Tuesday, January 10, 2017

Diversity + Proximity = War, One Exception

"Diversity + Proximity = War" is the great Heartiste 21st century slogan that encapsulates tribal warfare. One out though, which the American 20th century experiment proved was, it is possible to build a pan euro society. You know who ruined this with Marxist education, media and immigration, but an American identity was built across very different groups from inside and outside the hajnal line. The secret: are the men but especially are the women of comparable beauty.

Diversity will create winners and losers per the strengths and weaknesses of the disparate groups. Skills, abilities, physical traits are distributed differently among groups. Research shows even blind men prefer women with a lower waist to hip ratio. Nature is hardwired, and even the greatest propaganda machine in the history of the world has a hard time getting people to change their preferences (in action, not how they answer an opinion survey). Losers, and being part of the group that is disadvantaged, will create resentment, envy and anger.

There is no greater anger than being rejected sexually and for marriage. Cruise the internet, and you will find bitter men and women of different groups that lose out in the mating market. I chuckle considering how my wife saw Eliot Rodger's picture and thought he was a cute guy, but when she found out his height, knew why he was rejected by women. Living in a nation where the average height was well above his, Rodger was a mating market loser. He also went on an incel rage killing spree. Go even deeper and check out Tumblr for the odd stirrings of segregated dating. Black women are constantly advocating this, but even holy progressive whites are considering interracial dating as a kind of theft from groups (yes, it is comical). Side note: black women are so angry that white women are proud to have booties that they are saying white women are evolving as black women set the standard. Some white women always did, but they never knew it was okay to be proud of it until the media pushed J.Lo.



One must look beyond the Tumblrite talking points about beauty. The collage above is a fun collection of the composite faces from each nation per Facebook pictures. This is not simply skin tone. The disproportionate mating success issue is not skin tone but body shape and the facial bone structure. When non-white crybabies whine about white ideals of beauty, they are trying to make it about color and not about the underlying bone structure, hair and body shape.

Do we need to even discuss average BMIs, the waist to hip ratios of groups, hair? Look at the skulls below. The true trick to European facial beauty is the inverted pyramid of the nasal bridge and jaw. The soft jawline is the key to the feminine look, but the inverted pyramid gives the face a three dimensional look that the human eye finds desirable. No amount of Halle Berrys and Toni Braxtons, who still had facial plastic surgery, paraded on television is going to change the street level daily interactions of millions of people.



Peace also took decades for all, more than a century with the Irish, by breaking the mannerbunds of different American ethnic enclaves. There had to be crack downs on mafias, organized crime, etc. in combination with the spotlighting of the good of the Anglo system of law and order. It took decades to convince other groups to buy into it, but there had to be a carrot and stick approach. A carrot was that the economic system allowed for those not as cognitively blessed to prosper via manual labor or simply homesteading. One of America's greatest secret spices for success was always having new area to explore, fill and claim.

The carrot and stick also had help in that Anglos, Germans, Italians, Irish, Scandis and other Euro descended populations could feel that the mating market had parity. The American mutt could come into being because the overlap between groups was so great. Even media use of Madonna was a way of approving and saying "yes ethnic whites are just as good as the Anglo-Nordic ideal of beauty". If the women of each group in the melting pot has some comparable level of beauty and has strengths another group doesn't have and likewise the men of each group finds them all desirable, you can have peace.

Diversity + Proximity = War but not in all cases.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

I 100% agree that the beauty differences are not wholly about skin.

However, the light skin does matter. White skin is more attractive. I am almost sure its why White Skin evolved in the first place.

All other theories are bunk, including vitamin D, agriculture, etc.

Males selecting light skinned females is why White Skin evolved.

Even today, females of every single race on earth have slightly lighter skin than the males of that race.

Its obvious.

