Sophisticurves
Active Member
- Feb 27, 2019
- 602
- 1,569
- 304
Only 5.5% of the US population is naturally blonde. With so many fake blondes in the U.S. these days, many people wouldn’t even recognize a real, all-natural blonde if they saw one. It's crazy, but there are actually more and more people who don't even notice the difference.
But your claim about genetics isn't true.
Hair Color Genetics (Simplified):
- Dark hair is typically dominant over blonde.
- Blonde hair is usually a recessive trait, meaning a child must inherit the blonde allele from both parents to express it.
Scenarios:
- If both parents are brunette but carry the blonde allele (genotype: Bb, where B = brown, b = blonde):
- 25% chance the child will be blonde (bb)
- 50% chance the child will be a brunette carrier (Bb)
- 25% chance the child will have only dominant brown alleles (BB)
- If one or both parents don’t carry the blonde allele:
- Then the chance of a blonde child is essentially 0%
Real-World Complication:
- Hair color is polygenic — influenced by multiple genes — so the real inheritance pattern is more complex and varies with ancestry.
So it depends — but pretending that natural blonde children from dark-haired parents aren't rare is just misleading. That 25% chance only applies if both brunette parents happen to carry blonde alleles — and considering that only 5.5% of the U.S. population is naturally blonde, that’s clearly not a common scenario.
So, back to the point: for Anna to be a natural blonde, despite both her parents having dark hair, is highly unlikely.
By the way, this has nothing to do with the inheritance of height. Tallness tends to be more influenced by dominant genes, but there isn't a simple "dominant vs. recessive" rule as there is for traits like eye color or hair color.
Last edited:
