Jacky Kaba Keeps Writing Interesting Papers on Race

I blogged a few years ago about Amadu Jacky Kaba under the headline “A Scholar to Keep Your Eye On”:

Amadu Jacky Kaba is a Liberian-born striver who first came to Seton Hall University as a basketball player and, several degrees later, has returned as an assistant professor of sociology and anthropology. Like our friend Roland Fryer, Kaba is a black scholar who studies a lot of racial issues with a perspective and a latitude that is unavailable to white scholars.

If indeed you had kept your eye on Kaba, you would have seen that he keeps writing lots (and lots) of interesting papers. Among his oeuvre:

  •  “African Americans in the U.S. Women’s National Basketball Association, 2006: From the NCAA to the WNBA,” in Sociology Mind (abstract; PDF)
  •  “The Family and Political Unity between Blacks and Jews in the United States,” in International Journal of Humanities and Social Science (abstract; PDF)

And, of special interest to readers of this blog, as we’ve covered the male-female sex ratio widely:

  • “Sex Ratio at Birth and Racial Differences: Why Do Black Women Give Birth to More Females Than Non-Black Women?” in African Journal of Reproductive Health (abstract; PDF). From the abstract:

The two important questions that this paper will attempt to answer are: (1) why is it that regardless of race/ethnicity or geographic location, the sex ratio data at birth show more males than females?; and (2) Why is it that regardless of geographic location compared to other racial/ethnic groups, Black women or Women of sub-Saharan Black African descent tend to give birth to more females? Or to put this question the other way around, compared to Black women, why do non-Black women give birth to more males?


Would be nice if you could conclusions here as well


Clearly,he should rethink what an abstract is, he has provided no results in any of his just teasers-which is not what an abstract is.


the problem is that there are no results or conclusions. his papers are purely descriptive, and the touted sex ratio paper is a glorified literature survey.

his "methodology" in the WNBA article just describes how he did a data scrape and cleanse, then he just lists a bunch of stats like average age, height, and weight (those are topic headings). then he drops nuggets of wisdom like this:

"In addition to their love for the game of basketball, Black females in particular and females in general use the game to win scholarships to earn their bachelor’s or master’s degrees, which can cost tens of thousands of dollars or more."

the closest it gets to analysis is this:

"How can one explain this human behavior of gender bias in sports? According to James (2002): “It has been proposed that women’s sports have a different appeal than men’s sports” (p. 141). Wearden and Creedon (2002) claim that: “Feminist scholars point to the huge disparity in endorsement revenue between male and female athletes as evidence of a male hierar-chy in sport… The gender hierarchy argument holds that fe-male athletes are both “other than” and “less than” their male counterparts” (p. 189)."

how is this at all informative? none of the other pdf's are any better. i'm not trying to be abusive (please don't censor me); i just expect much---MUCH---better from this blog.


Eric M. Jones.

Easy: M-F ratio is probably related to testicle temperature.

But I want to address the question of "race":

Technically all humans are one race. Skin color and ethnicity is another thing. Most whites would identify Sub-Saharan blacks as the same "race" as aboriginal Australians or native New Guineans. There are very dark-skinned Indians (either Native Americans or Indian-Indians), as well as Native Caribbeans.

I have always thought "African-American" was not a very useful term. At least my "white" friend from Johannesburg thinks so.

I met in college a Senegalese black man who usually liked whites well enough, but was more than a little racist towards "African-Americans", and took pains not to be thought of as one. This opened my eyes to the whole issue.

Miley Cyrax

Just because a lot of people are ignorant of the basics of human biogeographical variation doesn't mean "race" isn't real or that humans are one "race", one indivisible monolith.