Now, dark-skinned women can be attractive, obviously. Sometimes the dark skin is sultry. But if you are a man, take a snapshot next time you lust after a darker girl. It is almost always a short-term lust, you want to sneak her into an alley, not the long-term "my god she's beautiful" want to have kids with her lust.

I think we all have those r-select vs. K-select modules.

Son of Brock Landers said...

Anon - Good points. Your point on skin tone is backed up simply by evolution. All evolution is who looks better or who kills better. People select for beauty and the world selects by death. That is evolution.



Other readers - I had to delete a tiny duck comment as he made a claim easily falsified by looking at marriage/dating preferences as revealed by online dating and even marriage stats. I didn't want him to clog up the comments section with a lame troll.

J said...

Yes, this is in line with Peter Frost's theory. Fairness is intrinsically attractive to men because it signals youth, and men have also been shown to favor rare specimens. To summarize, ice age Europe had an excess of females due to high mortality rates of young men. Nearly all food had to be hunted by men rather than gathered by women. Some Inuits had a similar problem, but their solution was female infanticide. 3 important takeways from this: women were more dependent on husbands for survival, men generally couldn't afford to support more than 1 spouse (select for monogamy), and competition for husbands was much greater (select for attractiveness). Frost uses this idea to explain the development of unique hair and eye colors, but I think it also explains the prevalence of other attractive features like small chins and noses, relatively long legs, etc.

Angry Midwesterner said...

I remember during med school, some guys and I were shooting the shit about which female classmates we would make a swimsuit calendar for. I remember two cucks (they did vote Romney) justhad to insist this affirmative action black chick was hot, Michelle O style.

One of the few moments that cemented my rep as 'the racist' when word got out of my vehement veto and disgust to such an idea. I laugh at such virtue signaling now, but at the time, I actually did get shit for having never been attracted to a black chick, like not those Halle Berry mulattos, but like an actual black chick ever. (still haven't)

Bone structure makes a huge difference that even being skinny can't make up for. Plastic surgeons and ENTs understand that even if they dance around race. Frankly most surgeons, the doctors most attuned to human anatomy, live in such ridiculous denial.

Jokah Macpherson said...

"Living in a nation where the average height was well above his, Rodger was a mating market loser. He also went on an incel rage killing spree."

I am pretty sympathetic to incel rage but a web search says he was 5'9", which is within a reasonable confidence interval of US male average. While 5'9" isn't going to generate attraction just from walking into a room, plenty of guys this height and shorter get laid and/or married all the time. Rodger on the other hand had a whole myriad of issues stacked against him, including for whatever reason very poor social calibration.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Salger said...

It's apparent from listings of sexy men that European women don't have Negroids or overly Negroid looking men high when it comes to bodily sex appeal.

http://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/gallery/sexiest-hottest-men-of-2015-2016

http://worldsmostbeautifuls.com/worlds-most-handsome-men-2016-poll/

Alexandros HoMegas said...

We need to destroy the media now. CNN/WaPo/NYT are pretty determined in getting rid of Trump

Son of Brock Landers said...

Angry Midwesterner - I've seen and worked with attractive black women but on the average, its not even close. Outside strip clubs, I've seen two (TWO) in my entire life that I would have a relationship with, and I've lived in big cities full of them. The weird way some white guys try to signal and elevate some is pathetic. Carla Campbell though was a fantastic looking and truly black woman, not a 65% white Halle berry.

Jokah - My dad is 5'4" and did well. I know short guys can do well, but Eliot was a munchkin and yes, socially awkward with mental issues.

Anonymous said...

Eliot Rodger *said* he was 5'9''. Which is what pretty much any guy between 5'5'' and 5'8'' says when they want to lie up, but know 5'10'' is too much of a stretch.

Smart money is on 5'6''.

kurt9 said...

We need to destroy the media now. CNN/WaPo/NYT are pretty determined in getting rid of Trump.

LOL! It seems to me the media is doing a good job of this on their own. It turns out the "golden shower" story was made up and that both the CIA and media have been punked once again.