Superstitious minds

Mini post. Kinda. Why is Benedict Cumberbatch so ugly?

No really. If we’re doing red pill observations, humour me.


I mentioned before about old world superstitions forgotten in recent years.
As recently as my parent’s generation, they considered ugly children the product of sin, that God was punishing their parents for their sin. You can still find this info around if you look but they rarely dive into it.

You could say it’s about STDs but back then people rarely travelled and slept around enough to frequently catch them. The modern microbiome of the slut is more taxed. So what?

Back to the school mocking. If a child had always married parents but became ugly in the teens, questions would be asked openly and they would get teased about whether one or both parents had ever cheated. This is where we get the term bastard. It isn’t actually about bastards, it’s about ugliness. The ugliness of parental deceit.

You can pretty much tell when there’s a birth defect in a baby, the eyes look dull if it’s mental. It’s a known indicator of fatal defects.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1875957214001703

2015 Birth Defects in the Newborn Population: Race and Ethnicity

Overall birth defect prevalence was 29.2 per 1000 in a cohort of 1,048,252 live births, of which 51% were Caucasians.

Full white or mongrelised? Let’s assume pureblood despite America (mixed white, mostly). American whites are on average less attractive as white blended than single nation counterparts, even living in America. Models tend to come from homogeneous national areas, (i.e. subrace) a finding that is known to apply to white settlers in Brazil to this day, they send scouts. Specifically.

https://www.thecut.com/2010/06/model_scouts_find_more_than_ha.html

Compared with Caucasians, the risk of overall birth defects was lower in African–Americans (relative risk = 0.9, confidence interval 0.8–0.9) and Hispanics (relative risk = 0.9, confidence interval 0.8–0.9).

Failure to consider abortions for “no” reason or gender as defective. Selection bias. A lot of those already had abortions because they’re high abortion groups!

The risk of overall birth defects was similar in Caucasians and Asians. Relative to the Caucasians, African–Americans had a lower risk of cardiac, genitourinary, and craniofacial malformations but a higher risk of musculoskeletal malformations. Hispanics had a lower risk of genitourinary and gastrointestinal malformation. Asians had a higher risk of craniofacial and musculoskeletal malformations.

Didn’t control for proportion in the population, then non-whites are way ahead.

Craniofacial = ugly. 

Musculoskeletal = ugly. Well, dumpy.

Unless you’re going to argue a big is beautiful for literal birth defects?

And “similar” isn’t same. It isn’t statistical. This is like IVF success studies again (see below).

Why did some old world men witness the birth? All babies look like those reddish potatoes, it can’t be a resemblance. You can tell a resemblance to one parent over another by middle childhood to puberty.
We’re told that it’s about adultery and it might be true if you suspect a man with certain features e.g. skin colour, an extra finger.

Yet, what can you tell at birth? Ugliness.
Whether or not the man in question remembers that reason.

Cinderella effect also applies to genetic but ugly kids (lookism, it’s aka). The parents reject them, even if one genetically caused their fug.

Take Cumberbatch, product of a union involving adultery.
Fugly. Nice voice, but his father is the looker. Mother is a looker too. The issue cannot be genetic.

Some superstitions have a basis in fact.

Why did old ladies peer into a pram to judge the ugliness of the babe?

To see if you’re a SINNER!

[inc Thou shalt not adulterate]

Picking on an ugly white guy wouldn’t be totally kosher. I have other evidence.

We’re looking for spiteful mutants.

Now the post gets huge.

To more data, ever more data, smother the liars in data:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/informationregardingmixedraceparentage

“Please may I request the following information, records and documentation under the Freedom of Information Act:

Information in regard to people of mixed race parentage- often called ‘white and black Caribbean’, ‘white and black African’, ‘white and Asian’, ‘other mixed’- being at increased risk of being born with a birth defect, stillborn, or of suffering from fertility problems in their adult lives, which is related to their mixed race parentage

Information regarding NHS policy and practice on the advising of interracial couples, who are prospective parents, about the increased risk of their child being born with a birth defect, stillborn, or infertile in adult life, which would be connected to their, the child’s, mixed race parentage

Please may I also request statistical information and records which display the following:

The percentage of overall cases of babies born with a birth defect, which is attributable to each ethnic group

The percentage of overall cases of babies still born, which is attributable to each ethnic group

The percentage of overall cases of infertility, which is attributable to each ethnic group

The percentage of overall births, which is attributable to each ethnic group”

Reply:

“In Tables 8 and 10, mixed race is included in a single category of Mixed, Chinese and any other ethnic group. This is because the numbers in these groups are sufficiently low to risk being disclosive, and follows agreed statistical guidelines.
a) being born with a birth defect – this information is shown in Table 10.
b) being still born – this information is not published. However, you could request a special extract (further details of how to do this are explained below).
c) we do not hold any information on infertility, and are therefore not able to answer your question about adults suffering from fertility problems, connected to their mixed race parentage.”

Do not hold information my lily-white arse.

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/infertility-ivf-nhs-race-lgbt-asian-black-women-a9216921.html

Table link: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/causesofdeath/bulletins/gestationspecificinfantmortality/2014-10-15

“Page does not exist”.

It’s this paper.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/causesofdeath/bulletins/pregnancyandethnicfactorsinfluencingbirthsandinfantmortality/2014-10-15

“Some research suggests that Black and Asian women have shorter gestation than White European women, and that this may be due to earlier fetal maturation (Patel et al., 2004). The discrepancies in gestation by ethnicity may also be explained by socio-economic, behavioural and physiological differences among the different ethnic groups (Gray et al., 2009).”

In an ONS report. They know.

“Table 10 (184.5 Kb Excel sheet) shows that for four of the five combined ethnic groups analysed, the most common cause of infant death was immaturity related conditions

(Black, 54%;

Mixed, Chinese and any other group, 44%;

White, 43%;

For a majority, that’s incredibly low.

and those where ethnicity was

not stated, 49%).

For the Asian group, the most common cause was congenital anomalies (41%). A higher incidence of congenital anomalies in Asian populations is well-documented (Gray et al. 2009).”

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/child-health/gestation-specific-infant-mortality-in-england-and-wales/2012/rft-table-1.xls

Low birthweight and prematurity are both measures of fetal development. Another measure is the baby’s size in relation to its gestational age. Babies whose birthweight lies below the tenth percentile for their gestational age are known as ‘small for gestational age’ (SGA).

Not all babies who are SGA have a pathological growth restriction; they may just be constitutionally small.

read: racially

This may explain why babies of Bangladeshi, Indian or Pakistani origin are more likely to be SGA than White British babies.”

Smaller brains too. Inbreeding depression but also group average by nation. Look at national IQ.

https://www.photius.com/rankings/national_iq_scores_country_ranks.html
Bangladesh 82
Over one whole standard deviation below. According to the likes of Peterson, useless to a Western economy. The average Bangladeshi.
India 82
Recall regression to the mean. Also, friendliness correlates more to low IQ. Do not be fooled.
Pakistan 84
Thailand 91
Philippines 86
Nigeria 84
Jamaica 71, where we’re picking up new NHS nurses.

Enjoy that decline.

Tables 8 and 10 mentioned in FOI request not listed, have to know it’s there.
Under Downloadable Tables:

“Table 8: Live births, neonatal and infant mortality by ethnic group and gestational age at birth, 2012 birth cohort, England and Wales

Table 10: Infant mortality by ONS cause groups and broad ethnic group, 2012 birth cohort, England and Wales”

For future reference, write your FOI requests as “concern for services provided to BAME women” and “progressive need for up-to-date medical guidance for mixed race couples and the biracial in family planning”.

You have to download the excel, click to tables 8 and 10, then read the footnote of superscript 1 to know to scroll right.

Table 8: All others^1
7.1% under 37wks
9.2% SGA

Black SGA: 9.2 and 12.3%.
Bangladeshi, Indian, Pakistani only SGA: 17%, 16.3%, 14.2%.
White SGA: 7.2%, 6.2%.
Unknown 8.2%.
ALL SGA average: 8.2%.

Something’s off.

Pre-term neonatal deaths
Total: 869
B,I,P: 9, 30, 47
Black: 39, 13
White: 549, 63
Unknown, not stated: 32
All others^1: 87
For such a vanishingly small percentage of the population, how is it 87?
10% of pre-term deaths were “1 Chinese, Other Asian, Other black, Other and all Mixed groups.”

Do you see what I see?

For non-statistically minded people:

Infant death, pre-term
Total: 1232
B 21
I 41
P 66
Black African: 62
Black Caribbean: 20
W native 750
W other 86
Not stated 48
All others^1: 138

See it yet? If you controlled for population ratio, it’d be more dramatic by far.

This is why they hide it and I have to make my own charts.

Term infant deaths
Total: 895
All others^1: 102.
That’s 11.4% from a tiny group of mixed.

Table 10 screen-capped, do your own charts.

Related studies, I do have a point about measurement error.

https://iussp2009.princeton.edu/papers/93139
2009 Fertility by ethnic and religious groups in the UK, trends in a multi-cultural context

Asian tsunami in USA too
https://www.statista.com/statistics/226292/us-fertility-rates-by-race-and-ethnicity/

https://www.statista.com/statistics/281416/birth-rate-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/

From one of the links, can’t find which. Calm down. Either they’re abstaining from having kids once here, infertile, the neonate dies or it’s retarded. Being here is actually a curse since they’re held to the standards and economy of a higher IQ nation. They’re voter birds here for a season or tax chattel and they’ll leave when it’s convenient to.

