I would like to submit the following manuscript for review and possible publication in Open Differential Psychology. The title is "White Skin Privilege. Modern Myth, Forgotten Past."
I added the journal tag to the title. -Emil
I moved this to the OBG journal which is more appropriate. -Emil & Fuerst
Back to [Archive] Withdrawn submissions
Peter,
This submission does not seem to be suited for this journal. It is more of a history piece than concerning differential psychology. I'm not familiar with history journals, but presumably Mankind Quarterly, being a fairly broad journal, could take it. I'm sure Richard and Gerhard would appreciate it.
--
I am not a historian or have sufficient historical knowledge to review this. I did however read it and I have some comments.
It seems to be that it should be the other way around.
Something seems to be missing here.
As far as I can tell, this is an incorrect use of 'conversely'. I think you meant 'equivalently' (these two statements are in fact logically equivalent).
Analogy could also be made to tragedy of the commons in other areas, like fishing, which did indeed result in near extinction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overfishing
Individual rationality leads to collective disaster in these kind of situations.
This submission does not seem to be suited for this journal. It is more of a history piece than concerning differential psychology. I'm not familiar with history journals, but presumably Mankind Quarterly, being a fairly broad journal, could take it. I'm sure Richard and Gerhard would appreciate it.
--
I am not a historian or have sufficient historical knowledge to review this. I did however read it and I have some comments.
These small trading settlements are consistent with genetic evidence that the Ashkenazim descend from a founder group of 300 to 400 individuals who lived about 800 years ago (Carmi et al., 2013). An earlier, Radhanite origin in southern France is also suggested by an mtDNA study that traced many maternal Ashkenazi lineages to northern Italy some two thousand years ago (Costa et al., 2013). Given that southern France has since that time received immigrants from northern France and from elsewhere around the Mediterranean, it may be that northern Italians are genetically closer than today’s southern French to the southern French of the Dark Ages.
It seems to be that it should be the other way around.
This trade now reached new heights. Between 1500 and 1650, over 10,000 Eastern Europeans were enslaved each year for export to North Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia ... a total of 1.5 million. Between 1530 and 1780, more than a million Western Europeans were enslaved and taken mainly to North Africa. By comparison, the Americas received fewer than 300,000 African slaves before 1600 and another 1.5 million between 1600 and 1700 (Davis, 2004; Fisher, 1972; Kolodziejczyk, 2006).
Something seems to be missing here.
White-skinned women became objects of trade because of an unusual set of circumstances: the relative strength of the Middle East and, conversely, the relative weakness of Europe. Today, we have trouble imagining this historical reality, although it continued well into the early modern era.
As far as I can tell, this is an incorrect use of 'conversely'. I think you meant 'equivalently' (these two statements are in fact logically equivalent).
Could this trade have eventually become sustainable? Doubtful. The market was too competitive and the time lag too long between present costs and future earnings. Furthermore, people want to manage a resource when they feel concerned about its perpetuation, yet such concern was hindered by the religious difference between enslaver and slave. Why worry about a bunch of infidels?
Analogy could also be made to tragedy of the commons in other areas, like fishing, which did indeed result in near extinction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overfishing
Individual rationality leads to collective disaster in these kind of situations.
Emil,
I would rather submit it to an open-access online journal, if only because the use of colour illustrations precludes submission to a paper journal. The manuscript doesn't really fit into any category because it uses history to prove a point about human psychology.
Your comments:
1. Southern France has undergone much demographic change over the past 1500 years. First, there has been a steady inflow of migrants from northern France because of the growing political dominance of Paris. Second, there has also been an inflow of immigrants, initially from southern Europe and then from North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa.
Genetically, the average southern French person of the year 2015 differs from the average southern French person of the year 700. The latter would be genetically closer to northern Italians than to any other contemporary population. So a sample from Milan (as in this case) would be the best modern proxy for the inhabitants of Marseille in the eighth century.
2. The ellipsis points simply mean a pause. Will the meaning be clearer if I put a comma (or an em dash) followed by "for a total of 1.5 million"?
3. The word "conversely" indicates that the writer is expressing the same idea in a way that is logically equivalent but reversed.
My dictionary gives the following example: "Six is more than five; conversely, five is less than six".
I would rather submit it to an open-access online journal, if only because the use of colour illustrations precludes submission to a paper journal. The manuscript doesn't really fit into any category because it uses history to prove a point about human psychology.
Your comments:
1. Southern France has undergone much demographic change over the past 1500 years. First, there has been a steady inflow of migrants from northern France because of the growing political dominance of Paris. Second, there has also been an inflow of immigrants, initially from southern Europe and then from North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa.
Genetically, the average southern French person of the year 2015 differs from the average southern French person of the year 700. The latter would be genetically closer to northern Italians than to any other contemporary population. So a sample from Milan (as in this case) would be the best modern proxy for the inhabitants of Marseille in the eighth century.
2. The ellipsis points simply mean a pause. Will the meaning be clearer if I put a comma (or an em dash) followed by "for a total of 1.5 million"?
