Lin said "Testosterone has the effect(of) .. increasing the leg :body ratio "
I'm interested in a reference for this and whether it would mean the most masculine women having the greatest leg:body ratio?
Stating the obvious, lengthening of the legs is the amongst the last changes before adulthood, most human beings with short legs are juveniles.
Hi, I'm a final year medical student, and I did a semester in paediatrics and had to read up a fair bit on growth and developement and stuff. Testosterone has the effect increasing height and increasing the leg : body ratio. This is why when a seemingly taller man and a shorter woman sit down, they height difference is diminished. Longer legs are evolutionaryly more advantageous -- you can ran faster and farther, you are better able to support your torso etc.
So why do guys like long legged girls? This must be one of the great ironies of life and physical attraction. Our genes, including those that controll sexual dimorphism as well as sexual attraction, are the results of random mutations after all. It's a wonder that they posses the order that they do, so it's not hard to imagine they must be a little non-sensical here and there.
Long leg legth in females is not the only physical attraction that's wierd in terms of having no explanation from a reproductive or sexually dimorphic angle. What about long necks and big collar bones on females? These are also attributes that are enhanced by testosterone and not oestrogen. Ever wondered why so many boys seem to have longer eyelashes than their sisters? I think this is a testosterone things as well -- you know, like facial hair.
Perhaps there are actually relevent genetic reasons as to why we find body parts attractive in the sex that does not naturaly come by them. For example, collar bones stick out more when you are thin, long necks disappear into flesh as you get older, and a healthy weight and youthfulness are relevent to the reproductive ability of females.
Can't think of a similar reason for legs though. I'm going with it's a media thing. Having grown up in subcontinental Asia for ten years, I can assure you that nobody slobbered over long legged girls. In fact, most parts of a woman were supposed to be smaller than most parts of a man, including legs. Even a long neck was considered unattractive.
I'm 22 years old, I could, if I wanted, walk around with a push up bra and revealing top but I don't... In my experience, It would only attract the lechers and rooters, especially in clubs and bars, I don't want any of them.
Men, if you are the dirty rooting lecher predator kind that uses women and throws them out, the world would be better off without you. I hope you die. Most men are rooters in western society, they just want to root around, a whore to take home for the night. You are very lucky to make a man commit to a relationship even for beautiful feminine attractive women.
Men just want to use women, pick up young teens in bars, watch porn, go to hookers and strippers and the like.
The only men that ever approach me are the rooters and lechers, the dirty STD filled men that have sex with 100's of women. Men always want to use women, they will disguise it however they can, they are a pack of lies. If men are good looking, have a nice car or job, they use women even more esp. the young naive teen girls.
The sexual revolution failed, big time, men spread their perversions like wildfire and jump from one woman to the next like a flee.
If your going to treat me like a whore you can at least pay me. But they don't I get nothing, not even a coffee or a meal.
On the topic of feminine beauty, have you ever considered that the high fashion models were chosen for their atypical looks which is pleasing to to the aesthetics of art?
I am an artist myself and I find 'some' of the high fashion models very beautiful; yet the others still retain my interest through their intriguing faces. These women, to me, look much more refined and elegant and have much more of a presence than your glamor models whom resembles somewhat typical females in society.
Your information is quite bempty as it focuses only on one aspect of the industry. I honestly believe fashion originated from art itself; the clothes, although odd and displaced if worn in public, reflect the wide boundaries of art. Thus why the fashion designers will never choose a more typical women to represent their clothes. They want their designs to look different and controversial and engages the audience.
Lastly your very homophobic remarks is very much evident throughout this website. You are referring a homosexual to a pedophile by provocatively suggesting that the homosexual fashion designers enjoy the aesthetics of underage teenage boys, which i can ensure you is not true as I have seen some gay couples in the city area and almost all look quite muscular and masculine and are NOT dating underage boys. If you look at the male models in the industry right now, you will see the same resemblance (muscular) and most of them now have very distinct face, some not exactly handsome, which is uncommon in a typical male which further reinforces my concept of art aesthetics being a factor in choosing models to represent designer clothes.
In conclusion I believe that you Erik, want the models to fit YOUR desires and why a heterosexual man like yourself would even be bothered in the women's fashion industry, as their clothes do not appeal to you. I stand by the concept of the fashion industry being a branch of art as shown by the clothes and the models.
