Penis size and attractiveness

I’m posting this so completely normal men don’t beat themselves up over a non-question.

Normal evolved for a reason. Normal being just over 5″ long, girth varies.

TLDR: It needs to be proportionate to body size.

As in, the supposed preference might actually be a preference for greater health overall.

Women hate the pretty ones


Yes, I’ve been on the receiving end of that.

Bullies always think they’re subtle when their tactics rely on it being the opposite, forceful.

I think the casual clothing arms race was about not getting bullied.
All this nude makeup and clothing signals conformity.

Covering up the natural red of the lips and literally being a beige person.

Great for getting otherwise petty friends.

Man repellent.

Evidence for Cochran’s & Harpending’s Theory of Genetic Load: The Link Between IQ and Attractiveness

The best way to test this is to combine an African father and Asian mother.

See what happens.

Master race of the beauty pageant circuit or bust?

It would be a mistake to go by continent instead of country or forensic tribe, in all matters facial. Small geographic bridges can demarcate extremes distinctions e.g. straight hair to curly thick, pale to tan based on a valley or mountainous hill, nose shape or for non-facial traits – the fingers and toes.

Celtic toes are not Roman toes are not Greek toes.

Certainly the greatest phenotypic range belongs to Whites, from grey to blue to violet to green to hazel to amber to brown to black eye colours. The sexual dimorphism fully ranges too, so if we look to averages there’s a bit of a Goldilocks effect. Children of either sex are unlikely to resent their parents.

JayMan's Blog

Greg Cochran and Henry Harpending have recently proposed a hypothesis on their blog that posits that the lower average IQ of tropical peoples may be related to the number of fitness reducing mutations these people carry.  Apparently, the rate of mutation is higher in the tropics. The majority of mutations that occur are neutral and harmless, but the majority of the remainder are harmful. Some of these are severely so, and they are rather quickly eliminated by natural selection. But most are only mildly deleterious, only slightly reducing fitness. It takes selection a long time to remove such mildly deleterious mutations; hence populations that experience a high mutation rate will accumulate a large amount of these fitness reducing genetic changes (i.e., genetic load) because they appear faster than selection can eliminate them. This has all kinds of ill effects for humans, as all these minor dings and dents can…

View original post 1,440 more words

China rigs bikini contest

in the most hilarious way possible.

Asian supremacy so fragile.

Sure, they just “forgot” to include White women.

Terrified of being outgunned by the average girl from Hull.

Who would win? One billion plus Chinese or… the average White figure?

That’s plain pathetic. And how many of those had surgery? If that was part of exclusion criteria, there’d hardly be anyone.

It must be tough holding your barely sexually dimorphic, pedomorphic females to womanly standards of physical development.

Meanwhile, in England-

Shall we blame Royal Mail? Did the invites get lost in the post? Will it happen next year?
The only curves Asians can do are in textbooks, get a reality check.

Stop trying to be white like a Twinkie and be happy with your gamine boy-toy-looking women.

Hell, even black (and I mean BLACK) women have got you on this.
Good for her.
They are hardly renowned in attractiveness studies for ranking top.

Hourglass Asians do not exist, their race lacks the sexual dimorphism. Look at pelvic width, you can’t buy one of those! That’s why their surgery and ‘beauty hacks’ and makeup are the most advanced in the world. It’s called erotic capital because they’re status whores.

Nice? No. True? Yes.

Imagine a Mr Olympia herculean contest with exclusively 100% Asian men. I don’t fucking think so.
So why hold the women to a higher standard? It’s unfair. They can’t compete, this literally proves it.

Good luck finding an Asian woman throughout all of history that looks like this without being trussed up and stuffed like a Thanksgiving turkey.

Lesson? Asians lie about everything prestigious.

The market problem with Patriarchy is false advertising of daughters.
They are bred as attractive as it’s possible to go, it’s only downhill from there. Their very demeanor is fake (the scourge of fake femininity) and cracks around menopause if you’re lucky. They are naturally kind only under financial hardship and cruel men. Otherwise, spoiled cunts. The majority of the worst divorce stories involve Asian women, they are ball-busters.
They’re fully looksmax-ed, that is It. That is their peak, the furthest right reach of their bell curve of SMV.

Stop trying to fob off your average-looking under-developed women to the West for anchor, higher status half-white babies. You’ll have as much luck opposing evolutionary preferences as the chubby-pushers. Migration habit to one side, it’s so r-selected to rig a competition so a true one is impossible. Don’t let ‘child per woman’ data fool you, Asians are r-selected, they expand to fill any area they live in until all the resources are consumed (hello Japan). There isn’t a single billion white people, but a 4.5 billion Asians. They are the world majority, well over half of the world population. By comparison, Africa, a bigger continent by survivable habitat, contains 1.2 billion. Asians are now buying up and swarming Africa, this should tell you who is the Ultimate R. They also lack the time preference to resolve basic problems e.g. elderly care (hello Japan).