3. The word "conversely" indicates that the writer is expressing the same idea in a way that is logically equivalent but reversed.
My dictionary gives the following example: "Six is more than five; conversely, five is less than six".
Peter,
Sorry for the late reply. I have been busy. I don't have any particular objection against publishing something atypical of differential psychology. I will give my approval for this if other reviewers are fine with it. This however brings us to the question of whether you could find an external reviewer? Preferably someone who has extensive historical knowledge. I suggest Razib Khan who is very knowledgeable about history as well as population genetics and differential psychology. Could you contact him and hear if he wants to review?
I agree. However, my reading of your text is that it states the opposite, namely that "it may be that northern Italians are genetically closer than today’s southern French to the southern French of the Dark Ages.". I think you meant "it may be that northern Italians are genetically closer to southern French of the Dark Ages than today’s southern French.".
Probably. The current writing left me confused.
You are right. My mistake.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conversely?s=t
http://www.britannica.com/topic/conversion-logic
I will ask the other reviewers if they have historical knowledge to evaluate the paper.
Sorry for the late reply. I have been busy. I don't have any particular objection against publishing something atypical of differential psychology. I will give my approval for this if other reviewers are fine with it. This however brings us to the question of whether you could find an external reviewer? Preferably someone who has extensive historical knowledge. I suggest Razib Khan who is very knowledgeable about history as well as population genetics and differential psychology. Could you contact him and hear if he wants to review?
1. Southern France has undergone much demographic change over the past 1500 years. First, there has been a steady inflow of migrants from northern France because of the growing political dominance of Paris. Second, there has also been an inflow of immigrants, initially from southern Europe and then from North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa.
Genetically, the average southern French person of the year 2015 differs from the average southern French person of the year 700. The latter would be genetically closer to northern Italians than to any other contemporary population. So a sample from Milan (as in this case) would be the best modern proxy for the inhabitants of Marseille in the eighth century.
I agree. However, my reading of your text is that it states the opposite, namely that "it may be that northern Italians are genetically closer than today’s southern French to the southern French of the Dark Ages.". I think you meant "it may be that northern Italians are genetically closer to southern French of the Dark Ages than today’s southern French.".
2. The ellipsis points simply mean a pause. Will the meaning be clearer if I put a comma (or an em dash) followed by "for a total of 1.5 million"?
Probably. The current writing left me confused.
3. The word "conversely" indicates that the writer is expressing the same idea in a way that is logically equivalent but reversed.
My dictionary gives the following example: "Six is more than five; conversely, five is less than six".
You are right. My mistake.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conversely?s=t
http://www.britannica.com/topic/conversion-logic
I will ask the other reviewers if they have historical knowledge to evaluate the paper.
Emil,
I will contact Razib.
The two sentences have approximately the same meaning, although the perspective is different. The first version says that A is closer than B to C. The second version says that A is closer to C than B.
I think the least confusing sentence would be your suggestion with the word "are" inserted near the end:
"it may be that northern Italians are genetically closer to southern French of the Dark Ages than are today’s southern French.".
I will contact Razib.
The two sentences have approximately the same meaning, although the perspective is different. The first version says that A is closer than B to C. The second version says that A is closer to C than B.
I think the least confusing sentence would be your suggestion with the word "are" inserted near the end:
"it may be that northern Italians are genetically closer to southern French of the Dark Ages than are today’s southern French.".
Emil,
I will contact Razib.
The two sentences have approximately the same meaning, although the perspective is different. The first version says that A is closer than B to C. The second version says that A is closer to C than B.
I think the least confusing sentence would be your suggestion with the word "are" inserted near the end:
"it may be that northern Italians are genetically closer to southern French of the Dark Ages than are today’s southern French.".
Thanks.
Yes, your version made me confused.
Emil,
Razib wants you to contact him. Do you have his email address?
Razib wants you to contact him. Do you have his email address?
Yes. Razib has agreed to review the paper.
Reading now FWIW.
I did email Razib to try to get his review. However, no response. Maybe try Twitter.
There is a substantial probability that we can't get sufficient reviewers for this article.
There is a substantial probability that we can't get sufficient reviewers for this article.
Interesting paper. I have some comments:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-DPEd7aSzZOY9XWZdHhBqzpzANFyUNAH2I6NiaojehM/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-DPEd7aSzZOY9XWZdHhBqzpzANFyUNAH2I6NiaojehM/edit?usp=sharing
Razib,
I am unable to find any comments from you in the file above. I also tried downloading it and looking without luck.
I am unable to find any comments from you in the file above. I also tried downloading it and looking without luck.
Razib has provided we with a link that shows his comments:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-DPEd7aSzZOY9XWZdHhBqzpzANFyUNAH2I6NiaojehM/edit?usp=sharing
I will post a new version of the manuscript shortly.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-DPEd7aSzZOY9XWZdHhBqzpzANFyUNAH2I6NiaojehM/edit?usp=sharing
I will post a new version of the manuscript shortly.