Looking at the short legged figures I get an impression of small overall size, indeed most people with short legs are of below average height so the Polish results may be due to lack of enthusiasm for short men.
Studies are often on subjects of higher than average social class which means less testosteronised on average,a high proportion of the most testosteronised men are not in colleges ect. where subjects are recuited, it is worth bearing in mind that Polish men have a rather high finger ratio.
Men having slightly short legs for the same height would be more heavily built - a masculine trait.
Men are predatory shit that need to be exterminated.
It doesn't matter how good/kind the woman is, they're only into rooting around!! They will try to disguise it, but it's true. It's always their goal to root and shoot through as many women as possible, like those poor girls above.
The sexual revolution is a failure - it lead to a lot of girls being used and tossed out like rubbish by dirty lecher men.
At least before the sexual revolution their perversions were more controlled.
Now the birth rate has dropped off.
And my generation (GEN Y) is going to bear the brunt of the ageing population.
Casual sex is not 'An equal opportunity pleasure for women', it hurts and stings like hell!!
I'm so sick of men, the only ones I ever meet or approach me are the dirty lecher kind, they hook girls in - by whatever deceptive means they can - then fuck them and when they are finished using them they toss them out like trash.
And I would rather die than be used and tossed out by another dirty rooting lecher man.
If men are going to treat me like a whore, they can at least pay me!!
Ruslana was murdered, it's so obvious.
Erik, why don't you do a new post on how men have 4X the rates of psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder compared to women, - (Biology and hormones are the basis for the gender imbalance). Thats your things isn't it Erik?
The gender imbalance is controlling for differences in upbringing, socio-economic status, education etc etc. - no loopholes there Erik.
And yes Erik, it's true, sexual selection has enabled men to more easily pass on their genes whilst maintaining repulsive, even psychopathic personality traits, all they have to do is have sex - by whatever deceptive means they see fit - even rape. As always the woman, providing she survives childbirth, is left to look after the dirty psycho lecher mans babies and his sons who turn out to be psychopathic like him with his male sex linked psycho genes.
And Erik, why don't you write about the biological and behavioural differences between the sexes, specifically mens comparative sexual promiscuity/sexual aggression, shallow affect and lack of conscience - which is why it's more likely to be men, not women, that have a tendency toward violence, sexual abuse and rape and any other antisocial behaviour which plagues society.
why the fuck did this dumbass that wrote this article put "transgendered male" they obviously have no idea in the slightest about transgenders or what they're talking about. a "transgendered male" is a ftm "female to male", while a "transgendered female" is a mtf. Get your facts straight idiot and stop posting ignorant shit.
A study reportedly found that the longer the legs (irrespective of height) the less chance a man has of a heart attack, but actuaries think very tall men are at high risk of early death(presumably due to XYY and Marfans). Barbie has extremely long legs as do artists pin-ups(apart from Fritz Willis),GI Joes legs don't look long.
The Slutz - sorry - Bratz dolls seem to be preferred over Barbie, the bridge of the nose looks like the opposite of derived to to me.
The abominable dolls will be pushed onto kids ostensibly for health education- social engineering is what they are really about. The justification for exposing toddlers to sex education dolls is http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-411266/Over-sexed-The tarty-Bratz-Doll.html another doll
I think there is a lot of stuff going on here, but I wonder if the 0% rate of Studio Art major virginity is anything to do with nonheterosexuality / developmental disturbance (especially if their intelligence is indeed lower) / prenatal testosterone.
Hi Erik,
My comment wasn't for you: It was Zahi Stephens. I just like to add my two cents, but i am glad you are getting some mileage out of your post from three years ago.
An authority on bodybuilding said blacks had an advantage over whites in the colour of their skin. Whites must agree, some of the them apply so much tanning solution they look like Al Jolson.
I commented on your citing Rohrmann in a superior tone, Erik that stuff is way over my head I can only understand P.Frosts conclusions, regression analysis ect. is beyond me. I forgot some people like to work things out for themselves and have the expertise to do so. Please don't waste time on this issue.
And please don’t distort my argument by saying I am accusing homosexuals of being pedophiles. Regarding wife beaters, deadbeat dads and the sort, this website has nothing to do with them. And this site is not about male fashion models, but you might be interested in reading the latest on the body weight requirements of male fashion models. Come up with a better explanation of the female high-fashion models’ looks trinity (very thin, masculine, teenagers) or quit.
