(This story was originally written and recorded for Retrocast #34, released on May 20, 2025.)

An article in the March 6, 1921, edition of the San Francisco Chronicle warned readers of a strange phenomenon that was spreading across Chicago, London, and the Midwestern United States. The crazy part is that it wasn’t a physical ailment or a political upheaval that one should be wary of. Instead, it was an urgent warning that one should beware of people with blue eyes.

So many people were discussing this problem that experts were beginning to delve into the potential connections between eye color and human behavior.

Leading the charge in England was Inspector Thomas Lumsden of the Board of Guardians of the Poor at Leeds. As an authority on the matter of runaway husbands, Inspector Lumsden made a startling observation: ninety percent of those who deserted their families possessed blue eyes.

Basically, when a spouse disappeared, Lumsden’s office would receive a detailed description of the missing person, which included their age, height, weight, identification marks, and crucially, the color of their hair and eyes. From this, Lumsden would file the records, prepare reports, and share the information with authorities throughout Great Britain. The goal of all of this was to find the missing spouse and return the husband to his family.

While fugitives could have any colored eyes, Inspector Lumsden made the startling observation that the vast majority of the runaway husbands had blue eyes.

Across the Atlantic, there was already talk of the perceived danger associated with blue-eyed individuals, although it was more focused on the harm that blonde-haired, blue-eyed women could cause.

A well-publicized example of the dangers that these women could cause was the recent arrest in Chicago of a woman who had been coined “Cleopatra.” This blue-eyed, blonde-haired beauty had used her feminine charm to lure dozens of unsuspecting men into her den, where a few men would them swoop in and steal all of the valuables from her victims.

While one femme fatale doesn’t prove anything, there was a widespread belief that women like this were nothing but trouble.

Dr. Reginald C. Augustine, president of the American Optometric Association, offered up the following theory as to why they were so dangerous:

“Blondes are not adapted to the climate. The glaring sunshine irritates their nerves. If your blonde wife or sweetheart is too temperamental, make her wear dark glasses. Do you want to make Chicago safe for husbands? Then deport the blonde beauties to Moose Factory or some other northern region. Blondes are irritated by the ultra-violet rays of the sun; so from an excess of energy they pull the Cleopatra stuff on the menfolk, flock to the cabarets, and sing ragtime songs.

“Blondes don’t belong in this latitude. They are affected by ultra-violet rays and have an excess of energy which they have got to pull off on men.”

Professor Gordon J. Hargrave, a Chicago character analyst, insisted that there was indeed something to the blue-eyed peril. He described the typical blonde as rapid-thinking, brilliant, variety-loving, and buoyant, likening them to a butterfly flitting from flower to flower, sipping sweetness from each. This characterization painted a picture of restlessness and a lack of constancy.

In contrast, Professor Hargrave characterized the brunette as steady and constant, like a moth circling steadily around one flame. In other words, dark-haired men make the best husbands, while blonde-haired men should be avoided.

As for women, Dr. Elizabeth Hamilton Muncie, of Brooklyn, NY, said, “Blonde women do excite the eye. I don’t know why that is, but it is a recognized fact in the medical profession that women with light, fluffy hair appeal to men more than the other kind.

“I investigated the case of two girls several years ago and proved it. One was a blonde and the other a brunette. Letters were exchanged between the two in which the fair-haired one advised her friend to change the color of her hair; for light hair, wrote she, got the men quicker than any other kind. The blonde, as we afterward discovered, wasn’t a vampish girl, but her philosophy of hair certainly sustained her point.”

But Dr. Orin W. Joslin, a specialist in color diagnosis, disagreed, stating:

“The color has nothing to do with it. In fact, there is no color in blonde hair.

“Blonde women undoubtedly attract men quicker than brunettes, but it is not at all because of their hair. It’s because of the rest of the features that go with it.

“Blue eyes, for instance, are treacherous to men. And blue eyes and blonde hair go together. We have found in our study of colors that blue is a seductive and tends to put a person to sleep. Granting this, it is not the hair, but the blue eyes that should be censured.

“And that is just why women and girls who dye their hair blonde to catch the masculine eye are so out of line. Any man subconsciously knows that features go with light hair and when he doesn’t find them, he is not attracted. They may be able to change the color of their hair, but they can’t change the color of their eyes. So, they’re simply misfits.” Princeton professor William E. Scott felt that the blue-eyed peril would eventually go away, theorizing that no one would have blue eyes by the year 2921. Why that year? Because we will have depleted the entirety of Earth’s coal resources by then, forcing the entire population to move to the tropics to avoid freezing to death. That will cause humans to gain dark features, and blue eyes would go extinct. (I’m marking this on my calendar for 2921.)