis of that data as no less valid than that of OKCupid, etc.

Maybe you read a different post, but the one linked here simply argues that "any black person will tell you, when black folks date online they don't go to OKcupid," then lists a bunch of sites targeting black users and concludes that the OKCupid data is not representative of the public at large, despite the complete absence of supporting data. I don't see an analysis of data, just a hypothesis.

You hit the nail on the head - he made an argument from emotion. The OkCupid post was an evidence based approach.

Re: The Black Damsel In Dating Distress: A Response to OkCupid's Conclusions

#78

Post by najirama »

Mz wrote: post #70
najirama wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Skin color isn't any more an indicator of class than shoe size or fingernail length. To show this, one need only think about the consequences of skin color actually being an indicator of class. Given a random sampling among a race, if skin color was an accurate indicator of class, you should be able to predict the same class (other than middle class) for each sample, and ultimately be right more than you were wrong.…

Skin color isn't any more an indicator of class than shoe size or fingernail length. Actually, long fingernails on a woman are typically used to signal "I don't do manual labor" and is very much intended as a class indicator. It's part of the appeal of long nails. As I understand it, there is lots of historical precedent across a number of cultures for this.

Even if I were to allow that the discussion be gender-biased, I'm afraid this wouldn't be accurate...

The very poor tend to have poor grooming habits, both in frequency and quality. As such, access to nail clippers is extremely limited...

Further, the nature of living in extreme poverty forbids the biting of one's nails; you would be shocked at the amount of dirt and grime that gathers there after just a few days without access to a bathroom or running water.

Re: The Black Damsel In Dating Distress: A Response to OkCupid's Conclusions

#79

Post by Mz »

najirama wrote: post #78
Mz wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Skin color isn't any more an indicator of class than shoe size or fingernail length. Actually, long fingernails on a woman are typically used to signal "I don't do manual labor" and is very much intended as a class indicator. It's part of the appeal of long nails. As I understand it, there is lots of historical precedent across a number of cultures for this.

Even if I were to allow that the discussion be gender-biased, I'm afraid this wouldn't be accurate... The very poor tend to have poor grooming habits, both in frequency and quality. As such, access to nail clippers is extremely limited... Further, the nature of living in extreme poverty forbids the biting of one's nails; you would be shocked at the amount of dirt and grime that gathers there after just a few days wit…

I am aware that it is not entirely gender-based. However, a quick google turns up this:

http://www.efingernails.com/fingernails-history/

Fingernails became shorter and the colours less intense during the 1980's when women became more interested in their work.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/feed/a41653-1999d...

Thorsten Veblen wrote in his classic "The Theory of the Leisure Class" (1899). "It not only shows that the wearer is able to consume a relatively large value, but it argues at the same time that he consumes without producing." Like the constrictive corset of Veblen's time, long nails today signal which women are too rich and too feminine (wouldn't want the little darling to break a nail) to perform manual labor.

Re: The Black Damsel In Dating Distress: A Response to OkCupid's Conclusions

#80

Post by natrius »

najirama wrote: post #75
natrius wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In America, skin color is a good predictor of class. The barometer isn't being right more than you're wrong; it's being more accurate than assuming everyone earns the average income. You will be able to make a more accurate guess of an American's income if you know their race. When you add in clothing, hair and accent, it'd be pretty difficult to misidentify someone's class, or more importantly, culture. Identifying…

A "good" predictor must be useful, correct? Well, then how can it be useful if it is wrong more than it is right....? Simply stated, being right more than one is wrong is the same thing as being more accurate than a random assignment (as we approach a large number of "trials") if the outcomes are equally likely. And that is the point - race tells you nothing more significant about class then guessing does (if we remo…

"And that is the point - race tells you nothing more significant about class then guessing does"

That's just mathematically incorrect. Different races have different average incomes. If you guess that average for each person, you'll be more accurate than guessing the overall average for everyone. If you're measuring at such a coarse level as upper/middle/lower class, then sure, that doesn't help. Since we're not relying on race alone, we don't need that kind of accuracy.

"Also, you seem to be conflating 'class' and 'culture' now."

I don't think culture and class are interchangeable. I think class is an indicator of culture, which I would then use to predict someone's behavior. I probably should've made that clear earlier. In America, any skin color except for white is a pretty good indicator of culture. Racial comedy is fairly large industry that only succeeds because it does a decent job of poking fun at behaviors that correlate with race.

"God only knows what you meant by 'accent.' Care to clarify?"

If someone speaks the Queen's English, you'll assign different probabilities to behaviors than if they spoke inner-city English.

I think race is useful in addition to the other indicators, but neither of us have any data on this, so I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree.

Post reply on HN