I'm glad it wasn't complete rubbish even if you were unimpressed with the wording.I don't like that word either but its in what the statment was pinched from, an answer in the comments at evo and proud. We could call it CSI (Caring and Sharing Inducing)morphology if thats not too Barney the Dino for you. Peter Frost's usage of pedomorphic can hardly be thought eccentric though."The fundamental principle of paedomorphosis need not be restricted to animals that have a distictive larval form that must undergo sudden and dramatic metamorphosis in order to assume the structure of the adult. Although there is no larva,animals that develop gradualy may undergo evolutionary change of the same type as that to which Garstang gave the name of paedomorphosis; for it may happen that adults resemble the juvenile or infantile stages of thei ancesters exept in the maturity of the reproductive organs. It seems legitimate to extend the meaning of paedomorphosis to cover such cases." From a 1974 book you called outdated when someone quoted it in support of certain ethnic taxa being somewhat paedomorphic. My other tome the Penguin Dictionary of Biology Tenth Edition does say that padomorphosis was formerly synomious with neoteny "Neoteny - formerly used in the broad sense of paedomorphosis... examples include development of display structures in some social mammals". This is from Feminine Beauty's perspective most relevant to adult females and why I mentioned skin which is thought redundant.What I think Frost is talking about is the key to undestanding much of the criticism your examples of feminine women and attractive women are drawing. As I interpret his blog posts (its not spelled out in them)is that white skin is held over into adulthood as a 'caring and sharing' signal to aid survival of women in the harsh conditions of winters on the north german plain 20,000 years ago,it resulted in provisioning by hunters who had the only food resources. However it inhibits aggression from males (as does the juvenile coat of many apes) and this inhibition can also extend to male sexual impulses. This is why darkening the skin as a sexual come on has a long history.Tanning is considered sexy because it is the equivalent of an adult coat colour, pale skin is juvenile and non adult characteristics are a turn of as you rightly point out. Top glamour models get the tanned look from UV,bronzer ,spray on tan,special lighting effects that give them a golden glow, or photoshopping ect.(Fashion models are a bit of an exception but bear in mind that the male ones are also very pale)Ignoring this effect you have put up some amateurish photos with poor skin tone ,some of the models realy are extremley pale compared to the mainsteam you want them to be favourably compared to. Hence critics think they look pastey, naive(stupid trailer trash)or too young. No matter how impressive the body one photo showing formica-white skin makes a very lasting and poor impression,consider never using photos where the model is or looks pale .Fat produces estone which lightens the skin localy this interacioncan creat an interaction that produces an unsitely effect, rancid as one critic has it, and she admits some of your examples really are attractive.
"The 'adjustment for age' in Table 3 is the breakdown of the data into three age groups.This point is explained in the Statistical Analysis section:
'We evaluated racial/ethnic differences in the hormones and SHBH (a)overall after adjusting for age and (b) within three age catagories reflecting hypothesized hormonal transitions though life; early adulthood(20-44 years old), mid-adulthood (45-69 years old), and late adulthood(70+ years old'.
I think you are making the same point rebutted here in the comments at Evo and Proud
" Your referring to the linear regression model... (but)the serum concentrations of each age group as listed in table 3 'Serum concentrations of sex steriod hormones'.. are simply geometric means. Yes the age ajusted linear regression model failed to find a black-white difference. There are two reasons.First testosterone levels do not decline linearly with age. The decline is much steeper in the mid to late twenties and is steeper for blacks than for whites.
...the black-white difference is wider in the 45-69 year olds. That is to be expected if T levels are higher in 45-69 year old black men than in 20-44 year old black men. Both of these findings indicate that a disproportionate number of high testostrone individuals were removed from the younger age group."
Alex: I haven’t designed this site to be offensive, but offending some people is inevitable if this site is to fulfill its purpose. It is not true that men have historically generally married very young girls. I have addressed this issue above, and now I will quote an anthropologist:
I’ve been reading your site for a few months now, but this is the first time i’ve felt very compelled to answer. I am an anthropologist with a specialty on extinct hunter-gatherer cultures, and I must say that 16 is not considered full maturity in most cultures. (and i apologize if the following rambles).
