Talk:Red hair/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

East Asian (natural) red-hair

Numerous people I know with Chinese/Japanese/Korean origin have NATURAL red tint to their jet-black (from afar) hair. Is this a variant of "the ginger gene" or some other cause? It seems that most (Northern Mongoloids) have a red tint in their hair, naturally, in my experience. I am aware of the popular practice of dying hair a red tint in Asian countries, but many people have this naturally. Shoudl this be added to the article? Chilledsunshine 02:31, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not


Right, it was just on the requested list and it looked like an odd request. So I just created the page. Your entry is far more concise than mine :)

ʕ


Red hair ("not just a hair color") is actually an interesting genetic phenomenon. See http://www.derm.med.ed.ac.uk/teaching/redhairgen.htm for more on this.

Broken link, see http://www.derm.med.ed.ac.uk/06_teaching/redhairgen.htm for the article Brinkost 07:16, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

We should have an article on melanocortin-1 receptor too.

And see this: http://www.healthandage.com/Home/gm=7!gid7=616

-- The Anome 13:20 17 Jul 2003 (UTC)

It is estimated that between 2% and 5% of the United States population have red hair.

Is this a joke:)? Shouldn't it be 0.2% and 0.5% ?
No, see [1]. -- The Anome 20:11, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Most common eye colors for redheads

Removed from the article:

  • Green - the most common
  • Brown - the second most common
  • Blue - the third most common
  • Hazel - the fourth most common

"Green - the most common" eye colour for redheads? Surely not. Cite please? -- The Anome 18:17, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

(In response to a request for justification of my comment) My "surely not" is based on personal observation of numerous blue-eyed redheads and few green-eyed redheads. What is the article's comment based on? -- The Anome 20:01, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I can't find many stats, but here's one data set I could see tabulated: [2] based on data collected by R. D. Snee in 1974.

Rank ordering is, from most common: 1. Brown, 2. Blue, 3. Hazel = Green.

The sample group was a statistics class with N approx 500, and I don't know from what population this was taken, or how representative the sample was. However, it does agree with my anecdotal evidence that Blue > Green. Oddly, though, Brown is top, somewhat contrary to one of the other papers I have found on hair/eye color inheritance (see the article). -- The Anome 20:33, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

This is interesting. Just from my own observations, I would say that blue is the most common eye color for redheads, followed by brown. I can't recall ever meeting a person with red hair and green eyes.Laurencooper 18:49, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

When I was a child, the occasional idiot would ask my why I didn't have green eyes. It got old really fast. Tweeq 14:06, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

heh! By the way, you might want to look at the change i made to your change. I think the word "some" is a better way of saying that. You don't have green eyes? You sure? Picture? Heh, just kidding :D --Phroziac (talk) 01:56, 28 August 2005 (UTC)


ive got green eyes, but my hair was never red enough to be picked on about it. but its not truly blonde either. i have small freckles on my arms, none on my face, dark body hair, but red whiskers. wierd? ive been told its 'strawberry blonde' but that sounds a bit poofy. it starts dark, and get gradually lighter the longer it gets. im in hair colour limbo.

My hair is a healthy shade of red and my eyes a healthy shade of green. Though they have that sunburst of bronze around the pupil. Is that the proper definition for hazel? Maybe my eyes are hazel green.

My dad had red hair when he was younger(his beard is also red/grey) and he has vibrant green eyes, and through my observations I'd say the order is: 1. Blue/Gray 2.Brown 3.GreenSmart194

Another question about the statistics

Is that 2-5% figure in the article for the population of the United States as a whole, or only for the population of Caucasians in the United States? —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 17:23, Nov 7, 2004 (UTC)

Can a citation be offered? —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 17:23, Nov 7, 2004 (UTC)

What about a cite for Korea and Japan?? lysdexia 00:32, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Josh "Creed" Kelly?

Josh "Creed" Kelly is mentioned in the portion of the article about "redophiles," but I've been unable to find anything about him. Is this just some guy who likes redheads?

Anti Red-Heads

I am red-headed, so naturally I am completely against it. But in the UK at least there is great prejudice against red-heads and many people are racist to red-heads. Should there be a part in the article about the phobia of red-heads?

Sounds like a good idea.

No wonder some British people call the Irish "the Red People." HaHa -- Brits are racist towards everyone, it's a known fact...if you aren't blonde/brown headed, blue or green eyes, slightly tall, and sorta thin then you're 'just not NORMAL' -- muahahaha -- i'm glad that i'm a dumbass American (with sort-of red hear, blondish red, but with a very red beard) -- good luck with those racist-brits! --152.163.100.203 08:56, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

That's Unfair to refer to all Brits as racist. When did you meet every Brit?--HuntingUnicorns 14:17, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

"A further 40% of Scots carry the so-called "ginger gene"."

What does that mean? - 19:02, May 15, 2005 (UTC)

It means that 40% of Scots have ginger DNA, meaning they are likely to have ginger children or relatives etc.

I removed the colloqialism, replacing it with a reference to having the MCIR variant gene.

Main Picture

The main photo on the page should be replaced! That woman is clearly not naturally red-headed, it is dyed!

Possibly the redophile section should be moved to a seperate article?