Ethnicity and IVF

“How a patient’s ethnic background affects her chance of pregnancy, especially with IVF, is a fascinating yet poorly studied area of research. According to a 1995 national survey of family growth, non-Caucasian married women were more likely to experience infertility than Caucasian married women, yet these same non-Caucasian women were less likely to receive any type of infertility treatment—especially treatment with assisted reproductive technologies.

There is very little data in the literature examining ethnicity and its affect upon pregnancy rates with in vitro fertilization (IVF). Ethnic minorities compose a small percentage of patients in the nation’s IVF programs, making it relatively difficult to examine how they respond to various infertility treatments. In the few studies that have examined the affect of ethnicity on IVF pregnancy rates, differing outcomes have been found.

There have been only a few studies specifically comparing IVF success rates between African Americans and Caucasians. The results of two of these studies contradict each other, with one showing that African Americans had decreased pregnancy rates with IVF as compared to Caucasians, and the other finding no difference in pregnancy outcomes with IVF between these two ethnic groups.

Likewise, there are only a few studies directly comparing IVF pregnancy outcomes between Indians and Caucasians. One shows a trend towards decreased pregnancy rates in Indian women and finds that Indian women were significantly more likely to have their cycle cancelled as compared to Caucasian women. In comparison, another study found no significant difference in IVF pregnancy rates between Indians and Caucasians. A more recent study has shown that Asian ethnicity was an independent predictor of poor outcome with IVF. There have been no studies examining IVF pregnancy outcomes in Hispanics in comparison to any other ethnic groups.

We’ll see why.

When I was in training, I published the first study comparing IVF outcomes among multiple ethnic groups. It was a retrospective study utilizing a data set that was the result of the collaboration between three IVF centers in the Boston area: Boston IVF, Brigham and Women’s Hospital IVF Center, and Reproductive Science Center.
We retrospectively reviewed the cycles of 1,135 women undergoing IVF between 1994 and 1998. Only the first IVF cycle for each couple was reviewed. Ethnicity was self-reported. Women who categorized themselves as having a mixed ethnic background were excluded.

Seriously. Measurement bias much?

….In order to better understand how ethnicity affects IVF outcome, it will be necessary to study a larger number of minority patients. In these studies, it is important that all ethnicities be included. If racial differences do exist, IVF treatment protocols could be adjusted to improve the success rates for patients of all ethnic backgrounds. Therefore, further exploration in this area is necessary and very important.”

We did that.

https://www.rcog.org.uk/en/news/bjog-release/

“After adjusting for certain factors including the age of the patient at time of treatment, cause of female or male infertility, and type of treatment (ICSI vs IVF), the study found that White Irish, South Asian Indian, South Asian Bangladeshi, South Asian Pakistani, Black African, and Other Asian women had a significantly lower odds of a live birth than White British women. For example, the live birth rate for White British women was 26.4% compared to 17.2% for White Irish women and 17.4% for Black African women.

The study also found that some groups of women including South Asian Bangladeshi, Black African, Middle Eastern, have a significantly lower number of eggs collected than White British women.

Moreover, South Asian Indian, South Asian Bangladeshi, South Asian Pakistani, Black British, Black African, Black Caribbean and Middle Eastern women were at a higher risk of not reaching the embryo transfer stage.

The paper explores the possible reasons behind the variation and states that while genetic background could be a potential determinant of egg and sperm quality, variation in environmental exposures relating to lifestyle, dietary factors, socio-economic and cultural factors could be influencing egg and sperm quality, accessibility of fertility treatment and behaviour towards seeking medical care and consequently reproductive outcomes.

No, they were living in the same place. Muh Magic Dirt.

Genetics is the ONLY difference now.

You have NOTHING.

DNA causes germline DNA, really? Maybe?

Furthermore, the increased prevalence of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) in South Asian women may have an impact on egg quality and lower implantation rates.

Shit tier WHR tipped us off on that one, see end.

Dr Kanna Jayaprakasan, Consultant subspecialist in Reproductive Medicine, Derby Fertility Unit, Royal Derby Hospital; Honorary Associate Professor in Gynaecology, University of Nottingham and senior author of the paper, said:

“The data suggests that ethnicity is a major independent factor determining the chances of IVF or ICSI treatment success.

“While the reason for this association is difficult to explain, the potential factors could be the observed differences in cause of infertility, ovarian response, fertilisation rates and implantation rates, which are all independent predictors of IVF success.

“The main strengths of the study are the use of the UK HFEA national database which includes a large number of women treated in all UK units. However, the numbers in some of the sub-ethnic minorities, such as Bangladeshi women, were low in the study.”

Professor Adam Balen, spokesperson for the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) and Chair of the British Fertility Society (BFS) said:

“Infertility affects 10-15% of the population and more people are seeking fertility treatment.

“This interesting study looking at maternal ethnicity provides useful data based on a large number of women undergoing fertility treatment. The reasons behind the variation need to be looked at in more detail but in the future could potentially help improve success rates amongst all groups of women.”

Nope!

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1472648315002564

“Black and South Asian women were found to have lower live birth rates compared with White women”
“Black and South Asian women seem to have the poorest outcome, which is not explained by the commonly known confounders. Future research needs to investigate the possible explanations for this difference and improve IVF outcome for all women.”

Almost like Anglo women evolved to breed in the Anglo climate?

The Ice Age killed the boyish ones.

MORE:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2636517/

“Variation in risk factors and outcomes was found in infants of White mothers by paternal race/ethnicity.”

I wonder which way.
Inbreeding or outbreeding depression?

Guess.

“Status exchange hypothesizes that in a marriage market framework, minority men marry less-desired White women (e.g., of lower education) in exchange for higher social status. The second hypothesis, in-group preference, simply suggests that people prefer members from their own group, and thus, intermarriage is the less desirable scenario.”

Dudebros like “where’s da studies?”

I’m like “Have you even looked?”

“Together they found that mixed-race couples differed significantly with respect to their sociodemographic characteristics from the endogamous couples. After control for those variables, biracial infants were found to have worse birth outcomes than infants with 2 White parents but better than infants with 2 Black parents.6,8–12 (Henceforth, infant’s race/ethnicity will be referred to by the notation “maternal race/ethnicity–paternal race/ethnicity” [e.g., White–Black].)”

DING DING DING DING DING

TIL Wombs iz white supremacist.

“Consistent with Table 1, infants in the White–unreported group had the worst birth outcomes in each category.”

Trans. mixed. Likely Asian since S. America and Black are already covered.

Learn to read, weebs.

“In general, I found substantial variation in birth outcomes within the group of infants with White mothers and fathers of different racial/ethnic groups. This is interesting because it shows that the common practice of using maternal race/ethnicity to refer to the infant’s race/ethnicity, regardless of father’s race/ethnicity, can be problematic.

aka nice way of calling out deception

For example, it is not uncommon for a study to refer to infants of White mothers as “White infants,” even though “White infants” may imply that the fathers are White. In this study, I demonstrated that infants of a White mother and a White father, the real “White infants,” have the better birth outcomes than do those infants of a White mother and a non-White father. Therefore, the practice of using “White mother” to refer to White infants will yield lower estimation of the birth outcomes because there are infants of non-White fathers in the sample.”

They know. It’s a cover-up.

Category errors galore.

“The infants in the White–White group had the most-advantaged birth outcomes, followed by infants in the 3 Hispanic-father groups. Infants in the White–Black group had the second-most-disadvantaged birth outcomes; the differences in birth outcomes between White–Black and White–White infants were statistically significant: White–White infants had a 2% (70 g) higher average birthweight, 26% lower LBW rate (4.64% vs 6.26%), and 39% lower infant mortality rate (0.43% vs 0.71%) than did White–Black infants. Infants in the White–unknown group had the most-disadvantaged outcomes in each category. These heterogeneities within White mothers show that the common practice of using maternal race/ethnicity to refer to the race/ethnicity of the infant is problematic: White–White infants had the best birth outcomes among the groups studied, so any other paternal race/ethnicity pulls down the averages for all White mothers. That is, the birth outcomes of White–White infants are actually underestimated by researchers who use mothers’ race/ethnicity to refer to infants’ race/ethnicity, and thus, the racial/ethnic disparities between White and any other race/ethnicity may be underestimated accordingly as well.”

Relevant!

“…Clearly, the unreported father is a proxy for more-noteworthy factors, because if unreported fathers were merely missing from certificates, their infants’ outcomes should not be so much worse.”

What DO these studies have in common? [Asians]

Could also be child of rape as a confound.

You’ll see.

2012 Biracial couples and adverse birth outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analyses.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22776059

“Biracial status of parents was associated with higher risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes than both White parents but lower than both Black parents, with maternal race having a greater influence than paternal race on pregnancy outcomes.”

Evolution is racist or instincts evolved for reasons? Pick ONE.

Your Third World surrogate plan may need retouching.

If it fails or dies or gets retarded, you still gotta pay up! What are the odds?

Why is it so hard to find studies about the most populous race on the planet?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31238617

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30564431
2018
What is associated with IQ and other development issues? Pre-term birth.

“Maternal age, education level, race and ethnicity, smoking during pregnancy, and parity were significant risk factors associated with PTB.”

It’s mentioned along with smoking.

“…The analysis of interactions between maternal characteristics and perinatal health behaviors showed that Asian women have the highest prevalence of PTB in the youngest age group (< 20 years; AOR, 1.40; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.28-1.54).”

I want more studies about them. I’m not scared of reality.