A 16 year old may be considered old enough to marry in some cultures, but women in subsistence-level cultures are not considered fully adult until they bear their first child (in cultures that practice child marriage, the children even live with their parents post-marriage until the parents deem them mature and responsible enough to move out). If a female is a memmber of a culture that is truly subsistence-level, tshe will likely not give birth to a healthy, live infant until her EARLY 20s. Unless excessive calories are available to provide enough fat to create excess developmental estrogen, teenagers are frequently incapable of carrying a fetus more than a few weeks, let alone to full-term. Even if they *do* have enough, their bodies have troubles. Even modern western teens typically have the hardest labors, post-partum problems, and premature babies amongst new moms. In a small part of Ethiopia where the ideal bride is post-menses and 12, they have enough care and calories to become pregnant at such young ages, and typically end up with a gaping hole after the birth (frequently a stillbirth) that stretches from the urogenital opening to the anus– these women are shunned hags by the age of 18.
Without modern western medicine, many teen moms and their babies would not survive. This is even reflected in many women’s bodies. It is very common for a female human to “finish” puberty in their late teens or early 20s, where the body will naturally carry an increased load of fat (especially around the hips, buttocks, and tummy pooch) and the pelvic girdle will widen, making room for babies to grow and to be born easier. In addition, the electrical connections in the brain (especially the ones responsible for being able to think through actions into the future and consider hard consequences) do not finish connecting until the mid-20s (this length of time for connections is also present in males, and it, combined with an excessive youth testosterone load, makes the leading cause of preventable death in 15-25 yr old males “doing something stupid”).
Taking this into account, and adding the modern western ideas of childhood and maturation, a 16-year old is still a child; a post-pubescent child, or an adolescent, but still a child nevertheless. I know some girls that, even without decreased caloric intake, do not even *start* menses until they were 16 or older.
I would also like to remind people that we consider 8 year olds children, but at the turn of the 19th century they were expected to go out and work in factories to make money for the family, even leaving the home to live in factory dormitories; in some so-called modern cultures, 8 year olds can even function as prostitutes. Does this make them adults, since they can go to work, have intercourse, and in some cases even bear children? I would really like to say no, or there would not be a taboo or laws against having intercourse with post-menses females under certain ages.
basically, to quote a popular song from a couple of years ago, 16 years old is not quite a child, not yet a woman.
You argument that statistics on higher rates of sexual interest in or sexual involvement with children among homosexuals “reflect a growing CULTURAL trend in our society against pederasty which homosexuals haven't encountered as strongly yet because of a general prejudice against them” doesn’t make sense. And where is the evidence that men in general like them young (as in children)?
Regarding this site being dangerous, it is dangerous for those who would like to preserve the things that I am trying to change, but it is not dangerous as in something that will cause more harm than good.
Lin said "Testosterone has the effect(of) .. increasing the leg :body ratio "
I'm interested in a reference for this and whether it would mean the most masculine women having the greatest leg:body ratio?
Stating the obvious, lengthening of the legs is the amongst the last changes before adulthood, most human beings with short legs are juveniles.
Hi, I'm a final year medical student, and I did a semester in paediatrics and had to read up a fair bit on growth and developement and stuff. Testosterone has the effect increasing height and increasing the leg : body ratio. This is why when a seemingly taller man and a shorter woman sit down, they height difference is diminished. Longer legs are evolutionaryly more advantageous -- you can ran faster and farther, you are better able to support your torso etc.
So why do guys like long legged girls? This must be one of the great ironies of life and physical attraction. Our genes, including those that controll sexual dimorphism as well as sexual attraction, are the results of random mutations after all. It's a wonder that they posses the order that they do, so it's not hard to imagine they must be a little non-sensical here and there.
Long leg legth in females is not the only physical attraction that's wierd in terms of having no explanation from a reproductive or sexually dimorphic angle. What about long necks and big collar bones on females? These are also attributes that are enhanced by testosterone and not oestrogen. Ever wondered why so many boys seem to have longer eyelashes than their sisters? I think this is a testosterone things as well -- you know, like facial hair.
Perhaps there are actually relevent genetic reasons as to why we find body parts attractive in the sex that does not naturaly come by them. For example, collar bones stick out more when you are thin, long necks disappear into flesh as you get older, and a healthy weight and youthfulness are relevent to the reproductive ability of females.