[attachment=685]The revised version of my manuscript is attached.
Thanks Peter. I'll read it again.
I'm moving this to the more appropriate behavioral genetics journal.
The revised version of my manuscript is attached.
Peter, I read your paper but I think one limitation is obvious: the paper is focused only on the trade of white women. To have a balanced view, you should perhaps include a discussion on the trade of non-White women
The white slave trade was unique with no real parallel. It was the only slave trade that primarily involved the commodification of women (and also prepubertal boys). If we look at other cases where slaves were traded on a large scale from one continent to another, we find that most of the slaves were men, usually overwhelmingly so:
1. Transatlantic trade (16th to early 19th centuries) - overwhelmingly men from sub-Saharan Africa. This was especially so with respect to the Spanish and Portuguese colonies where there was much less interest in letting the slaves reproduce. The English colonies imported proportionately more African women, although African men still predominated. In those cases where slave women were preferred as concubines, most of them were of mixed origin (quadroons and octoroons) who physically resembled European women.
2. Indian Ocean and Trans-Saharan trade (8th to 19th centuries) - overwhelmingly men from sub-Saharan Africa until the 18th century. Restriction of the white slave trade (by European powers) led to an increase in trade of African women, particularly among slaves from the Horn of Africa (called Abyssinians at the time). Women from that region were preferred because they phenotypically resembled European women, who became harder to obtain from the 18th century onward.
3. Papua-Java trade (18th century) - overwhelmingly men from present-day Papua New Guinea to plantations in Java.
4. "Blackbirding" (19th century) -overwhelmingly men from the South Pacific to plantations in Australia.
I'm not aware of any transcontinental slave trade, at least none on a large scale, that resembled the white slave trade in this respect. The closest might be the trade in Abyssinian women of the 18th and 19th centuries. To a large degree, however, that market was developed as a substitute for the market in European women.
1. Transatlantic trade (16th to early 19th centuries) - overwhelmingly men from sub-Saharan Africa. This was especially so with respect to the Spanish and Portuguese colonies where there was much less interest in letting the slaves reproduce. The English colonies imported proportionately more African women, although African men still predominated. In those cases where slave women were preferred as concubines, most of them were of mixed origin (quadroons and octoroons) who physically resembled European women.
2. Indian Ocean and Trans-Saharan trade (8th to 19th centuries) - overwhelmingly men from sub-Saharan Africa until the 18th century. Restriction of the white slave trade (by European powers) led to an increase in trade of African women, particularly among slaves from the Horn of Africa (called Abyssinians at the time). Women from that region were preferred because they phenotypically resembled European women, who became harder to obtain from the 18th century onward.
3. Papua-Java trade (18th century) - overwhelmingly men from present-day Papua New Guinea to plantations in Java.
4. "Blackbirding" (19th century) -overwhelmingly men from the South Pacific to plantations in Australia.
I'm not aware of any transcontinental slave trade, at least none on a large scale, that resembled the white slave trade in this respect. The closest might be the trade in Abyssinian women of the 18th and 19th centuries. To a large degree, however, that market was developed as a substitute for the market in European women.
The white slave trade was unique with no real parallel. It was the only slave trade that primarily involved the commodification of women (and also prepubertal boys). If we look at other cases where slaves were traded on a large scale from one continent to another, we find that most of the slaves were men, usually overwhelmingly so:
1. Transatlantic trade (16th to early 19th centuries) - overwhelmingly men from sub-Saharan Africa. This was especially so with respect to the Spanish and Portuguese colonies where there was much less interest in letting the slaves reproduce. The English colonies imported proportionately more African women, although African men still predominated. In those cases where slave women were preferred as concubines, most of them were of mixed origin (quadroons and octaroons) who physically resembled European women.
2. Indian Ocean and Trans-Saharan trade (8th to 19th centuries) - overwhelmingly men from sub-Saharan Africa until the 18th century. Restriction of the white slave trade (by European powers) led to an increase in trade of African women. At no time, however, did African women outnumber African men among the slaves being traded. The only possible exception would be the trade in slaves from the Horn of Africa (called Abyssinians at the time). Women from that region were preferred because they phenotypically resembled European women, who became harder to obtain from the 18th century onward.
3. Papua-Java trade (18th century) - overwhelmingly men from present-day Papua New Guinea to plantations in Java.
4. "Blackbirding" (19th century) -overwhelmingly men from the South Pacific to plantations in Australia.
I'm not aware of any transcontinental slave trade, at least none on a large scale, that resembled the white slave trade in this respect. The closest might be the trade in Abyssinian women of the 18th and 19th centuries. To a large degree, however, that market was developed as a substitute for the market in European women.
Then you could add this discussion to the paper.
Then you could add this discussion to the paper.
Duxide,
Thanks for the suggestion! I've added the discussion to page 21 and rewritten most of page 20.[attachment=703]
Duxide,
Thanks for the suggestion! I've added the discussion to page 21 and rewritten most of page 20.[attachment=703]
© Copyright 2024 OpenPsych - All Rights Reserved