Error message

Deprecated function: The each() function is deprecated. This message will be suppressed on further calls in menu_set_active_trail() (line 2405 of /home/hulijedw/public_html/includes/

Kanazawa fired after black women are unattractive blog goes bust

Anissa Ford's picture

Satoshi Kanazawa can get back to his other day jobs because Psychology Today has fired him and his blog ‘The Scientific Fundamentalist: a hard look at truths about human nature.’

One would think that a Japanese evolutionary scientist with a strong media following would know better than to offend black women. Lately, coming down hard on black women hasn't worked out so well for media guys.

October 2010, AOL writer Jawn Murray tweeted that he was tired of protests from nappy headed, angry black women over Tyler Perry’s “For Colored Girls” movie. Despite emails and protests, Murray responded with "so what and get a perm" on his Twitter page. AOL issued a statement, Murray apologized and he held onto his writing job at AOL's Black Voices for a few more months.

Murray signed off in April and blogged about the end of the road, or the end of his job at AOL's Black voices. So long good riddance, bud. Even though he's not blogging on AOL anymore, Murray's legacy for promoting European standards of beauty in African American women, and upon himself, remains. Imus, a popular but old stringy-haired white guy lost his MSNBC AM talk show to the news program " Morning Joe" after he called the Rutgers women basketball team a group of nappy headed hoes. Imus's legacy is pretty much the same. He's that guy who got fired for insulting black women.

And now Satoshi Kanazawa's lost his blog and his profile page has been deleted from Psychology Today's website. His article and unqualified research on unattractive black women sent off a fury of protests online. 75,000 people blew up Psychology Today via email, Twitter and Facebook. Some even rang Psychology Today's telephones off the hook.

When all was said and done, Psychology Today sent an email to and informed the largest online African American political organization that Kanazawa's work won't appear on their site any longer. Psychology Today even said they've instituted new rules to prevent inflammatory content in the future.

People who hadn't heard of Kanazawa were sharing the text in question, their hurt, their ire and disbelief that Psychology Today endorsed the piece. They demanded Kanazawa be fired. Students at Kanazawa's other day job, London School of Economics, have also called for Kanazawa's resignation.

It's not just American Black women who were put off by the piece, every segment of the globe's population was annoyed: white men, black men, white women, black women, academics, Asians, Indians, writers, babysitters, the mail man and mail lady. People who surf the web and browse Facebook for random stuff did not like it and this time could not dismiss it.

Kanazawa has been offensive before. He's blogged that criminals look different from non criminals (OJ Simpson, according to Kanazawa looks like a criminal.”) He had an epiphany when he blogged that all women are essentially prostitutes. In the past, offended readers emailed Kanazawa rather than his editors.

Kanazawa’s blogs, for as long as Psychology Today has published them (a little over five years now) have always been controversial, racist, sexist, and unfounded. Most of his blogs are hypotheses on human nature (or why men and women do the the things that they do). Readers are drawn into Kanazawa's ideologies because his notions offer one explanation for human behavior in our contemporary culture and its current setting.

As it stands, contemporary culture is obsessed with beauty and cosmetic surgery has proven itself recession proof. Celebrity lifestyles generally support many of Kanazawa's theses and much of Kanazawa's audience are celebrity and people watchers.

Kanazawa wrote about beauty, women, motherhood, men, and dating. All of which were big hits with contemporary online readers.


Submitted by Fred (not verified) on
So what is the point of your article? You believe in censorship of views that go against fashionable ideologies? Or anybody who is disapproved of by 'black women' should be banned for life? Oh I get it, you believe in free speech 'but'...

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on
Free behind. Why did he deliberately leave out the portion of the study that showed that there was no difference in attractiveness across racial groups. He did that because he felt a certain way and he wanted to shove it up black women's behinds. Sorry...Don't feel sorry for him LOL.

Submitted by Vichy (not verified) on
Humanists, Progressives, etc. worship at the alter of equality and political correctness. As black women are an OFFICIALLY DESIGNATED PROTECTED CLASS saying anything that might offend them (no matter how true) is blasphemy. These people pretend to be interested in 'science', but really they're just Village Atheists who don't understand physics better than Fundie twits understand the Bible.

Submitted by Speakforyourself (not verified) on
Seriously, You need to speak for your self Vichy should someone say all non blacks are rapist and their women hoes in a research and I bet you too would be quick to defend them. Now if you were a black women you would know that were tire of bs generalization and if some find us unattractive including black men than oh well but don't say the whole world because we can show you many of men in all racist who pay us compliments every day and that the truth. No one race is better nor perfect so get it straight

Submitted by Hypocrite (not verified) on
Fred, don't be such a hypocrite! If Nagasaki or whatever his name is wrote a "scientific" article on caucasian men being unsatisfying in bed due to small "equipment" there would be hundreds of posts from people similar to you complaining about being the most discriminated group of all time. All groups of people have a right to dignity and respect which is more important than Sushi's right to insult a group of people he doesn't know.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on
Maybe ignoring these sentiments is doing more damage than actually talking about them. I happen to agree, and I would think that black women might want to have this examined, as their social status, average pay, and overall happiness is directly related to how they are perceived in the society they live in. It's no big deal that all the black girls on beauty magazine have airbrushed cream colored skin and strait hair, but if someone actually points it out, its suddenly too offensive to talk about.

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on
You are free to agree if you wish. If I were to look at you I would most definitely say that you are also unattractive. I can tell by your hatefulness that you are no 'Brad Pitt..' Why do black women have the lowest suicide rates? Why do black women have one of the highest levels of spirituality? You need to look at markers which truly matter and as the bible describes Satan as beautiful, the beauty list is not one that I, as a black women, wish to top!

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on
very well put!

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on
very well put!


Add new comment