Why do mixed children look more like their darker parent?

This is aimed at all mixed children for example i have a fried who is half white and half indian but she looks fully indian, why is that.Why do mixed children look more like their darker parent?
Darker genes are more dominant.





Like how brown eyes are more dominant than blue eyes. Two parents can only have a blue eyed child if BOTH of them carry the recessive allele for blue eyes.





Same goes for hair, skin, etc.Why do mixed children look more like their darker parent?
White genes are resessive and black genes are dominate.. its just the way it is.





My daughter is half black but she lookes a mix between my genes and her mothers. So it could work either way.. like the kid will look a mix between both parents or would look like only one.. usually in that cause it would be the darker parents. But ive seen it the other way around tho.
Some do, some don't. I do happen to look more like my Black parent than my White parent to the point that we constantly get asked if we are sisters. At least that is what I was always led to believe. I do think I got more my mom's hair and height and my general face shape. But when I really look at pictures with an unbiased eye I came to realize I look pretty much dead average between my dad and mom. My skin tone is a perfect mixture of them, my facial features are a mix of both of them. But yet nobody has ever said how much I look like my dad. This started me thinking.





I don't really see what everyone sees when they say dark genes are dominant. Perhaps biologically they are but not the extent people see. I once read an academic study published that showed we have been brainwashed into seeing Mixed children as more Non-White than White. It makes sense, we have been indoctrinated to believe White is a pure race but Colored is all incompassing.





Once I read this I really opened my eyes and really looked at mixed children with photos of both their parents. And what I saw was astounding. Most of the time the mixed children were completely a mixture of both parents in skin color, hair color and texture, facial feeatures, eye color, ect. And actually a good amount of the time the child came out looking more like the White parent. And yes some of the time the children looked more like the darker parent in all of the above and almost none of the Whiter parents features BUT this is not exclusive to interracial relationships. I have seen plenty of monoracial couples where the child looked more like one parent than the other or even neither and people talk of great great grandma they look like. This is what happens when you have a child, they come out looking sometimes more like one parent than the other.





But somehow people lose their minds when it comes to an interracial couple and the child comes out looking ';more'; Asian, White, or Black and they attribute it to the dominancy of the parents' RACE when maybe the child just came out looking more like THEIR INDIVIDUAL PARENT. Have we ever thought about that?





EDIT: I looked at the link posted by one of the answerers. Wow that's what I call bad science. There was nothing in there to support the statement that White people are genetically weaker. Less diverse perhaps. But it switched studies and from the first one they said they did comparing African AMERICANS and European Americans, and then acting all surprsied when AAs had more genetic diversity. Really? Even just talking about admixture of course Black Americans are diverse, they were raped for hundreds of years. And that's just admixture. Even today we have actual biracial Americans who have been forced to identify as just Black American due to the social pressure of the One Drop Rule. I could have been in this study since my birth certificate says I am African American. And I would have had no responsibility to tell the researchers that my Dad is Italian American. What do you think the results of my blood test are going to show? Uh, duh I am going to have more genetic diversity than a White American who is not biracial. The reality of the One Drop Rule makes me very leery of studies like this.





Flawed study. Very flawed.
The trait for dark skin is genetically dominant. For instance, say a white woman and a black man have a child. That child will have skin that is dark--not as dark as her fathers, but still quite dark. Say the gene for dark skin color is MM. The father has MM, and the mother has mm (light skin). The child, no matter what, will have Mm, and the M half overpowers the m half.
Thats not necessarily true! My mother is very light skinned and my dad is more of on the brown side and both me and my brother is pretty light. I think it depends on who has the stronger genes or maybe who wears the jeans better...





Hopefully the world will keep mingling until the white gene totally die out! LMFAO! Just kidding! All this racism makes you feel racist sometimes! :-p
My son is a perfect mix of my color and my husbands (white). Most people say the child looks just like me, but then some say he looks like my husband. The child is just a mix of both our features.
White is pure anything that mixes with it will show through,only mixed looking to show how diverse they are ever see the white in them,everyone else sees black or whatever
you kno wat?





thats actually true in my case and i never realized that till now!





my dad is tha one who is dark and my ma is super light.





and i came out lookin like him!





thats crazy!
I think they look in between but since the bi-racial have got some color in them so you group them as dark skinned people although they are not black.
darker colours are naturally the dominate gene, the lighter is the recessive that just how it goes.
The darker gene is dominant on genotype and phenotype
b/c generally speaking the darker ethnicity has stronger genes that are going to come out to be more dominant.
if you mix white paint with colored paint you will get a color
their genes are dominate
dark skin is dominant to fair skin. but its meduim skin which we indians have which is the best