Can't think of a similar reason for legs though. I'm going with it's a media thing. Having grown up in subcontinental Asia for ten years, I can assure you that nobody slobbered over long legged girls. In fact, most parts of a woman were supposed to be smaller than most parts of a man, including legs. Even a long neck was considered unattractive.
Hi erik, I hate to not post directly on the subject but I just thought that this woman was really beautiful.
http://friedriceandbeans.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/09/08/meagangoodnipplesseethrough01.jpg
what do you think?
I'm 22 years old, I could, if I wanted, walk around with a push up bra and revealing top but I don't... In my experience, It would only attract the lechers and rooters, especially in clubs and bars, I don't want any of them.
Men, if you are the dirty rooting lecher predator kind that uses women and throws them out, the world would be better off without you. I hope you die. Most men are rooters in western society, they just want to root around, a whore to take home for the night. You are very lucky to make a man commit to a relationship even for beautiful feminine attractive women.
Men just want to use women, pick up young teens in bars, watch porn, go to hookers and strippers and the like.
The only men that ever approach me are the rooters and lechers, the dirty STD filled men that have sex with 100's of women. Men always want to use women, they will disguise it however they can, they are a pack of lies. If men are good looking, have a nice car or job, they use women even more esp. the young naive teen girls.
The sexual revolution failed, big time, men spread their perversions like wildfire and jump from one woman to the next like a flee.
If your going to treat me like a whore you can at least pay me. But they don't I get nothing, not even a coffee or a meal.
Men are sh*t a**holes.
Yum.
Fig. 1 (right side) face shape attractive x10 - Sophia Loren
So nice one
On the topic of feminine beauty, have you ever considered that the high fashion models were chosen for their atypical looks which is pleasing to to the aesthetics of art?
I am an artist myself and I find 'some' of the high fashion models very beautiful; yet the others still retain my interest through their intriguing faces. These women, to me, look much more refined and elegant and have much more of a presence than your glamor models whom resembles somewhat typical females in society.
Your information is quite bempty as it focuses only on one aspect of the industry. I honestly believe fashion originated from art itself; the clothes, although odd and displaced if worn in public, reflect the wide boundaries of art. Thus why the fashion designers will never choose a more typical women to represent their clothes. They want their designs to look different and controversial and engages the audience.
Lastly your very homophobic remarks is very much evident throughout this website. You are referring a homosexual to a pedophile by provocatively suggesting that the homosexual fashion designers enjoy the aesthetics of underage teenage boys, which i can ensure you is not true as I have seen some gay couples in the city area and almost all look quite muscular and masculine and are NOT dating underage boys. If you look at the male models in the industry right now, you will see the same resemblance (muscular) and most of them now have very distinct face, some not exactly handsome, which is uncommon in a typical male which further reinforces my concept of art aesthetics being a factor in choosing models to represent designer clothes.
In conclusion I believe that you Erik, want the models to fit YOUR desires and why a heterosexual man like yourself would even be bothered in the women's fashion industry, as their clothes do not appeal to you. I stand by the concept of the fashion industry being a branch of art as shown by the clothes and the models.
Looking at the short legged figures I get an impression of small overall size, indeed most people with short legs are of below average height so the Polish results may be due to lack of enthusiasm for short men.
Studies are often on subjects of higher than average social class which means less testosteronised on average,a high proportion of the most testosteronised men are not in colleges ect. where subjects are recuited, it is worth bearing in mind that Polish men have a rather high finger ratio.
Men having slightly short legs for the same height would be more heavily built - a masculine trait.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-411266/Over-sexed-The-tarty-Bratz-Doll.html
Men are predatory shit that need to be exterminated.
It doesn't matter how good/kind the woman is, they're only into rooting around!! They will try to disguise it, but it's true. It's always their goal to root and shoot through as many women as possible, like those poor girls above.
The sexual revolution is a failure - it lead to a lot of girls being used and tossed out like rubbish by dirty lecher men.
At least before the sexual revolution their perversions were more controlled.
Now the birth rate has dropped off.
And my generation (GEN Y) is going to bear the brunt of the ageing population.
Casual sex is not 'An equal opportunity pleasure for women', it hurts and stings like hell!!
