Godis: You are in sore need of some training in logical reasoning. If someone invokes a more animal-like appearance, then it does not mean that this is the same as an argument of inferiority because people know better than to base a judgment of superiority-inferiority on looks alone. Emily is under no illusion how well her skin would stand up to the sun in tropical Africa. This makes her no more inferior to Africans than the appearance of Africans makes them inferior to Emily.
I am not defending Emily’s use of ‘a more animal-like appearance.’ The term is incorrect and should have been avoided. Her reference is to the more overall ancestral facial appearance of sub-Saharan Africans, which is a fact. But you must not extrapolate Emily’s comment to an attempt on her part to dehumanize and treat Africans as inferiors. Putting words in people’s mouth is bad manners, and when you assign such serious charges (bias, sick views, no respect for others, etc.) then you force your opponent to defend herself; it’s a recipe for a disastrous flame war or trashed discussion thread.
The fallacy of your reasoning is aptly illustrated thus. Picture a dirty, smelly homeless beggar who cannot string a coherent sentence together, i.e., someone of little education and low intelligence. How would people react to him? Some will ignore him, others will tell him to go away, some will make fun of him, some may try to have fun with him, some would attack him, and some will help him with food or money. The helpers will have no doubts that they are superior to the beggar on most issues that matter, but they still ended up helping the beggar. This is a straightforward example of a generic situation documented in the sociological literature: beliefs of superiority are neither necessary nor sufficient for discriminatory, racist or dehumanizing behaviors. Thus, it does not follow from Emily’s stated beliefs about beauty that she necessarily harbors a view of overall superiority-inferiority or that she is desirous of or inclined toward discriminatory, racist or dehumanizing behaviors toward those she considers inferior on one or more counts.
You must not make serious accusations against people without good proof.
that yes this issue is about superiority. You are the one that reveals this over and over. You compare black people to appear more like animals. The only reason you would mention this is to give the reader an comparison. You want to associate people with animals, or less superior beings to us (since we are all animals technicall). This clearly shows that you believe white people to be more superior, because they are less animilistic. Therefore, this is a superiority issue. What you write is just a reflection of how you see people. You are attempting to dehumanize a whole race, and this is problematic. The problematic part is that you associate black people with inferior animals, dehumanizing them, and in turn suggesting that black people can be viewed and treated as inferiors. This is scary since we often kill animals and use them for labor. Hmmm....
Then you fail to acknowledge that black people can be athletically superior. You once again try to dehumanize them by demonstrating that they are prone to have lesser morals (I believe they are prone to taking steriods was the kind of comment you made). Black people in fact have higher testosterone levels allowing them to be more athletic than the other races on average. So you can acknowledge that Nordic women are more feminine and beautiful due to higher estrogen levels in women but you cannot acknowledge that black people are more athletic due to testosterone levels? Your bias and sick views are revealed over and over again. You have no respect for others and I question YOUR morals, not black peoples because "they take steroids".
"Some blacks may be better at some things, such as some sports(although I believe some of this might be due to blacks being more open and willing to taking steroids) and whites are generally better at "beauty".
There you go. You believe that the only way another race can be good at anything is if they take steroids or somehow artificially enhance their talents and attributes. Honestly, you believe that the white race is better at everything right? And more specifically Nordics.
Black people are better at sports because they are more adapted to a physically demanding environment. Hello, they come from Africa. Everything in Africa is wilder and bigger. Period. Maybe you should take a trip down there hunny, I don't think you'd last very long.
Whites cannot be better at beauty since beauty requires little to no effort. If you are beautiful chances are you are naturally beautiful. People are born beautiful and after that there is little effort to beinb beautiful besides maintaining oneself. SO your sentence should say that whites are luckier in the beauty area, not that they are better at being beautiful. Period.
Obviously, your comments are so biased its actually funny you think people are just mad at you because they are jealous. You try to make this a boo hoo for whites who can't voice their opinions. You make this issue about political correctness, when its actually not. People don't dislike you because you have a different opinion, they dislike you because your opinion is obviously biased.
Sarah: I didn’t delete your comment. Neither do I moderate comments. I don’t know what happened. Anyway, this website has nothing against women who are slim or women who have small breasts or women who are tall or women with all these features. I have featured examples of women that I like who happen to be slim or small-breasted or tall (and there are many such women that I will be adding to this website pending spare time; and these women are often classified in multiple categories such as being slender and small-breasted at the same time). I have also cited evidence that height has little to do with women’s attractiveness.
The issue of your own attractiveness depends on how it all fits together. You could be very appealing to straight men or you could be more appealing to nonheterosexual men, speaking of whom, one could find non-slim women with prominent breasts that these men will like more than men who are exclusively heterosexual. I don’t know how it all fits together in your case.
I'm hispanic and I agree that non-whites have the most to gain from the white gene pool, why is it that all the pretty non-whites are always mixed? Beyonce is mixed by her mother's side who is creole, not many black women are considered hot by the general public. Jessica Alba is another example. The most attractive people from different ethnic groups always tend to be mixed or white in facial features, and I find myself being attracted more to white women more then my own, not because I'm unwilling to date within my own, but because their is a shortage of truly gorgeous women.
"While I by no means think that every person is objectively beautiful, I do think the restrictions on this site are way too narrow and are quite ridiculous. There are all shapes and sizes that people find beautiful, and it is much more difficult to classify than with the simple restrictions provided here."
I think it is a misconception to label it "restrictions". On the contrary, I think it is necessary to create some kind of "role model" or "ideals" so that we can actually see and compare these to the modern masculine fashion model, if just to show how far off we are today in comparison to more healthy, natural and feminine ideals of the past.
Homosexual "powermen" within the fashion industry have been allowed for too long to dictate what beauty in women is supposed to be, even though they aren't even sexually attracted to these same women. They view women just like any other object that they are aestetically interested in. The core, raw, FEMININE sexual power that women have over heterosexual men are frightening and revolting to them, so they seek to suppress it, and almost never choose those kinds of women as models or standards of beauty.