That suggests a genetic predisposition to be present so young. I’d compare PTB to WHR, personally.

“Pacific Islander, American Indian, and African American women ≥40 years of age had a greater than two-fold increase in the prevalence of PTB compared with women in the 20-24 year age group.”

Their own women.

Pre-term study and IQ:

https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/136/3/415
“RESULTS: Across all assessments, VP/VLBW individuals had significantly lower IQ scores than term-born controls, even when individuals with severe cognitive impairment (n = 69) were excluded. IQ scores were found to be more stable over time for VP/VLBW than term-born individuals, yet differences in stability disappeared when individuals with cognitive impairment were excluded. Adult IQ could be predicted with fair certainty (r > 0.50) from age 20 months onward for the whole VP/VLBW sample (n = 260) and from 6 years onward for term-born individuals (n = 229).

CONCLUSIONS: VP/VLBW individuals more often suffer from cognitive problems across childhood into adulthood and these problems are relatively stable from early childhood onward. VP/VLBW children’s risk for cognitive problems can be reliably diagnosed at the age of 20 months. These findings provide strong support for the timing of cognitive follow-up at age 2 years to plan special support services for children with cognitive problems.”

So it doesn’t cause but it is associated. Humans evolved long gestation for the brain.

Clear defect evidence in the genes- study it!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29903290

But surely, you say, genetic issues would be also hormonal (hormones regulate genes as well) and apply to men?
Well…
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31348744
Yes. Yes it would.

“A total of 9079 patients were reviewed, of which 3956 patients had complete data. Of these, 839 (21.2%) were azoospermic. After adjusting for age, African-Canadians (odds ratio [OR] 1.70; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-2.25) and Asians (1.34; 95% CI 1.11-1.62) were more likely to be azoospermic compared to Caucasians.”

Some of us form opinions AFTER reading.
White men are literally more fertile and most fertile with white women.

“Similarly, African Canadians (OR 1.75; 95% CI 1.33-2.29) were more likely to be oligospermic and Asians (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.70-0.97) less likely to be oligospermic. Low volume was found in African-Canadian (OR 1.42; 95% CI 1.05-1.91), Asians (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.01-1.51), and Indo-Canadians (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.01-2.13). Furthermore, Asians (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.57-0.93) and Hispanics (OR 0.58; 95% CI 034-0.99) were less likely to have asthenospermia. Asians (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.57-0.94) and Indo-Canadians (OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.35-0.99) were less likely to have teratozospermia. No differences were seen for vitality. No differences were seen for FSH levels, however, Asians (p<0.01) and Indo-Canadians (p<0.01) were more likely to have lower testosterone.”

It’s always the damn Asians.
Magic Dirt won’t fix your shitty sperm.

Maybe if we spend more on the NHS! The evolution fairy may visit!

The lower sexual dimorphism of Asians makes them functionally partially infertile. This is why they marry so young (it isn’t traditionalism) and despite this, have a low birth count per person, and are the most populous race on Earth. They’re actually the most r-selected, Mother Nature holds them back from fertilization with mutations. Along with r-selection, more total fertility issues in the male/offspring (azoospermia, infant death), lower volume AND lower testosterone, it all fits!

Is that my fault? No. Stop blaming me for reading. I’m not, in fact, God.

Hey, we have our own group with shitty sperm. Theirs is just bigger and more characteristic of the whole.

from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26962784

“AR-CAG repeat length was longer in infertile men in Asian, Caucasian, and mixed races (SMD = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.08-0.43, P <0.01; SMD = 0.13, 95% CI: 0.02-0.25, P <0.05; SMD = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.15-0.63, P <0.01).

Notice p-value difference is so loose for white it doesn’t meet the medical standard? 0.05 is too high. Absurdly.

The overall study shows that increased AR-CAG repeat length was associated with male infertility. The subgroup study on races shows that increased AR-CAG repeat length was associated with male infertility in Asian, Caucasian, and mixed races. Increased AR-CAG repeat length was also associated with azoospermia. This meta-analysis supports that increased androgen receptor CAG length is capable of causing male infertility susceptibility.”

In the interest of intellectual honesty.

WHR

We literally have the studies. e.g. It’s metabolic.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4306982/

“Sixty-four PCOS patients and 40 women served as the control group were studied. The two groups were subdivided according to the body mass index (BMI) into two obese and non-obese groups. Waist:hip ratio (WHR), plasma epinephrine level was estimated, sympathetic skin response (SSR); postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, heart rate variability (HRV), and valsalva ratio were measured in both groups.”
“Compared to the control group, obese PCOS patients demonstrated higher BMI and WHR, reduced palmar SSR latency and higher amplitude, altered HRV, higher plasma epinephrine level, and rapid pulse rate. Moreover, non-obese patients show reduced palmar SSR latency and higher amplitude, higher plasma epinephrine level, and higher pulse rate. BMI and WHR of the patients were positively correlated with plasma epinephrine level; while the HRV was negatively correlated WHR.”
“The BMI and WHR were significantly higher in the PCOS patients compared to the control group 36.63±4.23 kg/m2 vs. 34.14±3.39 kg/m2 (p=0.041) and 0.88±0.05 compared to 0.79±0.11 (p=0.001), respectively.”

“We demonstrated high plasma epinephrine level during lying and standing positions in PCOS patients. This could be of obesogenic origin as we noticed a positive correlation between plasma epinephrine level and both of BMI and WHR. PCOS patients of this study exhibited central abdominal obesity and the mechanisms by which central obesity drive an increase in sympathetic activity are not entirely clear. Yet, the fat cells have increased sensitivity to lipolytic agents and/or the factors inducing fat mobilization are turned on (16). This was further supported that adipocytes isolated from the visceral fat depot of women with PCOS had increased catecholamine-stimulated lipolysis (17).”

Nice boy hips. Don’t try for kids. (Goes for all races, Spartans forced girls to be lightly athletic to be ready for childbirth as a woman, that broadens hips beyond racial average).
And when the NHS totally fails, picture the fatal correction to reality when these women expect childbirth interventions. No waist? No taste.

Old expression.

It’s genetic. They’re gonna get fat – or the kids will. We’ve all seen them. I’m just saying, the signs were there. Choosing a woman with a shit tier WHR is like electing for a manlet over the average height. It could rarely work out for health, but rarely. Don’t get angry at me.

https://www.europeanreview.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/4755-4761-Metabolic-parameters-in-PCOS-and-abdominal-obesity.pdf

“RESULTS: Women with WHR ≥0.8 had higher concentration of glucose and insulin (both fasting and after 120 min of oral administration of 75 g glucose), as well as HOMA-IR value, than women with WHR value < 0.8. Also, abdominal obesity disorders hormonal parameters. Higher free androgen index and lower concentration of sex hormone binding globulin and dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate were found in female with WHR ≥ 0.8.

There’ll still be guys like “WHR doesn’t matter, medically”.

Muh dudebros going, “at least they’re skinny”. But they’re not?

“Women with WHR ≥0.8 had… abdominal obesity disorders hormonal parameters.”

They’re literally not. Chemically. You can biopsy the tissue and test it.

the fat cells have increased sensitivity to lipolytic agents and/or the factors inducing fat mobilization are turned on”

My feels have zero to do with that, dude. It’s genes?

NOBODY is jealous. You keep your secret fatty.

I implore you to marry the future whale and learn the hard way. They’re a puffer-fish.

Whatever their race. But the shorter they are, the worse it is. Short women should have an even SMALLER waist, since it’s skeletal. My own is far smaller than most Asians, for instance, despite being taller than most of them as white. If you want to piss them off, say (honestly) that men like small waists. Just generally. Gets them every time, although most people wouldn’t say they had a large one (not really looking and they don’t dress for it). They know they’re broad and they hate women who dress to show any different, including lucky exceptions in their own race, since it’s a countersignal. Namely: I can afford to have a smaller midsection, less running and foraging is required.

[If I want to dress to piss off a group of women, bodycon but for the waist only. It’s subtle and you’d imagine as a man they would neither notice nor care. Great way to tell a woman’s natural WHR – do they like bodycon? It needn’t be tight on T&A, actually that’s better, it’s actually about waist fit. Pill women also get larger round the middle, any weight gain is there and ruins WHR so it’s visual slut shaming too. Love it.]

Follicular stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, androstenedione, and 17-beta-estradiol, were on similar level in both groups. Elevation in triglycerides, total cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein levels, as well as decrease in high density lipoprotein level in serum of women with WHR value ≥0.8, were found when compared to women with WHR < 0.8. A statistically significant correlation was found between WHR value and glucose, insulin, sex hormone binding globulin, free androgen index and lipid profile parameters.”

Hips don’t lie because biochemistry.

“CONCLUSIONS: Abdominal obesity causes additional disorders in metabolic and hormonal parameters in PCOS women, which confirmed changes in analyzed parameters between PCOS women with WHR < 0.8 and WHR ≥ 0.8 and statistically significant correlations between WHR value and analyzed parameters.”

Aging fathers, ugly kids

That’s one solid explanation for why people are generally uglier nowadays, even the healthy weight.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886916311035

Paternal age negatively predicts offspring physical attractiveness in two, large, nationally representative datasets

Freeze your sperm at 18 for optimum freshness.

Effect of paternal age on offspring attractiveness is investigated in two datasets.

Various covariates are utilized.

Significant negative effects are found in both datasets.

Effects are independent of birth order.

Findings consistent with paternal age as a source of new mutations in offspring.