This redhead article seems a bit odd- We have a photo of a woman with dyed hair and an article about paraphelia. We get Elsie Tanner and the blondes get Marilyn Monroe. Is it really necessary to mention pubic hair and nipple color in the main article? I really think we redheads can do better.


Hello, just wondering - I think it is absolutely ridiculous to say that there are redheads in Japan - so out the window it goes. The only redheads here are artificial - of course!

Edededed 04:59, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

They may not be fiery redheads, but the gene has spread all over the world and there are indeed people in Japan, and many other Asian nations, which have a red tint to their hair. One of my best friends has a cousin from India who has green flecks in her eyes and dark brown hair with a red tinge. It's all about knowing your history and those Vikings and later the Anglo British sure did get around. - Beckie S

The Welsh, on the contrary, have a Roman ancestry combined with a Babylonian-related Semitic ancestry

Is this just speculation?

A (relatively) recent study (cited below) analyzed the Y-Chromosome sequences of various British populations and found that the Welsh tended to have an excess of Paleolithic (i.e. markers indigenous to Britain in comparison to the Scots and English. There was no evidence of a significant Neolithic component to the gene pool of Welsh males, which is what would be expected should they have a Roman or Semitic derivation.

A Y Chromosome Census of the British Isles Current Biology, Volume 13, Issue 11, 27 May 2003, Pages 979-984 Cristian Capelli , Nicola Redhead , Julia K. Abernethy , Fiona Gratrix , James F. Wilson , Torolf Moen , Tor Hervig , Martin Richards , Michael P. H. Stumpf , Peter A. Underhill et al.

How very strange!

I found this article very strange. AFAIK, most people here in Russia admire the beauty of long red hair and most girls who dye their hair, dye it in red colour, so it's somewhat strange to read that "Redheads are stereotyped as ugly" - just the other way round. The only thing maybe is that people joke, saying that "red-haired are all wh*res, blondes are all stupid and brunettes are evil ones". But that's not serious, people love red-haired girls. --Anthony Ivanoff 05:48, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

"However, generally red hair was frowned upon until the early 20th century."

I wish someone (who can write better than I can) would fix that sentence in the social implications section. or delete it. CDA 16:07, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

  • I removed this sentence. And couldn't think of a better way to phrase it, and I don't know of any references to refer to about the social aspects of red hair. CDA 21:19, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

IMAGES

I deleted 2 more images and I'd like to explain each of the images.

  • Elsie Tanner: we need a higher quality image of Elsie Tanner if you find one. Does she have any promo images available?
  • Maureen O'Hara: someone uploaded an image but it was practicly black and white and didn't show any color in her hair at all. So I uploaded an albumn cover that shows her red hair but I don't think I understand fair use enough. I think maybe its fair use to use that image on the Maureen O'Hara page but not a trivia page. So I took it down.
  • Vanessa (half faced woman at top): she seems fine to me even though her hair is dyed. the image is public domain. so I vote she stays. EDIT: I looked up that image at its source and it says nothing about it being dyed. It used to be labeled "dyed red hair" under the image at wikipedia. That must have been false information. I have emailed the photographer maybe she will respond...
  • Pin up: that image is not public domain and was uploaded with no information and it will soon be deleted anyway. Its a beautiful image. Maybe someone could get permission to use it.
  • Alfons Mucha print: this image is in the public domain and all its paperwork is in order. so I vote it stays.

(unsigned, but by User:CDA)

File:Redhairgirlbluescarf.jpg
Redhairgirlbluescarf.jpg
Regardless of it not saying that it's dyed in the original description, it seems pretty apparent that it is a natural brunette. The color is too dark for natural red. Not to mention that the model's name and features make it extremely unlikely to be natural red. DreamGuy 00:03, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

I think dye jobs are probably not as good as true color ones, unless it's to illustrate a section on talking about how some use dyes that way. How about this one... redhairgirlbluescarf.jpg ? It's also stock.xchng photo with no usage restrictions. Am I just dense or it it more natural reddish hair? Of course you'd think we ought to be able to find a real nautral flaming redhead photo somewhere. I put a call out for some on the same website, I'll see if anyone responds.

DreamGuy 22:09, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

I have red hair, would anyone object to a picture of me? I'm pretty sure I could find one that shows the color well enough. I'm hesitant to just add a picture since I don't want to overstep any sort of bounds similar to writing an article about oneself. Dismas 23:36, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
Regardless of whether it's suitable for the article, you can always add it to the facebook. :-) JRM · Talk 23:39, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
File:Redheadedbella.jpg
Redheadedbella.jpg
Article photos here have to have a certain level of professionalism. You might be able to get that for us, but don't assume any old pic will do and get upset if others don't find it acceptable. DreamGuy 00:03, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
I would take the opposite approach. Find a picture of yourself that you like. One that shows off your hair, and add it to the page. If it is a good picture or red hair, it will be fine. I don't know what rule DreamGuyis refering to, but the bar as to waht is an acceptable picture is pretty low. Michael L. Kaufman 01:31, August 21, 2005 (UTC)


And here's another one (Redheadedbella.jpg) with what at least appears to be more natural color (not sure if it is), also with no restrictions on use. DreamGuy 00:14, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