Many of them are hostile to women, for obvious reasons, and the often extreme and ridiculous clothes designed for women by them, show that very clearly. Making women look like anorexic ghosts, denying them almost every feminine and natural aspect of their appearance, and making them starve themselves, tells you that these people don't have women's best interest in mind, nor the best interest of heterosexuals, in general.
In fact, I believe their goal is to create the illusion of one, androgynous gender, where feminine men and masculine women make it hard to even tell what gender they are, all in an attempt to show we are all equal, and that gender - just like race - is just a "social construct". Even now they show men in the media who give birth to babies, somehow proving men are just like women... of course not stressing the fact that these "men" were born women. I think society today is going crazy and that it has to stop.
Going back to feminine and truly pretty women - making them our role models - is far healthier and natural than these twisted and sick trends.
"TO be honest I am objecting to your racism not from a moral standpoint but from a beauty standpoint. Some of the most beautiful girls in the world are Mexican straight often long black hair round cheeks a short nose a very feminine figure u will find girls of both a lean feminine type as well as girls with large well proportioned breasts and butt with wide hips and narrow waists. They combine the Celtic and the native in a way that looks better than both races on their own."
Having a physical preference is NOT racism. They "combine the Celtic and the native".. Mexicans - like other non-whites - do benefit from racially mixing with whites. As usual they benefit and whites do not. Coarse "native" genes introduced in the white gene pool hardly benefits whites, generally speaking.
Most true Mexicans without any white blood are hardly most people's idea of beauty. If they are mixed with whites they can look good, obviously, thanks first and foremost to their white genes. If they look truly good it is often because they approach and look similar to whites - not because of looking native Mexican.
It is the diluting of Mexican blood that enhances their appearance. This is also true for other races/ ethnic groups that mix with whites.
Whites are a "recessive" race that give beauty to others while disappearing slowly themselves..
Non-whites LOVE to use the race card as soon as they are given an opportunity to do so, no matter how utterly ridiculous and empty their arguments may be. Here they seem to consistently inject racism and talk of "superiority", when the real issue is beauty and femininity. To me, it seems much like inferiority complex.
Saying it is racism to prefer your own people is laughable. Then the vast majority of people are racists since they DO tend to prefer their own people. Of course, only whites get attacked for this natural order - never non-whites, who on the contrary are encouraged to idolize their own and to show "racial pride" and a sense of identity and loyalty towards their own people, first and foremost.
To most people - regardless of race - whites, generally, are more beautiful and pleasing to the eye, and much more feminine. Generally speaking, black women don't even come close, often being far too robust, coarse and animal-like in appearance, unless racially mixed with whites or surgically altered in order to look more white, or less black, whichever way you prefer to look at it.
Some blacks may be better at some things, such as some sports(although I believe some of this might be due to blacks being more open and willing to taking steroids) and whites are generally better at "beauty". No one says life is fair, and regardless of what they told you when you were a kid we are not born "equals". The only thing we can do is live as good as we can with the cards we were dealt, and try not to be bitter about it. ;)
I think my post got deleted or something so I'll say it again. I do not see the point in this sight is it to tell people that they are ugly??? I am 5'10 1/2 have a cups and am NATURALLY slim no matter even if I eat loads will only put on a few pounds. So I am already aware of my height and small boobs but seeing the fashion models makes me feel better and it is because of them people say that I look good and "sexy". After seeing my looks quite literally disected and that I look like crap that only a gay will like to say the least I am upset. Are you trying to make people like me look bad and make fat people the new beauties of society. In other words are you campaigning so that people like me (tall, flat chested, slim) are laughed at and called the fuglies of society. By making others feel better you are telling people like me we are are crap. I'm so sorry I don't conform to what you call beautiful but let me assure you I have no control over being tall etc. Not liking someone for something they have no control over sounds like descrimination. One final point on how I came across this sight... Some girl that I don't get on too well with saterted saying stuff that only gays will like you you have a masculine body and you're only pretty because of society. When we made up she told me she came across this site so this was the source of abuse. So please don't delete this and do reply I would love to hear you're justification
Males have proportionally smaller torsos and longer thighs than females. The only logical explanation of these survey results are cultural bias and a small sample group
TO be honest I am objecting to your racism not from a moral standpoint but from a beauty standpoint. Some of the most beautiful girls in the world are Mexican straight often long black hair round cheeks a short nose a very feminine figure u will find girls of both a lean feminine type as well as girls with large well proportioned breasts and butt with wide hips and narrow waists. They combine the Celtic and the native in a way that looks better than both races on their own. The way they are all varying mixes seeing a group of beautiful Mexican women is like visiting a flower garden When they are wearing traditional folkloric costumes with all the layers of colors dancing around its enough to drive most men insane. But you go ahead and stick to your master race You are part of whats wrong with fashion not because you're a bigot I don't care about that all Im saying is your missing out add a little spice to your website and remember real women have curves
"Low rent" models are more likely to be employed by heterosexual men, so that would make sense. Just because an argument isn't politically correct doesn't mean it's not correct.
this is horrible. scrutinizing a glamorous woman is just as bad as scrutinizing a woman that you see down the street... and what is it that you are trying to achieve here? to make ordinary women feel better about themselves? by saying how a swimsuit model's butt doesn't look good?? this is the most awful site i have ever come across on the internet. you can't justify what you are doing and yes, this is a BITTER site.
"Kalash: I hope you realize that I am not under any obligation to answer your or anyone else’s questions. There are many unanswered questions here."
Yes ofcourse I understand you are under no obligation to answer ayones questions on here i never thought otherwise.
"The second was something to do with mixing of ethnic groups. I don’t recall what I said, but I doubt it was what you have stated, and I am positive that whatever I wrote was an attempt, that was unsuccessful, to prevent a political discussion of the issue of ethnic mixing".