Abstract

The effect of paternal age on offspring attractiveness has recently been investigated. Negative effects are predicted as paternal age is a strong proxy for the numbers of common de novo mutations found in the genomes of offspring. As an indicator of underlying genetic quality or fitness, offspring attractiveness should decrease as paternal age increases, evidencing the fitness-reducing effects of these mutations.

That’s a hard rectal red pill.

I’m sure the manosphere will try its hardest to ignore like the dead and defective babies.

https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Sins-Of-The-Fathers

The problem is, you think you have time.

Thus far results are mixed, with one study finding the predicted effect, and a second smaller study finding the opposite. Here the effect is investigated using two large and representative datasets (Add Health and NCDS),

holy Jesus a sound method

I almost fell off my high horse

both of which contain data on physical attractiveness and paternal age.

Validity! Validity! My queendom for some statistical validity!

The effect is present in both datasets, even after controlling for maternal age at subject’s birth, age of offspring, sex, race, parental and offspring (in the case of Add Health) socio-economic characteristics, parental age at first marriage (in the case of Add Health) and birth order.

The confound control is practically orgasmic, I can’t wait to see how they mansplain this one away.

That is perfect method. But it triggers butthurts and their precious feefees are hurt by the mere implication that degenerate older dads are bad for their kid’s health. Because all those upper crust respectable 1950s dads were like “60 is the new 20 lol!” Who gives a shit if your kids need you past high school? You got more priceless clubbing times you don’t remember, that’s what really matters. Not seeing your grandkids.

Class, race, sex, age at marriage, birth order, maternal age, offspring age – there’s literally nothing else to control for. Nothing. It’s flawless.

THESE. ARE. THE. STUDIES. WE. NEED.

Logically, since women are born with most of their eggs, there wouldn’t be a maternal effect. It isn’t constantly replenishing like the male gamete. Cell division’s a bitch. Male lifestyle for all his years prior

https://www.nhs.uk/news/pregnancy-and-child/dads-smoking-before-conception-harms-kids/

affects the child at conception (and even which sperm is conceived) far more than the details of pregnancy (minus pollutants it’s pretty much the same as in ancient times, the womb is not a new environment).

Maybe add child health although those studies already exist to cross-reference with attractiveness?

As in, are the girls more womanly as adults in WHR and the boys have more manly frames (broad shoulders, narrow waist, which should be a metric of its own)? Or less gender typical? Even androgynous, or fully gender-atypical?

Do younger or older fathers produce better-looking kids in the gendered sense?

[We can tell by looking at old photos but let’s pretend.]

Give me a time machine, please. The ugly wigger types hurt my eyes.

[I have also noted mannish looking sisters tend to be the older, “ugly” sister of two -coughs Beatrice- and the girly looking brothers tend to be the younger, usually gay one. Cannot unsee.]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0162309595000682

e.g.

“In addition to their attractiveness and intimidatory effects, human secondary sexual characters also provide cues to hormonal status and phenotypic quality consistent with the good genes model of sexual selection (which includes parasite resistance). Low waist-hip ratio is sexually attractive in women and indicates a high estrogen/testosterone ratio (which favors reproductive function). Facial attractiveness provides honest cues to health and mate value. The permanently enlarged female breast appears to have evolved under the influence of both the good genes and the runaway selection mechanisms. The male beard is not obviously related to phenotypic quality and may have evolved through a process of runaway intersexual selection.”

The beard can also be a sign of poor grade genes e.g. savages, wolf man. Overall bone structure uber alles.

Maybe factor in sexual activity of the father prior to conception? Especially partner count and STDs. STDs are known to harm attractiveness in the host [coughs David Beckham, most of Hollywood] so why not the offspring’s?

Back to the top study:

The apparent robustness of the effect to different operationalizations of attractiveness suggests high generalizability, however the results must be interpreted with caution, as controls for parental levels of attractiveness were indirect only in the present study.

aka please don’t sue us but you know it’s true

But you can wait forever because the Jews said so!

Say, who owns all the biotech and IVF companies?

https://www.fertilitybridge.com/blog/2018/4/11/battleforivfmarketwallstreetvsprivatepractice

[chuckles in Israel shekels]

https://hmcisrael.com/specialty/ivf-israel/

“According to statistics, around 20% of couples wishing to conceive are faced with certain obstacles that inhibit a successful pregnancy.

Fertility Treatment is one of the most prioritized fields of medicine in Israel.”

Sure, you can wait for decades! Also, cut the kid when they’re born!

We need more future little Viagra users.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.2307/2648044

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7752-female-genital-mutilation-can-cause-infertility/

Does Circumcision Decrease the Fertility of Sperm in the Male?

“However, birth rates are much higher in countries where the men are predominantly uncircumcised.”

There is no question that an uncircumcised man has a cooler penis than a circumcised man in the flaccid state. For some reason, removal of the foreskin is the reason for this. There seems to be some sort of temperature sensor in the foreskin that may control penile temperature. Removing the foreskin gets rid of this sensor.

It only takes a few temperature degrees of difference to damage sperm. As the penis is in close proximity to the testicles, it’s quite likely that a cooler penis would help keep the testicles cooler (Remember that men are more potent in the colder months of the year). Under these condition, if the testicles got too cold, they can always be retracted closer to the body.

Almost like God gave men a prepuce solely for this evolutionary function in reproduction.

…Now consider this: Circumcised and uncircumcised men have the same penis temperature on full erection, as we stated earlier in this article. So, clearly, there is a specific reason why a natural-uncircumcised penis remains at a cooler temperature during the flaccid state. When the penis is erect it is no longer in close proximity with the testicles, so penile temperature should not affect the testicular temperature at this phase (be the penis circumcised or uncircumcised).

Upon orgasm, the penis tends to retract more into the pelvis (at least with my experience). Due to the friction and increased blood flow that occurred during the sexual act, it makes sense that the penis will have an increase in temperature in a flaccid state post-sex than in a flaccid state previous to the sexual act. Could this retraction be another mechanism for the “heated” penis to steer clear of the testicles?

Go there, science.

Circumcision and Male Fertility: Is There a Link?

Scientists have recently concluded that circumcision can help with infertility in males suffering from two very specific diseases.

So… not generalizable.

Some woman perv studies after all that penis talk.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513814000269

Women’s faces and voices may be cues to their reproductive potential. If so, then individual differences in indices of female fecundity and residual reproductive value, such as hormonal profiles, body composition, and age, should be associated with women’s facial and vocal attractiveness to men. However, previous research on these associations is sparse, has rendered mixed results, and is limited to Western samples. The current study therefore explored relationships between correlates of reproductive capability (testosterone levels, age, and body mass index [BMI]) and facial and vocal attractiveness in women from industrial and foraging societies. Women’s facial and vocal attractiveness was associated with each of these indicators in at least one of the two samples. The patterns of these associations suggest that women’s faces and voices provide cues to both common and unique components of reproductive potential and help explain the evolution of men’s mating preferences.

Lesson: Avoid the manjaw.

Women change their vocal pitch all the time though. European women are taught to make it lower at school (speak up = louder, lower pitch), Asians try to make it higher. The key is how they sound when hysterically upset. That’s their true level. Europeans go up, Asians down.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513812000475

Attractive facial features in women are assumed to signal fertility, but whether facial attractiveness predicts reproductive success in women is still a matter of debate. We investigated the association between facial attractiveness at young adulthood and reproductive life history—number of children and pregnancies—in women of a rural community. For the analysis of reproductive success, we divided the sample into women who used contraceptives and women who did not.

So partnered, married women. Not single ones.

Introducing two-dimensional geometric morphometric methodology, we analysed which specific characteristics in facial shape drive the assessment of attractiveness and covary with lifetime reproductive success. A set of 93 (semi)landmarks was digitized as two-dimensional coordinates in postmenopausal faces. We calculated the degree of fluctuating asymmetry and regressed facial shape on facial attractiveness at youth and reproductive success. Among women who never used hormonal contraceptives, we found attractive women to have more biological offspring than less attractive women. These findings are not affected by sociodemographic variables. Postmenopausal faces corresponding to high reproductive success show more feminine features—facial characteristics previously assumed to be honest cues to fertility. Our findings support the notion that facial attractiveness at the age of mate choice predicts reproductive success and that facial attractiveness is based on facial characteristics, which seem to remain stable until postmenopausal age.

Menopause is not the face equalizer you think.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513816302318

African and European perception of African female attractiveness

Dare you to do the same study with every race judging every other.

Majority of research on attractiveness is restricted to faces of European origin. The perception of attractiveness may, however, vary across communities due to variations in both facial morphology and local standards of beauty. We investigated the relative contribution of four facial markers of attractiveness based on 101 female facial portraits (standardized, non-manipulated) from Cameroon and Namibia, which were assessed by local male raters and by raters from a distant European population, the Czech Republic. Images from Cameroon include only women of Bantu origin, while Namibians are represented by women of both Bantu (Owambo/Herero) and Nama origin. While controlling for age and BMI, we explored the relationship between female attractiveness and a set of facial traits: fluctuating asymmetry, averageness, shape sexual dimorphism, and skin color (rated and measured in CIELab color space).

In the Cameroonian sample, local male raters favored lighter-skinned female faces with morphology closer to average. The attractiveness of Nama women as rated by Nama men positively correlated with lighter complexion, but this did not extend to rating by Cameroonian men. The attractiveness of Namibian Owambo/Herero women was positively associated with facial femininity and lighter complexion when judged by both Cameroonian and Nama male raters. In all samples, the attractiveness as rated by Czech men was predicted by age and BMI, but not by skin color. We found no significant association between attractiveness and fluctuating asymmetry in any of the tested samples. When controlling for age, the effect of skin color on attractiveness turned to be non-significant in the Owambo/Herrero and Nama sample, but remained significant in the Cameroonian sample. Variations in skin color thus represent an important factor of African female attractiveness within the African context, but they do not seem to affect judgements made by European raters.