I'm so sick of men, the only ones I ever meet or approach me are the dirty lecher kind, they hook girls in - by whatever deceptive means they can - then fuck them and when they are finished using them they toss them out like trash.
And I would rather die than be used and tossed out by another dirty rooting lecher man.
If men are going to treat me like a whore, they can at least pay me!!
Ruslana was murdered, it's so obvious.
Erik, why don't you do a new post on how men have 4X the rates of psychopathy and antisocial personality disorder compared to women, - (Biology and hormones are the basis for the gender imbalance). Thats your things isn't it Erik?
The gender imbalance is controlling for differences in upbringing, socio-economic status, education etc etc. - no loopholes there Erik.
And yes Erik, it's true, sexual selection has enabled men to more easily pass on their genes whilst maintaining repulsive, even psychopathic personality traits, all they have to do is have sex - by whatever deceptive means they see fit - even rape. As always the woman, providing she survives childbirth, is left to look after the dirty psycho lecher mans babies and his sons who turn out to be psychopathic like him with his male sex linked psycho genes.
And Erik, why don't you write about the biological and behavioural differences between the sexes, specifically mens comparative sexual promiscuity/sexual aggression, shallow affect and lack of conscience - which is why it's more likely to be men, not women, that have a tendency toward violence, sexual abuse and rape and any other antisocial behaviour which plagues society.
why the fuck did this dumbass that wrote this article put "transgendered male" they obviously have no idea in the slightest about transgenders or what they're talking about. a "transgendered male" is a ftm "female to male", while a "transgendered female" is a mtf. Get your facts straight idiot and stop posting ignorant shit.
A study reportedly found that the longer the legs (irrespective of height) the less chance a man has of a heart attack, but actuaries think very tall men are at high risk of early death(presumably due to XYY and Marfans). Barbie has extremely long legs as do artists pin-ups(apart from Fritz Willis),GI Joes legs don't look long.
THIS IS THE MOST CRAP IVE EVR READ, ASSHOLE GET A LIFE.
GI Joe looks like a juiced-up bouncer. That could be having an effect on body image irrespective of being mentioned.
The Slutz - sorry - Bratz dolls seem to be preferred over Barbie, the bridge of the nose looks like the opposite of derived to to me.
The abominable dolls will be pushed onto kids ostensibly for health education- social engineering is what they are really about. The justification for exposing toddlers to sex education dolls is http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-411266/Over-sexed-The tarty-Bratz-Doll.html another doll
Hi Erik,
I thought you might find this interesting: http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2007/04/intercourse-and-intelligence.php
I think there is a lot of stuff going on here, but I wonder if the 0% rate of Studio Art major virginity is anything to do with nonheterosexuality / developmental disturbance (especially if their intelligence is indeed lower) / prenatal testosterone.
PS .
I never even read your comment until just now.
I came to this site for the article on Gay Designers.
it is the first things that comes up in Google.
Vicki
Hi Erik,
My comment wasn't for you: It was Zahi Stephens. I just like to add my two cents, but i am glad you are getting some mileage out of your post from three years ago.
Have a fantastic day.
Go Homo's!!!!
Yea
An authority on bodybuilding said blacks had an advantage over whites in the colour of their skin. Whites must agree, some of the them apply so much tanning solution they look like Al Jolson.
I commented on your citing Rohrmann in a superior tone, Erik that stuff is way over my head I can only understand P.Frosts conclusions, regression analysis ect. is beyond me. I forgot some people like to work things out for themselves and have the expertise to do so. Please don't waste time on this issue.
Vicki: Honey, you may have studied the topic extensively in college, but you got an F- for research. I know about the supposed 98% statistic, coming from the Jenny et al. (1994) study in Pediatrics, but see its refutation plus lots of goodies about homosexuality and sexual interest in children here.
And please don’t distort my argument by saying I am accusing homosexuals of being pedophiles. Regarding wife beaters, deadbeat dads and the sort, this website has nothing to do with them. And this site is not about male fashion models, but you might be interested in reading the latest on the body weight requirements of male fashion models. Come up with a better explanation of the female high-fashion models’ looks trinity (very thin, masculine, teenagers) or quit.