Thats why i stated in brackets (perhaps i have understood it wrong) because I couldnt find the exact quote.
"The fourth issue you mentioned started as, “I certainly do not regard Europeans as better looking …” This was in response to my reply to Paul elsewhere. I don’t need to respond to this because what I said to Paul had nothing to do with your preferences."
I was not looking for a response to this comment as I fully realised when i wrote it that the comment was linked to individual in this case my preferences.
"Regarding self-esteem related to looks (body esteem), if you were to ask Europeans whether they have a higher opinion of their looks than those of other ethnic groups, then the majority will indicate a higher opinion of European looks, but if you were to survey how individuals feel about their own personal looks, then European will on average have lower regard for their own personal looks than those in a number of populations, particularly African and Pacific Islander populations."
You have confirmed exactly what I was thinking and if i have understood you correctly that europeans do have a higher opinion of the looks of there ethnic group as a whole than some other ethnic groups but on an individual basis they dont have a high opinion on average of there looks compared to many other populations. This is exactly the kind of impression i got from reading this emily girls posts.
Erik - Feminine and masculine are subjective terms - we learn what is feminine and masculine through our lives and each have subtle definitions. Biological factors such as testosterone and oestrogeon levels have obviously defined correlating characteristics associated with female and male forms and behaviour to the extent that there is an overlap and agreement amongst most people in a particular culture. However this is not the be all and end all of femininity and masculinity, since our sexual preferences are somewhat learnt. Evidence for this comes from studies that show we straight males fancy people who look like our mother etc. Furthermore studies have shown that combining faces of people, from the same or different gender results in a more attractive face, we like average looking people - or more precisely well-balanced. Many of the faces of the models you dislike because they show masculine features are more well-balanced and have less extreme masculinization or feminization. You are clearly less attracted to them, however their existence is not down to male attraction. You forget that it is women who buy clothes not men. Fashion is not solely driven by what men prefer, and it is certainly not driven by the smokey back-room board of malevolent paedophilic homosexuals you insinuate! Take for example the fact that most male fasion models are feminized. Like most things fashion is driven largely by sales of clothes/magazines etc, of which are largely bought by women. Porn however is driven by male consumption, and the fact that many of your models of beauty are porn models - your tastes are nothing out of the ordinary. Beauty is subjective, and although many people agree certain geometric forms and symmetry seem beautiful there is always subtle variation from person to person. There is not 'the most beautiful/feminine women in the world' which would be agreed on by all men, or could be shown objectively - for there are no criteria for this. Whilst your cause against eating disorders is worthy, by defining a different exclusive version of it you would be recommitting the very same sin of the fashion industry: Girls who did not look like your defined shape would be unhappy with themselves. (Besides there are numerous causes aside from social issues that cause eating disorders - http://www.nationaleatingdisorders.org/nedaDir/files/documents/handouts/WhatCaus.pdf)It is worrying that you are atetmpting to suggest to girls they need to conform and sinister that you provide steps to do so. I feel a balanced view point is to accept that beauty is subjective, each person to their own preferences. To promote physical health, we need stop focusing on superficial discussion of physical characteristics, and more on health - I like to point out how unhealthy some models look. Also be tolerant - people can have surgery if they want to and people should never be persecuted for who they are attracted to, only on how they act. This is the 21st century after all!
And when I say, "Nordics had little to do with anything", I don't mean like literally they didn't accomplish anything, but I am saying I don't believe they were involved in EVERYTHING that was successful and great and advancing.
Emily is also reasonable as in someone who has mostly left reasonable comments.
At her worst, she self-destructed because of people like you. She made it a point to ignore useless and foul commentary by you, prompting you to bait her, as in the following example (see earlier on in the comments on this article):
lol Erik, maybe she destructed because she is not that bright in certain aspects. Maybe she self-destructed because half the crap that she typed was just crap. A reasonable person? Honestly. Wow. Just wow. Really? Did you read the crap she wrote?
You claim that the reason she acted the way she did was because people "baited" her. If she was wise or had half a brain she would not respond to the bait. Everyone gets hot headed sometimes and writes things they regret later, but she took it so far. It was a reflection of her character. Emily doesn't write here anymore because she has no integrity or honor left. She lacks morals, respect for others and respect for herself. She acted like a stuck up girl whom obviously has low self-confidence.
In your "special" world, lack of self-esteem is good sometimes. Northern Europeans are not satisfied, that is why they strive for the better right? Everyone else who has good self-esteem is happy with the way they are. They stop evolving or improving because they are happy with the minimum right? But no not Northern Europeans, they will never be happy because they are always looking to be better. Whatever. It's all bull crap. Again, you put "Nordics" or "Northern Europeans" on a pedestal. This is why they are not lazy like all the other races right? You have interesting biased ideas about Nordics. You like Emily obviously believe they are somehow superior. You are probably one of those people that believe that Nordics somehow had to do with anything successful such as Ancient Egypt, the Roman Empire, you can probably find a way to hold them responsible for why the ancient Mayans were so intelligent as well. Because somehow where there is any sign of intelligence,progress,greatness, the Nordics had something to do with it, when in my opinion they had little to do with anything really. Then you claim Emily has high self-esteem because she has so much pride.
This is not true. People who have too much pride have low-self esteem. Their pride is a reflection of what they are trying to do to themselves: Lie to themselves. Emily lies to herself and lies to others. She has to attach herself to a superior "race" because without that identity she would have no identity or worth to herself. She knows she is an average bland girl, but pretends she is part of a group of angels(Nordics) shat out of heaven. This complex she has about herself is just the result of low-self esteem.
Healthy self-esteem regards someone who can recognize their special characteristics, but also someone who can recognize they are not perfect and that they should also try to better themselves and the society around them.