They don’t want any of them.

Sensitivity to some facial markers of female attractiveness thus seems to be restricted to regional populations and/or constrained by shared ethnicity.

Paler women have more oestrogen. So duh.

Women reject old guys who’d give them dead or ugly kids:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513816301283

“This finding is consistent with men’s stated preference for young, fertile women in mating and suggests that the typical pattern is generated by women’s limiting role in mating.”

aka their gender role

“older men tend to marry older women, including those who are peri- and post-menopausal”

TIL Korea is so degenerate it has slave markets. Ooof.

So much for the myth that young women have the hots for them. Yeah, I’m sure the Jap schoolgirl came onto you, right perv?

Deadbeats are the end of the West:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1090513816303671

Research in evolutionary psychology, and life history theory in particular, has yielded important insights into the developmental processes that underpin variation in growth, psychological functioning, and behavioral outcomes across individuals. Yet, there are methodological concerns that limit the ability to draw causal inferences about human development and psychological functioning within a life history framework. The current study used a simulation-based modeling approach to estimate the degree of genetic confounding in tests of a well-researched life history hypothesis: that father absence (X) is associated with earlier age at menarche (Y). The results demonstrate that the genetic correlation between X and Y can confound the phenotypic association between the two variables, even if the genetic correlation is small—suggesting that failure to control for the genetic correlation between X and Y could produce a spurious phenotypic correlation. We discuss the implications of these results for research on human life history, and highlight the utility of incorporating genetically sensitive tests into future life history research.

I don’t think debtor’s prisons will come back – but if you breed it, you should feed it. I think the abandoned women that existed since Biblical times will just hire bounty hunters to shoot the first family deserter for a share of his life insurance policy.

Patriarchs everywhere would rejoice at culling the cads. The women get a widow’s pension.

Everyone wins. Hey, you said “until death do us part”. Men used to die by their oaths.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S109051381400052X

I have noticed that immigrant men have a higher pitch than their non-immigrant relatives.

Maybe the act of immigration impairs masculinity?

Low male voice pitch may communicate potential benefits for offspring in the form of heritable health and/or dominance, whereas access to resources may be indicated by correlates of socioeconomic status, such as sociolinguistic features. Here, we examine if voice pitch and social dialect influence women’s perceptions of men’s socioeconomic status and attractiveness. In Study 1, women perceived lower pitched male voices as higher in socioeconomic status than higher pitched male voices.

A lot of PUAs get shot down for 1. being brown and feeling entitled to a white woman, the lowest miscegenation group also further sickened by repeated forced “refugee” interactions and 2. having a high pitch voice and effete face compared to their national relatives. Compare within the white race, the “Latin lover” in Italy versus Italian immigrants raised and living in London, who sound like cartoon chipmunks by comparison.

Yes, we notice.

No, you can’t change it. We notice.

Same applies to white men who moved South so it appears to be immigration. Either being an immigrant or the act itself makes a man less manly. Most obviously, torso body fat deposition like a woman of their group and the sisters become like the men at home, more athletic.

In Study 2, women independently perceived lower pitched voices and higher status sociolinguistic dialects as higher in socioeconomic status and attractiveness.

It isn’t the money, it’s the genes.

Good genes, good brains, good money. Fixating on the money is what ugly guys do – Muslim prince to Jewish media mogul.

We also found a significant interaction wherein women preferred lower pitched men’s voices more often when dialects were lower in sociolinguistic status than when they were higher in sociolinguistic status.

Capacity to protect. Not a desk jockey. The middle-class is effeminate. They want army. No cowards.

Women also perceived lower pitched voices as higher in socioeconomic status more often when dialects were higher in sociolinguistic status than when lower in sociolinguistic status.

Women know quality, really? Almost like our lives depend on it.

Finally, women’s own self-rated socioeconomic status was positively related to their preferences for voices with higher status sociolinguistic dialects, but not to their preferences for voice pitch.

Plenty of men chose to marry down to get a looker out of their genetic league, hypergamy.

Erotic capital is worth it, as you can tell by the fertility study above, even post-menopausal they’re better-looking.

Hence, women’s preferences for traits associated with potentially biologically heritable benefits, such as low voice pitch, are moderated by the presence of traits associated with resource accrual, such as social dialect markers. However, women’s preferences for language markers of resource accrual may be functionally independent from preferences for potential biological indicators of heritable benefits, such as voice pitch.

Women…. making…. mate choices?

mutation load is important?

 

The scourge of the bitter mother

I wanted to write about something for a while that really doesn’t help the right-wing and only appears to move Overton. I expect a lot of hate for this, but …fuck it. As you can see, it’s a taste of their own medicine. Judge not lest. 5,000+ words.

If you don’t like it, shake it off.

Nobody talks about it.

We all see it, nobody says a word.

Who are they?

The prissy mothers you see all over the internet, so full of scathing resentment of other women that it almost tinges the screen green. One of their favourite topics is rape. They will go on and on with a Just World fallacy a five-year old would balk at, victim blaming women for, basically, “asking for it”.


That… isn’t how it worked. Ever?

It’s like saying “don’t get burgled”, if they target you/r house, that’s it. The predator of man is man and the predator of woman is man and if men can’t fight off other men, what hope do we have?

Crickets from the women who think, genuinely believe, they know everything.

Their “advice” boils down to “don’t be attractive”… sorry, I didn’t realize I stumbled into a fat acceptance meeting?

With friends like these, who is the enemy, again?
Whatever you look like, the way men work, some of them will find it hot. Yes, even camo pants and bulky sweaters. Should I walk around in a three-piece suit like it’s sexual Kevlar? Some of us are so innately sexy, honey, whatever we wear looks good. Sorry???

Ah, but they’d find fault with that too, huh? The New Shrews.

Everything you do is bad and you’re a bad woman because they don’t like you.

No, fuck you. Fuck you and your abundance of time to tell other people how to live.

Some of us aren’t here for male attention and we were here first. Sit down, Sandra.

You hate femininity. It isn’t evil, it’s not sinful, it’s divine and beautiful and sensuality =/= sexuality.

The enemy pours poison in your ear to think otherwise. Genophilia is good too.

A woman in a nice red dress isn’t looking to steal your husband, calm down.
Everyone fears the Marilyns of the world (like Kibbe Romantics can help their bone structure!) but nobody suspects the real sluts, the Graces and Audreys and other yacht girls and homewreckers (true story). If you actually observed, the women who unapologetically dress like women (no hate) are typically the least promiscuous. What is there to gain, they’re already attractive. Do we ask men to hide their shoulders because a woman might fancy them? It’s absurd and socially oppressive. We aren’t savages and even they had greater freedom. Why would a natural, feminine woman want leftovers either, if they’re even looking for a man? However, desperate women (for sex or A Man or marriage) can’t get away with dressing for show because 1. it’s unnatural to them, 2. having no taste, they don’t know how and 3. they want less attention on their actions, such as sleeping around. This is common female experience and suggests to me these women never got out much. Or they’re veering to the mean girls end of the spectrum, like a clinical narcissist.

“If I can’t have it, no one can!” – crazy hoe

No contact lenses can hide those green eyes, babe.

They hate the signal (esp. of youth) because they don’t have it, not because it’s wrong.
This is the frenemy and we aren’t thick, we can sense it. They can actually gaslight women into feeling bad about their beauty, it’s sick. Nor does a beautiful girl or woman have a duty to sleep with anyone, it’s innocent visual pleasantness, what is up with American entitlement now? It’s obnoxious. Do they key sports cars too, are they these people? Do they stamp on daisies and kick puppies?

Your opinion has no basis in fact. Beauty is scientific and good.

It’s good for society and people who want to corrupt that innocence are the ones you should be denigrating.

As I read, and it always stuck with me, women were raped in a time of petticoats and no ankles, clothing has nothing to do with it. Predators go for body parts and it’s like saying we should ban kitchen knives because serial killers like them. In the First World we expect a basic standard of behaviour. This type of female, however, chooses to prod and cackle at the misfortunes of other (white) women. It’s cunty.
It puts people off the right-wing and makes all mother types look un-maternal (what compassion, such love), embittered and bored (constantly carping on about pop culture online). If all you do (80%+) is bitch, you’re a bitch – and this goes for the men too.
I’m tired of hearing the same strawman applicable only to middle-class American campus dwellers and Sex and the City groan-inducing comparisons. I’m sick of it. Please find a new fiddle and a different tune. The broken record is putting off me and I frequently shitpost on b.

Don’t make me meme you.
Get your ass to a therapist if other women (minding their own business) make you irrationally angry, that is insane. Misogyny is possible in women (self-loathing) albeit rare and racial loathing is presently more common but sexual, gendered loathing of the feminine (or of an action only when a woman does it) isn’t unheard of. The Bible calls it envy because it’s your in-group. God made femininity, who are you to say that’s wrong?

http://biblehub.com/mark/7-22.htm

greed, wickedness, deceit, debauchery, envy, slander, arrogance, and foolishness

All these evils come from within, and these are what defile a man.”

7/8 bitches. Off the high horse, time’s up.