The demographic threat to Ks is yellow.
If we resolved the African boom problem, they outnumber us about 10:1.

And not one good figure to spare.

They’re not even skinny, they’re just squat, I’ve seen more lithe famine victims.

Male beauty correlates to right-wing position

Strong men aren’t much into helping the weaker competition, since your genetic looks are an advertisement.

(You could argue lifting weights is ‘lying’ about your natural somatoform and strength level, much like applying excess makeup to alter bone structure, fake masculinity and fake femininity, much like muscle implants or breast implants give off false cues about fertility and chemical dimorphism.)


You might disagree with my use of the term ‘male beauty’ but if we’re studying female constantly it follows there must also be a standard for men even if you prefer to call it handsomeness… it’s still beauty.

I love how the method is biased but the result came shining through.

“Both the simple and complex social bargaining models received partial support: sociopolitical egalitarianism was negatively related to bodily formidability, but unrelated to other measures of bodily/facial formidability/attractiveness; and a formidability-wealth interaction did predict variance in support for redistribution, but the nature of this interaction differed somewhat from that reported in previous research. Results of the experimental manipulation suggested that egalitarianism is unaffected by self-perceived formidability in the immediate short-term. In sum, results provided some support for both the simple and complex social bargaining models, but suggested that further research is needed to explain why male formidability/attractiveness and egalitarianism are so often negatively related.”

Now a study about the women, to make it scientific.

Racial differences accounted for in beauty science [face only]

I have noted the Marquardt mask before and the frequent misconceptions about it. I glossed over one valid criticism because I couldn’t find the data on hand at the time and didn’t want to say ‘just trust me’. #dodgyAF
I’m not going to insult anyone because that’s for people who lack empirical proof. I never met someone who chose to be ugly and we cannot help what we are born.

I’m not going to make cross-comparisons because that would be mean and likely biased to certain ascribed values.
Instead, this is how they vary by pure mathematics from the universal template for the human species.

There are only female masks and examples here and I do admit there needs to be equal research on male beauty.
Please, believe I want this as much as the next woman.

Here are the European, Asian and African variations.

Try to claim ‘cultural standards’ now, chewing on humble pie.

European example, frontal/anterior view.

Description given, italics mine because ‘slightly’ on this scale is huge: “EUROPEAN VARIATION FROM RF MASK Slightly vertically thin upper and lower lips Flat eyebrow (very little arch) Slightly wider nose Lateral border of the face slightly wider than the Mask Possible: Narrow eyes, longer vertical chin, longer nose.”
For example comparison, here’s the Asian prototype. A blind man could feel the difference. Yellow fever is creepier than White fever because Asian women resemble children, with faces most like babies (see, bust size, band size is fairly objective) whereas European women tend to resemble teenagers.

Description given, italics mine: “ASIAN VARIATION FROM RF MASK Medial epicanthic fold Lateral epicanthic fold Lateral border of the face significantly wider than the Mask Eye brows slightly superior to that of the Mask with shorter tails Slightly wider nose and nostrils (nasal ala and nares extend laterally) Superiorly positioned nasal columella creating a longer upper lip.”

Note: there are differences and the legal contrivance of a portmanteau ‘Caucasian’ is a myth based on geography (see the MRH), there is as much distinctiveness as between, say, European and African. As with all Asians, if you split by the demographic of sex as well, there would be greatly reduced sexual dimorphism (the men and women look more alike than Europeans by the same token comparison). This explains the great lengths the cultures go to, to distinguish themselves (makeup and what I and others consider fake femininity).

Further note: nobody meets the universal human standard. Nobody. This isn’t a point of so-called white supremacy, but white raced-women tend to conform to more of it on average, by chance.

Bear in mind, facial beauty is a reliable indicator of Darwinian fitness (see The Mating Mind) and positively, quite strongly correlates to IQ. That’s right – hot people are smarter too. The smart thing to do in an age that despises intelligence is to hide it.

Why don’t I make more scholarly posts?

1. The data isn’t collected to parse. 2. The data is suppressed (publication bias, left in the metaphorical drawer). 3. It’s behind a paywall or similarly hidden from sharing, meaning you’d have to trust my word and discussion, being less reliable and a general waste of everyone’s time. 4. These posts are literally my least popular but the most true. C’est la vie, mon amis.

What am I forced to do? Post gifs for every occasion and go under-appreciated.