Emily does not have healthy self-esteem. Most people don't. But most people don't go around posting crap. She also has to put down whole races to make herself feel "special". Please. You could do all the research you want on the subject I don't care. Sometimes science can be an embarrassment because its not really science. These days everything gives you cancer, and it takes scientists billions of dollars to prove common sense things. Sometimes I read a new scientific study and I ask myself, " It took them a study to figure this out? Really". So you cannot convince me what self-esteem is with a bullcrap article that proves nothing. I know from 20yrs of experience how it applies to people. When you have something reasonable that is worth reading, show me. Even though I am being a hippocrite because I haven't actually read that article. I'll admit it. But what you are writing makes no sense and I got a very high score on the reading section of my standardized tests, ivy league kind of score, I don't think I am misunderstanding, I really do believe, from what you write, the study is flawed.
Kalash: I hope you realize that I am not under any obligation to answer your or anyone else’s questions. There are many unanswered questions here.
Why are comments allowed here? I occasionally get useful feedback or criticism, which is what matters to me.
When replying to comments, I try to reply to comments that don’t take a lot of my time, comments that feature more serious criticisms of my arguments, and comments coming from troublemakers (hoping to put an end to their troublemaking).
Replying to other comments is a lower priority matter. Some people mention issues that have already been addressed. I need to have spare time to repeat my arguments. Less relevant/off-topic issues are also a low priority matter unless they are coming from troublemakers.
I admit that some on-topic questions have gone unanswered because the troublemakers have taken a lot of my time or I forgot about them because I have been caught up with too many things.
Two points you have brought up are irrelevant to this site. The first was the ethnic origin of the Kalash. The second was something to do with mixing of ethnic groups. I don’t recall what I said, but I doubt it was what you have stated, and I am positive that whatever I wrote was an attempt, that was unsuccessful, to prevent a political discussion of the issue of ethnic mixing. This site is not about the topic of ethnic mixing or any political issues associated with it.
The third issue you brought up was, in relation to self-esteem, whether Europeans don’t have a high opinion of their looks? Again, this is tangential to this site.
The fourth issue you mentioned started as, “I certainly do not regard Europeans as better looking …” This was in response to my reply to Paul elsewhere. I don’t need to respond to this because what I said to Paul had nothing to do with your preferences.
I will answer what I can.
Different European, Middle Eastern (some part-European) and European-like central Asian populations have passed through SouthWest Asia. Which of these left their impact on some local tribes is difficult to answer without much investigation. The other possible explanation of the lighter pigmentation/more European features in your example of the Kalash girl is indigenous development, but we note that different tribes that have been long-term residents of the same small geographic region but largely practicing inbreeding can be different in average pigmentation/features. This is consistent with a foreign input leading to more European looks, which is consistent with various genetic studies and archeological evidence.
If the European element has been diluted by local elements, then this would account for why many of the people, in spite of having light pigmentation, have an ethnic look distinguishing them from Europeans. Or the input could be from central Asian migrants that had lighter features but facial features different from Europeans to start with.
Years ago there was a rudimentary genetic study examining whether some of the tribes in southwest Asia showed descent from Greeks (Alexander’s Greek-Macedonian army). They didn’t find much useful data. But there are a couple of problems here. The genetic study was rudimentary. A Greek-Macedonian input would have been diluted in 2,300 years even if we assume that it was substantial in the beginning. And, most people in the Greek-Macedonia area today hardly descend from the upper class/warrior people in the Greek-Macedonia area that Alexander led on his way to conquer most of the then-known world.
Regarding self-esteem related to looks (body esteem), if you were to ask Europeans whether they have a higher opinion of their looks than those of other ethnic groups, then the majority will indicate a higher opinion of European looks, but if you were to survey how individuals feel about their own personal looks, then European will on average have lower regard for their own personal looks than those in a number of populations, particularly African and Pacific Islander populations.
Peter: I am not trying to put you down. I am trying to make you understand that your poor comments are not welcome here. You should do the honorable thing and move on. Or be made to move on.
My statement, “I didn’t say anything about Emily being reasonable or whether she has issues or not” is a reference to your commenting on my reply to Voice of Reason, which didn’t address Emily’s reasonableness or her issues.
My calling Emily a reasonable person in a comment addressed to her, in response to a different article, is not related to my putting words in your mouth or anyone else’s. Emily is reasonable as in someone who can be reasoned with. Emily is also reasonable as in someone who has mostly left reasonable comments.
At her worst, she self-destructed because of people like you. She made it a point to ignore useless and foul commentary by you, prompting you to bait her, as in the following example (see earlier on in the comments on this article):
EMILY!!!!!!!!!!! EMILY!!!!!!!!!!!! Darling what do i have to get your attention????
Do i have to call you a BITCH or start posting pictures of unattractive Nords???
Alas! She took the bait and destructed. Again, do the honorable thing and leave.
Rene: If that is you, the featured woman, then consider sending me (the webmaster of this site) close-ups of your face because the ones that I have all feature the bad eye make-up. See contact page for my email. Thanks.
Is there any reason you havnt answered my question, i notice that whenever anybody leaves an off topic or topics so very indirectly related to the website i.e this peter and emily character have done on numerous occasions you respond to there comments but yet when someone leaves something related to the website or beauty you dont seem to respond. whats the point of allowing people to leave comments when the only ones you seem interested in answering are the ones that have no relevence to the site.
you wrote
"Whereas this site argues that it is not possible to objectively compare the attractiveness of different ethnic groups, the argument is technical and abstract. In practice, people generally regard Europeans or whiter-looking people among their own better looking"
I certainly do not regard europeans as better looking though i agree that most people find whiter looking people amongst there own better looking which i would say is more closer to the point than "people generally regard Europeans" better looking.
Bad arguments must end!
