True Left

"he even got the bullies' face shapes correct!"

Not only did they get the face shapes, but they even got the clothing too.

At 0:30, you'll see the girl on the right has a pleated skirt, a collared shirt, a visible necktie, earrings and for the hair, it looks pretty...graphic and even has a bow. The girl on the left has plain jeans, a basic shirt, hair that looks straight and unembellished and no earings.

At 1:16, you'll see the same girl with the teal cardigan next to a boy wearing a shirt with another visible collar and a sexually dimorphic haircut (still comparable with the girl on the left).

At 2:55 (which is the thumbnail), the man doing the pinching has a plain black outfit and hair where each strand is in harmony, while the one being pinched has a hair where the strands are all over the place.

At 3:18, the hair of the girl on the left is still as superior as it was before it was cut, and just like the man's hair, the strands of the girl's hair is simple and in uniformity. Not to mention their tops are also simple.

Just to be sure, does hair length matter? Because even though you mentioned how superior long hair was here:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/issues/dress-decolonization/msg10479/#msg10479

Wouldn't you mind short hair if it coincides with everyone else, if it's low in maintenance and if it's cut for more temporary reasons (e.g. emulating individuals, cutting split ends without changing its current length)?

"Not only did they get the face shapes, but they even got the clothing too."

"society continues to delusionally think of bullying as learned behaviour rather than simply the normal behaviour of bully bloodlines"

Does the same apply for hate?

"High sexual dimorphism is inferior. Low sexual dimorphism is superior. How the low sexual dimorphism is achieved is for different societies to decide (probably based on practical considerations such as humidity etc.)."

Could that logic also apply for makeup? Because it seems like the issue is not only sexual dimorphism:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/human-evolution/re-sexual-dimorphism-preferences/msg4434/#msg4434

While I would disagree with someone who likes makeup on both males and females, I would not consider such a person aesthetically inferior as they at least have no gender-based double-standard. (I would consider still them ecologically/economically inferior, but that is a separate discussion.)

But looking at the NS Uniforms, uniformity seems just as important as the simplicity of dress. Maybe even more. And even with the western elements like collars and neckties, the uniforms still make up with its all black/brown/feldgrau theme. Agriculture fields are also just as superior.

Thanks for making it more clear. I apologize for asking so many questions, but I've been reading Aryanism and True Left since late 2010s that I have a lot of questions to ask.

*EDIT-This post was accidentally in quotations, so I edited it.

"Does the same apply for hate?"

Hate is not evolutionarily adaptive. Bullying is:

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/human-evolution/non-aryan-aggressiveness/msg2342/?topicseen#msg2342

https://trueleft.createaforum.com/human-evolution/non-aryan-aggressiveness/msg3556/#msg3556

"Could that logic also apply for makeup?"

I stand by what I said in my quote.

"Ignore my accidental quotation"

Why not edit your own post to remove it?