OLD CONTENT
www.theguardian.com/science/2019/apr/17/cheating-men-can-be-spotted-by-their-face-type-study-suggestsExperts found men with more “masculine” faces were more likely to be thought to be unfaithful, and such men also self-reported more cheating or “poaching” of other men’s partners
...
The team said being suspicious of men with masculine features – such as a strong browridge, strong jaw and thinner lips – might have offered an evolutionary advantage, allowing heterosexual women to spot a flaky partner and men to recognise a potential rival who might seduce their partner or leave them raising someone else’s child.
Previous research has suggested women are able to spot unfaithful men from their mugshot, with the masculinity of the man’s face a key factor in the judgment, while weaker effects have been found for men weighing up images of women.
Therefore aesthetic standards (e.g. Western) that prefer non-Aryan (ie. low neoteny, high sexual dimorphism) facial features are inferior. Which is what we already knew.
---
www.bbc.com/future/story/20190619-how-your-looks-shape-your-personalityOne study out of Germany’s University of Göttingen recently reported that of more than 200 men, those who were physically stronger and who had more “macho” bodies – including larger chests and biceps – also tended to be more extroverted, especially in the sense of being more assertive and physically active. The same strength-extroversion association was not found among the women in the study.
...
Other research has suggested that your approach to hooking up with relationship partners may also be a strategic adaptation influenced by your bodily and facial features, especially if you are male. For instance, in their research involving hundreds of undergrads, Aaron Lukaszewsk at Loyola Marymount University and colleagues, including Christina Larson and Kelly Gildersleeve at the University of California, found that the men (but not the women) who were stronger – based on a weight-training test – and more attractive were more likely to say that sex without love is okay, and that they could happily have sex with someone without being close to them.
This pattern of findings is consistent with the idea that among our male ancestors, those in better physical shape had more reproductive success by engaging in lots of casual sex and that such a sexual strategy has since evolved as a response to being physically capable. “The current findings support the hypothesis that stronger and more attractive men have more sex partners in part because these men are calibrated toward the pursuit of uncommitted mating opportunities,” the researchers wrote.
This fits our characterization of mesomorphy and robustness as non-Aryan.
Of course, what I take issue with is the article taking for granted that such features as "more attractive" or "better physical shape".
By Western standards these features may be considered such, but what we are here to do is to toss out Western standards and establish different standards.
I myself have always aesthetically despised heavy builds. Besides being obviously non-neotenous, heavy builds also waste energy in two ways: 1) the extra mass demands extra nutrition just to maintain in equilibrium; 2) during physical activity, the extra mass requires extra energy to move. The most energy-efficient build for a farming lifestyle is a light build that combines gracility with ectomorphy (which I also expect to positively correlate with the most romantic (including non-promiscuous) personality), which is what Aryan women should prefer in men. In other words, women who prefer robustness and/or mesomorphy in men are non-Aryan.
(Ironically, many women appreciate gracility and ectomorphy in women, yet not in men. In general, I can't stand people with gender-based aesthetic double-standards.)
---
www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/fb-5636031/ARE-MEN-SHORT-WIDE-FACES-LIKELY-CHEAT.htmlThe results showed that men and women with a high FWHR – square and wide faces – reported a greater sex drive than others.
Men with a larger FWHR were also more easy-going when it comes to casual sex and would consider being unfaithful to their partners.
The researchers hope the findings will shed light on the role that facial features play in sexual relationships and mate selection.
Their research builds upon previous studies that have shown that certain psychological and behavioural traits are associated with particular facial width-to-height ratios (FWHR).
Square-faced men tend to be perceived as more aggressive, more dominant, more unethical, and more attractive as short-term sexual partners than men with thinner and longer faces.
This shows that FWHR and the traits listed in the earlier posts such as heavy brow ridge, chest, etc. are all part of a consistent archetype - which was what I predicted from the beginning.
---
The archetype continues to be fleshed out:
medicalxpress.com/news/2013-10-low-voiced-men-em-women.html
Men with low-pitched voices have an advantage in attracting women, even though women know they're not likely to stick around for long.
...
"Until now, it's been unclear why women would like the voices of men who might cheat. But we found that the more women thought these men would cheat, the more they were attracted to them for a brief relationship when they are less worried about fidelity."