Godis: You are in sore need of some training in logical reasoning. If someone invokes a more animal-like appearance, then it does not mean that this is the same as an argument of inferiority because people know better than to base a judgment of superiority-inferiority on looks alone. Emily is under no illusion how well her skin would stand up to the sun in tropical Africa. This makes her no more inferior to Africans than the appearance of Africans makes them inferior to Emily.
I am not defending Emily’s use of ‘a more animal-like appearance.’ The term is incorrect and should have been avoided. Her reference is to the more overall ancestral facial appearance of sub-Saharan Africans, which is a fact. But you must not extrapolate Emily’s comment to an attempt on her part to dehumanize and treat Africans as inferiors. Putting words in people’s mouth is bad manners, and when you assign such serious charges (bias, sick views, no respect for others, etc.) then you force your opponent to defend herself; it’s a recipe for a disastrous flame war or trashed discussion thread.
The fallacy of your reasoning is aptly illustrated thus. Picture a dirty, smelly homeless beggar who cannot string a coherent sentence together, i.e., someone of little education and low intelligence. How would people react to him? Some will ignore him, others will tell him to go away, some will make fun of him, some may try to have fun with him, some would attack him, and some will help him with food or money. The helpers will have no doubts that they are superior to the beggar on most issues that matter, but they still ended up helping the beggar. This is a straightforward example of a generic situation documented in the sociological literature: beliefs of superiority are neither necessary nor sufficient for discriminatory, racist or dehumanizing behaviors. Thus, it does not follow from Emily’s stated beliefs about beauty that she necessarily harbors a view of overall superiority-inferiority or that she is desirous of or inclined toward discriminatory, racist or dehumanizing behaviors toward those she considers inferior on one or more counts.
You must not make serious accusations against people without good proof.
Oh,
And might I add Emily,
that yes this issue is about superiority. You are the one that reveals this over and over. You compare black people to appear more like animals. The only reason you would mention this is to give the reader an comparison. You want to associate people with animals, or less superior beings to us (since we are all animals technicall). This clearly shows that you believe white people to be more superior, because they are less animilistic. Therefore, this is a superiority issue. What you write is just a reflection of how you see people. You are attempting to dehumanize a whole race, and this is problematic. The problematic part is that you associate black people with inferior animals, dehumanizing them, and in turn suggesting that black people can be viewed and treated as inferiors. This is scary since we often kill animals and use them for labor. Hmmm....
Then you fail to acknowledge that black people can be athletically superior. You once again try to dehumanize them by demonstrating that they are prone to have lesser morals (I believe they are prone to taking steriods was the kind of comment you made). Black people in fact have higher testosterone levels allowing them to be more athletic than the other races on average. So you can acknowledge that Nordic women are more feminine and beautiful due to higher estrogen levels in women but you cannot acknowledge that black people are more athletic due to testosterone levels? Your bias and sick views are revealed over and over again. You have no respect for others and I question YOUR morals, not black peoples because "they take steroids".
Sorry, the paragraph above was by me.
Emily,
"Some blacks may be better at some things, such as some sports(although I believe some of this might be due to blacks being more open and willing to taking steroids) and whites are generally better at "beauty".
There you go. You believe that the only way another race can be good at anything is if they take steroids or somehow artificially enhance their talents and attributes. Honestly, you believe that the white race is better at everything right? And more specifically Nordics.
Black people are better at sports because they are more adapted to a physically demanding environment. Hello, they come from Africa. Everything in Africa is wilder and bigger. Period. Maybe you should take a trip down there hunny, I don't think you'd last very long.
Whites cannot be better at beauty since beauty requires little to no effort. If you are beautiful chances are you are naturally beautiful. People are born beautiful and after that there is little effort to beinb beautiful besides maintaining oneself. SO your sentence should say that whites are luckier in the beauty area, not that they are better at being beautiful. Period.
Obviously, your comments are so biased its actually funny you think people are just mad at you because they are jealous. You try to make this a boo hoo for whites who can't voice their opinions. You make this issue about political correctness, when its actually not. People don't dislike you because you have a different opinion, they dislike you because your opinion is obviously biased.
Sarah: I didn’t delete your comment. Neither do I moderate comments. I don’t know what happened. Anyway, this website has nothing against women who are slim or women who have small breasts or women who are tall or women with all these features. I have featured examples of women that I like who happen to be slim or small-breasted or tall (and there are many such women that I will be adding to this website pending spare time; and these women are often classified in multiple categories such as being slender and small-breasted at the same time). I have also cited evidence that height has little to do with women’s attractiveness.
The issue of your own attractiveness depends on how it all fits together. You could be very appealing to straight men or you could be more appealing to nonheterosexual men, speaking of whom, one could find non-slim women with prominent breasts that these men will like more than men who are exclusively heterosexual. I don’t know how it all fits together in your case.
Hi Emily
I'm hispanic and I agree that non-whites have the most to gain from the white gene pool, why is it that all the pretty non-whites are always mixed? Beyonce is mixed by her mother's side who is creole, not many black women are considered hot by the general public. Jessica Alba is another example. The most attractive people from different ethnic groups always tend to be mixed or white in facial features, and I find myself being attracted more to white women more then my own, not because I'm unwilling to date within my own, but because their is a shortage of truly gorgeous women.
"While I by no means think that every person is objectively beautiful, I do think the restrictions on this site are way too narrow and are quite ridiculous. There are all shapes and sizes that people find beautiful, and it is much more difficult to classify than with the simple restrictions provided here."
I think it is a misconception to label it "restrictions". On the contrary, I think it is necessary to create some kind of "role model" or "ideals" so that we can actually see and compare these to the modern masculine fashion model, if just to show how far off we are today in comparison to more healthy, natural and feminine ideals of the past.
Homosexual "powermen" within the fashion industry have been allowed for too long to dictate what beauty in women is supposed to be, even though they aren't even sexually attracted to these same women. They view women just like any other object that they are aestetically interested in. The core, raw, FEMININE sexual power that women have over heterosexual men are frightening and revolting to them, so they seek to suppress it, and almost never choose those kinds of women as models or standards of beauty.