At the risk of supporting censorship, I think we should avoid this picture on this article, because of the amount of skin there. No, you can't see anything, but it's a little suggestive, and there is no need for it in this article. It is however, very nice. Also, I happen to think the two images currently in use illustrate the article very nicely, and that we don't need any more, unless they are pictures of red hair on an animal. --Phroziac (talk) 15:06, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
I feel like an idiot after saying that. I just realized those are knees, not a boob. I like the pic, but i think the one already there is FINE. Who cares if it's dyed or not? And lets not just throw a bunch of pictures of chicks with red hair in there like before.. --Phroziac (talk) 20:50, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
But it's not natural! Plus, the Redheadedbella is way cuter. :-) bogdan | Talk 20:58, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
In my opinion, if someone replaces the picture with this one, then it'll be an argument over if her hair color is natural or not. *UGH*. Cuter, yes. More encyclopedic, no. Less encyclopedic, no. My position is fairly neutral, they're both nice pics. --Phroziac (talk) 21:25, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
Now they are both in the article. :-) bogdan | Talk 21:36, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
...and pushed the older picture down into the history section. I think it should just be removed since there doesn't really look like there is any room for the older picture. Also, I like the image description. Obviously a girl is human, and it doesn't insert the POV of it being dyed or not... ;) --Phroziac (talk) 21:59, 21 August 2005 (UTC)
Actually I removed it myself. --Phroziac (talk) 22:01, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Elsie Tanner has no promo images but there is a better screenshot of her now at her article. Mike H (Talking is hot) 19:13, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Here's my contribution to the red hair photos. (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v211/Onah/DigitalPictures135.jpg) With emphasis on red hair being like fire. Feel free to use if you want.

I'm not as pretty as the girl above, but I have red hair and I can honestly say that I have never colored it in any way. Here are two pictures where you can see it. Anyone can delete this stuff if it's just added mess. 

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y292/ihaveaclevernickname/bluelight3.jpg

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y292/ihaveaclevernickname/globelight2.jpg

"typical" hair

Ok guys, stop the silly revert war. I considered putting human back in, but I'd rather stay far away from this. I put the word human in that image description because 1) some people have images turned off, but may want to see the image, and knowing what's in it may help, 2) some people might be on really slow connections/wikipedia might be running slow, and they might want to know what's in it before it loads. --Phroziac (talk) 20:44, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

More Photos of Babes with Red Hair

PLEASE! (ohmygod! Just realised Im'm a redophile ... and what I ask myself is wrong with that?) A sincere if not terribly serious post from Fergananim 25.8.05

Deletion 26th Aug 2005

Am deleting this paragraph section...

However, some say that the belief is a popular misconception; and that the Celts were a small dark race like the modern Welsh, and it was actually the Neolithic/Bronze Age people whom the Celts displaced who were tall, fair skinned and had red hair. However, Roman accounts state clearly that the Celts were blonde-haired, blue-eyed, and red-haired, green-eyed people.

The last sentence (of above) appears to be factually incorrect, since:-

"The word celt was given to people who led a certain kind of tribal life in Northern Europe. Oddly enough, the name was never used for the inhabitants of the island of Britain" . Sir Roy Strong, The Spirit of Britain, Pimlico 2000. Page 9.

Also, the other part of the paragraph reflects some archological thinking, but is likely to be confusing to readers who just want facts. (Anon IP) 25.8.05 18:23

Moved pictures

I moved the pictures so they wouldn't be stacked up. CDA 21:11, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

What a pleasure it must be for the girl's honor to be posted next to a gorilla. ;) --None-of-the-Above 17:44, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
it's an Orangutan! :-) bogdan | Talk 17:47, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
Oh, that's right. They can be librarians and such. Ook! --None-of-the-Above 18:12, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Anaesthesia

The genetics of red hair is now being uncovered, together with connections between red hair and melanoma and other skin disorders, and red hair and problems with anaesthesia. The anaesthesia issue seems pretty interesting, could we get more information on this here or on the Anaesthesia page? I came here looking for more info after seeing this: Amazon.com: Playboy Redheads (Hardcover). Check out the Look Inside! There's a page of text claiming that redheads take 20% more anaesthetic to go under. This might be an interesting place to start a bit of research.

Actual article here: NewScientist.com ...and it's Scientific!
And another: Health24.com

New statistics

These new statistics are very interesting, but is there a source on them? -Branddobbe 18:52, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Recessive vs incomplete dominance

I notice that the article refers to red hair only as recessive, but my understanding is that red hair displays incomplete dominance; that is, it is expressed when only one red hair allele is present, but it "blends" with the hair colour of the other hair colour allele present. This explains the extreme variation between "real" red hair and strawberry blondes, auburns, and so on. I'm updating the page accordingly, but would welcome further input. -- Guybrush 04:27, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Playboy Source

  • Can someone explain to me what is so useful about the Playboy Redheads book? Thanks. JHMM13 09:23, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

So many animals photographs...