I'm glad it wasn't complete rubbish even if you were unimpressed with the wording.I don't like that word either but its in what the statment was pinched from, an answer in the comments at evo and proud. We could call it CSI (Caring and Sharing Inducing)morphology if thats not too Barney the Dino for you. Peter Frost's usage of pedomorphic can hardly be thought eccentric though."The fundamental principle of paedomorphosis need not be restricted to animals that have a distictive larval form that must undergo sudden and dramatic metamorphosis in order to assume the structure of the adult. Although there is no larva,animals that develop gradualy may undergo evolutionary change of the same type as that to which Garstang gave the name of paedomorphosis; for it may happen that adults resemble the juvenile or infantile stages of thei ancesters exept in the maturity of the reproductive organs. It seems legitimate to extend the meaning of paedomorphosis to cover such cases." From a 1974 book you called outdated when someone quoted it in support of certain ethnic taxa being somewhat paedomorphic. My other tome the Penguin Dictionary of Biology Tenth Edition does say that padomorphosis was formerly synomious with neoteny "Neoteny - formerly used in the broad sense of paedomorphosis... examples include development of display structures in some social mammals". This is from Feminine Beauty's perspective most relevant to adult females and why I mentioned skin which is thought redundant.What I think Frost is talking about is the key to undestanding much of the criticism your examples of feminine women and attractive women are drawing. As I interpret his blog posts (its not spelled out in them)is that white skin is held over into adulthood as a 'caring and sharing' signal to aid survival of women in the harsh conditions of winters on the north german plain 20,000 years ago,it resulted in provisioning by hunters who had the only food resources. However it inhibits aggression from males (as does the juvenile coat of many apes) and this inhibition can also extend to male sexual impulses. This is why darkening the skin as a sexual come on has a long history.Tanning is considered sexy because it is the equivalent of an adult coat colour, pale skin is juvenile and non adult characteristics are a turn of as you rightly point out. Top glamour models get the tanned look from UV,bronzer ,spray on tan,special lighting effects that give them a golden glow, or photoshopping ect.(Fashion models are a bit of an exception but bear in mind that the male ones are also very pale)Ignoring this effect you have put up some amateurish photos with poor skin tone ,some of the models realy are extremley pale compared to the mainsteam you want them to be favourably compared to. Hence critics think they look pastey, naive(stupid trailer trash)or too young. No matter how impressive the body one photo showing formica-white skin makes a very lasting and poor impression,consider never using photos where the model is or looks pale .Fat produces estone which lightens the skin localy this interacioncan creat an interaction that produces an unsitely effect, rancid as one critic has it, and she admits some of your examples really are attractive.
"The 'adjustment for age' in Table 3 is the breakdown of the data into three age groups.This point is explained in the Statistical Analysis section:
'We evaluated racial/ethnic differences in the hormones and SHBH (a)overall after adjusting for age and (b) within three age catagories reflecting hypothesized hormonal transitions though life; early adulthood(20-44 years old), mid-adulthood (45-69 years old), and late adulthood(70+ years old'.
I think you are making the same point rebutted here in the comments at Evo and Proud
" Your referring to the linear regression model... (but)the serum concentrations of each age group as listed in table 3 'Serum concentrations of sex steriod hormones'.. are simply geometric means. Yes the age ajusted linear regression model failed to find a black-white difference. There are two reasons.First testosterone levels do not decline linearly with age. The decline is much steeper in the mid to late twenties and is steeper for blacks than for whites.
...the black-white difference is wider in the 45-69 year olds. That is to be expected if T levels are higher in 45-69 year old black men than in 20-44 year old black men. Both of these findings indicate that a disproportionate number of high testostrone individuals were removed from the younger age group."
Alex: I haven’t designed this site to be offensive, but offending some people is inevitable if this site is to fulfill its purpose. It is not true that men have historically generally married very young girls. I have addressed this issue above, and now I will quote an anthropologist:
Quote:
You argument that statistics on higher rates of sexual interest in or sexual involvement with children among homosexuals “reflect a growing CULTURAL trend in our society against pederasty which homosexuals haven't encountered as strongly yet because of a general prejudice against them” doesn’t make sense. And where is the evidence that men in general like them young (as in children)?
Regarding this site being dangerous, it is dangerous for those who would like to preserve the things that I am trying to change, but it is not dangerous as in something that will cause more harm than good.
Pages