Many of them are hostile to women, for obvious reasons, and the often extreme and ridiculous clothes designed for women by them, show that very clearly. Making women look like anorexic ghosts, denying them almost every feminine and natural aspect of their appearance, and making them starve themselves, tells you that these people don't have women's best interest in mind, nor the best interest of heterosexuals, in general.
In fact, I believe their goal is to create the illusion of one, androgynous gender, where feminine men and masculine women make it hard to even tell what gender they are, all in an attempt to show we are all equal, and that gender - just like race - is just a "social construct". Even now they show men in the media who give birth to babies, somehow proving men are just like women... of course not stressing the fact that these "men" were born women. I think society today is going crazy and that it has to stop.
Going back to feminine and truly pretty women - making them our role models - is far healthier and natural than these twisted and sick trends.
"TO be honest I am objecting to your racism not from a moral standpoint but from a beauty standpoint. Some of the most beautiful girls in the world are Mexican straight often long black hair round cheeks a short nose a very feminine figure u will find girls of both a lean feminine type as well as girls with large well proportioned breasts and butt with wide hips and narrow waists. They combine the Celtic and the native in a way that looks better than both races on their own."
Having a physical preference is NOT racism. They "combine the Celtic and the native".. Mexicans - like other non-whites - do benefit from racially mixing with whites. As usual they benefit and whites do not. Coarse "native" genes introduced in the white gene pool hardly benefits whites, generally speaking.
Most true Mexicans without any white blood are hardly most people's idea of beauty. If they are mixed with whites they can look good, obviously, thanks first and foremost to their white genes. If they look truly good it is often because they approach and look similar to whites - not because of looking native Mexican.
It is the diluting of Mexican blood that enhances their appearance. This is also true for other races/ ethnic groups that mix with whites.
Whites are a "recessive" race that give beauty to others while disappearing slowly themselves..
Non-whites LOVE to use the race card as soon as they are given an opportunity to do so, no matter how utterly ridiculous and empty their arguments may be. Here they seem to consistently inject racism and talk of "superiority", when the real issue is beauty and femininity. To me, it seems much like inferiority complex.
Saying it is racism to prefer your own people is laughable. Then the vast majority of people are racists since they DO tend to prefer their own people. Of course, only whites get attacked for this natural order - never non-whites, who on the contrary are encouraged to idolize their own and to show "racial pride" and a sense of identity and loyalty towards their own people, first and foremost.
To most people - regardless of race - whites, generally, are more beautiful and pleasing to the eye, and much more feminine. Generally speaking, black women don't even come close, often being far too robust, coarse and animal-like in appearance, unless racially mixed with whites or surgically altered in order to look more white, or less black, whichever way you prefer to look at it.
Some blacks may be better at some things, such as some sports(although I believe some of this might be due to blacks being more open and willing to taking steroids) and whites are generally better at "beauty". No one says life is fair, and regardless of what they told you when you were a kid we are not born "equals". The only thing we can do is live as good as we can with the cards we were dealt, and try not to be bitter about it. ;)
Erik,
I think my post got deleted or something so I'll say it again. I do not see the point in this sight is it to tell people that they are ugly??? I am 5'10 1/2 have a cups and am NATURALLY slim no matter even if I eat loads will only put on a few pounds. So I am already aware of my height and small boobs but seeing the fashion models makes me feel better and it is because of them people say that I look good and "sexy". After seeing my looks quite literally disected and that I look like crap that only a gay will like to say the least I am upset. Are you trying to make people like me look bad and make fat people the new beauties of society. In other words are you campaigning so that people like me (tall, flat chested, slim) are laughed at and called the fuglies of society. By making others feel better you are telling people like me we are are crap. I'm so sorry I don't conform to what you call beautiful but let me assure you I have no control over being tall etc. Not liking someone for something they have no control over sounds like descrimination. One final point on how I came across this sight... Some girl that I don't get on too well with saterted saying stuff that only gays will like you you have a masculine body and you're only pretty because of society. When we made up she told me she came across this site so this was the source of abuse. So please don't delete this and do reply I would love to hear you're justification
Sarah
Males have proportionally smaller torsos and longer thighs than females. The only logical explanation of these survey results are cultural bias and a small sample group
"Yeah, maybe Eva has hair on her arm, "
she has it because she's so skinny, her body is growing hair for warmth. That's more gross than any leg hair.
TO be honest I am objecting to your racism not from a moral standpoint but from a beauty standpoint. Some of the most beautiful girls in the world are Mexican straight often long black hair round cheeks a short nose a very feminine figure u will find girls of both a lean feminine type as well as girls with large well proportioned breasts and butt with wide hips and narrow waists. They combine the Celtic and the native in a way that looks better than both races on their own. The way they are all varying mixes seeing a group of beautiful Mexican women is like visiting a flower garden When they are wearing traditional folkloric costumes with all the layers of colors dancing around its enough to drive most men insane. But you go ahead and stick to your master race You are part of whats wrong with fashion not because you're a bigot I don't care about that all Im saying is your missing out add a little spice to your website and remember real women have curves
"Low rent" models are more likely to be employed by heterosexual men, so that would make sense. Just because an argument isn't politically correct doesn't mean it's not correct.
link | Submitted by Erik on Thu, 04/30/2009 - 05:25.
Godis: I would like to know myself why Hitler went after Jews
Maybe Money/economics because they were hording up wealth?
this is horrible. scrutinizing a glamorous woman is just as bad as scrutinizing a woman that you see down the street... and what is it that you are trying to achieve here? to make ordinary women feel better about themselves? by saying how a swimsuit model's butt doesn't look good?? this is the most awful site i have ever come across on the internet. you can't justify what you are doing and yes, this is a BITTER site.
"Kalash: I hope you realize that I am not under any obligation to answer your or anyone else’s questions. There are many unanswered questions here."