I was reading this article, and something immediately hit me: the number of pictures of animals in it. For an article that mostly concerns red as a human hair-colour, the fact that pictures of redhaired human beings are outnumbered by those of other animals 3-to-1 is a bit off-putting. I could see this being taken as the manifestation of a prejudice against red-heads (although, I'm not saying that it is): on the pages for blonde and brunette, there are only examples of humans with blonde and brown hair respectively, no animals. The photographs are nice, (although the placing of an orangutan right beneath a red girl is a bit insensitive, to my eyes) but I don't think that they add much to the encyclopædia, on this page, at least. 23:16, 11 December 2005 Iinag

I agree. What is the feeling on removing them? Michael L. Kaufman 04:45, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
I tried to remove the first one here (the chikmp) previously as irrelevant, only to have the editor who added it throw a fit and add lots more. Glad to see sanity finally prevailed. DreamGuy 17:43, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Replaced the picture

I replaced the picture of Bella with one of a natural redhead. It seemed to make more sense that if we are only going to have one person with red hair, it should be natural red hair. Michael L. Kaufman 04:45, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree that the pic should be natural, which is why we originally got the one that you removed. What makes you think it isn;t natural? DreamGuy 17:45, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Here we go again with the picture changing. But I have to say that the "principle Steve" is what I consider the perfect example of a human redhead. And it is well-lit in a way that shows the color in his hair and skin acurately, unlike the many poorly lit photos that have gone before and including the new image of what looks like a girl in a Scottish folk costume. I hope the Steve picture stays.--cda 00:08, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
I have got no problem with Principal steve. For asthetic reasons, I would rather put the attractive scottish girl first, but that is just my personal opinion. CDA, what don't you like about the picture of the Scottish girl?
As to why I don't think Bella is a natural redhead: 1) She has brown roots. 2) She has brown eyelashes. 3) It is a shade of red that is generally from a bottle. 4) If you go to her web site, you can find a number of pictures of her with brown hair. IE: http://www.sxc.hu/browse.phtml?f=view&id=70737 and http://www.sxc.hu/browse.phtml?f=view&id=70739 and http://www.sxc.hu/browse.phtml?f=view&id=126197. Michael L. Kaufman 00:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
If you look carefully at the Scottish girl her entire face and most of her hair is in shadow. Where there is light it is so blown out that all I see is white - not the true color of her hair. It's a bad photo. Principal Steve is well-lit so you can really see the variations in his skin tone and hair color. It is a much better photograph scientifically speaking. Which is the point isn't it? This article is about the science of red hair. About what it really looks like. Not about whether someone is pretty or not. The way the Bella picture is lit she could be blonde. Many blonde people photograph red-haired in bad light. And it's all soft focus. Just doesn't work for me. Should be in the red hair fetish page if that still exists. --cda 01:30, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Caption for the red headed man

The captions "A man with red hair" is useless because it doesn't add any information to the picture. Its obviously a picture of a man with red hair. It is just a caption for the sake of having a caption. WHat value do you think it adds? Michael L. Kaufman 22:29, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: Caption for the red headed man

But if you look at the history with the red headed female previously it did say "a girl with red hair" so I thought that the correct way to say it was a male with red hair for this picture. Then how come you didn't criticize the other female redhead? You only criticize this picture. That's not fair at all. Besides what's wrong with adding a little more information? Can't hurt by adding more facts. Please help clear it up for me b/c I don't understand what the problem is. (Oahc 22:53, 19 December 2005 (UTC))

I think they are both useless. I didn't comment on the woman's caption because I am trying to get that picture off the page. The Steve picture is fine (is the permissions are correct), but I think a useless caption is useless. DO you really think that saying a picure of a man is a picture of a man is useful? Michael L. Kaufman 03:04, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Rights on the man with red hair

I see that the photo of the man recently put on this article claims to be released under license, but the image was taken from a school website where that information is not available. If this photo is going to stay on Wikipedia we need to be sure that the COPYRIGHT OWNER has knowingly and explicitly released it under license, and that it's not just some kid grabbing it and claiming that other people can use it without authorization. DreamGuy 01:04, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


Bella Picture

Dreamguy, Why do you keep putting a picture of a girl with brown hair on the red hair page? Repeated from earlier: As to why I don't think Bella is a natural redhead: 1) She has brown roots. 2) She has brown eyelashes. 3) It is a shade of red that is generally from a bottle. 4) If you go to her web site, you can find a number of pictures of her with brown hair. IE: http://www.sxc.hu/browse.phtml?f=view&id=70737 and http://www.sxc.hu/browse.phtml?f=view&id=70739 and http://www.sxc.hu/browse.phtml?f=view&id=126197. Michael L. Kaufman 00:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)Michael L. Kaufman 03:03, 20 December 2005 (UTC)


Redhead Ancestry

I changed "Celtic ancrestry" to "Northern European." Scotland and Ireland are famous for their redheads and are listed as Celtic countries, but history tells us (as well as the Celts themselves through their art and those who encountered them in battle) that Celts were in fact originally blonde people. Science tells us that blonde is a recessive gene that is cancelled out by all other hair colors. There are NO redheads in Celtic mythology or celebrities. Redhair cancelled out the blonde in the Celtic countries by a group of people who came from a particular population from Norway Scandinavia who later became famously known as the Vikings. Vikings were in fact historically documented as being red haired, not the Celts. Later when the Vikings settles the British Isle, the redhair dominated the blonde, but the freckles remained dominant. Thus freckled redheads. Whom are in fact of Viking ancestry. Though it's not uncommon to see redheads closer to the original gene, no freckles, blue eyes and red hair often of Scandinavian descent.