Cut it out like a tumour before it kills you.

https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/green-eyed-monster.html

Why green? It’s poison, these emotions will stress your body and harm you.
They won’t harm the object that triggered you this cotton-picking week.

http://www.sensationalcolor.com/color-meaning/color-words-phrases/green-with-envy-2109

You’re not helping, you know you’re not helping the rest of us but worst of all, don’t care. It’s all about dem feels. And male approval from strangers on the internet, which is exactly what instawhores do too?
So don’t act as if you’re better than them. You need your narc supply just like they do. They get it from tit pics, you get it from bashing the women posting titty pics. Where is the good here? Do men really need to be told up isn’t down? Repeatedly telling men the obvious like they’re a retarded toddler is the reason they avoid you or are otherwise rightly suspicious of your motives. Bitching doesn’t add anything to the conversation and most of you are incapable of rational thought. You add nothing. Shouldn’t you be enjoying your families than dedicating 50+ hours a month to online shitposting? What kind of example does that set to the little ones? Oh, a woman has a career and she’s happy? Wow, how awful. Cue laugh track, right? Spinsters didn’t exist in the 50s! And nuns aren’t real women because they didn’t breed! The longer we look, the more it looks like you oppose the latter rather than the former. Why do you care? It’s a literal waste of your time, take up canning. Be useful. I laugh at genetic suicides as much as the next edgykin but there’s a limit and that’s about half an hour a month. Yet… this is ALL you do, all you contribute? Nah, fam. I’m not having it. Considering the odds of collapse and unrest, you could pop them out like a rabbit, have fifty kids by IVF and they could still all die in the next ten years. You’re not immortal because you have a pussy. Your plan isn’t foolproof, you’re foolhardy. I bet the doctor who delivered your baby was a woman or certainly the midwife and God help you if you need the help of a female engineer one day to fix your machines. Women contributing to society isn’t the issue. The way we do it doesn’t matter, the fact we do it, does. We could all sit around taking welfare for period pain and we don’t. There is an almost autistic obsession in these harpy women that conforms to the baby cult for privilege points and it’s ridiculous in historical context. You’re still outnumbered, look at Asian and African demographics. Your sons could easily, easily die in the next war. There is no laurel to rest on, the pedestal doesn’t exist. The work isn’t done once the midwife hands you the baby. Woman is a lifelong career.
I expect emotional incontinence from SJWs but I’ve tolerated it from supposed “tradwomen” for long enough.


Clean house, you sluts.
Fun fact: a slut refers to a woman who keeps an untidy home and/or demeanor. You are the epitome of uncouth. This is the true reason women can’t be openly right-wing amongst themselves, women like you. You’ll smack ’em down like a bug for trying. Where is the class? No, there’s only shame for having simple dignity like having nice hair or dresses.

This is you.

Getting into slanging matches like the slag down the road isn’t persuasion. If it’s an easy target, stop and think. The seekers who typically find these women first don’t feel the slightest warmth from the very people who could help them (maybe) but would rather beat them when they’re already down. Stunning and brave.
Women need to help one another, that’s what feminism was supposed to be before they stole it. Hating men is backwards, hating other women is also backwards. Both sexes need one another or society dies.
When I can feel the toxic waves of victim blame (tell the little girls of Rotherham that, you’re just like the social workers who told them they were hookers) and jealousy that a woman isn’t part of the Mombot hivemind by native disposition, even I feel deterred from certain ideas. Burn the witch! Shun the outcast! There have always been exceptions – Captain Obvious. It is fundamentally off-putting. It’s totally negative and offers no useful, practical advice. They fill in the blanks of a stranger’s life with a catastrophic worst case scenario (clinically unhealthy). https://psychcentral.com/lib/what-is-catastrophizing/
e.g.

>I can see her skin/shape
>She must be a slut

Sorry, do you live in porn? Are you from Pornland, where that isn’t a non sequitur?
Move to Saudi Arabia if the sight of perky breasts offends you so.

You know what proves a woman’s character? Her actions!

Shocking, I know! It’s called integrity!

A woman can have hypothetical power over men and never, ever abuse it!
(Psychologically: They know they would in the same situation and project).

Some of us have a moral compass. Fashions are based on social norms, practicality, and not individual choice. There will be people who hate me and pre-judge me for wearing heels and other people who like me for the exact same thing. It’s a waste of time caring. Pleasing everyone is impossible.

A woman could walk around naked (and if you live in Sweden, in their culture it’s normal) but if she doesn’t sleep around, you can’t insult her! Because she doesn’t do the thing! You can’t call her a slut or other behaviour-based insults unless she actually does those things. Otherwise it’s called defamation (there were/are laws about slandering a woman’s sexual honour specifically because other women are the main culprits, think Medusa’s punishment) and you’re a nothing more than a jealous, vindictive cunt.

Fact you can take to the bank.
(Yes, men do it too, so? Everyone already knows they’re bitter about what they can’t have).

I heard from a man once some piece of witty gold. He overheard some women talking about me (my dress was knee-length, people!) and I was upset about it. To console me, because they were really jealous over the fact he was there with me and felt responsible, he said:

“How do you know a woman’s attractive – without ever seeing her?” he grinned, leaning down.

“I dunno, how?” I said, trying not to cry in public.

“All the other women hate her.”

I laughed and it’s never bothered me since. Great riddle. Great man.

It’s true, they just want us to cover up and hide away. Is sleeveless banned? Are ungloved hands too pretty? A woman with good skin or even features must wear a face mask like some Harrison Bergeron costume party? What’s with the social acceptability of bitter individuals nowadays?

Another common, more overtly vitriolic one:
>own vagina
>expect to be raped


No. We fought wars over this. No. And does that mean men or little boys deserve it too? [No.]
In the onslaught of anti-white propaganda, the last thing women need is to be shamed for having tits by so-called allies. These snipes want other women to be ruined and traumatized for life because the idea makes them feel good. It’s twisted bullshit. It’s creepy how they salivate over fellow women’s hypothetical suffering “you’ll be sorry” style.
Were the women in Germany on NYE “asking for it”? No, STFU. Shit happens. You know who else thinks all white women are automatic whores? Muslims, straight outta the Muslim playbook (Koran). Such progress. Much culture.

If women are the greatest victims of this toxic culture, victim blaming is the last thing anyone should do. Does every woman have a man to protect her, family or husband? No. Funds to live somewhere safe? No. Money to buy clothing that doesn’t look High St i.e. a little bit trashy? No. They don’t care about the truth, they care about being sadists and stamping down women. I can’t be doing with control freaks, it’s so Mrs Grundy. I waited years to bring this up.

Slander is a cancer. It’s the hallmark of postmodern morals. Don’t do it.

If you’re going to take the moral high ground, you don’t get to sneer from it. People found you because they wanted help, not yet another woman-basher finger-wagging and trying to hide behind the pitiful criticism shield “as a mother”, the shit-tier right-winger’s As a Woman…

Being a mother takes nine months, being a woman takes a lifetime. Being a good woman comes before everything else. Is anyone else done with the Pharisee Matriarchs? I’m just fully done at this point.

I’d like to plop those women down in front of some of the infertile women I know and make them tell them, to their face, why they’re a bad person. To the women and wives who cannot afford children yet and refuse to be irresponsible burdens on the taxpayers or their husband. These are real people you humiliate in sweeping statements, like you know their life. How presumptuous and ugly. They don’t dare start on men, more worthy of scorn, who sit around drinking, hollering, deadbeating. No, start on the easy targets. You’ll really get women to look up to you that way…

Face it, you aren’t tall enough for this ride. Hop off the bandwagon before we chuck you.

These women have privilege, sure, I haven’t seen a single one of these women who isn’t firmly middle-class. Your comfort is not the norm and your assumptions are frankly embarrassing. You’re out of touch, how nice that you have an 18-acre farm and don’t need earning potential, but shut up and let your husband do the talking like the Bible says. By the way, I’m 99% sure he visits hookers on the side like most married “conservative” men who spend their time verbally opposing “degeneracy”. “We live in a society…” doesn’t really work when I can almost see your husband cringe behind you.

Twenty years ago, these women would just be bashing men. It’s only now white feminism has turned on their page 3 hating kind they magically find the right. How convenient. They’re so principled.

I’m waiting on one of them to eventually get sued for providing medical advice without a license and lawsuit insurance (all doctors have).
Telling people they have to have children could actually kill them, maternal death happens.
The “disclaimers” you put on videos and such don’t actually count? A judge would laugh at you. If you have a channel and hundreds of hours of footage devoted to guilt-tripping women into getting pregnant, yes, you knew what you were doing. There is a very clear motive.

Expert is that way of behaving, intending that people do exactly as you say. I’m very careful to look like a raving nobody despite having real authority. Crazy like a fox. How many fell since I started? Still here.

Showing is fine, telling is legally binding.

You wouldn’t tell them to go base jumping because oh, that’s dangerous!

It isn’t as if maternity services are lacking or non-existent, is it? IS IT.
It isn’t like labour is to women what war is to men. The most common cause of death or injury.

You can’t play leader without some real culpability. Yay for being treated equally!

It reminds me of the PUAs who think putting up a sign about recording in their bedroom legally counts, when porn actresses need to sign a model release (to record) and legal distribution rights contract (who gets to see the footage). Idiots don’t know their law and it’s your own fault. Arrogance is illegal in many forms.

The fact you filmed without legal consent means the whole interaction is unconsenting!

Back to the scourge.