Yes ofcourse I understand you are under no obligation to answer ayones questions on here i never thought otherwise.
"The second was something to do with mixing of ethnic groups. I don’t recall what I said, but I doubt it was what you have stated, and I am positive that whatever I wrote was an attempt, that was unsuccessful, to prevent a political discussion of the issue of ethnic mixing".
Thats why i stated in brackets (perhaps i have understood it wrong) because I couldnt find the exact quote.
"The fourth issue you mentioned started as, “I certainly do not regard Europeans as better looking …” This was in response to my reply to Paul elsewhere. I don’t need to respond to this because what I said to Paul had nothing to do with your preferences."
I was not looking for a response to this comment as I fully realised when i wrote it that the comment was linked to individual in this case my preferences.
"Regarding self-esteem related to looks (body esteem), if you were to ask Europeans whether they have a higher opinion of their looks than those of other ethnic groups, then the majority will indicate a higher opinion of European looks, but if you were to survey how individuals feel about their own personal looks, then European will on average have lower regard for their own personal looks than those in a number of populations, particularly African and Pacific Islander populations."
You have confirmed exactly what I was thinking and if i have understood you correctly that europeans do have a higher opinion of the looks of there ethnic group as a whole than some other ethnic groups but on an individual basis they dont have a high opinion on average of there looks compared to many other populations. This is exactly the kind of impression i got from reading this emily girls posts.
Thank you for getting back to me Erik.
Erik - Feminine and masculine are subjective terms - we learn what is feminine and masculine through our lives and each have subtle definitions. Biological factors such as testosterone and oestrogeon levels have obviously defined correlating characteristics associated with female and male forms and behaviour to the extent that there is an overlap and agreement amongst most people in a particular culture. However this is not the be all and end all of femininity and masculinity, since our sexual preferences are somewhat learnt. Evidence for this comes from studies that show we straight males fancy people who look like our mother etc. Furthermore studies have shown that combining faces of people, from the same or different gender results in a more attractive face, we like average looking people - or more precisely well-balanced. Many of the faces of the models you dislike because they show masculine features are more well-balanced and have less extreme masculinization or feminization. You are clearly less attracted to them, however their existence is not down to male attraction. You forget that it is women who buy clothes not men. Fashion is not solely driven by what men prefer, and it is certainly not driven by the smokey back-room board of malevolent paedophilic homosexuals you insinuate! Take for example the fact that most male fasion models are feminized. Like most things fashion is driven largely by sales of clothes/magazines etc, of which are largely bought by women. Porn however is driven by male consumption, and the fact that many of your models of beauty are porn models - your tastes are nothing out of the ordinary. Beauty is subjective, and although many people agree certain geometric forms and symmetry seem beautiful there is always subtle variation from person to person. There is not 'the most beautiful/feminine women in the world' which would be agreed on by all men, or could be shown objectively - for there are no criteria for this. Whilst your cause against eating disorders is worthy, by defining a different exclusive version of it you would be recommitting the very same sin of the fashion industry: Girls who did not look like your defined shape would be unhappy with themselves. (Besides there are numerous causes aside from social issues that cause eating disorders - http://www.nationaleatingdisorders.org/nedaDir/files/documents/handouts/WhatCaus.pdf)It is worrying that you are atetmpting to suggest to girls they need to conform and sinister that you provide steps to do so. I feel a balanced view point is to accept that beauty is subjective, each person to their own preferences. To promote physical health, we need stop focusing on superficial discussion of physical characteristics, and more on health - I like to point out how unhealthy some models look. Also be tolerant - people can have surgery if they want to and people should never be persecuted for who they are attracted to, only on how they act. This is the 21st century after all!
And when I say, "Nordics had little to do with anything", I don't mean like literally they didn't accomplish anything, but I am saying I don't believe they were involved in EVERYTHING that was successful and great and advancing.
Emily is also reasonable as in someone who has mostly left reasonable comments.
At her worst, she self-destructed because of people like you. She made it a point to ignore useless and foul commentary by you, prompting you to bait her, as in the following example (see earlier on in the comments on this article):
lol Erik, maybe she destructed because she is not that bright in certain aspects. Maybe she self-destructed because half the crap that she typed was just crap. A reasonable person? Honestly. Wow. Just wow. Really? Did you read the crap she wrote?
You claim that the reason she acted the way she did was because people "baited" her. If she was wise or had half a brain she would not respond to the bait. Everyone gets hot headed sometimes and writes things they regret later, but she took it so far. It was a reflection of her character. Emily doesn't write here anymore because she has no integrity or honor left. She lacks morals, respect for others and respect for herself. She acted like a stuck up girl whom obviously has low self-confidence.
In your "special" world, lack of self-esteem is good sometimes. Northern Europeans are not satisfied, that is why they strive for the better right? Everyone else who has good self-esteem is happy with the way they are. They stop evolving or improving because they are happy with the minimum right? But no not Northern Europeans, they will never be happy because they are always looking to be better. Whatever. It's all bull crap. Again, you put "Nordics" or "Northern Europeans" on a pedestal. This is why they are not lazy like all the other races right? You have interesting biased ideas about Nordics. You like Emily obviously believe they are somehow superior. You are probably one of those people that believe that Nordics somehow had to do with anything successful such as Ancient Egypt, the Roman Empire, you can probably find a way to hold them responsible for why the ancient Mayans were so intelligent as well. Because somehow where there is any sign of intelligence,progress,greatness, the Nordics had something to do with it, when in my opinion they had little to do with anything really. Then you claim Emily has high self-esteem because she has so much pride.
This is not true. People who have too much pride have low-self esteem. Their pride is a reflection of what they are trying to do to themselves: Lie to themselves. Emily lies to herself and lies to others. She has to attach herself to a superior "race" because without that identity she would have no identity or worth to herself. She knows she is an average bland girl, but pretends she is part of a group of angels(Nordics) shat out of heaven. This complex she has about herself is just the result of low-self esteem.
