Post reply

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:
Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: December 03, 2025, 05:10:19 pm »

"I think what he was trying to say that it beautiful people (regardless of ethnicity) are more beautiful than ugly people (regardless of ethnicity)."

If you have to find a top percentile member of group P to beat a bottom percentile member of group Q, you are implying that group Q is superior on average.

A more neutral statement would be: "A beautiful Indian woman will be more attractive than 99% of white women."

A minimal anti-Eurocentric statement would be: "A beautiful Indian woman will be more attractive than a beautiful white woman."

A statement as anti-Eurocentric as his statement is Eurocentric would be: "A beautiful white woman will be more attractive than unattractive Indian women." (Why didn't he say this?)

"The fact he understand the beautiful people are their own race does show that he at least has some rudimentary understanding race and Aryanism."

Except his need to compare a beautiful Indian woman with unattractive "white" women, but not also the other way round, implies that he believes beauty is more common among "whites". (For the record, I agree that high sexual dimorphism is more common among "whites". But anyone who equates high sexual dimorphism with beauty is not following Aryan aesthetics.)
Posted by: antizion
« on: December 03, 2025, 09:42:59 am »

Quote from: 90sRetroFan on September 24, 2024, 03:55:31 am
(By the way, note the tweeter's Eurocentrism despite trying to present otherwise:

https://x.com/meditationmonke/status/1825882286480343243

Quote
A beautiful Indian woman will be more attractive than an unattractive white woman...

That he has to compare a beautiful Indian woman with an unattractive "white" woman already reveals how the two groups actually rate inside his Eurocentric mind.)

I think what he was trying to say that it beautiful people (regardless of ethnicity) are more beautiful than ugly people (regardless of ethnicity).

Quote
researching into Blackpill led me to realise that beautiful people are their own race, no matter where they come from in the world..be it geographically, culturally or socio economic strata wise

The fact he understand the beautiful people are their own race does show that he at least has some rudimentary understanding race and Aryanism. (Compare to the replies, which still can't see past ethnicity.)
Posted by: rp
« on: October 05, 2024, 06:42:59 pm »

https://x.com/DoungaJohn/status/1841798286962745688?t=_Aob4sJUOGRqq0MMSRrlVQ&s=19
Quote
If the baby is disabled/crippled in ultrasound, Why not just do an abortion?

Why give birth to the child so he can suffer the rest of his life?
Quote
Blackpilled since he was born.

Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: September 24, 2024, 03:55:31 am »

(By the way, note the tweeter's Eurocentrism despite trying to present otherwise:

https://x.com/meditationmonke/status/1825882286480343243

Quote
A beautiful Indian woman will be more attractive than an unattractive white woman...

That he has to compare a beautiful Indian woman with an unattractive "white" woman already reveals how the two groups actually rate inside his Eurocentric mind.)
Posted by: rp
« on: September 24, 2024, 01:54:58 am »

"I would rather attribute it to overpopulation. But I am aware that this is because overpopulation occupies my own mind"
Overpopulation has also been occupying my own mind recently. I realized how it makes folkism more difficult. I also realized how fecundity more generally causes breakdown in relationships among extended family members, as they start prioritizing their offspring more (financially or otherwise).
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: September 23, 2024, 08:58:45 pm »

Does there have to be a single explanation? Is it not more reasonable to assume that each particular case had its own situational cause?

But if you insist that I offer a single explanation, I would rather attribute it to overpopulation. But I am aware that this is because overpopulation occupies my own mind, therefore am I prone to bias in attributing other phenomena to it. The real question is: if the tweeter is behaving similarly, what issue occupies the tweeter's mind?

The point is: tweets like these say more about the tweeter than anything else.
Posted by: rp
« on: September 23, 2024, 08:15:29 pm »

Ok. Then what explains mother's cruelty toward sons? Every other day I here about some subaltern mother in India killing her son.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: September 23, 2024, 07:43:35 pm »

I think you are giving the tweeter too much credit. Look at some of his other tweets FFS:

https://x.com/meditationmonke/status/1724037127447396752

https://x.com/meditationmonke/status/1746553760388730885

He also takes sexual dimorphism obsession to the next level:

https://x.com/meditationmonke/status/1780940102652276915
Posted by: rp
« on: September 23, 2024, 07:00:21 pm »

"Unless the tweeter is claiming the woman isn't sure who fathered the child and has to see what the child looks like in order to check!"
Yes. This is what I think.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: September 23, 2024, 06:13:48 pm »

If so, they would have aborted them and then passed it off as miscarriage. Why wait for the child to be born? (Unless the tweeter is claiming the woman isn't sure who fathered the child and has to see what the child looks like in order to check!)
Posted by: rp
« on: September 23, 2024, 07:30:37 am »

Is this true?
https://x.com/meditationmonke/status/1837491458950987894?t=3O2Kj-x2c5Vf_H30GRDmAQ&s=19
Quote
Women hate their children especially sons born from the seed of men they don't love or don't feel attracted to..

They feel this constant itch to kill them, child sacrifice them to Moloch
Posted by: rp
« on: May 28, 2023, 07:50:19 pm »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovTuwlFVbQ0
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: May 19, 2023, 09:45:50 pm »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BuiHZh4FRw

The correct solution is for the state to prevent the conception in the first place. But False Leftists such as Hayes who are against state control will not even discuss this True Left option.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: April 25, 2023, 06:55:28 pm »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBEv37i2JpU

In the past, the following query was often raised: "Wouldn't it make more sense for rightists to support abortion (which would include more "non-white" abortions than "white" abortions as "non-whites" become the majority)?" I now finally understand why it would not. It is because the optimal strategy (which I believe rightists subconsiously sense even if they are not consciously aware of it) for "white" supremacy is as many "white" births as possible, even if it also means as many "non-white" births as possible at the same time.

Why is this? Answer: because it is likely that "white" machinists/N "white" births > "non-white" machinists/N "non-white" births. Thus when both sides increase their fertility by the same factor, "whites" get more additional machinists out of the increase than "non-whites" do.

Imagine if gene pool P produces 1 machinist/1000000 births, while gene pool Q produces 0 machinists/1000000 births. If fertility is sufficiently low for both P and Q, the likely outcome is for neither to produce even a single machinist in a given generation. On the other hand, if fertility is sufficiently high for both P and Q, the likely outome is for P to produce at least one machinist while Q continues to produce no machinists in a given generation. In the latter scenario, it won't matter even if Q outnumbers P in total population, because that one machinist could invent a machine that becomes a force multiplier for P in war against Q to a degree that more than offsets any advantage Q had over P from raw population number.

Reality may not be as clear-cut as 1 vs 0, but the principle still holds.
Posted by: 90sRetroFan
« on: February 04, 2023, 05:05:46 pm »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZK53NsUJzc