I am reverting. Ireland and Scotland are far more red-haired than Norway, as reflected in the previous version of the article. If you have a source that proves that the Vikings introduced the MC1R gene to Europe, please post it.
Red hair originated in Europe, it was introduced to the British Isles. :P And Scotland has more redheads than any nation in the world even if it was derived from the Norweigen Vikings, they were known for traveling away from their homeland.
Again, if you have a source for your allegation that the MC1R gene variant originated in Continental Europe, please post it.--Jbull 16:29, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Further, the Irish and Scottish are not particularly genetically "Celtic," so your unsourced historical review is not necessary here.--Jbull 02:13, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
There are seven Celtic countries listed. Doesn't mean that even MOST of the people in those countries are Celtic anymore, but it does not mean red hair has originated from the Celts.
I think you miss my point. Neither Ireland or Scotland are especially genetically "Celtic." They are mostly pre-Celtic genetically, with a Celtic culture, likely brought by a relatively small number of Celtic invaders. The presence of red hair in Ireland and Scotland--and its relativce absence in other, more genetically Celtic areas--indicare a local mutation. Again, if you have sources to contradict this, please post them.--Jbull 16:29, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm not disagreeing, just that red hair did not come from the Celts. Even in their art they depict themselves as blonde people. Vikings were recorded as invading the British Isles and recorded having red hair. Erik the Red is a good example, name specifically for his red hair.

http://realmagick.com/articles/05/1305.html http://www.answers.com/topic/eric-the-red http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:tLRrcpe5160J:www.wellcome.ac.uk/doc_WTX022535.html+viking+red+hair&hl=en http://millennium.fortunecity.com/greendale/500/Scot/red.html

Hope that helps.

Wow, so you want sources, someone gives you sources and you erase their sources because they found proof that contradicts your misconceptions? Real mature. I don't think those other people are happy for you changing their facts or sources either. Not sure what points they have to argue against their facts and sources, I'll let them tell you, but I stand beside my facts and sources that stated the origin of red hair, the invading gene in the British Isles, who the Celts really are, and that red hair did not come from the British Isles. Historical recordings from the Romans, observation of Celtic celebs (Queen Maeve) and even the Celts themselves can show you with their own art who they were, not red haired.

The fact that one Viking had red hair does not establish that the MC1R gene variant arose in Norway. Quoting from a white supremacist website does not enhance your credibility. We agree that red hair did not necessarily arise in the continental Celts. I have no idea what your point is otherwise.--Jbull 17:24, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Hmm. Clicked an article entitled Celtic history, was not aware it was racist site. Where you find articles on white history you'll find extremists. Source deleted. Either way, I CLEARLY stated other websites that has VikingS listed as red haired and taking the gene into the British Isles, even stating the most well known. Queen Maeve was known for her blonde hair and was Celtic, does she not count because she's just one person? We could even go into the Mythology and the poems, but do they not count because they were written by one person? Or just one Goddess? I also listed sites that state the ancient Celts as blonde, ect. Other people left their sources too after you say you want sources and you delete theirs as well. So, if you want proof to delete it because it doesn't uphold your beliefs I'm not sure what you're getting at. If we both agree it's not of Celtic ancestry, then perhaps you should take out the part of the article that says it's associated with Celtic descent. There are many redheads in Scandinavia outside the British Isles. It does not even mean their ancestors came from the British Isles, red hair is a _Scandinavian_ gene that was brought to the British Isle. You can still keep the facts about Eric the Red in there since he is a famous redhead in history and that would not hurt. He's not the only Viking recorded for having red hair, but he was most famously associated BECAUSE of his red hair.

It is not acceptable to edit other people's comments.
If you want to add in Erik the Red as a famous person with red hair, be my guest.
I think we are having a problem communicating. My points are these. 1. Red hair is a genetic traits associated largely with MC1R. 2. Red hair and MC1R are by far most common in Ireland and Scotland. 3. Genetically speaking, Ireland and Scotland are not Celtic, but are pre-Celtic. 4. Ireland and Scotland are often, erroneously, called Celtic, but are properly "Celtic." 5. Red hair is not particularly common in Scandinavia. 6. The high occurrence of red hair in Ireland and Scotland are indicative of a local mutation, not a characteristic brought in by invaders.
You keep insisting that red hair is a _Scandinavian_ gene, but you produce no _genetic_ evidence showing this. Anecdotal evidence that red hair occasionally appears or appeared in Scandinavia does not prove that it did not arise in Ireland and Scotland.--Jbull 18:15, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree with all that was said except #6. I have yet to see any genetic evidence that says that red hair was a genetic mutation SPECIFICALLY in the British Isles. Flat facts, the Celts (excluding England by a magical wall the Romans built to keep the Celts out) were recorded as blonde. The Vikings were recorded as redheads (with researchers arguing some Nordic blonde men were a part of the group as well as a few men from Africa). Vikings came from Scandinavia. Red hair (as well as black and brown) cancells out blonde hair (the same thing happend later when the Moors came in and created the Black Irish). They travelled away from their homeland. Now you've got a strong population of an introduced gene (Which has been scientifically researched, even in one of the articles I linked to). The Vikings even founded Dublin itself. These are facts, so how could red hair have mutated somewhere in there and in such a short period of time in Ireland and Scotland? And what migration did these peoples take to spread the MC1R gene to Europe when there is more proof of migrations coming TO the islands for settlement. (http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/en/genome/genesandbody/hg07f010.html or http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/doc_WTX022535.html) Red hair was clearly introduced to these regions.