Another job for state control over reproduction!
---
www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/7902663/cheaters-have-longer-index-fingers/Contrary to previously held beliefs, women who have more "feminine" traits are less likely to remain faithful
I told you so.
Eiluned Pearce measured the fingers of 275 female volunteers and also sampled their DNA, before getting them to complete psychological tests about their relationships.
She found that "women with higher (more feminine) left-hand digit ratios are more impulsive and rate their romantic relationships less favourably" -which she said was "intriguing, because the opposite might be expected".
Not by me. Only worshippers of high sexual dimorphism would think that:
Scientists previously believed that they'd been exposed to higher levels of female sex hormones in the womb and therefore were "more feminised" and were more likely to be satisfied with romantic relationships.
Wrong, wrong, wrong! Femininity is evil, just as masculinity is evil!
Combined with the above posts about male infidelity, we now have a complete picture. The best men are the least masculine men, and the best women are the least feminine women, exactly as I had predicted from the beginning using no empirical data but only our (now validated) theory of Original Nobility.
---
**** the new weapon of choice
Ramallah, West Bank - **** movies and programmes in Hebrew are being broadcast by Israeli troops who have taken over three Palestinian television stations of Ramallah, irate residents of the besieged West Bank town said on Saturday.
The offices of three local television and radio stations were occupied by soldiers on Friday morning, a few hours after tanks and hundreds of troops stormed the town in Israel's biggest offensive against the Palestinian Authority and its leader Yasser Arafat.
The soldiers started broadcasting the **** clips - considered extremely offensive by most Muslims - intermittently on Saturday afternoon from the Al-Watan, Ammwaj, and Al-Sharaq channels, the residents said.
"The pornographic movies started on Al-Watan television at around 03:30," one 34-year-old Palestinian mother named Reema said.
"I have six children at home, they have nowhere to go with what is going on here and can't even watch TV," she said angrily.
"It's not healthy really. I think the Israelis want to mess with our young men's heads," she said.
www.news24.com/xArchive/Archive/****-the-new-weapon-of-choice-20020330
---
Purely aesthetically speaking, I have never liked
****. Remember that time I tried to explain the difference between
**** and gravure on the old blog?
aryanism.net/blog/aryan-sanctuary/colohoax-confirmed/comment-page-2/#comment-170360
We should consider promoting gravure as a clean alternative to
****. Whereas
**** demeans the performers, gravure pedestalizes them. Thus in terms of psychological impact on the viewer, whereas
**** leads to desensitization (and consequently the need for increasingly
**** performances just for the same effect), gravure leads to sensitization (and consequently the demand for increasingly subtle performances). A gravure fan looking at
**** will find it so unsubtle as to evoke only disgust. This is what we should aim at: not people refusing
**** out of fear of being aroused by it, but people refusing
**** because they find it too aesthetically crude to be arousing.
---
I recall reading somewhere that Aryans are able to much more easily control their naturalistic tendencies when younger, as opposed to non-Aryans. This is why celibacy is valued in youth in Aryan culture, in contrast to non-Aryan culture which promotes asceticism/celibacy in old age.
For example, this guy:
www.rooshv.com/5-layers-of-sexual-temptationIf you’re a fornicator, you may find the above examples silly, but if you’re chaste, you understand how hard it is to remain so in a secular world that has elevated **** and sex to virtues. You will be tempted nearly every which way you turn, not just from pornography and real-life women, but also advertisements, movies, and music videos. It’s almost as if those in power want you to think of sex constantly. The average woman in her prime is more than eager to play along with this agenda.
I know that my biggest weakness is the female flesh. I have very little willpower to defend against an attractive woman, so I’ve had to identify and block the main areas where they tempt me while praying to God for help. If there’s no temptation, there’s no lust, and if there’s no lust, the desire to fornicate diminishes. I’m still a hot-blooded man, but thanks to these efforts, I’m much more in control of my passions than before.
So while non-Aryans such as Roosh V (Gentile?) may indeed be sincere when he says he wants to control his sexual impulses, the fact is at this late an age (40), it is of little to no consequence, especially when he was at the center of promoting Eurocentrism at the height of PUA. Perhaps the good thing that has come out of all this is that Roosh V's adventures in PUA have destroyed his ability to bond so much that he will not enter a long term relationship in the foreseeable future and thus will not reproduce.