Those women are not good mothers, I can tell you now. These women act like saints because they’ve pushed a baby out of their twat with an epidural. Your fertility is not an accomplishment and fertility is neither a sign of moral grace. “As a mother….” type, pretentious and sickening. It isn’t about the politics, it’s about the attitude. It’s ugly in lefties too.
I waited and waited, hoping for a natural evolution of the dialogue.

If all we can do is bitch about pop culture and insult other white people, we’re already dead.

Where is the prosocial focus, people? Where is the building one another up?

If a woman gets the instilled sense nothing she ever does is right, feeding that won’t make her listen.

Where’s the discussion of quality? You might be married yes, but to a piece of shit, we don’t know? Show us! Just getting a ring on your finger isn’t the status symbol of old, there are plenty of dirtbags buying a Moissanite ring and lie that it’s a diamond, as if that metaphor doesn’t show you how far we’ve fallen as a civilization . “Passing off” is illegal? That’s grounds for divorce, honestly. Traditions exist for a reason. Where’s the filter here? Crickets on the subject. Helpful. Don’t even bring up the savagery of lust matches, that might make unwise people question themselves and we can’t have that! Anything but that!
We don’t have the courtship rituals or family filtration anymore, plenty of trash get married in Vegas. There is no innate status to marriage anymore due to this ease, you aren’t necessarily a better person for it. In spite of this, oceans of smug.

Er…

Why?

Really, why?

I haven’t seen a single person address why. I’ve seen a lot of footage.
You just stand there, smug because you got married. No rhyme or reason.


Something that happened to you. All the agency of a stump. Lefties, at least, are smart enough not to be smug about a party that happened once. It isn’t a big deal. If you swore never to divorce, we might care.
Are you superior to Newton, Joan of Arc, Sappho or Tesla, then? They never got married and they’re more valuable human beings than most who will ever live.

It’s such a superficial way of viewing it.

Married = Moral.

No? Plenty of awful people are married. Your contribution isn’t that. It isn’t even children, no shortage of shitty parents in the world. And what do women do once the kids grow up, wither and die? Grow warts and become witches in the outback?
Is a woman’s only contribution her loin meat? Don’t children and older women contribute anything to society?

Crickets from the gobby girls. If it isn’t ALL about them and their “lifestyle”, they don’t care.

Like everything in the world will magically become good if everyone is married?
I don’t have to test your IQ to know it’s low if you really believe that.

Before somebody asks about the traditions, it’s logical proof of gender role success:

If a man can’t afford to get engaged, he can’t afford to get married. If a man can’t afford to get married, he can’t afford to “keep” a wife, as it was commonly well known. He certainly can’t afford to raise kids, plural, (3-4+) if a tiny diamond is out of reach. She isn’t working, right? Single income, just like you wanted.

h/t the snarky conservative with Dixon Diaz

And why diamond? Well, you intend to be married for life and pass on the stone to your daughter, don’t you? Everything else cracks. Americans don’t remember but Europe does. Look at the antique market. Plenty of diamonds, hardly any other stones. Emeralds, considered a coloured diamond, are rare choices because they scratch to buggery very easily. Try doing your research before vapidly deferring to “women are crazy”. I’ve had to help male friends shop for engagement rings and they were shocked it was so logical (always spring for the comfort band, guys).

There used to be entire books (h/t WM A Alcott) about how to be a good husband, it was a whole genre! Men would take decades, growing up and learning, training. And you think…. turning up?

~whispers~ I don’t think so.

Husband doesn’t mean what you think it means. There are plenty of good bachelors and plenty of adulterous scumbag husbands. Go outside once in a while.

These snooty housewives can be just as hypocritical as the SJWs, ignoring any data they dislike. Anything that’s complicated, unknown or hard to think about, they reject out of hand. It’s weak, I’m done sitting here silently waiting for women older than myself to get their shit together. They fawn over men for existing (sad) but hold women to impossible and contradictory standards. That is not healthy. It’s just as sick as the culture we grew up in. Get your act together and get over yourselves.
And they’re never great parents, always average at best. Like, if your life’s gonna revolve around something (or your ego): be dedicated to it. Read the research journals, cookbooks, encourage the best of both daughters and sons – don’t just do the bare minimum 50s housewife LARP in a frilly apron and act like everyone should kiss your feet for it.

They de-sexualise themselves like the Virgin Mary in a pathetic bid to get respect.
That doesn’t work. The fact you care so much about strangers’ opinions means you won’t get it.

I feel like posting tits or GTFO because they expect all the rapt male attention of jiggling D-cups and bring none of the substance. Okay, you …exist…

???

Now what?

Shouldn’t you be spending this time with your kids? Friends? Hobbies? Church?

You don’t see African women popping out eight kids acting like Gaia incarnate.
I saw a pregnant photo of Spencer’s Russian honeypot and I just burst out laughing.
She actually angled the shot so it looked like the sun was shining out of her belly.
That’s narcissism Beyonce would be proud of. I’m fairly certain it was heliocentrism, the Sun does not, in fact, shine out of your vag.
The Disney princesses aren’t married for a reason. You’re not important anymore.
This is an attitude problem which stems from callow pride and is also found among the ghetto. It isn’t classy, please stop.

“Oh, I cook my kids’ food!”

…. you’re SUPPOSED to!

The virtue signalling is obscene. “Well, I never had a one-night stand!” Neither have most women currently or in all human history. Your point?

They act as if pop culture is real. Look at the stats. No, it’s fake. Get out more.

Not that I let men off the hook. The man who acts like a hero for not being an alcoholic at the bar and spending his time with his children is literally doing the bare minimum also. Co-parenting is a trendy word for being.. normal. Children need a lot of time with both parents. Men don’t get to skip off to a club or hang around with their friends more than their wife. Neglect is a form of abuse, guys.

“The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife.” 1 Cor 7:4 When you marry, your time belongs primarily to your spouse. That’s the “commitment” part. I don’t get to take a job, turn up three days of five and wonder why I was fired.

Another common topic is clothing, as aforementioned. Because when the Queen wore that low cut coronation dress, she was such a skank. Because shaming the female figure is helpful for our purposes in encouraging women.
You disgust me. Unless you’re wearing a niqab, some man somewhere will find you attractive and according to the Bible, it’s his fault. Are you holier than the Bible too?

Before someone tries to @ me with a quote like I haven’t read it, should women have long hair?
I think a woman should have long hair as long as it wouldn’t be dangerous to her and as long as it’s more flattering. Now, how many men with #opinions on long hair, have never had it? You have to tie it up, you have to pin it back. Braiding is an efficient way of keeping it clean and neat. So when the Bible slags off braiding of the hair, what they mean is the three-hour updo with a solid gold pagan headpiece when your husband can’t afford it. [1]

Pictured: probably out of most budgets.

It does NOT extend to keeping it up out of food (she cooks, right?) or away from machinery so she isn’t scalped (you like her scalp, right?) or clean and not covered in baby vomit. The feminists don’t get everything wrong, you know. Just most things.
While I’m on my high horse for the season, the Bible does actually tell women they need to work. Stupid Yanks confuse this with taxable income. Per hour, housewives work more total hours than their husbands.
https://unstats.un.org/unsd/gender/chapter4/chapter4.html
Acknowledge the work women already do, because the State sure doesn’t.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unpaid_work
“In the United States, the latest available data from 2014 shows that women undertake 14.58 hours per week on household labor.” Gee, why are women entitled to alimony? Almost like wife is a job! It’s “free” conditional on the lifelong union, because home management is really a full-time management job, if you’re doing it properly, hence the jarring pricing once the union is dissolved (by the State, not God). Investments have value.
Women are supposed to work as hard as men, equally yoked, it’s in the Bible. (Proverbs 31:13 on) we must pull our own weight, independence isn’t some newfangled (Jewfangled?) invention from the 1960s, women entered the workplace always. If she’s going to do that work anyway (say, the increasingly popular flexitime from home) who are you to a tell a marital union you have no part of, that she can’t earn money from it? That’s between her and her husband, it’s nothing to do with some judgmental opinionated nobody whose only qualification is a vagina.

I don’t see them pining over the deep meaning of Timothy. “I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.” Applies between women n’ all. That’s the job of her family. Even if you’re related to a woman, you probably don’t understand her situation from the outside and if you aren’t going to physically help, shut up! The nag talks and talks and pretends they’re helpful, really they’re emotionally venting and trying to look good. Das pride.

1: It is also important to dress and act your station. The modern obsession with dressing poor is rude if you aren’t because it makes your family look poor and your husband look like a failing provider. Read old books.

Corinthians also discusses why not everyone is suited for marriage “I want you to be free from anxieties…” and personally, I don’t think any of these women have a right to sneer on the celibate. No, your baby-making twat doesn’t make you morally superior to a woman who acts like a nun (and look at the stats, it’s common to not sleep around now). Defaming other women is expressly condemned throughout the Bible and it’s sick to see women calling everyone who isn’t exactly like them a whore, basically. God made your body, don’t be ashamed of it (just don’t flash anyone either). This isn’t complicated.

Would I want to be friends with most of these women, I think. And no is the inevitable answer, they are quick in temper and scorn without due consideration and reason.

“She does him good, and not harm,
all the days of her life.”
Shouldn’t we expect the kindest behaviour from woman to woman?
If you’re going to be a cunt, at least be somewhat practical and recognize the reasons and exceptions, Jesus Christ.

Jesus didn’t dropkick the fallen but you wouldn’t know from how they behave and give all of us righties a bad name.

Mommy blogs are the ideal: helpful, practical and sanctuaries from the reminder of degeneracy.