1. The Celts have nothing to do with this discussion. 2. The inhabitants of the north of Great Britain (Caledonia) were recorded as having red hair. 3. Red hair does not "cancel out" blonde hair. Its interaction with other hair colors is complex and can result in intermediate shades, like strawberry blonde. 4. The Vikings did travel to and from the British Isles, carrying some genes there and others back, but there is no genetic evidence that the MC1R gene varian originated in Scandinavia. Neither of the links you provided address this. 5. The Moors had nothing to do with the so-called "Black Irish."
If you are going to continue to argue, please post some proof that Vikings brought the MC1R gene to the British Isles. Otherwise, please explain why the MC1R gene is so much more common in Scotland and Ireland than it is in Scandinavia.--Jbull 20:13, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

1. It does if you say red hair comes from people of Celtic descent.

I don't.--Jbull 23:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
" 16:18, 29 December 2005 Jbull" Reverted to previous version despite sources. You did.

2. Coledonian's were recorded as red haired from the Romans who came to Britain ironically hundreds of years after the Vikings. They built the Hadrian wall to keep out all sorts of people, from Picts to Celts. All were barbaric to them

The Romans came to Britain _before_ the Vikings. Romans first invaded Britain in 43 CE. The Vikings invaded Britain _800 years later._ Hadrian's Wall was erected to keep the Northern Picts out of the rest of Britain, not the Celts (or Vikings).--Jbull 23:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

So if the Romans built the wall to keep only the Picts out, why do they mention ecountering the Celts in battle too in the same area? Read "Hadrian's Wall." [3] Maybe that will help you. Or some history here. [4] 3. Blonde is a recessive gene that can only be attainable if two parents have the recessive gene (or a 2% change it overides the dominant gene, which is rare but possible in genetics). Red hair can cancel out blonde hair though both are closely genetically related. I won't argue red hair isn't special, it can lay dormant for generations, but have you ever heard of shades of "auburn" or "dirty" blonde? Brown + red or brown + blonde. Colors can mix, but it's not just red hair.

This has nothing to do with anything.--Jbull 23:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Of course it doesn't. It prooves you wrong. Red hair is not the only gene that can "mix." It can cancel out and be canceled.

4. If you bothered to read every word there is strong evidence the Vikings are red haired, originated in Scandinavia, and brought the gene with them to the British Isles. You want to complain about lack of evidence, I haven't seen a single source of yours.

Nobody denies that some Vikings had red hair, but red hair in Britain predates the Vikings.--Jbull 23:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I would like to read evidence of this since I am not entirely closed minded of the subject, I just want to see some facts.
The evidence is in the article: "Boudica, the famous British queen of the Iceni, was said by the Greek historian Dio Cassius to: "be tall and terrifying in appearance ... a great mass of red hair fell over her shoulders". The Roman Tacitus commented on the: "red hair and large limbs of the inhabitants of Caledonia (Scotland)" (The Life of Agricola, Ch.11). Dio Cassius was born in 155 C.E. Tacitus was born in about 56 CE. Both weote long before the age of the Vikings.--Jbull 01:04, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
Very good. There are always exceptions to the rules. I will believe that red hair existed before the major Viking invasion. However; it does not prove where red hair originated and there are still many facts out there that suggest it was an introduced gene. People for thousands of years have been crossing to and fro from Europe, it's not unlikely people with red hair made the journey before the Vikings.
Hey, you're right--the gene for red hair may have originated somewhere in continental Europe. If you can prove it, I'd love to see it. Also, who is to say that the MC1R gene variant didn't arise independently in different places? But the default view in population genetics is that characteristics are likely to have arisen where they are most common (barring recent migration, of course). That would be Ireland and Scotland.--Jbull 01:57, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

5. The Moors have everything to do with the Black Irish, but there is more than ONE theory on why some Irish ended up with black hair and light features, the strongest believed to be from the largest influence being from Spain because of the trade market held with Ireland (not the single Spanish Armada shipwreck).

Dark hair is the most common hair color in Ireland. People in Ireland have always had dark hair. The "Black Irish" is an American myth created by people ignorant of that fact.--Jbull 23:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Dark hair is most common almost anywhere because it is a dominant gene. Does not mean Ireland was mostly dark haired at one point. And last time I checked, "dark hair" was not a "hair color."

1. I have posted MORE THAN ONE SOURCE that the Vikings brought red to the British Isles, that the Vikings were red headed, and that red hair was in introduced gene, and that the previous peoples before were in fact blonde. You cast it out the door I'm NOT going to re-emphasize my points and re-post the links. You want extended research on the subject? Go to a bookstore. You'll find further evidence.