---
"Aryans are able to much more easily control their naturalistic tendencies when younger, as opposed to non-Aryans."
If referring to sex drive only, this should be a straightforward function of our lower sexual dimorphism.
Roosh V looks like this FFS:
You can tell he is a sex maniac from his primitive appearance (esp. facial hair area (but note also the upper arm hair)) alone.
---
"You can tell he is a sex maniac from his primitive appearance"
But according to the False Left he is just a basement-dwelling virgin! LMAO (rofl)
Are the False Left really that stupid, or are they simply too cowardly to confront the truth that sex maniacs do indeed exist?
The False Left's tendency to gravely underestimate their enemies will get us all killed tbh
---
"If referring to sex drive only"
Yes
In terms of fornication, I recall that we were discussing that contraception will no doubt do some good in preventing births by sex maniacs, but (as you have mentioned) what good is it when the sex maniacs can simply now reproduce at their own volition? The only solution is state control over reproduction, which Roosh, being a traditionalist*, will not accept. While the general cultural shift to lower sexual dimorphism itself will somewhat select against these types of men, which is why he laments over the inability to find a partner, only state control over reproduction will definitively phase people like him out.
* I recall in one of his blogs he mentioned that the Enlightenment "rationalist" (i.e. empiricist) of trying to accumulate as many partners as possible because it is in accordance with one's Darwinist biological imperatives was wrong, but only because that type of sex was "sterile", and so the solution he proposed was to encourage sex that actually resulted in reproduction, because the latter was what was truly in accordance with one's biological imperatives. Roosh V is a primalist, plain and simple.
---
"Perhaps the good thing that has come out of all this is that Roosh V's adventures in PUA have destroyed his ability to bond so much that he will not enter a long term relationship in the foreseeable future and thus will not reproduce."
The women who find Roosh V attractive enough to be willing to have sex with him are the ones who should be prohibited from reproducing.
In the grand scheme of things, it won't make much difference if Roosh V doesn't reproduce, since the same women willing to reproduce with him will just reproduce with some other similarly primitive man instead, since that is what they find sexually stimulating. But if the National Socialist state manages through state control over reproduction to eliminate from the gene pool all the matrilineal bloodlines attracted to non-neotenous traits, then all the Roosh V types in the world will be unable to get sex even if they want it (unless they resort to
****). That is what we are here to do.
---
"since the same women willing to reproduce with him will just reproduce with some other similarly primitive man instead, since that is what they find sexually stimulating."
A common trope I have heard is that Jewish women cheat on their partners for more masculine and aggressive Gentile men, hence why wee see feminists such as Laurie Penny (Jew) promoting PUAs. This would lead to selection in favor of offspring that carry both Jewish cunning and Gentile aggression in their blood, as manifest in present day Israelis.
---
Although not strictly infidelity, non-monogamy is a driving force of sexual dimorphism:
Sexual dimorphism is often caused through evolution in response to male male competition and female choice.[15] In polygamous species there is a noted sexual dimorphism. The sexual dimorphism is seen typically in sexual signaling aspects of morphology. Males typically exhibit these dimorphic traits and they are typically traits which help in signaling to females or male male competition.[17][26] In monogamous species sexual conflict is thought to be lessened, and typically little to no sexual dimorphism is noted as there is less ornamentation and armor. This is because there is a relaxation of sexual selection.[17]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monogamy_in_animals#Sexual_dimorphism
So while non-Aryans such as Roosh V (Gentile?) may indeed be sincere when he says he wants to control his sexual impulses, the fact is at this late an age (40), it is of little to no consequence, especially when he was at the center of promoting Eurocentrism at the height of PUA. Perhaps the good thing that has come out of all this is that Roosh V's adventures in PUA have destroyed his ability to bond so much that he will not enter a long term relationship in the foreseeable future and thus will not reproduce.
I mean, he still has 35+ years where he could reproduce.
---
"Although not strictly infidelity, non-monogamy is a driving force of sexual dimorphism"
I wish our enemies understood that legislative monogamy =/= fidelity in practice:
Home
Search
Login
Register