Up with Mommy blogs and fashion blogs and home decor blogs and hell, female DIY and natural science blogs. Down with preachy whiny Domestic Goddess nauseating delusions of superiority.

Speaking about good women like they’re shit is bad for the cause, shame on you, Brutus.
It only gives men and foreigners an excuse to treat us like it too. Judas got paid, Patreon whores.

They are obsessed with finding people they are allegedly superior to, I’m bored now.

“I’m not like the other girls tee hee hee” is over.

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/my-xtmas-wish-for-you-please-please.html

Hatred is broadly speaking a waste of time, unless you need it to feel normal.

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/the-red-pill-must-indeed-be-pill.html

“Those who talk most about themselves having-been Red-Pilled are examples of ‘false-awakening’: still asleep but merely dreaming that they have awoken”

I don’t think new readers quite understand how often I take the piss out of myself.

This is a shit blog and entirely pointless, we won’t change a thing. I know that. You won’t change a thing either. At least I don’t do the grandiose thing and put my hair in rollers to appear in a Youtube video with a face like a slapped arse.

We have limits.

Narcissism in the Family

The covert narcissist will pull others down to feel better about themselves. It ain’t right. This simply isn’t cricket, ya hear?

“Though the narcissistic father is a formidable bully, I suspect the narcissistic mother is, in many ways, often much worse, if for no other reason than that she can cunningly exploit the stereotype of the angelic, saintly mother who criticizes her victim only out of ‘concern’. Remember that while we normally think of narcissists as self-absorbed egotists, many can come across convincingly as selfless and altruistic, all for the purpose of gaining narcissistic supply from being thought of as such saintly types.”

http://unitycounsellingservice.co.uk/understanding-narcissistic-behaviour-narcissist-hates-others-happiness-joy/

They laugh at women for their special qualities, I think that was the obvious thing. Yes, there have been plenty of female geniuses, read a book and stop giggling about women “acting like men”, the brain doesn’t work like that. For example, IQ is more dependent on white matter organisation. Guess what women have more of?
You aren’t cool, you’re ignorant. You aren’t edgy for telling white women they’re dirt like the media does. None of this stuff is as simple as you make out, once you actually look.

Read something that isn’t a magazine.

The stereotypical housewife is an ignorant shrill cow and you’ll filling it to a tee. It’s a pox on the pro-natal right.

Brain development and face

Shocking

http://www.unz.com/article/can-we-judge-people-by-what-they-look-like-in-fact-yes/

UNZ and VD are behind

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2018/01/appearances-may-not-be-deceptive-new.html

Appearances are not always deceptive. Indeed, quite the opposite! In this highly informative and entertaining mini-book, Dr Dutton surveys the psychological data in support of the neglected idea that we can tell a lot about someone from how they look. 

They’re still trying to ignore Charlton because he’s genuine.

Really it’s about character. Good or bad.

Do a study on the rise of ugly news readers.

LA never disappoints

They have full range.

https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/white-men-are-our-greatest-allies-they-hate-white-women-as-much-as-we-do-they-love-women-of-color.1212566/#post-31772662

I would like to point out that white men are our greatest allies. Yes, 62% of white men voted for Trump, but that is expected of them. The largest betrayal was 53% of white women voting for Trump. I hate them so much; the world would be a better place if white women all died, quite frankly. This includes the ones who are married to men of color like Madchen Amick and Ali Landry.
The 38% of white men who did not vote for Trump are our biggest allies because they truly have the power in the world. They are educated, wealthy, handsome, and successful. They use their power to uplift all minorities and they are passing on their wealth to minorities by marrying women of color.”

What White Fever?
Speaking of Our Men

you seem pressed.

https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/plain-looking-american-woman-in-japan-is-sad-that-she-cant-get-attention-poordat.832407/page-12#post-20912124

Anyway, I disagree. I hate white women (most are unattractive, envious, entitled, jealous), but I like most white men. I think white men are fine with their power crumbling. That’s why they date out the most. Their children with their nonwhite wives will obviously be nonwhite, too, and they will pass whatever wealth, assets, and benefits they have to those nonwhite children. They are contributing to the diminishing of the white supremacy structure and that’s a good thing.
Besides, white men are preferred by most. They have no reason to be insecure or envious of other men since they are the top of the food chain. White women, on the other hand, do … since not even their own men prefer them. They are trashed across the Internet, but white men are not. There are Tumblrs, threads, and other sites dedicated to white men who are with women of other races. There are NO things such as that dedicated to white women.”

This is what they really think about your Yellow Fever arse, they’re winning the gender war and the white genocide one. They are 100% woke on it. So when I see white men start insulting his own race bc Feminism, I want to strangle him for entirely justified reasons.
Race traitors sell us out.

https://www.lipstickalley.com/xfa-blog-entry/blog-53-abuse-what-happens-when-you-argue-with-a-narcissist.4918/
Then there are great posts.
The key is to never show a narcissist you’re being harmed by them. Negative people who want to bring about discord to pacify their inner chaos do not know how to respond to kindness and calmness. For them, it is an impenetrable barrier. They only know one thing and that is to create discord and see you suffer as a result. If they do not have their reaction, in either situation, they become absolutely powerless and they’ll show you what lies beneath without being able to control it. The vexation and agitation will build up in them to such an intent, that it’ll be a catastrophic explosion of rage etc that will obliterate the mask, the facade and hidden agenda.”

“The best advice posted in this blog is to emotionally detach and be unreachable. Be the unruly character that won’t be pigeonholed. This unnerves them to the core. When approached, I become Mr Spock, I don’t emote and I make them feel like they are being inspected and studied so that they avoid me. Ha!
They’re automatons, formulaic machines. Their response to seeing you pressed for time, rushing is to engage you by offering salutations and conversations to covertly frustrate you. If you nod while keeping it moving, you’ve ad libbed and gone off script!”

Hello bitch shield my old friend….

Things only attractive women know. They prey on politeness. But you’re not obliged to talk to strangers, actually – you’re not supposed to?
If they can’t be introduced via work or social circle, there’s a class conflict anyway.
Don’t bother with a Federline. REMEMBER FEDERLINE.

never 4get

Like, the fullest range.

https://www.lipstickalley.com/threads/instagram-th-ts-before-and-after-head-transplant-russian-edition.950189/page-27#post-30874353

“These girls are gorgeous, now. But, what I thought was hilarious is what I heard from a guy.. he said something I never thought of.
These men marry a stunning beauty, but they don’t realize they’re in for a huge shock when their kids come out with the features of her real face. Classic.”
10/10

Beauty is an advert for genes.

“Generally, I tend to have an idea on what sort of surgeries these women have had but I didn’t realize that some were getting lower eyelid surgeries and lip implants. I’m not sure if the video is in Russian or Ukrainian but I know it’s one of the two. ”
White women do the fake femininity thing too.
I didn’t post before because I hadn’t found fitting examples until now, I’m not excluding my own race.

Not a patch on Aaliyah, if we’re comparing races.

It’s a mistake I’ve pointed out before to apply individual judgements based on group-level differences.
The world doesn’t work like that, you have to look at the individual. If the group is SO (thing) then the individual will be too.

“The Russians sure do know how to do some lips. They need to bring their ass over here so these white housewives can stop hurting my eyesight.”


“The Koreans are the wizards of plastic surgery. If OP does a thread for them, you’d better be sitting down while you scroll. The Russians come in close second and the Brazilians are third.”

Men need to be informed.

See? I’m not being racist (today), I’m being bitchy. All races are doing this, but in different ways and I think it shits on various men from different heights. That is wrong.

Stop appropriating white culture

You look like you fell out of a student production of Shakespeare.
It’s like putting Tarzan in a three-piece, you look silly.

Asians don’t suit white clothes unless they’re vaguely slutty-looking because they retain their boyish figure. The fabric dwarfs them. Look at all the Asian sites selling our 20thC. clothing – high hemlines, tight on the chest, no sleeves, bedroom fabrics.
You can’t be white, please stop trying. The fake eyelids take the cake.

white-puff-sleeves-vintage-medieval-blouse asian model
There aren’t many ladylike or high-class non-white fashions, are there?
And they can never pull them off, most insultingly.

Renaissance Italy and previously Medieval Europe. Victorian buttons.

Rococo gilding, NW European. Gold ball, bead and stud jewelry, ancient European.

Celtic tribal knots and Arthurian coronets. Yes, stealing regalia. Find me an historical non-white Princess monarchy, Princess culture is a white invention, and a key stock character in our fairytales. Does Africa have fairytales, which are traditionally set in dense forests?
The metallurgy on the right is distinctively European and looks ancient Briton, which included examples of twisted silver work.

None of these people are original.
In artistic circles, that’s theft.
Traditionally, only conquerors wore the tokens of their defeated, replaced enemy. To mock them.

Just because SJWs are too dead above the neck to beauty to study fashion history doesn’t mean the rest of the world is fooled. Two of these photos came out in the past week.
The double standards of these people make me sick.
While you’re at it, give us back the antibiotics and die of leprosy.

Update: 

Some examples of proof, you can look up for yourself as well. In many cases, these things look directly lifted.





We had these before you had a culture.
Some respect is in order, if you’re going to steal our stuff and then cry White Supremacy for liking our own, advanced metallurgy.

Above: This is ancient Irish, not Egyptian.


Celtic tribal torc.

Shield detail, tribal warrior motif from the 1st century BC.
While you’re crying about the Maori.





Think very carefully before you segregate textiles too, because Europe invented most of them due to the constant weather changes and the manufacturing standard is pure British Industrial Revolution.