You have established that the Celts were blonde. I said that the Irish and Scottish are not Celtic. You said that some Vikings had red hair. I admitted this, but red hair in Britain predates the Viking arrival.--Jbull 23:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

2. Why is red hair more common in the British Isles than Scandinavia? Scotland has the largest percentage of redheads than anywhere in the world, in regardance to population. There are a lot more people inhabbiting Scandinavia than the British Isles.

Please look up percentage. I don't think you understand the concept.--Jbull 23:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Please look up reference. I don't think you understand the concept.

If you do a little research on the thing called the Viking Era, you'll see that in fact they DID travel to other places than their homeland and outside the British Isles.

Yes, but so what?--Jbull 23:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
If you put the connection together of the two sentences, and did research on the Viking era, you'll disover that red hair is in a healthy population where the Vikings traveled and settled.

There is a large population of redheads in Denmark. There are many redheads in Norway, and even Russia.

But it is far less common than in Scotland and Ireland.--Jbull 23:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Above was the point you missed.

At one point in history red hair was even frowned upon for false religious reasons. There have been many people moving to Scandinavia for generations. The most popular today being Muslim. Most of the worlds population has dark hair, dark hair can cancel out both blonde and red. Less than half of Scandinavia's population is blonde at all. In 200 years the last biological natural blondes will be born in Finland with no engineering. Blondes originated in Scandinavia too, and even the blonde percentage in some countries is a minority.

None of this is relevant.--Jbull 23:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Of course not, it answers your question with a little bit of thinking. You're trying to say that red hair could not have originated in Scandavia because of the population. Well, blonde hair ALSO originated in Scandavia, and most of the people in Scandinavia aren't even blonde. In fact, because brown and black hair cancels out blonde hair (and red hair too), it might explain a little bit about population due to genes.

If a stronger population of dark-haired people moved to Scotland then it would be only a matter of time before Ireland had more redheads than Scotland, ect. Then the arguement would be that red hair came from Ireland since it has more redheads than anywhere else. Before 600 A.D. the highest percentage of redheads anywhere in the world was not the British Isles.

Please prove your allegation that, before 600 A.D., the highest percentage of redheads was not in the British Isles.--Jbull 23:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Please prove that red hair existed in the British Isles before the Vikings.
Please see above.--Jbull 01:04, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

You're turn. You want to keep arguing?

No, I want you to calm down and think logically.--Jbull 23:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
And I want you to stop deleting what people have to say just because it doesn't support your opinion.

I can go on for days. You have yet to post a single source at all.

Please don't keep going on. I made a number of additions to the article in question, including adding sources. You are the one making an unsupported allegation, so the burden is on you to provide proof.--Jbull 23:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

So enlighten me, how did red hair originate from the British Isles? When did it happen? Who and what caused it to originate there? And when did these people migrate to other parts of Europe to spread the gene and what countries did they spread the red hair gene to from the original location?

I have no idea how the MC1R gene variant developed, or why it developed in the British Isles, though I would expect that it was a relatively recent mutation that spread through the founder effect and sexual selection.--Jbull 23:22, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Still not impressed.

I'm making unsupported allegations? *laughs* You haven't even posted a single link. Actions speak louder than words, and no sources and all talk makes me an unbeliever. You're the one arguing red hair originated in the British Isles with no evidence to back it up. Clear and simple. Your opinion is not a scientific fact. You can't sit on your justified chair and point fingers with no evidence for your claims, and many parts of what you say are completely wrong (and ironically the sources I posted contradicting what you say were deleted in parts too). If you don't know where the MC1R gene came from then don't say that it was a mutation that arose from the British Isles and then when asked for proof revert to an "I don't know" state. Also, when people come in here with sources to back the things they say that contridict what you believe, do NOT delete their facts because it clashes with your opinion. It's reasonable if they say something with no sited proof, but you've done this to a few people and it discourages other people from contributing to the articles here. The point of a debate is not one person nag the other for sources while they produce none whatsoever themselves, that does not make you a valid debator, nor does immaturely trying to look past the facts that proove yours' wrong. You offered no valid evidence for contradicting what I had to say or that red hair was not introduced or that red hair originated in the British Isles and that in the end got us no where. You want it to end? You're going to have to think smarter than that. Some of the facts stated SHOULD go towards contributing to the article.