Healthy self-esteem regards someone who can recognize their special characteristics, but also someone who can recognize they are not perfect and that they should also try to better themselves and the society around them.
Emily does not have healthy self-esteem. Most people don't. But most people don't go around posting crap. She also has to put down whole races to make herself feel "special". Please. You could do all the research you want on the subject I don't care. Sometimes science can be an embarrassment because its not really science. These days everything gives you cancer, and it takes scientists billions of dollars to prove common sense things. Sometimes I read a new scientific study and I ask myself, " It took them a study to figure this out? Really". So you cannot convince me what self-esteem is with a bullcrap article that proves nothing. I know from 20yrs of experience how it applies to people. When you have something reasonable that is worth reading, show me. Even though I am being a hippocrite because I haven't actually read that article. I'll admit it. But what you are writing makes no sense and I got a very high score on the reading section of my standardized tests, ivy league kind of score, I don't think I am misunderstanding, I really do believe, from what you write, the study is flawed.
'unique' to you is another word for fug, what a sad excuse.
Kalash: I hope you realize that I am not under any obligation to answer your or anyone else’s questions. There are many unanswered questions here.
Why are comments allowed here? I occasionally get useful feedback or criticism, which is what matters to me.
When replying to comments, I try to reply to comments that don’t take a lot of my time, comments that feature more serious criticisms of my arguments, and comments coming from troublemakers (hoping to put an end to their troublemaking).
Replying to other comments is a lower priority matter. Some people mention issues that have already been addressed. I need to have spare time to repeat my arguments. Less relevant/off-topic issues are also a low priority matter unless they are coming from troublemakers.
I admit that some on-topic questions have gone unanswered because the troublemakers have taken a lot of my time or I forgot about them because I have been caught up with too many things.
Two points you have brought up are irrelevant to this site. The first was the ethnic origin of the Kalash. The second was something to do with mixing of ethnic groups. I don’t recall what I said, but I doubt it was what you have stated, and I am positive that whatever I wrote was an attempt, that was unsuccessful, to prevent a political discussion of the issue of ethnic mixing. This site is not about the topic of ethnic mixing or any political issues associated with it.
The third issue you brought up was, in relation to self-esteem, whether Europeans don’t have a high opinion of their looks? Again, this is tangential to this site.
The fourth issue you mentioned started as, “I certainly do not regard Europeans as better looking …” This was in response to my reply to Paul elsewhere. I don’t need to respond to this because what I said to Paul had nothing to do with your preferences.
I will answer what I can.
Different European, Middle Eastern (some part-European) and European-like central Asian populations have passed through SouthWest Asia. Which of these left their impact on some local tribes is difficult to answer without much investigation. The other possible explanation of the lighter pigmentation/more European features in your example of the Kalash girl is indigenous development, but we note that different tribes that have been long-term residents of the same small geographic region but largely practicing inbreeding can be different in average pigmentation/features. This is consistent with a foreign input leading to more European looks, which is consistent with various genetic studies and archeological evidence.
If the European element has been diluted by local elements, then this would account for why many of the people, in spite of having light pigmentation, have an ethnic look distinguishing them from Europeans. Or the input could be from central Asian migrants that had lighter features but facial features different from Europeans to start with.
Years ago there was a rudimentary genetic study examining whether some of the tribes in southwest Asia showed descent from Greeks (Alexander’s Greek-Macedonian army). They didn’t find much useful data. But there are a couple of problems here. The genetic study was rudimentary. A Greek-Macedonian input would have been diluted in 2,300 years even if we assume that it was substantial in the beginning. And, most people in the Greek-Macedonia area today hardly descend from the upper class/warrior people in the Greek-Macedonia area that Alexander led on his way to conquer most of the then-known world.
Regarding self-esteem related to looks (body esteem), if you were to ask Europeans whether they have a higher opinion of their looks than those of other ethnic groups, then the majority will indicate a higher opinion of European looks, but if you were to survey how individuals feel about their own personal looks, then European will on average have lower regard for their own personal looks than those in a number of populations, particularly African and Pacific Islander populations.
Peter: I am not trying to put you down. I am trying to make you understand that your poor comments are not welcome here. You should do the honorable thing and move on. Or be made to move on.
My statement, “I didn’t say anything about Emily being reasonable or whether she has issues or not” is a reference to your commenting on my reply to Voice of Reason, which didn’t address Emily’s reasonableness or her issues.
My calling Emily a reasonable person in a comment addressed to her, in response to a different article, is not related to my putting words in your mouth or anyone else’s. Emily is reasonable as in someone who can be reasoned with. Emily is also reasonable as in someone who has mostly left reasonable comments.
At her worst, she self-destructed because of people like you. She made it a point to ignore useless and foul commentary by you, prompting you to bait her, as in the following example (see earlier on in the comments on this article):
Alas! She took the bait and destructed. Again, do the honorable thing and leave.
Rene: If that is you, the featured woman, then consider sending me (the webmaster of this site) close-ups of your face because the ones that I have all feature the bad eye make-up. See contact page for my email. Thanks.
Erik
Is there any reason you havnt answered my question, i notice that whenever anybody leaves an off topic or topics so very indirectly related to the website i.e this peter and emily character have done on numerous occasions you respond to there comments but yet when someone leaves something related to the website or beauty you dont seem to respond. whats the point of allowing people to leave comments when the only ones you seem interested in answering are the ones that have no relevence to the site.
you wrote
"Whereas this site argues that it is not possible to objectively compare the attractiveness of different ethnic groups, the argument is technical and abstract. In practice, people generally regard Europeans or whiter-looking people among their own better looking"
I certainly do not regard europeans as better looking though i agree that most people find whiter looking people amongst there own better looking which i would say is more closer to the point than "people generally regard Europeans" better looking.
Pages