You have stated no facts. You said that red hair in the British Isles originated with the Vikings. I have proven you wrong. When you have facts to contribute-like you addition about Erik the Red--you are welcome to do so.--Jbull 01:04, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
Right, because all the sources stated and the research done by scientists who know far more about this than we do are all lies. You showed me that red hair actually was recorded in England before the major Viking invasion. I am convinced. But you still did not site any theory that would convince me that red hair originated in the British Isles. There is far more evidence it was introduced from Europe. If those facts clash with your opinion then perhaps you should contact the site administrators. And when you say I am welcomed to contribute if I have the facts, I would like to point out that previously when I contributed to the article I had sources sited and it was deleted by you (as well as facts stated by previous people). I want to make sure that when someone has their facts and is siting their sources to back up their points it WON'T be deleted because of your own personal opinion - like the origin of red hair in the British Isles.
When you have proof--any proof--of the source of the MC1R variant responsible for red hair, please post it. Otherwise, the article should continue to state that red hair is most common in Ireland and Scotland. Thanks.--Jbull 01:50, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
Funny, I don't remember stating that red hair was NOT common in Ireland and Scotland. I remember stating clearly that Scotland had more redheads than any country in the world (specifically Ireland). I also remember stating which points of the article you changed that I disagreed with and most were on ancestery (more specifically Celtic and Viking) such as Vikings having red hair and Celts not. Therefore it is incorrect to say that people of red hair are of Celtic descent when these people were blonde. I also remember someone else saying that Picts were red haired too, but that got deleted. Perhaps Vikings and Picts, whom were noted for their red hair, should get a little credit for being red haired.
I agree that a reference to the appearence of red hair among the Vikings and Picts may be in order. I have never disagreed that the Celts were blonde, and if you look at my edits, you will see that I have put quotes around the "Celtic" Scots and Irish to indicate that they are not, genetically speaking, Celtic.--Jbull 02:10, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

When a reader looks at the article, it says, "red hair in the human population is most commonly associated with those of 'Celtic' descent,". Now it has a reference to the meaning of Celt, but there is no reference to the quotations around the word Celtic. Without having read this article where you explained why you put the quotations, how is a reader suppose to know you are making a diference between a modern day Celtic nation and an ancient tribe of people? Perhaps that should be clarifid because until you explained it to me, even I didn't know what you meant.

Yeah, it is not clear, is it? The problem is that somebody put the Celtic reference in there before I came along, and I tried to fix it without being too disrespectful. What if we change it from "'Celtic'" to "Scottish and Irish?"--Jbull 02:32, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm in the process of adding a little about the Picts and Vikings, but this is what I have to make it as clear as possible: " Although red hair in the human population is most commonly associated with those of the British Isles (more specifically the Scots and Irish), dark red or reddish-tinged hair can be found in a few other Caucasian populations."
Sounds good to me.--Jbull 02:46, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I read somewhere that the genetic mutation that causes red hair originates with the Moors. I cannot find it now, so I will not edit the page, but I think it might be something to look into since the Moorish invasion could explain the arrival of the gene in the British Isles and why it is most heavily present in Scotland. Red hair does seem to be, or was, common in the regions they invaded, not just in the British Isles..maybe someone else can find more on it? 108.83.177.138 (talk) 00:53, 10 July 2014 (UTC)Rebe

Donating a photo to the cause

If anyone would like to use my photo for the article, I'd be more than glad to help. And yes, my hair color is real. Here's the link.

File:RedheadedGuy.JPG

MY GENE POOL

Some of you are so busy stating that ALL redheads must have blue eyes or redheads CAN'T have brown eyelashes or all celts are blond...You have forgotten about basic biology and the distribution of genes from the parents to the offspring aka DNA. 

 My mother is Scottish with brown hair hazel eyes covered in freckles...My father Half English Half Scottish(he considers himself simple British) with black hair gray eyes no freckles.  I have Red hair green eyes a fair amount of freckles with brown eyelashes and a mixture of blonde and brown eyebrows.  I am 5'9' I also have a very distinct Scandinavian last name...from the English side of my family.
 So where did I come from?  The Picts?  The Celts? I'm Scottish. Maybe the Vikings? I'm tall. The Romans? After all my father has black hair!?
 None the less...I am just another example that you don't have to have red eyelashes, red eyebrows and blue eyes to be a natural redhead.   And of course I am very tempestuous...about being a redhead and fiercely SCOTTISH.  After all a Glaswegian discovered the MC1R gene...
Uh, ever heard of the phrase "don't believe everything you see on T.V."? Same goes for the internet. Redheads can have any color of eyes, shade of lashes and eyebrows and even dark skin tones.

The article, and also the discussion above, are needlessly Euro-centric. You barely mention an entire second genesis and center of red hair: the Caucasus and/or central Asia. Consider:

Red-haired mummies of central Asia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarim_mummies http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/chinamum/taklamakan.html

Red-haired mummy of Iran: http://www.bbc.co.uk/oxford/content/articles/2005/10/04/saltman.shtml

Scythians (of city of Gelonus) had red hair: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythia

Kazaks with red hair: http://www.csen.org/aciaa_article/Eurasian%20Women%20Warriors3.htm

Khazars had red hair (perhaps from which some Ashkenazim get their red hair) http://www.imninalu.net/Khazars.htm

Gian-Gun of western Siberia said to have had red hair: http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20030329/timeline.asp

Iranics said to be often red-haired: http://www.iranian.com/History/2005/March/Gutians/

My family is entirely of southern Polish descent, but two of my brothers have red hair, apparently a legacy of the rule of Alans-Sarmatians over southern Poland in the 5th century: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alans#Alans_and_Slavs My mother's brother has yDNA haplogroup G2, which is associated with the Alans-Sarmatians-Ossetians.

Strange Religious Additions?

I just removed the following comment from the article:

"Both of these suggestions however are speculation and are in direct conflict with the Judeo-Christian Bible, which dates the age of the earth at approximately 6000 years old."

This comment has nothing to do with the article or red hair, and is a religious opinion. Why was this inserted into the article?

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Red_hair/Archive_1&oldid=1145855519"